Dunstan, Aethelwold, and Isidorean Exegesis in Old English Glosses: Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley...

DUNSTAN,�THELWOLD, AND ISIDOREAN EXEGESIS IN OLD

ENGLISHGLOSSES: OXFORD, BODLEIAN LIBRARY BODLEY 319

by matthew t. hussey

Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley 319 is one of the three manuscripts written by thescribe of the Exeter Book of Old English poetry in the later tenth century; it wasoriginally entirely in Latin, but an Old English gloss was added to the last chapterin the eleventh century.This paper argues that the gloss shares lexical and stylisticfeatures with a group of Old English texts recently linked to the importantBenedictine reformer and author, �thelwold of Winchester. This a⁄liation withthese Old English texts, especially the Royal Psalter (London, British Library Royal2.B.v), suggests that the copy of Isidore’s De ¢de catholica in Bodley 319 was studiedin the intellectual circles of �thelwold and Dunstan in the decades following theirtime together in Glastonbury in the mid-tenth century. Like the Royal Psalter, theBodley 319 gloss reveals an experimental foray into reproducing the complexities ofLatin typological thought in the vernacular. Furthermore, the connections betweenBodley 319 and this speci¢c intellectual and literary milieu can shed light onthe earlier history of Bodley 319 and perhaps its sister manuscripts, London,Lambeth Palace 149 and the Exeter Book. Drawing a connection between thethree manuscriptsçincluding one of the most important Anglo-Saxon poeticcollectionsçand Dunstan and �thelwold provides a new context for understand-ing the emergence of the literary vernacular in the later tenth and early eleventhcenturies.

Rarely discussed for its own merits, Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley 3191 morefrequently can be found on the periphery of some intensive debates touching itspaleography, codicology and early history. Yet this manuscript has some veryengaging qualities and is extremely well-connected; ¢rst of all, the book holds abeautifully written Latin text with an interlinear Old English gloss to the lastchapter; second, this gloss is in an Old English more artful than the usualcalque, showing signs of connection to a particular intellectual milieu; andthird, but of no less importance, the manuscript’s design, construction, andscript reveal that it shares its origin with one the most famous Anglo-Saxoncultural productions, the Exeter Book of Old English poetry. For these reasonsBodley 319 is due a substantial reexamination. By reviewing a few material aspects

1 N. R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957), no. 308; HelmutGneuss, Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts: A List of Manuscripts and Manuscript FragmentsWritten or Owned in England up to 1100, Medieval and RenaissanceTexts and Studies, vol. 241(Tempe, AZ, 2001), no. 568.

The Review of English Studies, New Series� The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press 2009; all rights reserveddoi:10.1093/res/hgp050

The Review of English Studies Advance Access published June 25, 2009 at U

niversity of Prince Edw

ard Island on March 2, 2013

http://res.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

http://res.oxfordjournals.org/

of the codex and undertaking an analysis of the Old English gloss, a claim can bemade that Bodley 319 allows us a fuller understanding of later tenth-century andearly eleventh-century English literary and intellectual history. The Old Englishgloss shares stylistic and lexical features with texts recently associated withDunstan and �thelwold, and in turn, this shared lexical material suggests a linkbetween the scriptorium which produced Bodley 319 (and by extension the ExeterBook), and the Dunstanian or �thelwoldian scholarship of the Benedictinereform movement.

Bodley 319 is a copy of Isidore of Seville’sDe ¢de catholica contra iudaeos, a treatisein two books on Old Testament prophecies as well as Christian history and doc-trine.2 In addition to the complete copy of Isidore’s Latin text, the ¢nal chapter ofBook 2,‘Recapitulatio operatio’ [sic] (‘Recapitulatio operis’ in the PL) has an inter-linear gloss in Old English.3 The book itself is made of a creamy and relativelysmoothly ¢nished parchment, with occasional thin leaves, pricked and ruled fortwenty-three lines per page. There are seventy-four leaves and they measure320mm� 220mm. with a writing space of about 233mm�142mm. (though the¢nal leaf has its lower half cut out). The script is a distinct Anglo-Saxon squareminuscule that gives the writing a very clear and formal appearance, likely writtenin the latter half of the tenth century.4 A number of characteristics link this bookwith two others: its parchment, size, ruling, and layout are very similar to that ofExeter, Cathedral Library 3501 (the ‘Exeter Book’) and London, Lambeth PalaceLibrary 149, which is somewhat smaller. All three books are ruled for 22^24 linesper page, and laid out in similar long lines with ample space. Additionally, as hasbeen frequently discussed, a single scribe appears to be responsible for the mainscript in all three books.5 This identical scribe has led most scholars to attribute

2 The standard edition of Isidore’s De ¢de catholica contra iudaeos (henceforth De ¢de) is J.-P.Migne’s Patrologia Latina, 221 vols (Paris, 1844^1891) vol. 83, cols 450^538. Further citationsas PL volume number, column number.

3 The Old English gloss, along with the Latin text it glosses has been edited twice byA. Napier: ‘Altenglische Glossen zu Isidor’s Contra Judaeos’, Englische Studien, 13 (1889),25^7 and in Old English Glosses: Chie£y Unpublished (Oxford, 1900), no. 40 (pp. 205^7).Patrizia Lendinara,‘Old English Renderings of Latin tabernaculum and tentorium’, Anglo-Saxonica, ed. K. R. Grinda and C.-D.Wetzel (Munich, 1993), 289^325 (305 n. 80) announcesa new edition of the gloss to be forthcoming.

4 See Ker, no. 308 and Gneuss, Handlist, no. 568. For more extended discussions of thedate of the Latin main textçand the the script of the Exeter Bookçsee Robin Flower,‘TheScript of the Exeter Book’, in The Exeter Book of Old English Poetry, eds R.W. Chambers, M.Fo« rster and R. Flower (London, 1933), 83^90, who dates the script between 970 and 990 and‘rather early than late in that period’ (p. 89); Patrick Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter: A Tenth-Century Cultural History (Woodbridge, 1993), 48^94, especially 77, 80 and 94, who dates itbetween 950 and 970; and Richard Gameson,‘The origin of the Exeter Book of Old EnglishPoetry’, Anglo-Saxon England, 25 (1996), 135^85, especially 160 and 166, who dates it between960 and 980.5 In the facsimile of the Exeter Book, Robin Flower, ‘The Script’, 85, credited KennethSisam with discovering the identical hand in the Exeter Book and Lambeth 149. Neil Ker,reviewing the 1933 facsimile noted that Bodley 319 was in the same script as the ExeterBook and Lambeth 149; seeMedium�vum, 2 (1933), 224^31 (230).These linksçand links to

2 of 24 matthew t. hussey

at University of Prince E

dward Island on M

arch 2, 2013http://res.oxfordjournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from


Bodley 319, Lambeth 149 and the Exeter Book of Old English poetry to a singlelate tenth-century foundation.

Seeing as this foundation is responsible for the Exeter Book, its exact locationhas been vigourously debated, with Exeter itself, Crediton,Tavistock, Canterbury,and Glastonbury all put forward.6 Nonetheless, before its donation by Leofric, theprovenances of the Exeter Book, as well as that of Lambeth 149 and Bodley 319, arefor the most part unknown. The Exeter Book ¢rst appears in Leofric’s famousdonation list, which dates to near 1072; before that, nothing is securely knownabout the manuscript’s history. Bodley 319 may or may not be included onLeofric’s list. Ker claims that it was ‘probably . . . given to Exeter by BishopLeofric’.7 In the 1506 catalogue of Exeter’s books, there are two copies ofIsidore’s De ¢de, identi¢able with Bodley 319 and Oxford, Bodleian LibraryBodley 394. In the 1327 inventory of the library, only one item containingIsidore’s De ¢de is listed, and the wording of this entry and the wording of theearly title added to Bodley 394 are quite close. This led Richard Gameson tosuggest that Bodley 394 is more likely the De ¢de in the Exeter catalogue of 1327,and thus Bodley 319 probably came to Exeter between 1327 and 1506.8 This mayhave been the case, but without further positive evidence, it remains possible thatBodley 319 was in Exeter before 1327. Additionally, Teresa Webber noted that amanuscript of the late eleventh century from SalisburyçLondon, BritishLibrary Royal 5.e.xviçis probably a copy of Bodley 319. Lambeth 149 appears tohave been in Salisbury as well, in roughly the same period.9 For the history ofBodley 319, all we know is that it was written somewhere in the south of Englandand it may have come to Exeter after 1327, but was in Exeter before 1506.10

a second trio of booksçhave been discussed intensively by Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter,33^47 and Gameson,‘The origin’, 162^77.

6 The same set of data suggestsçwithout ruling outça number of possibilities for thebook’s origins. Conner argues for Exeter in Anglo-Saxon Exeter, passim; Gameson suggestsGlastonbury or Crediton in ‘The origin’, 179. Michael Swanton suggested Tavistock,‘Introduction’, in Pages from the Exeter Book, ed. Michael Swanton, Exeter UniversityOccasional Papers (Exeter, 1974), ii. Recently, Robert M. Butler, ‘Glastonbury and theEarly History of the Exeter Book’, in Old English Literature in its Manuscript Context, ed.Joyce Tally Lionarons, Medieval European Studies, vol. 5 (Morgantown, WV, 2004),173^215, has argued for Glastonbury. Jane Rosenthal, ‘The Ponti¢cal of Saint Dunstan’, inSt. Dunstan: His Life, Times, and Cult, eds Nigel Ramsey, Margaret Sparks, and T. W. T.Tatton-Brown (Woodbridge, 1992), 143^63 (147^8), relays that David Dumville, in personalcommunication of 16 August 1988, suggested Canterbury as an origin for the Exeter Book,Bodley 319, and Lambeth 149.

