ALiud est Grammaticè, aliud Latine loqui, is a distinction of a thousand fiue hundred and fortie yeares standing; the Author is Quin­tilian; and his sense is thus:

There are two sorts of Latine, whereof one is Grammar-Latine, and the other Latine-Latine.

By Latine-Latine I meane such as the best appro­ued Authors wrote, and left vs in their bookes and monuments of vse and custome.

By Grammar-Latine I vnderstand that Latine that we now make by Grammar rules: the first in­tention of which rules, and their collection out of that custome, and those Authors, was, to make vs write and speake such Latine as that Custome and those Authors did; which was, Latine-Latine: but it succeeded not.

Wherefore my Petition is to this high Court of Parliament, (not that Grammar should be questio­ned, [Page 2]in y^t it is our old acquaintance, and hath a long time been a ledger here amongst vs, on the behalfe of these Authors; but, considering it is not able to giue vs Authors Latine) that these Authors, whom we seeme to haue so much respected in our Schooles and Vniversities, coming themselues as it were in person, and offering to dwell amongst vs, may to their deserued honour and our desired benefit, be now receiued, priui­ledged and admitted to tell their owne tales, and teach vs their owne Latine.

This admittance of theirs, haue I these eighteen yeares contriued, and these fiue last yeares seriously solicited, and cannot as yet find any way to com­passe it, without manifest danger of ruining my self and mine assistants, vnlesse by fauour of this high and honorable Court I may be allowed father of mine owne children, and Author of mine owne works and in­uentions: that is, that no man else may print them or im­port them nor any man teach Languages by that method that I propose, but such as I thinke fitting; and that these priuiledges may continue for the space of 21 yeares after the publication of euery booke of this nature that shall be published within the terme of yeares before spe­cified; with prohibition that no man shall hereafter, du­ring that time, attempt the same way in any other Au­thor or Language, without my speciall allowance.

Herein I haue not onely had the gracious eare of his Maiestie, but Prince like encouragement of his Highnesse, the assent of many of the Nobility, and the fauourable desires and wishes of some of the greatest Scholars of this kingdome; but espe­cially of such whose ends and priuate respects led [Page 3]them not to a preiudicate opinion concerning it.

But whilst this hopefull beginning engaged me with full sayle to prosecute my first intention, I found in the very maine of my businesse some se­cret Remora, suddenly to stop my helplesse ship, al­though the winds of my deuotion thereunto blew very strongly.

Whereupon, not knowing who did hurt me, or what might helpe mee, I began to listen partly to mine owne surmises, partly to what my friends su­spected, and partly to the mutterings of such as were incredulous: for all these brought sundry ob­iections and demands; to which I made these fol­lowing answers; most humbly submitting both my selfe and them vnto the censure and definitiue sen­tence of your Honorable Wisedomes, whether I shall stop here and sinke, for attempting to bring a benefit to your posteritie, or set forward to effect what I pretended.

The first obiection was, 1 that it might be thought a great presumption and arrogancie in me, to attri­bute so much vnto my selfe, as to set vpon a new­found thing, that for so many ages and amongst so infinite a number of learned men, was never hither­to reflected on; and therefore much to be suspected and demurr'd vpon.

This obiection I answered in mine Appeale to Truth, in the Controuersie betweene Art and Vse, pub­lished (Anno 1622. and extant at the brazen Serpent in Pauls Church-yard) to shew the opinions of the grauest Authors to this purpose: and first, what Grammarians thought one of another; then, what [Page 4]others thought of Grammarians and their Art; and lastly, what way they approued of, to come to puri­tie of language.

This approued way go I, which in the genera­litie is theirs, and none of mine; nor is it new, in that it hath beene euer since speaking was, which was long before Grammar, and is where no Gram­mar euer came, and therefore may and will subsist subsist without her. From whence it may be gathe­red, that I am so far from being presumptuous or arrogant in putting on so publick and so great a be­nefit, that I might rather haue been held negligent or envious in concealing it; especially being a pro­fessor of letters, and as it were one of the Parliament in the Common wealth of learning.

The second obiection was, 2 that though the ge­nerall way by custome and authoritie might be in­timated by these Authors, yet I could not excuse my selfe of presumption in the course I tooke vnto it in particular.

