of making up one's mind at the time, and imply intention rather than authoritative determination. Even the "shall" in the fifth may mean " is not "destined to hurt us-is sure not to hurt us," and thus express more than the simple future.52

Now all these passages from Chaucer, to which many others might be added, make it, I think, clear that our modern usage of "shall” and “will” is not quite of such recent origin as the Edinburgh Reviewer, or even Archdeacon Hare, would lead us to suppose. Wycliffe no doubt usually employed “shall” in translating the future, but his contemporary was evidently conversant with the modern idiom. Exceptions, as I have said, can be found, but such instances, however numerous, cannot destroy the affirmative inference which we are authorised to draw from the examples quoted. The distinction between "shall" and "will" was understood and recognised in English long before the authorised version of the Bible was made. This inference will be strengthened if we turn to letters of the time of Henry IV. and Henry. V., published by Sir Henry Ellis.

Jankyn Harrard, constable of Dynevor, writing with reference to Owen Glendower's rebellion, says, "For thai han ymad har avow that thei well al gat have owss dede th'rn. Wher for I prei zow "that ze nul not bugil ous, that ze send to ous "warning whether schull we have eny help or

66

66

no. ." 53 That is to say, "For they have made their

52 See above, p. 26.

53 Ellis's Letters, second series, vol. i. letter iv. p. 15.

E

66

66

vow that they will anywise have us dead therein. "Wherefore I pray you that you will not trouble (boggle, or beguile?) us; that you will send us "warning within short time whether we shall have "any help or not."

It is possible that the "will" may, in one or two of these instances, imply volition or determination; "shall" is employed with the first person, and there is nothing in the passage conflicting with modern usage. In the following example "will" occurs with the neuter pronoun of the third person: "and "zif it be tariet til sumyr hit wil not be so So again, "youre shippe wolle not

66

lightly."

"be redy.

54

955

In John Skydmore's letter 56 to Fairford, the Receiver at Brecknock, he says, "Wherefore wryteth "to Sir Hugh Waterton, and to all thilke that ye suppose wol take this mater to hert.”

66

66

The Bishop of Durham addressing Henry V. tells the King" Als sone as I may more do ye shall "have wityng therof;" 57 just as we should now say, as soon as I am able to do more you shall "know it;" the act of giving the knowledge being in the power of the speaker, and therefore not within the principle which obliges us to use "will" with the second person,

It

may

be worth while to trace the usage of these

54 Letter of Reginald de Bayldon. Ellis's Letters, first series.

vol. i. p. 36.

55 Ib. vol. i. p. 69.

57 Ib. letter xvii. p. 52.

56 Ib. letter vii. p. 20.

auxiliaries a little further down in the history of the language.

66

66

66 6

The following passages are from Lord Berners' 'Froissart.' 58" Now I shall shewe you what auns"were the King had of his counsayle."-"I shall "do accordyng to your advise."-" And he thought "in hymselfe he wold agree therto."-"Than the Bysshop of Burgos, Chauncellor of Spayne, who was well langaged, sayd, 'Sirs, ye knyghtes of Englad perteyning to the Duke of Lacaster, and "sent hyder fro his constable, understande that "the Kyng here of his pytie and gentylnesse wyll "shewe to his enemyes all the grace he maye; and, Sirs, ye shall retourne to your constable, "❝ and shew him fro the Kyng of Castyle that he "shall make it to be knowen through al his hoost by the sowne of a trumpet, that his realme shal "be open and redy to reicyve all the Englysshmen "hole or sicke.'-These knightes thanked the

66 6

66 6

66

66 6

Kyng and his counsayle of their aunswere, and "said, 'Sir, there be certayne artycles in your auns were, we can nat tell if they will be accepted or nat; if they be nat we shall send agayne to you our heraulte: if he come nat we "shall accept your saying.'

66 6

66 6

Now here the first "wyll" may be explained by supposing it to express the intention of the king; but the last is clearly the simple future employed in the passive with the third person.

58 Edition of 1812, 4to. vol. ii. pp. 5

66 07 199

in

several cases implies power or control; in the others it is used with the first person as it is now.

66

Latimer 59 in his sermons constantly uses, "But ye will say;" anticipating, as it were, an objection on the part of his hearers. One such sentence as the following is sufficient to show that he was familiar with the use of "will" as the simple future auxiliary in the third person. "Then do you deck "the very true temple of God, and honour him in "rich vestures that will never be worn, and so forth use yourselves according unto the commandments; " and then finally set up your candles, and they will report what a glorious light remaineth in your "hearts. 60

66

66

Again, in the same sermon- Offer your obla"tions and prayers to our Lord Jesus Christ, who "will both hear and accept them."

On the other hand "shall" is employed to signify destiny, or the decree of God; as, "I say such men "shall go to hell for so doing." 61

I think that I may close this chapter by asserting confidently that the use of "shall" and "will" according to the modern idiom has been familiar to English authors from the time of Chaucer downwards. On the other hand, I do not maintain that the nice distinction between these forms was uniformly or accurately observed by all our writers during these centuries. I do not assert that the

59 See Latimer's Third, Fourth, and Sixth Sermons before Edward VI., and compare the Second Sermon on the Card.' 60 Second Sermon on the Card (ad fin.).

61 First Sermon on the Card.

practice now established by the example of our best authors and the usage of cultivated conversation can be considered as settled until modern times. The difference, however, was recognised, and the idiom grew and strengthened until it has become part and parcel of the English language, capable of being embodied in a rule of grammar, and founded on a clear and definite principle.