7 Ker, Catalogue, 360.8 Gameson,‘The origin’, 169^70.

9 Teresa Webber, Scribes and Scholars at Salisbury Cathedral c. 1075-1125 (Oxford, 1992), 68.10 It is possible that Bodley 319 came to Exeter amongst the many books bequeathed toExeter by John Grandisson, when he was bishop between 1327 and 1369, though by thefourteenth century its script would have been somewhat archaic. However, Grandissonborrowed and bought books from numerous sources, so even if Bodley 319 could belinked to Grandisson’s acquisitions, its earlier medieval provenence would remain a mys-tery. On the collection of medieval manuscripts at Exeter and Grandisson’s books, seeN. R. Ker, Ian Campbell Cunningham and Andrew G. Watson, Medieval Manuscripts in

dunstan, �thelwold, and isidorean exegesis 3 of 24


dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Robert Butler speculates that Bodley 319 traveled with its sister-manuscript,Lambeth 149,11 and if this was the case, slightly more would be known of its earlyhistory. Lambeth 149 is probably listed in Leofric’s donation and is inscribed withthe name Leofric on its last folio (fol. 138v).12 However, Lambeth 149 bears aninscription of donation that predates its Leofrician inscription,13 and this tellshow the book, among others, was donated to a monastery of St. Mary in a placewhose name has been ¢rst scratched out, and then blotted out when a reagent wasapplied some time afterwards.The inscription records how a dux�thelweard gave‘this book also’ to St. Mary’s in 1018.14 The book may have been donated alongwith vestments, treasures, or other assets, and this donation may have includedother books, but no other record of the donation survives.The blotted letters havethemselves caused quite a bit of ink to be spent, with Exeter, Crediton, Tavistock,and Glastonbury having been suggested as places with a monastery dedicated toSt. Mary and linked to the ealdorman �thelweard in around 1018.15 If a place-name could be read, it would tell us where the book was donated in 1018, andpossibly where Bodley 319 and the Exeter Book were donated as well, if the‘quoq5ue4’ implies Bodley 319’s sister manuscripts. In turn, this place-namecould tell us where the book later may have been acquired by Leofric. It is perhapsimportant to note that Bodley 319 too has been defaced in the place where any

British Libraries, 4 vols (Oxford, 1969^2002), vol. 2: Abbotsfold ^ Keele (1977), 800^46 andL. J. Lloyd and Audrey Erskine,The Library and Archives of Exeter Cathedral, 3rd edn (Exeter,2004). On Grandisson himself, see Audrey Erskine, ‘Grandison, John (1292^1369)’, OxfordDictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004 [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/11238, accessed August 2008].11 As Butler suggests, ‘Glastonbury’, 181^8, by pressing the meaning of ‘quoque’. Besidesthis possible sense of the Lambeth 149 inscription and the shared provenance(s) of the twobooks, there is no evidence they traveled together.

12 See Michael Lapidge,‘Surviving Booklists from Anglo-Saxon England’, in Learning andLiterature in Anglo-Saxon England: Studies Presented to Peter Clemoes on the Occasion of his Sixty-¢fth Birthday, ed. Michael Lapidge and Helmut Gneuss (Cambridge, 1985), 33^89 (68); seealso Lapidge, The Anglo-Saxon Library (Oxford, 2006), 139^40; Gameson, ‘The origin’, 171.For a discussion and an edition of Leofric’s list, see Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 1^21 and226^35. Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 210^3, also discusses the various possibilities for thename, and argues for a di¡erent Leofric, abbot of Exeter in the late tenth century.13 Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 210^3 argues that the name Leofric on the folio predatesthe donation inscription above it.

14 The text reads ‘hunc quoq5ue4 uoluminem’ on Lambeth 149, fol. 138v. Discussed indetail by Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 210^4; Gameson, ‘The origin’, 170^2; and Butler,‘Glastonbury’, 182^94. For a facsimile, see Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, plate IX andGameson,‘The origin’, plate VI.

15 Frances Rose-Troup,‘The Ancient Monastery of St. Mary and St. Peter at Exeter: 650-1050’, Report and Transactions of the Devonshire Association for the Advancement of Science,Literature and Art, 52 (1931), 179^220 (206^7), suggests Exeter. Flower, ‘The Script’, 87,argues against this. Joyce Hill, ‘The Exeter Book and Lambeth Palace Library MS 149: AReconsideration’, American Notes and Queries, 24 (1986), 112^6, and ‘The Exeter Book andLambeth Palace Library MS 149: The Monasterium of Sancta Maria’, American Notes andQueries, n.s. 1 (1988), 5^8, argues for Crediton against Exeter. Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter,35^6, argues for Tavistock. Butler, who gives an account of this particular crux,‘Glastonbury’, 182^4, makes a case for Glastonbury, 184^93.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


similar inscription would be found.The meaning of this excision of the last pageis impossible to know, but it is suggestive.16 All that can be reasonably stated isthat Bodley 319 was written in an unknown center, probably between 950-980; itwas glossed in the eleventh century; it seems to have been used as an exemplar inSalisbury around 1100; the manuscript was in Exeter at least by 1506 and wasdonated to the Bodleian Library in 1602.

The absence of de¢nitive evidence and the proliferation of suggestive signsmakes it very di⁄cult to determine the early history of Bodley 319. However, itsOld English gloss has never been fully examined. The gloss was added betweenthe lines of the last chapter of Isidore’s De ¢de in the eleventh century, providing aword by word translation of the Latin below it (for a diplomatic edition, see theappendix). As my analysis below demonstrates, despite its brevity, the Bodley 319gloss shows close lexical and literary a⁄liations with several other Latin toEnglish translation projects of the mid to late tenth and early eleventh centuries.Particularly, there are some similarities between the gloss and the so-called‘Winchester’ Old English, some correspondences with the Old English translationof the Rule of Saint Benedict, and some correlations to the Old English glosses toAldhelm’s Prosa de virginitate found in Brussels, Bibliothe' que Royale 165017 andOxford, Bodleian Library Digby 146;18 but most of all, the Bodley 319 glossshows marked a⁄liations with the Old English gloss to the psalter in London,British Library Royal 2.B.v.19 These last three texts (Old English Rule, Brusselsand Digby Aldhelm glosses and the Royal Psalter gloss) have been linked byMechthild Gretsch to the earliest proto-reform scholarship of Dunstan and�thelwold while they still were together in Glastonbury between 939 and 954.20

The evidence of the Old English glosses shared between the Royal Psalter andBodley 319 points to strong a⁄liations with the emergent vernacular literary

16 The last folio of Bodley 319 is cut out, perhaps by the Leofrician donor, perhaps toremove traces of previous ownershipçsuch as an �thelweardian donation inscriptionçorindeed, perhaps to remove traces of the Leofrician inscription itself; this act could havehappened in Leofric’s Exeter or in Osmund’s or Roger’s Salisbury (or somewhere elsealtogether). If there was excision of an inscription at the former (Leofric’s Exeter), thebook was acquired from an unknown location (where, perhaps, it had been donated in1018) and given to Exeter before it went on to Salisbury half a century later. If there wasan excision at the latter (Salisbury), the book could have come from Leofric’s Exeter, orelsewhere.The excision could likewise been done at any point in the book’s history before1602. This £urry of hypotheses is a result of lack of evidence, and while specious, at leastindicates the possibilities for Bodley 319’s history.

17 Ker, Catalogue, no. 8 and Gneuss, Handlist, no. 806. Facsimile in Aldhelm’s De LaudibusVirginitatis with Latin and Old English Glosses: Manuscript 1650 of the Royal Library in Brussels,ed. George van Langenhove (Bruges, 1941). For a new description of contents and codicol-ogy, as well as a facsimile, see Rolf Bremmer and Kees Dekker, Manuscripts in the LowCountries, Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts in Micro¢che Facsimile 13 (Tempe, AZ, 2006), no. 18.

18 Ker, Catalogue, no. 320 and Gneuss, Handlist, no. 613.19 Fritz Roeder (ed.), Der altenglische Regius Psalter: eine interlinearversion in hs. Royal 2.B.5 desBrit. Mus. (Tu« bingen, 1904). Henceforth cited by Royal with psalm number and verse.

20 Mechthild Gretsch, The Intellectual Foundations of the English Benedictine Reform,Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England 25 (Cambridge, 1999).



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


projects of Dunstan and �thelwold, perhaps stemming from their time togetherin Glastonbury, but soon disseminated through Abingdon, Winchester,Canterbury and elsewhere. In turn, this link between Bodley 319 and later OldEnglish glossing practice broadens our understanding of the scope of theDunstanian and �thelwoldian scholarly project during the Benedictine move-ment and may illuminate Bodley 319’s early provenance and use.

