The Bible and the Apocrypha in the Early Irish Church (A.D. 600-1200) (Instrumenta Patristica Et Mediaevalia, 66) 9782503547954, 2503547958

Citation preview

THE BIBLE AND THE APOCRYPHA IN THE EARLY IRISH CHURCH (A.D. 600-1200)

I N S T R V M E N TA PAT R I S T I C A E T M E D I A E VA L I A

Research on the Inheritance of Early and Medieval Christianity

66

Martin M c N amara

THE BIBLE AND THE APOCRYPHA IN THE EARLY IRISH CHURCH (A.D. 600-1200)

Collected Essays

2015

I N S T R V M E N TA PAT R I S T I C A E T M E D I A E VA L I A

Research on the Inheritance of Early and Medieval Christianity

Founded by Dom Eligius Dekkers (†1998)

Rita Beyers  Alexander Andrée  Emanuela Colombi  Georges Declercq Jeroen Deploige  Paul-Augustin Deproost  Anthony Dupont  Jacques Elfassi Guy Guldentops  Mathijs Lamberigts  Johan Leemans  Paul Mattei Gert Partoens  Marco Petoletti  Dominique Poirel  Paul Tombeur Marc Van Uytfanghe  Wim Verbaal

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. © 2015, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium D/2015/0095/101 ISBN 978-2-503-54795-4

Memoriae illvstrissimi viri

Bernhard Bischoff cvivs   stvdivm

“Wendepunkte” dvodecim ante lvstra in lvcem   editvm est

FOREWORD In this brief foreword I wish to express my gratitude to those who have made possible, and have been involved in, the production of this work: the Editorial Board of Corpus Christianorum for agreeing to the publication of the work, and inserting it in the Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia series; Bart Janssens for his patient work as intermediary in all the negotiations with that Board; the Editorial team of the Corpus Christianorum for their efficient work in arranging the many essays in uniform fashion and preparing for publication; Dr Fearghus Ó Fearghail for his competent work as proof reader of the page proofs; the holders of copyright of the original essays and photographs for permission to reproduce. Completion of this work in the year 2014 coincides with the sixtieth anniversary of the publication of Professor Bernhard Bischoff’s essay “Wendepunkte” in 1954, a study which brought to public attention many early medieval works on biblical interpretation which Bischoff believed were of Irish origin or had Irish affiliations. Many of the studies here reproduced have originated in that seminal work of Dr Bischoff. It is hoped that the essays here reproduced will help further towards a fuller understanding of the activity of the early Irish Church in matters relating to the biblical texts and their interpretation, and the interest paid to the branch of literature generally designated Apocrypha.

ABBREVIATIONS A.D. Anno Domini aic McNamara, Apocrypha in the Irish Church aelac Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne bc Before Christ bl British Library bm British Museum BnF Bibliothèque nationale de France c. circa cccm Corpus Christianorum. Continuatio Mediaevalis ccsa Corpus Christianorum. Series Apocryphorum ccsl Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina ce Common Era cla Codices Latini Antiquiores cpl Clavis Patrum Latinorum dil Dictionary of the Irish Language fol(s) folio(s) gcs Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller (der ersten drei Jahrhunderte) Infancy Narratives contained in the Leabhar Breac Inf lb Infancy Narratives contained in the Liber Flavus FerInf lff gusiorum jA r Arundel form of the J Compilation jH er Hereford form of the J Compilation lqe Liber questionum in euangeliis lu Best & Bergin, Lebor na hUidre ms (s) manuscript(s) nli National Library of Ireland ntts New Testament Tools and Studies of Old French oit Old Irish Treatise, ed. K. Meyer pg Migne, Patrologia Graeca piba Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association pj Ptrotevangelium of James (Protoevangelium Jacobi) pl Migne, Patrologia Latina pls Patrologiae Latinae Supplementum pria Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy sg Latin translation of PJ in MS Paris Sainte-Geneviève, 2787 Saltair na Rann Snr tb, tbn Tenga Bithnua vl Vetus Latina

Introduction

Robert T.  Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012 Part I (unpublished).

