a greater indifference to it than we feel to-day.
This feeling was shared, as we know, by the great
humanists of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,
when the revival of interest in the Greek and Latin
languages and literatures begins. Petrarch, Poggio
Bracciolini, and the other great leaders in the movement
were concerned with the literary aspects of the classics,
and the scholars of succeeding generations, so far
as they studied the language, confined their attention
to that of the great Latin stylists. The first
student to conceive of the existence of popular Latin
as a form of speech which differed from formal literary
Latin, seems to have been the French scholar, Henri
Etienne. In a little pamphlet on the language
and style of Plautus, written toward the end of the
sixteenth century, he noted the likeness between French
and the language of the Latin dramatist, without,
however, clearly perceiving that the reason for this
similarity lay in the fact that the comedies of Plautus
reflect the spoken language of his time, and that
French and the other Romance languages have developed
out of this, rather than from literary Latin.
Not until the middle of the eighteenth century was
this truth clearly recognized, and then almost simultaneously
on both sides of the Rhine.
It was left for the nineteenth century, however, to
furnish scientific proof of the correctness of this
hypothesis, and it was a fitting thing that the existence
of an unbroken line of connection between popular Latin
of the third century before our era, and the Romance
languages of the nineteenth century, should have been
established at the same time by a Latinist engaged
in the study of Plautus, and a Romance philologist
working upward toward Latin. The Latin scholar
was Ritschl, who showed that the deviations from the
formal standard which one finds in Plautus are not
anomalies or mistakes, but specimens of colloquial
Latin which can be traced down into the later period.
The Romance philologist was Diez, who found that certain
forms and words, especially those from the vocabulary
of every-day life, which are common to many of the
Romance languages, are not to be found in serious
Latin literature at all, but occur only in those compositions,
like comedy, satire, or the realistic romance, which
reflect the speech of the every-day man. This
discovery made it clear that the Romance languages
are related to folk Latin, not to literary Latin.
It is sixty years since the study of vulgar Latin was
put on a scientific basis by the investigations of
these two men, and during that period the Latinist
and the Romance philologist have joined hands in extending
our knowledge of it. From the Latin side a great
impetus was given to the work by the foundation in
1884 of Woelfflin’s Archiv fuer lateinische
Lexikographie und Grammatik. This periodical,
as is well known, was intended to prepare the way
for the publication of the Latin Thesaurus,
which the five German Academies are now bringing out.