In Bodley 319, the ¢nal chapter of Isidore’s De ¢de is numbered ‘XXVII’ andtitled ‘Recapitulatio operatio’ [sic] in a higher grade capital script.21 Like theothers, the text of the ¢nal chapter opens with a large simply designed capital,here an ‘O’ (in the vocative ‘O infelicium iudaeorum de£enda dementia’). Themain Latin text of the last chapter is written in the same famous later tenth-century script as the rest of the book, while the Old English gloss is in a round,variable, and informal eleventh-century hand. In his Catalogue, Ker writes onBodley 319: ‘A continuous interlinear gloss on the last two leaves (¡. 74^75) of acopy of Isidore, De miraculis christi, which is written in a square Anglo-Saxonminuscule hand very like that of Lambeth Palace MS. 149 and the ‘‘ExeterBook.’’’22 Ker’s relative pronoun, ‘which’, refers to the Latin text and not thegloss;23 in his heading to the entry, Ker clearly dates the gloss to the ¢rst half ofthe eleventh century as does Napier in both of his editions of the gloss.24

The gloss does not appear to have been planned in the original laying-out ofthe folios but is an accomplished and well-integrated addition, despite signs ofbeing an adaptive and an ad hoc performance. Its size varies from small and tightto a bit more expansive, as it adjusts to the available interlinear space that iscontingent on the ascenders and descenders of the main text. Having no rulingas a guide, the gloss is horizontally uneven and the gloss occasionally overrunsinto marginal space. The script is an eleventh-century insular vernacular hand,and for the most part, the letter-forms are regular with a few notable traits: the ghas a closed loop, the body of the h is made with a curving stroke that ends belowthe baseline, there is exclusive use of the straight and dotted y and the � ratherthan the ð,25 the top cross stroke in the abbreviation for and [7] begins with ashort downward tic, and the ¢rst three words of the Old English gloss admitAnglo-Caroline a and g. Despite the gloss having some unevenness in size,variability in placement, and the admission of the Anglo-Caroline letter-forms

21 In the PL, the chapter is numbered XXVIII and titled ‘Recapitulo operis’ (PL 83.536).22 Ker, Catalogue, no. 308 (p. 360).23 Bernard Muir (ed.),The Exeter Anthology of Old English Poetry, 2 vols, rev. 2nd edn (Exeter,2000), I. 25^6 (n. 76) queries the referent of Ker’s ‘which’ in the entry on Bodley 319 butdoes not make a conclusion.24 Napier, ‘Altenglische Glossen’, 25 and Old English Glosses, xxi. Only N. F. Blake, ‘TheScribe of the Exeter Book’, Neophilologus, 46 (1962), 316^9 (316^7) takes the ‘which’ as refer-ring to the Old English gloss and suggests the possibility of a tenth-century date.

25 Blake notes the exclusive use of the �,‘The Scribe of the Exeter Book’, 316.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


(a and g in the ¢rst words),26 it is well-executed, includes some accent marks andsome punctuation, and on the whole re£ects consideration and care, with spon-taneous adjustments to its context and the constraints of the Latin main text.Thegloss is complete, covering each Latin word, and each gloss is usually positionedabove its lemma, and often pronouns are added to indicate the subject of the verb.The regularity of the language, the pedantically positioned gloss-words, theabsence of any other version of this gloss, and its odd appearance at the end(rather than the more usual beginning) of the book suggest that the scribedid not only write the gloss, but composed it. Though the scribe’sswitching from Anglo-Caroline script to a vernacular insular script may showthat he was trained in the later Anglo-Caroline and copying a less familiar insularminuscule in the exemplar, it is also possible the scribe started in his regularhand (Anglo-Caroline) before switching to a Anglo-Saxon minuscule to matchthe main-text hand.27 The scribe may have chosen only to gloss to the last chap-ter, perhaps for its recapitulation of Isidore’s work’s allegorical and exegeticmethod.

Though it is later, the writing of the gloss, like the copying of the main manu-script, probably occurred in a scriptorium of the south-west, and this is sup-ported by dialectal and lexical evidence. Owing to the small amount of it,assessing the dialect and age of the language in the Bodley gloss can only betentative. The language appears to be late West-Saxon in both vocabulary and inits forms. Patrizia Lendinara notes that the gloss has a ‘high percentage of lateWest-Saxon words, e.g. begiman, eala, eornostlice, £�sc (as a semantic loan ofLatin caro), for�gewitan, leahtor, m�rsian (frequent in lWS, but found in alldialects), on, o¡rung, so�f�stnes ‘ueritas’, understandan (its use is also lateAnglian)’.28 The gloss preserves these West-Saxon forms as well: the use of y fori or ie in ongyta� and begyminge ;29 the use of u for eo after w in arwur�ia� andtowurpan;30 and the use of ^nes as a su⁄x instead of Anglian ^nis.31 The gloss hascom in its conjugation of cuman which suggests late West-Saxon.32 West Germanicaþ nasal appears as a, again suggesting later West-Saxon.33 Finally, two otherfeatures suggest a later West-Saxon dialect: preterite plural verbs end in ^un and

26 As noted by Ker, Catalogue, 360; there is a bit more Anglo-Caroline script than Kernotes: the ¢nal a in iudea is Anglo-Caroline, like the a’s in eala.27 In a very di¡erent argument about the non-glossing scribe’s dialect, Blake,‘The Scribeof the Exeter Book’, 318 makes some similar interpretations of the glossing scribe’s com-posing and writing of the gloss.

28 P. Lendinara,‘Old English Renderings’, 305, n. 8029 Alistair Campbell, Old English Grammar (Oxford, 1959), x301. Henceforth,‘Campbell’.

30 Campbell, x321.31 Campbell, x384; this di¡ers from the Exeter Book, see Blake,‘The Scribe’, 317.32 Campbell, x742.

33 Campbell, x130.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


preterite and past participles of weak class 2 verbs end ^ud(e).34 The vocabularyand the dialectal features of the Bodley 319 gloss point to it being copied inWessex and probably in eleventh century, though due to the small amount of thegloss and the fact that West-Saxon had become a widepread written dialect by theeleventh century, dialectal analyses are not de¢nitive.

The Old English gloss in Bodley 319 has lexical and stylistic ties to ‘Winchester’Old English and the related vocabulary of the Royal Psalter gloss, and the parallelusages found in the glosses to Aldhelm’s Prosa de virginitate with some similaritiesto the Old English renderings of Latin words in the �thelwoldian translation ofthe Rule of Saint Benedict; these correspondences best illuminate this gloss’sorigin, if not the manuscript’s. The use of a speci¢c Old English lexicon forglossing speci¢c Latin words moves the general connection to the linguisticsouth-west towards a genuine a⁄liation with the lexical and literary work ofDunstan and �thelwold, which arose in Glastonbury in the middle of the tenthcentury, and developed as these two men went on to their later careers. This linkbetween the Bodley 319 gloss and these later intellectual milieux at the very leastplaces a manuscript copied by the same scribe as the Exeter Book in aDunstanian or �thelwoldian cultural network.

Helmut Gneuss and Walter Hofstetter laid the groundwork for understanding‘Winchester’ literary language.35 Gneuss ¢rst outlined the development ofWinchester usage in West-Saxon by tracing the career of �thelwold toWinchester, where �thelwold taught and disseminated this lexicon. Gneuss alsoexamined studies of Old English semantic ¢elds, to localise theWinchester wordsin a group of late tenth- and early eleventh- century texts. Following Gneuss’svanguard study,Walter Hofstetter has developed and extended our understandingof this lexicon by examining thirteen semantic ¢elds across the Old Englishcorpus, with the result of a fairly clear group of texts which are related to�thelwold’s Winchester and its concerted e¡ort to standardise English prose.36

Mechthild Gretsch has argued for a particular place and time for the earlierdevelopmental stages of �thelwoldian Old English literary language.37 Through acomplex and intensive inquiry into the vernacular (and Latin) glossing of theRoyal Psalter and the works of Aldhelm, as well as the translation of the Rule of

34 These features are often indicative of early and Anglian dialect but in this case repre-sent later West-Saxon or southern forms; see N. F. Blake,‘The Scribe’, 317^8. See Campbellxx385, 757.

35 Mechthild Gretsch notes the distinction between ‘Winchester’ usage and ‘Standard OldEnglish in ‘In Search of Standard Old English’, in Bookmarks from the Past: Studies in OldEnglish Language and Literature in Honour of Helmut Gneuss, eds Lucia Kornexl and UrsulaLenker (Frankfurt and New York, 2003), 33^67, esp. 34^5.

36 Helmut Gneuss, ‘The Origin of Standard Old English and �thelwold’s School atWinchester’, Anglo-Saxon England, 1 (1972), 63^83. Hofstetter’s study is Winchester und derspa« taltenglische Sprachgebrauch: Untersuchungen zu geographischen und zeitlichen Verbreitung alten-glischer Synonyme, Texte und Untersuchungen zu Englischen Philologie 14 (Munich, 1987).See his condensed English version of some of this work in ‘Winchester and the standardi-zation of Old English vocabulary’, Anglo-Saxon England, 17 (1988), 139^61.37 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Saint Benedict, Gretsch has reconstructed an intriguing possible literary history:while they were at Glastonbury together between 939 and 954, �thelwold andDunstan began developing the intellectual underpinnings of this literary verna-cular based on the study of the psalms and the works of Aldhelm. As it developed,this literary Old English evolved and later became central to the Benedictinereforms of the tenth century and the Winchester foundation. Gretsch’s claimsfocus particularly on �thelwold and Glastonbury, and aspects of these claimshave been problematised in reviews of her work. Scott Gwara, especially focusingon the glosses to Aldhelm’s Prosa de virginitate, has shown that the Brussels andDigby Aldhelm manuscripts likely originated at Canterbury before coming toAbingdon, with the resultant suggestion that the study of Aldhelm was spear-headed by Dunstan, and the related Old English vocabulary emerged fromDunstan’s teaching at Glastonbury, Worcester and Canterbury, rather than pri-marily from his student �thelwold.38 Gwara does not take issue with Gretsch’sassessment of the Royal Psalter, a manuscript perhaps written in Glastonbury orAbingdon between about 940 and 960. Between them, Gretsch and Gwara markout the the scholarly legacy of Dunstan, mediated by his students like �thelwold,in foundations later fully or somewhat participating in the Benedictine revival ofthe tenth-century.The characteristic and specialised use of Old English found inthe Royal Psalter, and to an extent the Old English Rule and the Brussels/DigbyAldhelm manuscripts, seems located in these intellectual circles, and it is withthese circles that the Old English gloss to Bodley 319 is a⁄liated.