Whereunto I answered, y^e any man might take the ground-work of this particular way frō Cicero, who was the first that taught mee to divide the man, or body of speech into the parts thereof & knittings. I meane not those eight sorts of parts, whereof 4 are declined, 4 vndeclined, after the vulgar Gram­mar; but after Cicero's Grammar, into one sort of parts, that is, into clauses, which are vndeclined. Now if Cicero's Grammar, that consists of one part of speech, and that vndeclined, were not much ea­sier than that of eight parts, and 4 declined; and should not thereby rid vs of much labour, and to [Page 5]better purpose, I should not be so ready to em­brace it. But, as for that which is built vpon this ground worke, for the peculiar vse of euery man, and the bringing of that into act, which these graue men haue giuen vs hitherto but to contem­plate: that (without presumption) I call mine; as the pipe of lead calls the water which it conveyes to many cisternes; alwayes acknowledging the waters of all true vnderstanding to proceed onely from the eternall fountaine of all wisedome my Creator.

But seeming still to doubt of the possibilitie thereof, they would often aske me: 3 Are you sure you know what you promise? Is it possible to learne Latine without a Grammar?

Hereupon I shewed them Quintilians fore-allea­ged distinction; and then, I replied thus: It is not possible to learne Grammar-Latin without Gram­mar; but it is possible to learne Latin-Latin (that is, the Latine that was in vse amongst the ancient Latines) without Grammar. And moreouer, I told them, that I thought, the way to write and speake this last Latine, was the true way rectè scribendi at­que loquendi; else Cicero and his equals wrote not rightly. And I inferred, that if this be true, we must either pull out rectè, or put in Grammaticè, or vul­gar Grammar would haue but an imperfect defini­tion. For rectè scribendi atque loquendi ars, must run along with the custome and vse of speaking that was obserued by those ancient-Authors: which, I must confesse, the vulgar Grammar aimeth at, or else it should want all colour and authoritie: but [Page 6] Quintilian, & that that's more then ten Quintilians, the very practise tels vs, it hitteth not the marke of writing rightly. God is my record. I speake not this to depriue Grammar of her scholars, (for she hath her own worth, and according vnto it should be respected) but my humble Petition is, that the old authentick Authors and chiefe Lords of Language, our best and syncerest friends, may not be thrust out of their owne patrimonie, by those whose chiefest grace it is to be thought their followers.

They replyed: 4 Suppose that we will grant you, that Authors-Latine is better then Grammar-Latine, what proofes bring you that it is possible for you to help vs to a way to learne this better Latin; that we may be assured that you can be as good as your promise?

Whereunto I againe made answer: If I lay my grounds in that wherein all the Languages of the world agree, and out of which no Languages haue perfect correspondence, and vpon these grounds and foundations can erect a solid and compleate edifice, doubtlesse it will be possible for me to help you to that way, whereby I may performe what I haue promised. And proceeding yet further, I told them, that the grounds of speech are laid in things, in the meanings of which things all tongues meet. Therefore as they are all the meanings of things, so they are all the meanings of one another. But if we will search vnto the depth for the rootes and e­lements of all these meanings, we shall finde that farthest off they consist all in a point; a little nearer in a point, and in a right & crooked line; yet nearer [Page 7]in literall characters produced of these point and lines; and nearer yet, in syllables produced of these letters: and yet somewhat nearer, in words produ­ced of these syllables. And vpon this ground of words, all ordinary wayes insist.

But they are not yet come to that which they pretend; for no two languages in the world doe perpetually and infallibly meete in words: where­fore we must go yet a step further, till we come at our foundation, which is layd in sense or meaning; which consisteth not alwayes of simple words, but now of simple, now composed. For, as letters that are knit together, make one character of this or that word: so words knit together, make one character of this or that sense. These characters of sense are the nearest elements of speech, vnderstandingly ac­knowledged by Cicero vnder the names of ioynts and members; and are delivered vnto vs in their natiue formes and substances by Custome and Au­thoritie. But Art amazed at the not well appre­hended, or ill distinguished magnitude of this sub­stance, matter or body of speech, presuming of her owne abilitie of bringing vs a nearer way to Lan­guages, hath taken both matter and formes thereof, & torne them all in peeces: of the formes she hath made a Grammar; of the matter a Dictionarie: and hath dispersed them amongst all nations for their seuerall vses in forreine languages. And now, euery nation desirous of a forrein tongue, runs presently to Art to borrow these peeces, and thinkes by her instruction to compose a perfect and well shaped body of speech in some desired forreine language. [Page 8]But they are deceiued: for first, though Art know what similar parts (as wee terme them) as, what nerves, films, flesh, bones, &c. euery instrumentall member consisteth of; yet, she being vniuersall for all nations, and all nations naturally varying the situation and position of these peeces or particles of members, according to their owne natiue Idiom; they must (as not taught by Art any other varia­tion) lay all these peeces of forreine speech, accor­ding to the situation of these peeces in their owne language. Whereupon, not to runne into France or Italy for an example, a Welch-man, not yet well grounded in our tongue, (speaking Welch-English) bids vs here in England, giue him bread white, and meate fat, after the native position of these peeces of speech in his language, and is laught at for his labour. In like maner an English man in Wales speakes English-Welch, and bids giue him gwin barra and brasekige, that is, white bread and fat meate, af­ter his position of these peeces, and is as much laught at there, as they here, and as worthily. And this is not onely found in the English and Welch, but in all other languages, to be most ridi­culous: and yet no Grammar prouideth for this mis­chiefe, nor indeed can it prouide, vnlesse euery na­tion should make so many seueral Grammars of one and the same tongue, as there are seuerall sorts of nations to communicate with it: which were a ve­ry great and a voluminous inconvenience.

