Trown i gyd a n bryd i n bro dir at Dduw Archwn neu gurrwn fe agorir [VI.]-AWDWL DDUWIOL.1 SION TUDUR. Duw naf Arglwydd rhwydd pan fo rhaid eur-ner Arno mae f' ymddiriaid Dwyn i m Cof Duw wynn i m Caid Duw f' anwyl hwde f' enaid O gnawd enaid gnawd y gwnaf adeil wydd Om dieu nerth i m Duw naf A dawn jach gair Duw n Uchaf Uchaf brenin llin pob llwydd, diwaelaf Ior haelaf air hylwydd Uchaf t'wyfog rhywiog rhwydd O fwy eurglod yw f' arglwydd [P. 21.] Nid Arglwydd hylwydd i hoyw lu eurglod Ond Arglwydd y gallu Nid Amherawdr llywiawdr llu Nid tywyfawg ond Iefu Iefu naf haelaf hylaw dda wych rym Oedd heb ddechreu arnaw Iefu fydd llywydd rhag-llaw A i ddydd heb ddiwedd iddaw I w ddawn wir gyfiawn Ior gofiad, Credaf Cariadus Un mab rhad Iefu gadarn fy geidwad I enaid dyn Oen y tad 1 "A Godly Ode." 85 5 10 15 20 [P. 22.] Iefu 'n newis pris o i fwydd i n gwydd Yw n gweddi n dragywydd Iefu yw nghof mab ddofydd Iefu dad bob nos a dydd. 30 35 Dydd a ry r Iefu wiw gu nid gau Ac ni thyrr un wedd er mawredd mau A r dydd a dry n hwyr nid llwyr1 wellau 40 Am hyn yn ddwyfol liw ddydd golau 45 Er blys Cnawd na i ffrawd naws ffrydiau, trach want Ar union lwyddiant na wnawn wleddau Ior Dduw ymprydiodd yn wir ddiau 50 [P. 23.] Gwr yw Duw a wnaeth bob arfaethau. 55 60 Beunydd yr efrydd yn ddiboenau, rhed I ddywedyd2 y mud ammodau Cyfar I glywed fyddar o glod foddau Meirwon ddynion ddoniau ai n fywion 65 O'i foddion roddion a i rinweddau Ac ir Deml pan ddaeth gwr diammau ged A chredwn i Dduw a i wyth radau, mawl [P. 24.] Nef awr Ri gwrawl a i ragorau Credo addoliaeth Credu i ddelwau 1 Claiar inserted in the margin. 80 2 A u written by I. ab D. above the last y of this word (so as to make dywedud), but the y is left intact, and not expuncted. 4 Altered from oreu, 3 MS, a r. 5 This line is underscored (apparently by I. ab D.) with a line, of which only about half is continuous. Is this meant, like his regular dotted line, to indicate a doubtful reading? (To be continued.) SIR WILLIAM JONES AS LINGUIST AND AUTHOR. BY THE REV. JOHN DAVIES, M.A. (Read before the Society, March 10th, 1887.) I HAVE undertaken to attempt a definition of the position which belongs to Sir W. Jones as a linguist and as an author. At the close of his brief career-he was only forty-seven when he died-his fame as a scholar, in many departments of literature, had risen to the highest point: its sound “had gone into all lands." It was universally acknowledged that his attainments were such as to place him in the fore-front of the scholars of his time; if I were to add, of all the scholars of the eighteenth century, I should affirm no more than of right belonged to him, and was generally admitted. But. after Sir W. Jones, Colebrook, Wilkins, Wilford, and others had studied the Sanskrit language, and had discovered its connection with the Teutonic, Celtic, and other forms of speech, revealing, like Columbus, the wonders of an unknown land, the study of the Sanskrit language and Sanskrit literature was taken up by many German scholars, such as Bopp, Grimm, Schlegel, and, in more modern times, by Weber, Roth, Bötlingk, Schleicher and many others, and their abundant labours in this field have been so successful that they have cast the attainments of their predecessors somewhat into the back-ground. The time, therefore, seems favourable for an attempt to bring more fully into view the attainments of our countrymen in this department, and to show how much we owe to the hardy and successful labours of the pioneers who |