The lexical and literary similarities suggest that the Bodley gloss either stemsfrom the same period of development or is derivative of Dunstanian-�thelwoldian gloss-work, especially the Royal Psalter gloss, and it is notablethat the manuscripts themselves have similar links.To the best of our knowledge,the date and provenance of Bodley 319’s main text (c. 950^80) overlaps a bit withthat of these Glastonbury glosses (at earliest, c. 939^54), and comes from a centerin the south of England, perhaps Canterbury, Exeter, Glastonbury or Crediton.Likewise, the Royal Psalter is mid-tenth century and likely from Glastonbury orAbingdon, though it had early provenances in Winchester and Christ Church,Canterbury.39 Brussels, Bibliothe' que Royale 1650 and Oxford, Bodleian LibraryDigby 146 (containing the Aldhelm glosses) may be from Canterbury, whereDunstan arrived as archbishop in 960;40 alternatively, they may have an origin in

38 See Gwara’s review of Gretsch in Studi Medievali, 3rd ser., 41 (2000), 713^23, esp. 722^3.Gwara’s more detailed study of the complicated inter-relationships of the Aldhelm Prosa devirginitate manuscripts and their glosses is found in his edition, Aldhelmi MalmesbiriensisProsa de Virginitate cvm Glosa Latina atque Anglosaxonica, 2 vols, Corpus ChristianorumSeries Latina CXXIVand CXXIVA (Turnhout, 2001), CXXIV. 188^308.

39 See Ker, Catalogue, no. 249; Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 264^8.The Glastonbury orWinchester origin for the manuscript is not entirely secure. See Gneuss, Handlist, no. 451,where he gives no de¢nite origin.

40 See Gwara, ‘Review’, 719^23; and idem, ‘The transmission of the ‘Digby’ corpus ofbilingual glosses to Aldhelm’s Prosa de uirginitate’, Anglo-Saxon England, 27 (1998), 139^68and Aldhelmi Malmesbiriensis: Prosa de uirginitate, CXXIV. 94^101 and 147^56.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Abingdon.41 Both books at least seem to have had an eleventh-century prove-nance in Abingdon, where �thelwold had come in 954. Brussels 1650 is a copy ofthe Latin main text from early eleventh century with the Old English writtensoon after, while Digby 146 is a late tenth-century copy of the Latin text withOld English glosses added at various stages of its history. �thelwold translatedthe Benedictine Rule into Old English in the 940s or early 950s, and the transla-tion’s earliest manuscript is from the last quarter of the tenth century, perhapsfromWorcester, another center of the Benedictine reform movement.42 The con-centration of these texts and manuscripts in foundations linked to Dunstan or�thelwold indicates shared originary circles.

In the relatively short text of the Bodley 319 gloss, there is a striking concentra-tion of lexical and stylistic parallels to Gretsch’s proto-Benedictine-reformglosses. In the short space of 285 words, many of which are grammatical particlesor repetitions, there are seven interpretamenta which are consistent with theusage in Gretsch’s �thelwoldian corpora; additionally there are three‘Winchester’ words in accord with Gneuss’s study, and three other usages whichsuggest a⁄liation with the Benedictine reformers and Winchester usage. Two ofthe parallels between the Royal Psalter and the Isidore gloss are not only lexicalbut stylistic. The following list consists of Latin lemmata and their Old Englishinterpretamenta which I have found are shared by the Bodley gloss and the proto-Benedictine/ ‘�thelwoldian’ corpora:43

Latin lemmata Old English interpretamenta

1. caelebrationes, celebramus m�rsunga, m�rsia�ergo eornostlice

uitiorum leahtra2. differentia todal

minime nat(o�)eshwonindicia gebycnung(a), gebicnung(a)

3. conuersionem gecyrrednesseobseruationem, obseruamus begyminge, begyma�

sacrificia offrungaimmolamus, immolatus offria�, geoffrudmalitia yfelnesse

sollemnitates symbelnessatabernaculorum eardungstowa

41 See Ker’s account of this in Catalogue, and see Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 264^8.42 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 226^60. See Ker, Catalogue, no. 353, and Gneuss,Handlist, no. 672: Oxford, Corpus Christi College 197, s. x4/4,Worcester?.43 I have used Antonette di Paolo Healey (ed.), Old English Corpus (Ann Arbor, 2000)[http://quod.lib.umich.edu.proxy.lib.sfu.ca/o/oec/] accessed August 2008; Gneuss, ‘Theorigin’; Hofstetter, ‘Winchester’, and Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, to determine theshared lexical tendencies and literary use.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Group 1 consists of three lexemes that Helmut Gneuss suggests may beWinchester-related vocabulary items, but he points out that two of them are farfrom de¢nitive. Both eornostlice for ergo and the m�rsian-m�rsunga complex arefound frequently in Winchester texts as well as in many other late West-Saxonworks not associated with Winchester usage.44 Therefore, little weight should beplaced on them as evidence of Winchester membership. Indeed, a word likeeornostlice is common enough that nothing ¢rm at all can be founded on its use.Of the three lexemes in Group 1, only leahtor (here in the genitive plural, leahtra)for ‘vice’ is more closely a⁄liated with the Winchester group; as Gneuss argues,other earlier and later West Saxon texts tend to use un�eaw or other synonyms.45

The words in Group 2 are not attributed by Gneuss or Hofstetter to theWinchester group, nor to the �thelwoldian gloss-group by Gretsch. However,as glosses for the particular Latin lemmata, these words reveal a⁄liation withWinchester-group language. The gloss todal for the Latin di¡erentia is foundthree other times in the Old English corpus. In his Grammar, �lfric undertakesan explanation of various rhetorical and grammatical terms, moving betweenLatin and Old English; he construes thus: ‘Sum ð�ra is DIFFERENTIA, ��t istodal betwux twam �ingum’.46 Similar interpretamenta are found in the Aldhelmglosses of Brussels 1650 and the related Digby 146 glosses. At Aldhelm’s Prosa,chapter XVII, Brussels 1650 has ‘di¡erentia’ in the main text, with ‘i5d est4distantia’ added in one hand,‘divisio’ added in another, and Old English ‘todal’ ina third; later, in chapter XIX, the main text reads ‘Porro tripertiam humani gen-eris distantiam orthodoxae ¢dei cultricem catholica recipit ecclesia . . .’ and thelayers of glosses in Brussels 1650 read ‘i5d est4 tres partes diuisam’ with theOld English ‘todal’ added in one hand and ‘on �reo d�led todal’ added inanother.47 Digby 146 is similar with ‘di¡erentia’ glossed ‘i5d est4 distantia

44 Gneuss,‘The Origin’, 80.45 Gneuss, ‘The Origin’, 76, notes that in ‘our group of texts, which I shall call ‘‘theWinchester group’’ from now on. . .. The word for ‘‘vice’’ is leahtor. . .’. A survey of the OldEnglish corpus shows that ‘leahtor’ is the word of choice in �lfric’s homilies to representthe semantic area of ‘sin’, ‘crime’, ‘vice’ et cetera. It is also widespread in Winchester textssuch as the Old English Rule of Chrodegang. See Hofstetter, ‘Winchester’, 152^4 on thesetexts. As a gloss for the Latin lexeme vitium, leahtor is found in several texts linked toWinchester vocabulary, such as �lfric’s own Grammar, the interlinear gloss on theBenedictine Rule in London, British Library Cotton Tiberius A.iii, and the DurhamHymnal. Again, see Hofstetter, ‘Winchester’, 152^4 on these texts. However, the vitium-leahtor lemma-gloss pair is found in several non-Winchester texts, such as the gloss onIsidore’s Sententiae and Defensor’s Liber Scintillarum in London, British Library Royal 7.c.iv.On the non-Winchester texts, see Hofstetter,‘Winchester’, 154^6. Healey, Old English Corpus,accessed December 2008.

46 Julius Zupitza (ed.),�lfrics Grammatik und Glossar, pt. 1Text und Varianten, rpt and newintro., Helmut Gneuss (Berlin, 1966), 293.47 Gwara (ed.), Aldhelmi Malmesbiriensis: Prosa de uirginitate, CXXIVA. 217/1.The glosses forBrussels 1650 also available in Louis Goosens (ed.), The Old English Glosses of MS. Brussels,Royal Library 1650, Brussels Verhandelingen van de koninklijke Academie voorWetenschappen, Letteren en schone Kunsten van Belgie, Klasse der Letteren 36(Brussels, 1974), lines 1232 and 1386. For numerous corrective readings to Goosens edition,see Hans Schabram,‘Review’ of Goossens, Anglia, 97 (1979), 232^6.

dunstan, �thelwold, and isidorean exegesis 11of 24


dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


todal’ and ‘distantiam’ glossed ‘i5d est4 di¡erentiam todal’.48 These three sharethe gloss todal for di¡erentia and the three fall roughly into the group of proto-Winchester andWinchester texts, as de¢ned by Hofstetter, Gneuss and Gretsch.49

Other texts di¡er in their glossing for di¡erentia, for instance the Cleopatra glos-sary (Cleopatra 1) has the Old English toberennes for di¡erentia, while the Harleyglossary echoes some Aldhelm glossesç‘di¡erentia’ glossed ‘i5d est4 distantiadiuisio dissimilitudo’çbut here has no Old English.50

The Old English gloss for indicia in Bodley 319 is gebycnunga, and while thisorthographical form is unique, gebicnung is found eight times in Old English, allwith a similar meaning and all in the works of �lfric. It appears in the CatholicHomilies and the Lives of Saints, and as such, never as a gloss to a Latin lemma.�lfric couples the noun with a verbal form of geswutelian or even the adjectivalswutele.51 The semantic range for the word is ‘sign’, ‘index’, ‘symbol’, or ‘¢gure ofspeech’, and this accords with the meaning in the Isidore gloss. For instance, from�lfric’s ¢rst series of Catholic Homilies we ¢nd ‘Hel oncneow. �a ða he hyreh�ftlingas un�ances forlet. 7 �eah ða heardheortan iudei. noldon �urh eallum�am tacnum �one so�an scyppend tocnawan: �e ða dumban gesceafta under-geaton: and mid gebicnungum geswutelodon’.52 Here, not only does usage accordbetween �lfric and the Isidore gloss, but the senses of the texts are cognate.Thefact that the word appears only in �lfric and the Bodley 319 gloss, as well as theirrelated semantic values, suggests if not a positive link, at least an association; theBodley gloss may fall inçat placesçwith the post-Winchester Standard OldEnglish of �lfric.