FIFTY-NINE YEARS OF STUDY IN IRISH BIBLE AND APOCRYPHA (1955-2014) From an early stage I was interested in early Irish monastic learning. This increased during the course of my biblical studies at the Biblical Institute Rome (1954-1956). The obvious question of the extant evidence of this supposedly high monastic learning was still in quest of an answer. During the 1950s John Ryan, Professor of early Irish history in University College Dublin gave a series of annual talks on Irish ecclesiastical topics at the Gregorian University, Rome. In 1955 the theme of the series of talks was : “Irish contribution to medieval culture and piety”. I recall putting him a question after one of the talks as to the lack of known evidence on the nature and quality of early Irish monastic learning. He replied that a German professor had now indicated that the evidence is far greater than once believed. His reference must have been to Bischoff’s essay on the matter, “Wendepunkte”, that had appeared the previous year. News of Bischoff’s possibly groundbreaking work had early reached Ireland.1 I did not then quite understand the importance of Bischoff’s work or realize how closely I would later be involved with his essay “Wendepunkte”. On completion of my studies for the Licentiate in Sacred Scripture in 1956 I had to decide on a topic for a doctoral dissertation. My two areas of interest were the Aramaic Targums, and the Bible text, biblical commentaries and biblical apocrypha in the early Irish church. I followed the advice of Francis McCool, at the Biblical Institute, who suggested that I choose rabbinics and leave the study of the literature of the Irish church for a later date.

1  I was glad to discover recently in the Jesuit Library, Milltown Park, Dublin, a copy of Bischoff’s 1954 article “Wendepunkte”, with personal handwritten greetings from the author  – probably intended for Aubrey Gwynn, then Professor of Medieval Irish History at University College Dublin.

4

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Developments during the 1960s My interest in the subject continued during the 1960s after my return to Ireland. This was sharpened by the publication in 1964 of James Carney’s work The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan together with the Irish Gospel of Thomas and a Poem on the Virgin Mary.2 Together with the explicitly apocryphal Gospel text, the poems of Blathmac had a number of apocryphal references. Towards the end of this period I worked with Dr  Maurice Sheehy, assistant to Professor Ludwig Bieler, Department of Late Latin, University College Dublin, on Hiberno-Latin biblical texts, exploring the possibility of the publication of the Bischoff material. I had a special interest in the Psalms in the pre-Norman Early Irish Church (600-1200) and commenced compiling an overview of this. This was finally published in 1973, with the edition of four Latin texts edited by Dr  Sheehy as appendices. Over the same period I worked at the compilation of a list of apocrypha in Irish sources. I was advised by an academic friend in the field of Early Irish to go beyond the mere list, and present it as a book. This finally appeared in 1975. While publication of the material brought to our attention by Bischoff was proving difficult, it seemed indicated that his 1954 German essay be translated into English. Permission to do this, from the second edition, was procured and work on the translation proceeded during the later 1960s. Good fortune had it that a colleague with a command of German, Colm O’Grady, MSC, agreed to do the translation. He had completed it before his untimely death, in a plane accident in Izmir, Turkey, in 1974. Towards the end of the decade it was agreed that I myself would prepare one of the texts as a Ph.D. dissertation and for possible eventual publication. Developments during the 1970s Activity during the 1970s was more or less a continuation of the preceding decade. On a visit to New York in 1972 I had the opportunity of meeting Fr Robert McNally at Fordham University and discussing the choice of a Ph.D. topic with him. I mentioned an edition of the Eglogae tractatorum in Psalterium. He considered 2 

Irish Texts Society vol. 47, Dublin, 1964.

