brought out an edition of it. That the text of this manuscript was anterior to those of Paris, Lyons, Metz or Cambridge, appeared to admit of no doubt. The changes that take place in a language in what may be called the earlier stages of its formation, are such that it is much more easy than at later periods, to affix the date of any writing from that circumstance alone. The French language at the time in question, was in the most crude and immature state; and the judges competent to examine into the subject affirm, without hesitation that the Song of Roland found in the Bodleian cannot belong to a period later than to the eleventh century. The language is, indeed, precisely the same with that of the laws of William the Conqueror, whilst the construction, versification and whole tissue of the story are of the utmost simplicity; so that a comparison with the more elaborate poems on the same subject belonging to a later era, will at once satisfy the critical reader that this before us bears the impress of those times and manners to which it professes to belong. As regards the author of this poem, all that can be told is, that the name of Turoldus is found appended to the last verse. But the question arises whether this be the name of the author or merely that of the copyist? If of the author, who was this Turoldus? The preceptor of William the Conqueror bore that name. He died in 1033. But there was another Turoldus, son or nephew of the first mentioned. He was a Benedictine of the Abbey of Fécamp, and accompanied the Conqueror to England. After having rendered considerable services, he was made Abbot of Malmsbury, and, subsequently of Peterborough. Now, it is a curious circumstance connected with this latter fact, as reported by Gunton, that among the manuscripts of the Abbey of Peterborough, there were anciently discovered two copies of a French poem upon the war of Roncesvalles (“De Bello Valle Runciae”), and it appears most probable that one of these it is, which has found its way to the Bodleian. Ten years after M. Michel had published his edition of the poem in its original antique language, M. Génin undertook to give the world a translation of it; but, unfortunately, this gentleman chose for his medium the French language as it existed in the time of Amyot, which though admirably calculated to convey an idea of the simplicity and energy of the original , yet, has become so far obsolete as to require itself a translation to make it accessible to those not versed in French antiquity. This has been undertaken by M. Vitet, -