The lexeme nateshwon, and Bodley 319’s related nato�eshwon, is fairly common.In the Old English corpus, it appears, as nateshwon, at least 174 times, 97 ofwhich are in �lfric’s work. As a gloss to minime, we ¢nd it in a tighter group of

48 Gwara (ed.), Aldhelmi Malmesbiriensis: Prosa de uirginitate, CXXIVA. 197/6 and 217/1. SeeNapier, Old English Glosses, no. 1, lines 1186 and 1356.49 See Hofstetter,‘Winchester and the standardization’, 153^4 for statistical membership inthe Winchester group.

50 For Cleopatra 1, see the edition of W. G. Stryker,‘The Latin Old English Glossary fromMS. Cotton Cleopatra A.iii’, Ph.D. diss. (Stanford University, 1951), line 1965. For the Harleygloss see R. T. Oliphant (ed.), The Harley Latin-Old English Glossary (The Hague, 1966), no.2123 (‘D’ no. 447). See also the discussion (and proposal of a new edition) of the Harleyglossary, and its Worcester origin: Jessica Cooke, ‘Worcester Books and Scholars, and theMaking of the Harley Glossary: British Library Ms. Harley 3376’, Anglia, 115 (1997), 441^68.51 Peter Clemoes (ed.), �lfric’s Catholic Homilies: the First Series:Text, EETS S.S. 17 (Oxford,1997). For instance, see Catholic Homilies I, 34, lines 29^32 (p. 466): ‘Ic secge �e ��t ic �astowe �e se fear geealgode synderlice lu¢e. 7 ic wolde mid ��re gebicnunge geswutelian.��t ic eom ��re stowe hyrde. 7 ealra ��ra tacna �e ð�r gelimpað. ic eom sceawere 7gymend’. See also �lfric’s Homily for St. Vincent’s Day in Susan Irvine (ed.), Old EnglishHomilies from Bodley 343, EETS O.S. 302 (Oxford, 1993), 111: ‘Ac ��s halgan weres lic, �urh�es H�lendes mihte, to �am strande becom �r �am �e hi stopon on land, and on �amceosole gel�g, oð��t sum gelea¡ul wudewa swutele gebicnunge be �am underfeng hw�r sehalga lichama l�g on �am strande, beworpen mid �am ceosole �urh �a s�lican y�a, swilcehe bebyrged w�re �urh Godes wissunge’.

52 Clemoes (ed.), �lfric’s Catholic Homilies I, 7, lines 99^102 (p. 235).



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


texts: nateshwon glosses minime in the Aldhelm of Digby 146, in �lfric’s Grammar,in an Old English gloss to the Regula Benedicti in Tiberius A.iii, and in the gloss tothe Regularis Concordia also in Tiberius A.iii, which has two other interpretamentafor minime as well (na, naht).53 Numerous alternatives exist for interpreting minime:�lfric has hwonlicost in his Grammar, while the late tenth- or early eleventh-century interlinear gloss to Boethius’ De consolatione philosophiae in Cambridge,Corpus Christi College 214 has translations of minime, using simple negations(ne, se, un-) but also glossing with the uncontracted phrase na to ð�s hwon.54 Theinterlinear gloss to the Liber scintillarum uses hwonlice and the simple negationna,55 and the mid-eleventh century gloss to prayers in London, British LibraryArundel 155 has hwonlice.56 Surveying these uses, the tendency is clear: nateshwonand nato�eshwon usually appear as a gloss to minime in the Regula S Benedicti,Regularis concordia, Digby 146, and in �lfric, and in the Boethius gloss. All butthe Boethius gloss are texts clearly associated with the tenth-century Benedictinereform, �thelwold and Winchester; the use in Bodley 319 falls in with them. Itmust be noted that the interlinear gloss to the Regularis concordia is excluded fromthe Winchester group by Hofstetter.57 Perhaps its mixed glossing for minimeçboth nateshwon and na/nahtçsignals divergence from the Winchester usage and�thelwold’s milieu.

The strongest lexical and stylistic links for Bodley 319 are to the Royal Psaltergloss, and the related �thelwoldian translation of the Rule of Saint Benedict andthe glosses to Aldhelm in Brussels 1650. Seven lexical items, some used severaltimes, point to an a⁄liation with these texts of the Dunstanian or �thelwoldianmilieu from the mid-tenth century and later.

A short account of Isidore’s De ¢de catholica is required here in order to clarifythe literary valences of a number of the Old English glosses to the Latin. De ¢decatholica is like many other Isidorian works; it is a compilation of useful materialmost likely designed for reference. In Book 1, Isidore ¢nds apt Old Testamentprophecies, which can be read as foretelling almost all the elements of Christ’sadvent, nativity, life, passion and resurrection. The second Book is concerned

53 Gwara (ed.), Aldhelmi Malmesbiriensis: Prosa de uirginitate CXXIVA, ch. XXXI (p. 397/32);Zupitza (ed.), �lfrics Grammatik, 226; H. Logeman (ed.), The Rule of St. Benet: Latin andAnglo-Saxon interlinear version, EETS O.S. 90 (London, 1888), 3.13, 10.39.10; Lucia Kornexl(ed.), Die Regularis concordia und ihre altenglische Interlinearversion: mit Einleitung undKommentar, Texte und Untersuchungen zur englischen Philologie 17 (Munich, 1993), 7/98,14/249, 29/631 and 32/729.

54 W. C. Hale (ed.), ‘An Edition and Codicological Study of CCCC MS. 214’, Ph.D. diss.(University of Pennsylvania, 1978), 3.2.78 et passim.55 E.W. Rhodes (ed.), Defensor’s Liber scintillarum with an interlinear Anglo-Saxon version madeearly in the eleventh century, EETS O.S. 93 (London, 1883), passim.56 H. Logeman,‘Anglo-Saxonica Minora I’, Anglia, 11 (1889), 97^120 (115^9).57 See Hofstetter,‘Winchester and the standardization’, 156. TheTiberius A.iii gloss to theRegularis concordia is seen as a member of the Canterbury-lexicon texts. See Elmar Seebold,‘Winchester und Canterbury: Zum spa« taltenglischen Sprachgebrauch’, Anglia, 107 (1989),52^60 (55).



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


with Old Testament evidence of major Christian tenets and sacraments. Forexample, in Book 1, Chapter 12 records that the divinely inspired prophet of theBook of Numbers proclaimed, ‘A star will arise out of Jacob, a man will rise upfrom Israel’ (Numbers 24.17: Isidore’s text here varies from the Vulgate which has ‘ascepter shall spring up from Israel’).58 Isidore then explains: ‘For the magi,coming from parts Orient, had ¢rst reported the nativity of Christ from theindication [indice] of a star’.59 For the most part, Book 1 of De ¢de catholica readsthe Old Testament in a fairly standard allegorical manner, a variation of historicaltypology. Working backwards from Christ’s advent, life, and death, Isidore pro-vides Old Testament lines which he claims look forward, as types for these events.Book 2 reads the Old Testament prophecies as historical types, but also occasion-ally adds a second layer of interpretation: the mystical as Isidore names it, or whatmight be called the moral or topological. Book 2, Chapter 16 provides a character-istic example; Isidore discusses Old Testament prophecies which, if understoodcorrectly, reveal that circumcisionça £eshly riteçhas been ful¢lled by Christ,and now is a mark on the spiritual heart of true Christian believers. Thus, a linefrom Deuteronomy (30.6),‘The Lord God will circumcise thy heart and the heartof thy seed’60 is read as a prophecy of the end of the £eshly circumcision and as apointer to the NewTestament faith and seal [signum)] within the heart.61 In Book2, much is made of the passing away of the old law and testament, and the comingof the new law and testament.

We ¢nd then in Isidore’s De ¢de a fairly succinct and well-organised handbookof both important Christological types in the Old Testament, and allegorical ormystical readings from the Old Testament to support Christian doctrine, espe-cially the sacramental elements such as baptism, anointing, Eucharist, and thesign of the cross. In its steady examples and mostly straightforward interpreta-tion, the work teaches two modes of reading the Old Testament. Isidore’s rotecorrelations of Old Testament lines and their ful¢lments satisfactorily, if notgratifyingly, illustrate typical typological reading. Such a workmanlike handbookperhaps appealed to relative newcomers to learned Latin Christianity, with itscomplex exegetic techniques and deeply textual referentiality. These ‘newcomers’may have been readers in seventh-century rural Visigothic Spain, as well as thevernacular-minded educators in tenth-century Anglo-Saxon England.62

58 Isidore’s Biblical text reads: ‘Orietur stella ex Jacob, consurget homo de Israel’ (Book 1Chapter 12 Paragraph 1, henceforth 1.12.1, PL 83.471). The Vulgate has, ‘orietur stella exIacob et consurget virga de Israhel’. All Vulgate citations from Bonifatius Fischer et al.(eds), Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem (Stuttgart, 1983).59 1.12.1 (PL 83.471): ‘Magi enim ab Orientis partibus venientes, primi Christi nativitatemstella indice nuntiaverunt....’

60 Vulgate: ‘circumcidet Dominus Deus tuus cor tuum et cor seminis tui’.61 2.16.1^3 (PL 83.524^5).

62 Isidore’s De ¢de perhaps may have been used similarly on the Continent, where it wastranslated into Old High German: see Hans Eggers (ed.), Der althochdeutsche Isidor: nach derPariser Handschrift und den Monseer Fragmenten (Tu« bingen, 1964).