Againe, in such members, wherein two seuerall tongues may place these peeces of speech alike, so that euery peece of the one be answerable to e­uery [Page 9]peece of the other, both in place and signifi­cation: the whole member put together in the one and the other tongue, shall be good & perfect sense in the one, and no way vnderstood in the other lan­guage. For though the words thereof be all, by both tongues acknowledged; yet being put toge­ther, the one of these nations receiues, the other disclaimes the member: which is manifest between the English and the Italian. For, though un be an; cavallo, horse; di, of; buon, good; metallo, metall: and [An horse of good metall] put together be good En­glish; yet the Italian vnderstands not vn cavallo di buon metallo to be Italian, but disclaimes it. Nei­ther doth any Grammar remedy this particular, nor indeede can remedy it, vnlesse it draw all the proprieties of euery language of the world, and ap­ply them to it selfe in and for euery different lan­guage; which would proue a greater inconveni­ence then the former. If therefore we would not (with Art) fall vpō these deformities of mispeccing and mismembring languages, we must rely wholy vpon Authoritie, from whence, euen Art her selfe was drawne, though insufficient; and to which, when Art can say no more, she oft referrs vs. Now if this Authoritie be so reduced by Analysis to pra­ctise, that we neither teare in peeces, or breake the members of speech, nor hurt the ioynts or wheeles on which it runneth: and then be made vp a new composition or method of writing after mine in­tention; it shall not onely demonstrate the possibi­litie of a way to learne this better Latin, (and there­by assure you that I can be as good as my promise) [Page 10]but it shall also (as I haue said in mine Appeale) giue any man a reall power of writing rightly the first day he sets vpon it. But, vnderstand me, this power is in my books, and not in his braines that writeth, till he by dayly practise haue reduced this power of my books to an habit in himselfe. And no doubt but an habit may this way in halfe the time be got­ten, that is spent in Grammar. And then, our habit is made in Latine-Latine, the other in Grammar-Latine; the differences whereof haue formerly been debated. Neither shall wee in this Latine-Latine stand in need of rules of constructiō (which Gram­mars for the most part giue) or position and pro­prietie (which they giue not;) for these fall all in sense and meaning, wherein all the members and clauses of all Languages haue their meetings.

But they continue to obiect, 5 that Authoritie cannot affoord members for all senses.

To this I answer, that senses, clauses or members, consist as well in forme as in matter. In forme, they are all in Authoritie; otherwise Art had not found them, being onely produced from Authoritie; and therefore they occurre in my method out of Authors. In matter they are also the most part there, excepting some few names of things that fell not within the discourses of mine Authors; or haue since their times been invented; and these shall be affoorded by supplement, which is also drawne out of authoritie. And therefore I craue leaue to print these Authors with this supplement, which some haue thought that I had neuer dreamed of, but vpon their obiections made within these twelue months: [Page 11]whereas I haue good testimonie of the thing be­gun and almost halfe done aboue these six yeares. Moreouer, euery sense may in one and the same tongue be many wayes altered in the words or clau­ses, and yet produce alwayes the selfe same mea­ning. Now, as euery tongue hath this varietie; so any, or euery one of these varieties is not onely a due expression of that sense in one and the same tongue, but also of all and euery particular varia­tion of that sense in euery other language. Other­wise the Poet should not be able to expresse him­selfe Poetically both in other numbers and other frames & formes of speech than are vsuall amongst Orators: nor could Orators giue vs their meanings now in an humble, now in a loftie, now in a middle, or other kindes or styles of writing. And yet euery one of these can produce, after his owne maner, e­uery thing that may be spoken; witnesse the Poets ‘Quicquid conabor dicere versus erit.’ And considering that all these wayes of expression fall within the limits of mine instrument, either by authoritie or supplement, I cannot so much as dreame of an impossibilitie of producing any thing that may be spoken.

