every one who has examined
our ancient writers of romance, during the 12th and 13th centuries, must
know that the name of Alfred was thus disfigured by them. Thus, two
kings of England, Alfred and Henry, have a claim to that honour. But
whence is it that the historian of Alfred, Asser, as well as William of
Malmesbury, have mentioned the different translations of this prince,
without having noticed that of Aesop?[29] Is it credible that an
Anglo-Saxon version of the ninth century would have been intelligible to
Mary, who had only learned the English of the thirteenth? Had not the
lapse of time, and the descents of the Danes and Normans in the eleventh
century, contributed, in the first place, to alter the Anglo-Saxon? and
afterwards, during the twelfth, the rest of the people from the northern
and western provinces of France, having become dependent upon England,
did not they, likewise, by their commerce, and residence in that
country, introduce a considerable change into its language? The names of
Seneschal, Justiciar, Viscount, Provost, Bailiff, Vassal, &c. which
occur in these fables, both in the Latin text and French translation by
Mary, ought naturally to have been found in the English version. Now
these several terms were all, according to Madox, introduced by the
Normans;[30] and the morals to these fables, which make frequent
allusion to the feudal system, prove more and more, that this English
translation must have been posterior to the time of Alfred.

In the last place, the Harleian MS. No. 4333, ascribes the translation
to King Henry. The Normans were acquainted with the fables of Aesop, or,
at least, those which were attributed to him during the middle ages. The
collateral heirs of Raoul de Vassy, who died in 1064, when, after the
death of William the Conqueror, they found means to establish their
claims against Robert Courthose; in asserting it, reproach his father
with having made the _lion's partition_ in seizing Upon their
inheritance.[31]

This proverbial expression very clearly shews that the writings of the
Greek fabulist, or at least of those who had followed him, were known to
the Normans from the eleventh century. It is possible, therefore, that
Henry I. might have studied and translated them into English. Again, all
historians agree in giving this prince the title of _Beauclerk_, though
no one has assigned any reason for a designation so honourable: and this
opinion would justify history, which