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


In Isidore’s De ¢de, the concept of conversio and its verbal partner convertere isquite important. Isidore repeatedly returns to the necessity of conversion in orderfor one to live in the true faith in the Christian church.63 Historically, the textrefers to the Jews and Gentiles which convert to Christianity, but the conversionalso points to the turn to a truer life of faith in the present. In Bodley 319, theglossator has chosen to interpret conuersionem as gecyrrednesse: ‘Gentium conuer-sionem legunt et de sua reprobatione minime confunduntur’ is glossed ‘�eodagecyrrednesse hi r�da� 7 be hyra aworpennesse nato�eshwon hi beo� gescende’.The Old English word gecyrrednesse is relatively uncommon; outside of �lfric, it isfound only in the Royal Psalter’s gloss to the Quicumque vult, in �thelwold’stranslation of the St. Benedict’s Rule, and a few other Old English versions of theRule. In the Old English Rule, it refers to the ‘entrance of a secular person into themonastery and hence the ‘‘conversion’’ of a secular person into a monk or nun’.64

Bodley 319’s gloss perhaps draws on this association: the Old English in manyinstances strives to render both the literal meaning, as well as the allegoricalpotential infused into the Latin by Isidore’s text. The usage here suggests thatthe glossator intended some referentiality, the literal conversion called for in theOld Testament text, the allegory of eventual ful¢lment in the conversion ofthe Gentiles to Christianity, and the more mystical or sacramental sense that theOld Testament predicts the imperative to convert from secular life to truer mon-astic life.

The Bodley glossator was also concerned with theological nuances in sense,though they are not expressly allegorical. For the Latin sollemnitates, he has chosensymbelnessa, which is a relatively common word often associated with secular (andthus sybaritic) feasting. In the Isidore text, it refers to the Jewish observance ofschenofegias, or templhalgunga in Old English, a dedicatory rite to the Tabernaclewhich has been ful¢lled or completed by the advent of Christ and the establish-ment of the Christian church. The tabernacle is the dwelling place of God, andthe rite now need not be observed, though nonetheless it is a religious rite.Gretsch points out that the Royal glossator attempts ‘to restrict symbel(-) to thereligious sphere (an attempt also discernible in the Aldhelm glosses)’, an attemptlater abandoned for new terminology for feast days.65 The Bodley glossator seemsto use symbel(-) in the solemn manner found in Isidore’s base text. The religiousdenotation of the word is enriched by its context, an extended allegorical OldEnglish play on the Latin tabernaculum to be addressed shortly.

A few of the Old English interpretamenta do not have any explicit allegoricalvalences, though they still point to a link with the Royal Psalter vocabulary. Thecomplex begyming as substantive and the verb begyman as a gloss to the Latinforms, observatio and observare, is normal in the Royal Psalter and this predilection

63 See for example 2.5.3 (PL 83.508^9).64 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 27965 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 219^20.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


occurs three times in the Bodley gloss.66 Gretsch points out that the Royal glossshares a tendency for gymen and related words with the Brussels and DigbyAldhelm glosses and with the Old English Rule, but the begym- use for the verbsintendere, observare and attendere and the noun observatio is an innovation of theRoyal glossator against other Psalter glosses.67 And ¢nally, like Bodley 319,the Royal Psalter uses yfelnesse for malitia against other psalter glosses, such asthe Junius which uses wea.68

Before turning to the two most telling links between the Bodley 319 gloss and theRoyal Psalter glossço¡rian/o¡rung for ‘sacri¢ce’ and eardungstow for tabernaculumçit is important to note that the Bodley 319 and the Royal Psalter glosses share afew stylistic traits in addition to their lexical correspondences. In Bodley 319, notall of the stylised glossing has direct correlation to the Royal gloss’s vocabulary; inBodley 319, we ¢nd both the wordplay and alliteration which Gretsch attributes tothe Royal glossator, though on gloss-pairs not found in the Royal Psalter.69 Forinstance, there is the paronomastic ¢gura etymologicaça play on shared etymologyin wordsçon three Latin words: completa, implevit, and adimplere. In each case theBodley glossator uses a form of the Old English gefyllan. Isidore’s Latin text runs:‘Nos autem, sub gratia positi, omnia haec facta et celebrationes, quae futurorumerant indicia, iam cognoscimus esse completa. Quidquid enim huiusmodi sacra-menti prophetabatur iam Christus implevit, quia non venit solvere legem, sedadimplere’. By using the same Old English verb to gloss all three Latin verbs, theglossator uni¢es the meaning of Christ’s new law: it complete, ¢lls out, and ful¢lsthe old law through his one coming.70 Such wordplay is not uncommon in theRoyal psalter gloss. Alliteration is another stylistic feature common to both theBodley and Royal glosses; the glossators link words and ideas through sound toadd a richer, often allegorical, layer of meaning.71 These shared stylistic traits atthe least suggest a similar intellectual and literary milieu for the Bodley and RoyalOld English glosses.

There are two more telling lexical and aesthetic interpretations of Isidore’sLatin found in Bodley 319’s Old English; both reinforce a connection to theRoyal Psalter gloss and stress an allegorical and exegetical reading borne from

66 As at Royal 36.12 and 105.39.67 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 221.68 E.g. Royal 35.5, 51.3 and 5, 77.72 et passim; cf. Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 326.69 For Gretsch’s treatment of the Royal glossator’s style, see Intellectual Foundations, 54^73 etpassim.70 The text of the Bodley gloss: ‘we so�lice under gyfe gesette ealle �as d�da 7 m�rsunga�a towearde w�run gebycnunga we oncnawa� wesan gefyllede; swahw�tswa so�lice mid�us geradum gerynumw�s gewitgud eallunga crist gefylde, se ne com towurpan �a �we acgefyllan.’ [Underlining my own.]71 Examples of alliteration in the Bodley gloss: gewependlic gewed ^ de£enda dementia; mid�us geradum gerynum ^ huiusmodi sacramentis; gecy�nesse hi oncnawa� ^ testi¢catione cognoscunt;ealdre of ealdorlicnesse ^ ueteris auctoritate; ��re ealdan �we ^ ueteris legis. For alliteration in the�thelwoldian gloss corpora, see Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 68^73 and 113^124, etpassim.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


De ¢de into the vernacular.These employ paronomastic ¢gurae etymologiae: playingon the etymology of a word to convey an allegorical sense. In the ‘Recapitulatio’,Isidore recalls his rereading of Jewish rites, which have been emptied and ful-¢lled: ‘Sacri¢cia ueteris legis non immolamus quia per eadem sacri¢cia aut christipassionem aut carnalium uitiorum morti¢cationem insinuatam cognoscimus’.72

The noun o¡rung is used by the glossator for sacri¢cia and the verbal form o¡rianfor immolamus. This usage corresponds strongly with the Royal Psalter, whichalmost always uses o¡rung as a noun interpretamentum for sacri¢cium and care-fully uses o¡rian for immolare ; other Psalter glosses di¡er in this. Thus, o¡rian isrestricted to a ‘sacri¢ce in a liturgical or ritual ceremony’.73 The Royal Psalteragrees with the Old English Rule and the Brussels Aldhelm glosses in thisusage.74 Adopting these interpretamenta allows the Bodley 319 glossator also toengage in a bit of play: ‘O¡runga ��re ealdan �we we na ne geo¡ria�, for�on�e�urh �a sylfan o¡runga o��e cristes �rowunge o��e £�sclicra leahtra cwylmingegeswytelude we oncnawa�’. Besides being characteristic of the Royal glossator, thewordplay allows the Old English to intensify the sense of the word.While Isidorerewrites the Old Testament sense of sacri¢ce and sacri¢cing into a NewTestamentChristian reading, the verbal play in Old English con£ates them into one word-stem. Just as the Christian sacri¢ce or o¡ering re-enacts the Old Testament event,so the Old Testament event predicts the Christian sense of sacri¢ce or o¡ering:conceptually and lexically, they are inseparable.

However, the last sentence of Isidore’s ‘Recapitulatio’ has the most revealinglink between Bodley 319 and the Royal Psalter in terms of vocabulary and a modelof reading:

Schenofegias, id est sollemnitates tabernaculorum non obseruamus quia tabernaculum deisancti eius sunt in quibus habitat in aeternum75

Templhalgunga ��t is symbelnessa hyra eardungstowa we na ne begyma� for�on�eeardungstow godes his halgan synt on �am he earda� on ecnesse

The play on eardungstow in the ¢nal thought of the work directly ties this glossinto Royal-gloss praxis. For tabernaculum, both the Bodley and the Royal glossatorschose to use eardungstow, as opposed to the more common glosses, such as geteld.76

The allegorical signi¢cance of the gloss is clear: in numerous exegetic works onthe Psalms, the tabernacle is described as not just the ‘dwelling of God’ but alsothe Christian Church, which God inhabits.77 In De ¢de, Isidore a⁄rms the taber-nacle as a type for the church: ‘Figura enim hujus prioris tabernaculi ad typum

72 2.28.3 (PL 83.537^8).

73 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 206; see Royal 26.649.15, and 105.37.74 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 205^7.75 De ¢de 2.28.4 (PL 83.538).76 See Lendinara,‘Old English Renderings’, passim.77 For instance, Cassiodorus, in his Expositio; see Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 71 n. 97and n. 99. Bear in mind that Gwara problematizes the eadungstow-tabernaculum gloss, see his‘Review’ of Gretsch, 714^5.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Ecclesiae ducitur’.78 The Old English gloss plays on the eardung-complex, espe-cially by not only glossing tabernacle as eardungstow: dwelling place, but also usingthe verbal form, earda�, for the Latin habitat. This ¢gura etymologica wordplayoccurs in the Royal Psalter where the Glossator employs eardungstow for tabernacu-lum and eardian for habitare.79 The rarity of this gloss and its speci¢c aesthetic areimportant in Gretsch’s linking of the Royal gloss with the Old EnglishBenedictine Rule and �thelwold;80 its appearance in the Bodley 319 not onlysuggests that the gloss has a link with the literary and intellectual circles ofDunstan and �thelwold, but the gloss also reveals a mode of interpretationfound in Isidore’s Latin writing being borne into vernacular glossing and lexicon,in which the vernacular is used not only to clarify the sense of the Latin text, butit participates in a typological aesthetic, albeit in an experimental way.