Hereupon they further demaund, 6 Where are these Authors reduced to your method? and where that supplement? vnlesse you produce them (say they) you will neither be beleeued, nor get your licence.

This were but hard measure (said I) considering so many presidents to the contrary. There was a Patent, and an Act of Parliament passed before [Page 12]the bringing of the New-riuer water from Ware to London; and the like for cutting the passage of a riuer from Tame to Oxford. Now, if men that pre­tended good but to some parts of priuate Cities, be thus fauoured; it is not likely that I (that pleade for euery mans posteritie, yea his, what ere he be, that's most against me; as also in the behalfe of ma­ny nations and whole kingdomes, and for those Authors that they so much desire and reuerence) should be driuen to hazard both time, labour, and expences, without some kind of assurance as well from his Maiestie as the Parliament, that I shall not ruine both my selfe and others which haue herein ayded me. Epecially considering how apt men are now adayes to snatch the bread out of other mens mouthes, and to sell their labours to their owne profits, and grow fat vpon them, while those that sweat and groned to produce them, perish with fa­mine. Which oftenest happens to poore students, who are contented to be giuen to vnderstand, that it is enough for them to haue the honour of their books, in lieu of their labour, time and charges: and in the meane season are laught at, as foolish Logi­tians that will lose the substance for so poore an accident. But admit yet farther, that after priui­ledge granted, I should not be able to performe what I intended; there's no mans reputation, no mans time, labour and expences lies at stake but mine. So that if I performe, it was well granted; in that euery man shall reape the benefit: if I perform not, yet was it well granted; in that it turnes to my iust punishment: and therefore in my opinion I [Page 13]should not be vrged to a greater inconvenience, (as to bestow yet other foure or fiue hundred pounds) to produce that, which when it is produced, giues me no more assurance of a priuiledge, then at this present.

Then was it obiected, 7 that his Maiestie had al­readie confirmed a Patent granted for the Gram­mar, and would admit of no other course of teach­ing.

Whereupon I demanded, what hinderance the Goldsmiths priuiledge was to the Brasiers. I desire not the suppression or hinderance of Grammar, but the puritie of Latine. Againe, this Grammar was priuiledged to forbid all other Grammars: but I seeke not to introduce another Grammar, except we shall very improperly call it Cicero's Grammar. My desire is only, that such as are weary, and would not, or can no longer go by Grammar, or are not desirous of Grammar-Latine, might be admitted to an easie and profitable vse of Authors, and to these Authors own way of teaching their own lan­guage without Grammar; as being two sundry courses, to two diuers ends. For Authors cannot bring a man to Grammar-Latine, nor Grammars vnto Authors Latine, as is proued. Nay further, I find the Preface it selfe to this priuiledged Gram­mar, to be more fauourable on my behalfe then this opinion: for it sayes plainly, that it is not amisse, if one seeing by triall an easier and readier way than the common sort of teachers do, would say what he hath pro­ued, and for the commodity allowed; that other not know­ing the same, might by experience proue the like, and [Page 14]then by proofe reasonably iudge the like: not excluding [by this priuiledged Grammar] the better way when it is found out, but in the meane season forbidding the worse. Now, I hauing by triall proued this way by Authors, to be another, and an easier and readier way than that of Grammar, and allowing thereof for the infinite commoditie that I finde therein, humbly intreate that I may be priuiledged to pro­duce my bookes, that may make others proue and iudge as I doe; according to the intent of the fore­alledged Preface.

8 What proofe, say they, or demonstration, can you bring vs of this way of yours?

I answered, a two-fold proofe: one, of a power that these bookes bring to any man, the first day to write rightly by them: And another, of this power, reduced by an exercise to an habit of wri­ting rightly without them. Of the first kind (in that this method holdeth in all Languages as well as in Latine) take this Italian Letter, translated by a Gen­tlewoman that knowes not two words of that lan­guage, and that, the first day that she applied her selfe vnto it.

Of the same kinde is this other in Latine, trans­lated out of English, through power giuen in my bookes, to a capable yong man, that had been six yeares at a Grammar Schoole, and had discon­tinued eighteen moneths.

