us. vii. APRIL 12, 1913.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
283
ree years before the death of the Rector
Thruxton, so that he must, early in life,
ive come under the influence of his maternal
andfather the Puritan minister a circum-
ance which renders his conversion to
oman Catholicism not many years later
mewhat extraordinary. When Dorothy
>pe made her will in 1668, her two sons,
"illiam and Alexander, were serving their
)prenticeships. Nearly all biographies of
ie poet state that his father was a
len-draper, but this is not borne out
T contemporary documents. At various
tervals, in 1675.. 1677, 1682, 1684, 1698,
id 1700, are references to "Alexander
Dpe of London, merchant." He appears
the 'London Directory' of 1677 as ring in Broad Street, which lay wholly
partly in the parish of St. Bennet- ink ; and in the Churchwardens' Accounts
this parish of the year 1679 is an ttry of the fee received from him for ie burial of his wife Magdalen: "Reed, om Mr. Allexander Pope for Buriall of his ife Ground and Great Bell I8s. 4rf." Lists ratepayers show that he came to live in ie parish after Christmas, 1677, and left )fore Easter, 1680. In 1684 the two others, William and Alexander, then in irtnership, were engaged in a suit concern - g parcels of linen cloth and other goods, Id in Virginia in 1677, in payment for hich they were to receive several thousands
pounds of tobacco. They did- a con- ierable trade with Virginia, for they nployed a factor in the colony for the induct of their business. Lastly, Alex- ider was, both in 1698 and 1700, endeavour - g to recover 600?. said to have been lent 'i him in 1675 on a mortgage of those same nds in Buckinghamshire which were the urce of trouble in 1715. It is important
observe that, as in 1700 he still styles mself " of London, merchant," he had >t then retired to Binfield, and that in ^sequence the poet's home for his first reive years (1688 to 1700) was in London >t at * Binfield, as^Dr. Johnson believed. 11 that can be told of the later portion of te merchant's life has been recounted se where.
In view of what has been written here, will probably be conceded that Pope was deed descended from " a very tolerable mily." His forefathers held no exalted )sitions, but were substantial people of ie middle class. And it may be noted, as matter of more importance, that both his ther and grandfather Were men of educa-
References to the Chancery suits quoted
are : In the series of Charles L, P. 19/48,
P. 50/59, P. 59/5, and W. 88/61. In the
series " before 1714," Reynardson 86/84,
and Hamilton 266/67. In the series 1714
to 1758, No. 9/19. F. J. POPE.
17, Holland Road, Kensington.
LATIN PRONUNCIATION.
THIS subject was discussed at length in the Tenth Series (ix. 81, 131, 175, 251, 314, 351, 511), and was then concluded by an editorial note : " We cannot spare further space for this subject " ; but perhaps I may be permitted to revert to it by calling attention to certain evidence which at that time was not referred to by any of your contributors, presumably because it is drawn from a field which unfortunately receives Jess attention than it deserves in this country. The late Prof. Skeat and other contributors then showed conclusively, to my mind that the so-called " new pronunciation " was the real pronunciation of Latin in classical times ; but nobody referred to the very striking evidence afforded by Greek papyri, and to their testimony as to v I should like to draw attention. It is natural that after the Roman conquest of Egypt, Latin words and names should have begun to appear in the Greek documents written in that country. In the first century of our era Latin words are rare, and almost confined to military terms ; in the second and third centuries their number increases ; but it was not till after the reforms of Diocletian that they were taken over in large quantities. From the beginning, however, there were numerous Romans in the country, from the prefect down to private soldiers or traders, and their names are of fairly common occurrence in papyri.
Now in the earlier Roman period the invariable Greek transliteration of Latin consonantal v is ov. This is surely suffi- cient evidence for the w pronunciation of v, for then and later ov was used also to express the Latin vocalic u. The supposi- tion is further confirmed by the fact that later, when the pronunciation of v had changed, a new transliteration was adopted, namely, ft. I fancy that by an exhaustive examination of the papyri it could be determined, within comparatively narrow limits of time, when this change occurred. I have not under- taken such an investigation myself, but, judging from a fairly extensive study of papyrus texts for other purposes, I should be inclined to date the change during the