Of course, allegorical and typological exegesis was important in the literatureof the Benedictines in late tenth century and eleventh century southern England.Very little of Dunstan’s literary work survives (just a handful of distich inscrip-tions and a diabolically di⁄cult acrostic poem81), and what does shows littleengagement with allegorical or typological aesthetics. However, as Gretschshows, Dunstan’s student �thelwold has these allegorical inclinations in someof his work, notably the Old English word-choices for translating Benedict’s Rule.Moreover, there is an even clearer statement displaying allegorical and exegeticknowledge in �thelwold’s prologue to the Old English translation of theBenedictine Rule, a text known as ‘Edgar’s Establishment of the Monasteries’.82

�thelwold explicitly invokes allegorical thinking, writing:

�eah �a scearp�anclan witan �e �one twyd�ledan wisdom hlutorlice tocnawa�^ ��t isandweardra �inga 7 gastlicre wisdom^ 7 �ara �g�er eft on �rim todalum gelyfedlicewuna�ç �isse engliscan ge�eodnesse ne beho¢en . . ..83

As Gretsch notes, this appears to be an ostentatious display of learning targetedat those readers already in the know,84 and yet it stands as a statement of the

78 De ¢de 2.25.2 (PL 83.534).79 See Royal 14.1, 60.5, 64.5 and 68.26.

80 For a more extended treatment of this see Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 71^3.81 Michael Lapidge has edited and discussed these in ‘The Hermeneutic Style in Tenth-Century Anglo-Latin Literature’, Anglo-Saxon England, 4 (1975), 67^111; rpt. Anglo-LatinLiterature 900-1066 (London, 1993), 105^49, and in ‘St. Dunstan’s Latin Poetry’, Anglia, 98(1980), 101^6; rpt. in Anglo-Latin Literature, 151^6.82 Dorothy Whitelock made the case for �thelwold’s authorship of ‘Edgar’sEstablishment of the Monasteries’ in ‘The Authorship of the Account of Edgar’sEstablishment of the Monasteries’, in Philological Essays: Studies in Old and Middle EnglishLanguage and Literature in Honour of Herbert Dean Merrit, ed. J. L. Rosier (The Hague, 1970),125^36; see also Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 230^3. The text is edited in DorothyWhitelock, Martin Brett, C. N. L. Brooke (eds), Councils and Synods with Other DocumentsRelating to the English Church I: 871-1066 (Oxford, 1981), 142^54.83 Whitelock et al. (eds), Councils, 151.84 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 123^4.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


aesthetic and interpretive mode �thelwold brought to scripture. His student,�lfric was more directly useful and workmanlike in his allegorical and exegetichomilies, which present doctrinally orthodox typological and exegetic readings ofpassages in the bible in lucid vernacular prose. Through the developing reformsof the late tenth and early eleventh centuries, the exegetic and typological wascrucial enough to religious practice (as it long had been) that it was translated intoEnglish; the Bodley 319 gloss is a fragmentary and provisional foray into not onlyrendering a Latin exegetic text in English, but reproducing that typological formin the gloss’s lexical and literary style.

Lexical and literary characteristics link the Old English gloss of Isidore ofSeville’s De ¢de catholica found in Bodley 319 to the corpora of Old English glossesand translations now associated with �thelwold and Dunstan, especially those ofthe Royal Psalter. This a⁄liation of vocabulary and style in the Old English glosssuggests that Isidore’s De ¢de was studied in a centre where the Royal Psalter wasmade, glossed, or studied, or in a centre where exponents of this intellectualmilieu worked and its traditions persisted. For the Royal Psalter itself, Gretschargues for an origin in Glastonbury or Abingdon, a sojourn in Winchester (per-haps coming there with �thelwold) in the later tenth or early eleventh century,and then its coming to Canterbury by the eleventh century.85 The gloss to theRoyal Psalter was written by the original scribe, and so, if Gretsch’s suggestions oforigins are accepted, then the Old English stems from Glastonbury or Abingdon.However, the Royal Psalter gloss was in£uential in both Winchester andCanterbury in the eleventh century, and thus these centres also may have pro-duced the gloss found in Bodley 319. The gap in time between the writing of themain Latin text and the writing of the Old English gloss suggests that the BodleyOld English was added after some intellectual or literary impetus, and in thiscase, that impetus may have been the arrival and study of the Royal Psalter orone of its closely related descendants.The prime candidate for such a place wouldbe Canterbury, if the Royal Psalter came there by the end of the eleventh century.There is some not-quite-conclusive material evidence that manuscripts traveledfrom Glastonbury to Canterbury,86 and between Abingdon and Canterbury.87

Furthermore, Scott Gwara has argued that the Aldhelm-manuscripts inBrussels 1650 and Digby 146 are from Canterbury, and these manuscripts contain

85 Gretsch, Intellectual Foundations, 264^7 on Glastonbury or Abingdon, and 267^9 onWinchester and 430^1 on Canterbury. Recently, Donald Scragg, ‘London, British Library,Royal 2 B. V, Christ Church, Canterbury, and the English Language in the EleventhCentury’, in . . .Un tuo serto di ¢ori in man recando: Scritti in onore di Maria Amalia D’Aronco,eds Silvana Sera¢n and Patrizia Lendinara, 2 vols (Udine, 2008), II.381^92, has argued thatthe Royal Psalter arrived in Canterbury before the end of the tenth century.

86 For example, Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley 572, which seems to have traveled fromWales, to Glastonbury to Winchester to Canterbury, see Gneuss, Handlist, no. 106; alsoperhaps Oxford, Bodleian Library Hatton 42, with provenances in perhaps Glastonbury,Canterbury and Worcester, see Gneuss, Handlist, no. 629.87 E.g. London, British Library Tiberius A.vi, which seems to have moved betweenCanterbury and Abingdon, see Gneuss, Handlist, no. 364.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Latin-English lemma-gloss pairs that are analogous to usage in Bodley 319.Canterbury in the aftermath of Dunstan represents a real possibility for theglossing of Bodley 319. Alternatively, Bodley 319’s Old English gloss could havebeen added in a center where the a⁄liated glosses of the mid-tenth-centuryRoyal Psalter and the learning those glosses represent persisted. Abingdon seemsa likely candidate for this scene: it was refounded by Dunstan’s student�thelwold in 963 and his teachings could have persisted into the eleventh cen-tury; both Brussels 1650 and Digby 146 had eleventh-century Abingdon prove-nances; and cultural contact between Glastonbury, a possible origin for Bodley319’s Latin text, and Abingdon is express.88 Both Canterbury and Abingdon, inthe ¢gures of Dunstan and �thelwold and their circles, drew deeply from thelearning at Glastonbury in the mid-tenth century. From there came people andbooks, both of which left a legacy in subsequent decades. Bodley 319 and its OldEnglish gloss may stem from the cultural movement in Glastonbury and its after-e¡ects in Abingdon or Canterbury. These latter two centres seem likely prove-nances for the manuscript, subsequent to its making and before its arrival inSalisbury in the late eleventh century.89

There is of course another possibility which arises from the argument ofConner: that Bodley 319, the Exeter Book, and Lambeth 149 were written atExeter. Glastonbury was instrumental in the Benedictine reform and refounda-tion of Exeter in 968, led by the monk Sidemann.90 Sidemann brought with him agroup of monks from Dunstan’s Glastonbury, and any work in a scriptorium atExeter, especially in the decades immediately following Sidemann’s reforms therewould likely have been deeply in£uenced by Glastonbury’s codicologicalresources, training, and practice. These years overlap with the consensus decadesthat the Exeter Book was produced (950^80). Bodley 319, or either of the othermanuscripts by the same scribe, if written at Exeter, quite easily could havereturned to its mother house where it may have been glossed, or indeed, passedfrom Glastonbury to another of its foundations and been glossed elsewhere.91

88 Butler, ‘Glastonbury’, 207^8, makes a case for a manuscript that may have come fromGlastonbury to Abingdon: Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 57 (Gneuss, Handlist, no.57). Gretsch,‘Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 57: AWitness to the Early Stages of theBenedictine Reform in England’, Anglo-Saxon England, 32 (2003), 111^46, esp. 143^6, dis-cusses the ways that the Corpus 57 has signi¢cant links to Glastonbury. If Bodley 319 waswritten in Glastonbury and later brought to Abingdon, the donation inscription inLambeth 149 becomes intriguing again: could �thelweard’s donation of ‘hunc quoqueuoluminem’ have gone to St. Mary’s at Abbendune? The blotted space is too long andAbingdon is too far outside �thelweard’s domain.89 Webber shows that in the last decades of the eleventh century, Salisbury acquiredbooks from Canterbury, among many other English and Continental centers. There islittle evidence for Abingdon, however. See Scribes and Scholars, chs 2 and 3.