introduction

5

this unsuitable for a doctoral dissertation, and, in any case, one of his own students was working on an edition of this. He suggested instead an edition of the Vatican Library manuscript Palatinus Latinus 68. I took up his suggestion and worked from an excellent reproduction of the manuscript provided by the National Library of Ireland. I was able to complete the edition by 1976. This manuscript has some specifically Northumbrian contraction symbols, and both early Northumbrian as well as Old Irish glosses, evidence making it uncertain whether it was written in Northumbria or Ireland. Given Fr McNally’s association with my choice of doctoral dissertation topic, I contributed an essay on the Northumbrian associations of the manuscript for the festschrift in his memory. 3 My interest in bringing the Bischoff material to the awareness of a larger public led me to contribute a number of essays on the topic to the Irish Theological Quarterly.4 In the same journal I gave a report on the discussion of the matter at an annual general meeting of the Irish Biblical Association.5 I contributed an overview of the period A.D. 600-1150, in which I accepted uncritically H.H. Glunz’s view on the influence of Peter the Lombard’s Maior Glossatura on the glosses in the Gospels of Máel Brigte,6 a position later refuted by Jean Rittmueller.7 The study on the Psalter text and study earlier begun was also published in 1973, together with the texts edited by Dr. Sheehy.8 3  M. McNamara, “Ireland and Northumbria as illustrated by a Vatican Manuscript”, Thought (Fordham University) 54 (no. 214, 1979), pp. 274-290 (R.E. McNally Festschrift). 4  M. McNamara, “A Plea for Hiberno-Latin Studies,” Irish Theological Quarterly 39 (1972), pp. 337-53 – this volume pp. 49-69 ; McNamara, “Hiberno-Latin Studies. An Addendum”, Irish Theological Quarterly 40 (1973), pp. 364-69 McNamara, “Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies. II An Irish Abbreviation of St Gregory the Great on the Book of Job”, Irish Theological Quarterly 40 (1973), pp. 367-70. 5  M. McNamara, “Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies ; The AGM of the Irish Biblical Association”, Irish Theological Quarterly 41 (1974), pp. 317-19. 6  M. McNamara, in “The Bible in Ireland (A.D. 600-1150)”, Scripture Bulletin 6/2 (1975-1976), pp. 36-39, at 39 – this volume pp. 83-91 at 91. 7  J. Rittmueller, “The Gospel Commentary of Máel Brigte Ua Máeluanaig and its Hiberno-Latin Background”, Peritia 2 (1983), pp. 185-214, at 186. 8  M. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (A.D. 600-1200)”, PRIA 73 C (1973), pp. 201-98.

6

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

To recall the importance of Bischoff’s work, in 1974, two decades after publication of his essay “Wendepunkte”, the Irish Biblical Association organized a conference on early Irish exegesis at the Dominican Retreat centre at Tallaght, near Dublin. While most of the papers were delivered by Irish scholars, an international dimension was added by the presence of Dr Joseph F. Kelly, John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio, a student of Robert McNally. It was decided to publish the contributions of the conference, in a periodical to be named Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association. This decision saw the beginning of the Publications Committee of the Irish Biblical Association, with Professor Andrew Mayes, Trinity College Dublin, Wilfrid Harrington OP and Martin McNamara MSC as Committee members. The first issue of the Proceedings included the now completed English translation of Bischoff’s essay.9 In 1971 I published some notes on the so-called Infancy Gospel of Thomas, edited by James Carney.10 In 1972 I read a paper of a general nature on Irish apocrypha at a Patristic Conference in Oxford. It was later published.11 The School of Celtic Studies of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies kindly accepted for publication my work on the Irish apocrypha. The Director of the School at the date of publication was Professor Brian Ó Cuív who contributed greatly to the value of the work by his meticulous attention to details and by added references.12 In the studies with which we are concerned not too much attention is paid to these texts as witnesses to early Irish theology and devotion. In 1978 I published a general essay on this topic.13

9  Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, ed. by Martin McNamara (PIBA 1), Dublin, 1976 (including “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, by Dr Bernhard Bischoff, translated into English by Colm O’Grady, MSC). 10  M. McNamara, “Notes on the Irish Gospel of Thomas”, Irish Theological Quarterly 38 (1971), pp. 42-66  – this volume pp. 483-512. 11  M. McNamara, “New Testament Apocrypha in the Irish Church”, Studia Evangelica 6 (1973), pp. 330-40. 12  M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975. 13  M. McNamara, “Sources of Early Irish Theology. The Apocrypha, the Canon of Scripture”, Milltown Studies 2 (1978), pp. 58-69.

introduction

7

Developments during the 1980s There was significant development during the 1980s in the entire field of early Irish ecclesiastical learning, including the Bible and the apocrypha. A significant development during this decade was the establishment of certain structures which promoted and directed studies in these areas. A few of these may be mentioned. One was the Europa Zentrum, Ireland and Europe Conference, in agreement between Tübingen and University College Dublin, for conferences on a specific topic from this period, with papers from international specialists in the various fields, the edited papers later published in elegant book form. The first of these was held in Tübingen in 1979,14 the next was at University College Dublin in 1982,15 the next two also in the same venue in Dublin in 1987,16 199417, and the last in Konstanz in 1998.18 At the 1982 conference of this body a suggestion made by one of the participants was that some effort could well be made to create a fund for publication of some of the works drawn to our attention by Bernhard Bischoff, for instance the “Reference Bible”, Das Bibelwerk (now officially known as De enigmatibus). The Irish Biblical Association returned to the subject of Hiberno-Latin exegesis and unedited material in the Annual General Meeting of 1984, a decade after the matter was discussed at the 1974 seminar on the subject in Tallaght. At the 1984 AGM a paper was read on developments during the intervening decade and a proposal put forward at the meeting to set up a Special PublicaPublished. Die Iren und Europa im Früheren Mittelalter, ed. by H. Löwe, 2 vols, Stuttgart, 1982. 15  Published. Irland und Europa/Ireland and Europe. Die Kirche im Frühmittelalter/The Early Church, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1984, 16  Published. Irland und die Christenheit/Ireland and Christendom. Bibelstudien und Mission/The Bible and the Missions, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1987. 17  Published. Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Bildung und Literatur/Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, 18  Published. Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Texte und Überlieferung/Texts and Transmission, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin – M. Richter, Dublin, 2002. 14 

