OCRed data provided
for searching only. APPENDIX II
FORMATION OF THE AUTHORIZED GRAMMAR
THE COLET-LILY FIRST PART and the Erasmus-Lily materials for the second
part were gradually revised and supplemented to become the authorized grammar. Wolsey states in his edition of 1529 that the Colet-Lily first part was already so authorized, "oIbus aliis totius Anglig scholis prescripta." The Convocation of Canterbury was also in 1529 taking steps toward an authorized grammar.' There are clear indications that by 1534 the chief competitors of both parts had for some reason dropped out. These were the grammatical works of Stanbridge and Whittinton. The various grammatical and other works of Stanbridge except the Vocabula tend to have their last dated editions in 1529 or 1530. But the dccidentia as revised by Whittinton had some half a dozen known editions from 1529, the last dated one in S. T. C. being 1534, an undated one being guessed as 1550. It looks as if the ,fccidentia had not been prohibited by 1529, as Wolsey's statement would lead us to suppose; but for some reason it also practically suspended publication after 1534.
Whittinton's own grammatical works show a similar demarcation. His Dechnationes nominum has its last dated edition in 1533. De heterocTttis nominibus has its final dated edition in 1533. De nominum generibus [15343Ã De octo partsbus crcationis [1533}, De syllabarum quantitatibus [1530?}. De synonymis, 1533. Syntaxis, 1533. Yerborum Praeterita, 11535?1Ã Yulgaria, 1533. Incidentally, the second and apparently the Iast edition of the Vulgaria of Horman dates 1530. When Ascham in the Scholemaster some thirty-years later condemns the Vulgaria of Norman and of Whittinton, he is flogging horses long dead; they belonged to his grammar school days, knd had been obsolete for many a year, as were most of the practises he condemns.
For some reason, Stanbridge and Whittinton went out wholly about 1534, while Lily continues strong. The competitors of the Colet-Lily first part, except Stanbridge's lecidentia, cease around 1529 or 1530, tending to confirm the statement of Wolsey in 1529 that the Colet-Lily first part was already the authorized work. It would seem clear also that about 1534 the competitors of Lily ceased to be published; at least, ceased to be published regularly and in quantity. One suspects that this date is in itself ominous. The old texts were shot through with "superstition" as well as poor Latin, in their illustrations and elsewhere. These had been Roman Catholic; Lily was merely pagan. But whatever the reason, the fact seems to be that by 1534 the works of Lily had won the field. The next problem was to revise and supplement them into one complete and authentic whole. This also was a more gradual process than has usually been supposed.
I See Vol. I, pp, 121-1,23. Flynn, V, I., "The Grammatical Writings of William Lily, ?1468-?l523; ' Tht Papers of the Bibliographical Society of 14mer4ca, Vol. =V11, pp. 85-113, came into print only in time to be recorded here.
69o
[ Volume
One ] 
