Arrrrgggh! I hate it when people use "f" to represent the long "s"
of olden days. If you look at the originals, it is always more or
less clear which characters are f's and which are s's because the loops
curve in opposite directions for handwriting, the printed versions are
clearly distinguished by having a full crossbar on the "f" but only a
tick on the right side of the vertical stroke of the "s". There are
many pairs of words where an "s" can be changed to an "f" to give a
different meaning, both in French and in English, so there is definite
harm in misreprenting the old way of writing. Any time you don't have
a font with a distinct "long s", it is far preferable to use the
ordinary "short s"....
The reference is: "(a) Voyez du Bouchet, hift. de Courtenay,
pages 194.
HIST
& fuivanees."
SUIVANTES (I wonder how that
"t" came out as an "e")
"Robert, moine de S. Remy de Reims, en fon hiftoire de la Terre
Sainte
SON HISTOIRE
liv. IV. a ecrit, que la maifon de Melun fortoit d'une fource
royale,
MAISON SORTOIT SOURCE
(a) l'on a raffemble (b) des titres & monumens de cette
grande maifon
RASSEMBLE
MAISON
deftinez pour une hiftoire genealogique plus complette, qu'on ne
la peut
DESTINEZ HISTOIRE
donner ici. Le premier de cerre ancienne maifon, dont la memoire
s'eft
CETTE MAISON EST
confervee jufqu'a prefent eft."
CONSERVEE JUSQU
PRESENT EST
Well, ok, there was no ambiguity in this passage, but that was just luck.
It's hard enough dealing with archaisms like "destinez" for
"destines"
without having to watch out for f's as well. (At least the s's at the
ends of words were never written "long," so that's a help!)
John Chandler