But, because I was desirous to see how well hee could translate it of himselfe, without the power giuen him by these books, I made him first make it in his owne Latine, which (with some help of such [Page 16]as had done it before him) was as followeth: ‘Iste non est pauper qui parum habet, sed qui plus appetit. Nam huic multa desunt; illi, animo solum integro, & e­recto, fortunâ dispicientiâ. Sed, quisnam, qui contentus est rebus suis: Si enim in mentem tuam benè introspi­cias, satis adest; sed nulli preter sapientes placati aut contenti sunt eo quod habent. Adhuc enim in animo non sorbeas, quàm contentus est semitipso qui vasibus fictilibus vtitur vice toreumatis; Sed cum animum puerilem deponas, & Philosophia in numeros hominum te referat, inuenies quod hominem est aeque culmene te­ctum quam aurum. Sed vt literam concludam (crede mihi) hominem istum non esse beatum quem seipsum it a esse non cogitat. Hec & similia sepe sunt ad cogitanda vt veram libertatem paras & vitam tuam libenter linqueres.’

In verse also, these are of that first kind, made by men of great iudgement, who were desirous to make some proofe thereof.

And this Distichon, made vpon this following English: Without sense or reason a thing promised cannot be beleeued.

By the second way, that is, by the power of those bookes, reduced by a moneths practise to the be­ginning of an habit, these exercises were made without those bookes.

The like may be done in the Latine of other an­cient or moderne Authors, as of Livie, Plinie, Taci­tus, or of Lipsius, or any other whatsoeuer: and that not onely (as is said) in Latine, but in euery other language also.

But we vnderstand, 9 say they, that in this way of yours by Authors, you would haue these clau­ses, which you speake of, to be rendred whole: which cannot sinke into our heads to be good, by reason that you know not, by this means, what the words do signifie: and therefore it were much bet­ter that euery clause should be construed word for word. And besides, to take whole clauses out of Authors, were to steale.

Whereunto I answered: First, you may by triall find, that this construing word for word, is altoge­ther impossible in any language: Next, you may see the inconvenience thereof by the French-mans English: for while he followes the correspondence of words, he forgets their placing; and therefore saith, I you pray Sir, placing our English as his Ie vous prie Monsieur is placed, which is absurd and barbarous; and proceedeth onely from his con­struing word for word; euery man applying the words of a forreine language according as they are ranged in his owne. Wherfore I had rather a scho­lar should remember the naturall and receiued po­sition of a clause by keeping the words alwayes all together, than vnderstand the particular correspon­dence of the words, and thereby lose their proper places. For discretion, and comparison of clause with clause, will at length bring the vnderstanding [Page 19]of the words, whether we will or no; but nothing will bring the true position of these words againe, by reason that our owne tongue doth therein still misguide vs, and makes vs alwayes to be distin­guished for strangers, euen in our very writing. And the mainest reason thereof is this, that clauses are almost of the same condition that words are. For, as out of words of 2.3.4. or 5. letters, there may be 2.6.24. or 120. various reuolutions, and yet but one of those variations shall be allotted to signifie this or that one thing in particular: So is it in clauses of 2.3.4. or 5. words, whose variations may be as many as was before said of the letters; yet vse hath com­monly made choice but of one of those reuolutions of words to stand for this or that sense: which if you precisely take not, without adding, diminish­ing or transposing; you either alter the sense, maner of style, or dialect; or else you speake a kind of non sense. And that clause or sense, that vse hath taken hold of in one language, shall not many times haue the selfe same number of words in another; and therefore you must faile of your verball trans­lation: and in those that haue the selfe same num­ber, you seldome finde the words that signifie and expresse each other, to haue in both tongues the same position. Wherfore, if you take not the whole clause together in the one and the other tongue, you must at some time speake barbarously of neces­sitie. Now if this be that, which you call theft or stealing, there are none of vs that fall not hourely within the compasse of this kind of theevery. For, if you marke it wel, all speech runnes in this maner, [Page 20]and euery man speakes each others clauses. True it is, that one and the same clause or sense, may (as I haue said) be diuers wayes deliuered; but then you keep not the same words or number of them, but vary per Synonomiam, Enallagen, Antonomasiam, Pe­riphrasin, Metaphoram, and other such like variati­ons; which all must also keepe their receiued clauses, or else we shall do wrong to languages.

Other demaunds and obiections lesse materiall, as not touching the thing it selfe, but some particu­lar and by-respects, would cloy your eares with more then becomes a modest brevitie: wherefore leauing them, till some farther occasion offered; and most humbly intreating you to cast a fauoura­ble eye on this Petition. I in all obedience dedicate my selfe, my labour, and the rest of my life, in the full extent of my whole talent, to the eternall glo­rie of my God, to the loyall service I owe vnto my Soueraigne and his Succession, and to the future good of you and your posteritie.