Can you recognise this?

It appears to be written in an Anglo-Saxon unical, with Latin interspersed.

The image below is from the Book of Kells, and provides a more elegant example of unical:



The reason i believe it may be Anglo-Saxon, is the use of the letter thorn (Ƿ, ƿ)--but that could also mean that the document comes from Old Norse or Icelandic. However, unical script was falling into disuse by the time Christianity (and therefore Latin) reached the Norse and the Icelanders, so that is why i suspect it is from an Anglo-Saxon source. Olaf Tryggvasson forced the Norse to convert to Christianity, including the population of Iceland, and he committed suicide in 1000 AD. Unical had already fallen into disuse by then.

That's less recognizable.

Old English is far more harder than one can imagine.

Old English. Those are the opening lines (or one version of them) of Beauwulf the epic poem, of Danish origin, first transcribed in Anglo-Saxon probably some-where around the 7th Century c.e.

No, no . . . harder is already a comparative, so you don't need "more." You should write: Old English is far harder than one can imagine.

I learned to read Anglo-Saxon more than 40 years ago when i was at university. I can't read it these days because i haven't used the language since then, so i've forgotten much of the vocabulary. It will be hard for you for the same reasons that English is hard. It's not an accident or mere whimsy which has assigned the name Old English to Anglo-Saxon. Many aspects of the language (such as syntax, originally derived from Old Frisian) haven't changed in the intervening 1500 years. Any English speaker should be able to learn Anglo-Saxon, and it's not that hard. However, it will be as difficult for a non-native speaker of English as it was for them to learn English. I also don't see the utility in you attempting to learn Anglo-Saxon, but, each to his own, said the old lady as she kissed the cow.