90 Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 29^31, who discusses the primary sources for Sidemann’scareer.91 Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 86^9, also links this trioçBodley 319, Lambeth 149 and theExeter Bookçwith a second trio of books by a shared scribe: Oxford, Bodleian Library,Bodley 718; Exeter, Cathedral Library 718; and Paris, Bibliothe' que Nationale lat. 943 the‘Sherborne’ or ‘Dunstan Ponti¢cal’.The link is found on fol. 66r of Lambeth 149, where ¢ve



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Sidemann seems to have been quite important to both Dunstan and King Edwardwith notable links to the bishops and kings that spearheaded the reforms.Byrhtferth of Ramsey’s Vita S. Oswaldi notes that Sidemann was Edward’s teacheras a boy, training him in divine law, closely linking Sidemann and Edward’s father,King Edgar, who of course was closely linked to Dunstan’s reform movement.92

Sidemann later became bishop of Devon at Crediton in 973 which may be linkedto Edgar’s elaborate consecration at Bath the same year.93 Following Edgar’s deathin 975, succession was contested by Edgar’s two young sons, Edward and �thered.Edward was supported by Dunstan himself and won out with the vote of thewitan.94 The relationship between King Edward, Dunstan and Sidemann wasclose enough that when Sidemann died in 977, Dunstan and the king had himburied in a tomb in St. Paul’s chapel at St. Mary’s in Abingdon.95 This suggestscontinued close ties to Dunstan, Glastonbury, Abingdon and the reform move-ment, if Bodley 319 was written under Sidemann at Exeter. In any of these cases,Bodley 319 moved in the intellectual, scholarly, and literary circles of Dunstan,and his foremost students, such as �thelwold, in the decades following itsmaking.

The Old English gloss and the Royal Psalter share in the project of using thevernacular to comprehend and express typological and exegetic ideas, and thislanguage appears to stem from Dunstan and �thelwold’s work in Glastonbury,and its later developments in other centres. This vernacular project certainlydraws on Isidore’s De ¢de in Bodley 319, and it is consonant with the materialfound in the other two books written by the same scribe: Lambeth 149 with itsexegetic texts by Augustine and Bede96 and the vernacular poetry of the Exeter

lines are added at the foot of the page in a hand nearly identical to the second trio’s mainhand. This is most intriguing in the case of the ‘Dunstan Ponti¢cal’: it would make sensethat monks from his former house, Glastonbury, or a house refounded by his impetus,Exeter, would have produced such a book for the archbishop. However, Canterbury originis strenuously argued by Gameson,‘The Origin’, 172^8.92 Vita S. Oswaldi, in The Historians of the Church of York and its Archbishops, ed. J. Raine,3 vols (London, 1879^94) at I, 55.449

93 Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 30. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle poem,‘The Coronation ofEdgar’, memorializes the consecration; see The Anglo-Saxon Minor Poems, ed. E. V. K.Dobbie, Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records 6 (New York, 1942), 21^2.

94 Cyril Hart, ‘Edward [St Edward; called Edward the Martyr] (c.962^978)’, OxfordDictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, Sept 2004; online edn, May 2007[http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/8515, accessed 4 April 2009].95 See Katherine O’Brien O’Kee¡e (ed.), Anglo-Saxon Chronicle C-text, Vol. 5, Anglo-SaxonChronicle: A Collaborative Edition, eds David Dumville and Simon Keynes (Cambridge,2000), annal 977, for the account. See also Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 29^31.96 For a brief account of Bede’s exegesis of the Apocalypse, see W. F. Bolton, Anglo-LatinLiterature (Princeton, 1967), 105^7. For the text, see Roger Gryson (ed.), Bedae PresbyteriExpositio Apocalypseos, CCSL 121A (Turnhout, 2001). On the basic exegetic character ofAugustine’s De adulterinis, see C. T. Hueglmeyer (trans. and intro.), ‘Adulterous Marriages’in Treatises on Marriage and other subjects, Fathers of the Church 27, ed. R. J. Defarrari(Washington, DC, 1955), 53^132, esp. 55. The standard edition of Augustine’s De adulterinisconiugis is by J. Zycha (ed.), Sancti Avreli Avgvstini De ¢de et symbolo, CSEL 41 (Vienna, 1900).

dunstan, �thelwold, and isidorean exegesis 21of 24


dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Book, much of which engages in typology, allegory or interpretation.97 Clearly,this aesthetic mode was an important one to literary culture in Anglo-SaxonEngland from the mid-tenth century on, and the intellectual circle aroundDunstan and �thelwold viewed it as integral to the spiritual renewals of theirreinvigorated Benedictine monasticism. This cultural milieu emerged fromGlastonbury in the mid-tenth century, and though it is not possible to say theyin£uenced the making of Bodley 319, it does seem possible to say they made useof it: these Old English glosses suggest that Bodley 319çand perhaps its sistervolumes, Lambeth 149 and the Exeter Bookçmoved in the vernacular literarycircles of Dunstan and �thelwold in the dynamic decades following their studytogether.

Simon Fraser University

Appendix

Diplomatic edition of the Latin text of Isidore of Seville’s De ¢de catholica andits Old English gloss from Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley 319, fols 74r-75r.Abbreviations silently expanded. Full-stop used for punctus; colon forpunctus elevatus; semicolon for punctus versus;\/marks insertion.

fol. 74r (beginning at line 11 of the page)

XXVI. RECAPITULATIO OPERATIO

eala unges�ligra iudea bewependlic gewe¤ dO Infelicium iudeorum de£enda dementia.

efne ��s h�lendes. tocyme ne cy�nesse ealdreecce saluatoris aduentum. nec testamenti ueteris

of ealdorlicnesse. hi ongyta�. ne hine cuman hi onauctoritate. intellegunt. nec eum uenisse acci

fo� �eoda gecyrrednesse hi r�da� 7 be hyrapiunt; Gentium conuersionem legunt: et desua

aworpennesse nato�eshwon hi beo� gescende. rested�ges10 reprobatione minime confunduntur. Sabba

begyminge hi onfo� �one aworpenneti. obseruationem suscipiunt. quem reprobatum.

97 For an analysis of the compilation of the Exeter Book as re£ecting developingBenedictine concerns, see Conner, Anglo-Saxon Exeter, 148^64.



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


haliges gewrites gecy�nesse hi oncnawa�. ymbsnidenessescripturae testi¢catione cognoscunt; circum

£�sces hi arwur�ia� �a¤ heortan cl�ncisionem carnis uenerantur. qui cordis mun

nesse forspildun. we so�lice under gyfeditiam perdiderunt; Nos autem subgratia

gesette. ealle �as d�da 7 m�rsunga �a20 positi. omnia h�c facta & caelebrationes: qu�

towearde w�run gebycnunga. we oncnawa� wesanfutura erant indicia: cognoscimus esse

gefyllede swahw�tswa so�lice mid �us geradum gerynumcompleta; Quicquid enim huiusmodi sacramentis

fol. 74v

w�s gewitgud eallunga. crist. gefylde se¤ ne co¤ mprophetabatur. iam christus impleuit: qui non uenit

towurpan �a �we. ac gefyllan tocumendre eornostlicesoluere legem. sed adimplere; Adueniente er

so�f�stnesse seo scadu ablann. 7 for�y eallunga30 go ueritate: umbra cessauit. Ideoque iam car-

£�sclice we ne beo� ymbsnidene for�on�e on ymbsnidenaliter non circumcidimur. quia in circum

nesse hiwe. behatenum fulwihtes gerynecisionis tipo. promisso baptismatis sacramen-

we syn gecl�nsude. ��s rested�ges �nethwile |¤ dle we tella�.to mundamur; Sabbati otium superuacuum du-

for�on�e eallunga. �one onwrigenan hyht. reste ��re eceancimus. quia iam reuelatam spem quietis �ter-

we habba� o¡runga ��re ealdan �¤ we we na¤ ne ge40 ne� tenemus; Sacri¢cia ueteris legis non im

o¡ria� for�on�e �urh �a sylfan o¡runga o��e cristesmolamus. quia per eadem sacri¢cia aut christi

�rowunge o��e £�sclicra leahtra cwylmingepassionem aut carnalium uitiorum morti¢ -

geswytelude we oncnawa�. �a o¡ringdagascationem. insinuatam cognoscimus; Azimas



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


we na¤ ne begyma�. for�on�e afeormudre ��s ealdan lifesnon obseruamus. quia expurgata ueteris uitae

yfelnesse. on niwre. geleafan gyfe we ganga�50 malitia. in noua ¢dei gratia ambulamus;

toda¤ l ��ra metta we na ne healda� for�on�eDi¡erentias ciborum non custodimus. quia

ealle �a gastlice we understanda�. on �eawumcuncta illa spiritaliter discernimus; In mori

manna uncl�nra w�s getacnudbus hominum inmundorum: signi¢cabatur

wi�erweardnes ��ra nytena. be ��s lambes �¤ te eastrun we na¤aduersitas animalium; De agni. esu. pascha non

ne m�rsia�. for�on�e eastrun ure geo¡rud is crist60 celebramus. quia pascha nostrum. immolatus est christus:

for�on �urh ��t lamb. he w�s getacnud. se swa swaquia per illum agnum ¢gurabatur. qui tamquam

scep to snide w�s gel�dd. 7 swa swa lambouis ad occisionem ductus est. & quasi agnus

beforam �am scyrendan hit swa he ne ontynde mu� hiscoram tondente se. Sic non aperuit os suum;

�a bigengu ��s niwan monan we na¤ ne healda�. for�on�eNeomenias noue� lune� non custodimus. quia

eallunga on criste niwre gesceafte �a ealdan for� gewitun70 Iam in christo noua creatura: uetera transierunt.

fol. 75r

7 efne hi w�run gewordene niwe templhalgunga ��t is symbel& ecce facta sunt noua; Schenofegias id est sollem

nessa hyra eardungstowa we na ne begyma�. for�on�enitates tabernaculorum non obseruamus. qui\a/ ta

eardungstow. godes. his halgan synt. on �am he earda�bernaculum dei sancti eius sunt. in quibus habitat

on ecnesse:.in aeternum:7

79 EXPLICIT DEO GRATIAS AMEN



dward Island on M


Dow

nloaded from


Date post:	03-Dec-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	m-t
View:	216 times
Download:	1 times