8

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

tions Trust.19 This Trust would have as aim “to edit and publish, and assist in editing and publishing, material of historical interest relating to the Bible in Ireland with special reference to the commentary material, the apocrypha, and the text of the Latin Bible in Ireland”. It would explore the possibility of cooperating with other bodies interested in the same fields of research and seek co-publishers for works which it believed merited publication. Thanks to funds raised in 1984 and 1985 an agreement was concluded in April 1986 between the Royal Irish Academy and the Irish Biblical Association with regard to the production and publication of critical editions of Hiberno-Latin texts containing material of biblical interest, such as commentaries, homilies and works of a biblical-theological nature. A joint Editorial Board was set up for the new project, with two members for each of the two bodies, in the first instance Michael Lapidge and Michael Richter for the Academy and Maurice Sheehy and Martin McNamara for the other. At the initiative of Corpus Christianorum and Brepols Publishers, through the good offices of Mr Roel van der Plaetse, on April 3 1987 an agreement was reached between the Irish Biblical Association, the Royal Irish Academy and Brepols Publishers, Turnhout, Belgium, for the publication by Corpus Christianorum of the scriptural commentary material in a sub-series to be known as Scriptores Celtigenae and in 1988 another agreement with the Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne (AELAC) for publication of the Irish apocryphal texts in the series Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum under the title Apocrypha Hiberniae. In the agreement with Corpus Christianorum-Brepols Publishers the organization agreed on was as follows : The Scriptores Celtigenae (Brepols Editorial Advisory) Committee is drawn from two members appointed by the Royal Irish Academy, two by the Irish Biblical Association and one jointly nominated. Brepols sends an Academic Adviser and a participating Observer. The DMLCS (Dictionary of Medieval Latin from Celtic Sources) Editor serves as Secretary. Before any agreement on a concrete project had been

19  M. McNamara, “Early Irish Exegesis. Some Facts and Tendencies”, Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association [henceforward PIBA] 8 (1984), pp. 57-96.

introduction

9

drawn up there had been contact between interested scholars on the desirability of publishing certain Hiberno-Latin exegetical and related work. This meant that after the agreement had been finalized a publication priority list could be drawn up and an agreement reached with interested editors.20 The original editorial board for the Apocrypha Hiberniae series, included the present writer, Professor Brian Ó Cuív, Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Máire Herbert, Department of Early and Medieval Irish, University College Cork, and Pádraig Ó Fiannachta, Department of Modern Irish, St Patrick’s College, Maynooth. On learning of the agreement with AELAC Brian Ó Cuív expressed happiness : the Irish apocryphal material was now being studied at the level of international learning, where it deserved to be. I trust he would not be disappointed with the later developments. When Pádraig Ó Fiannachta had to withdraw from the Board, Pádraig Breatnach, Professor of Classical Irish, University College Dublin, through the good offices of Brian Ó Cuív agreed to become a member of the Editorial Board. Later, when the workload become exceptionally heavy for the Board, Caoimhín Breatnach, of the Department of Modern Irish at the same university, through the good offices of Pádraig Breatnach, agreed to become a member. By and large the Board members were both an editorial team and the editors of most of the apocryphal texts. Their contacts with the specialists in the field assured that for the project there were very competent extra editors of texts. Another development worthy of note in this decade was the introduction in 1985 into the International Congress on Medieval Studies, Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, of a session on “Early Medieval Hiberno-Latin Texts and Exegesis”. The idea of such a session, and its organization, were due to the work of Denis Brearley, Professor of Classics at the University of Ottawa. The three speakers at this first session were Michael Herren, Joseph F. Kelly and Denis Brearley himself. This first session was, so to speak, a private initiative. Denis Brearley had been in contact with me shortly after 1974, and in this new situation he understood that to have permanence at Kalamazoo sponsorship was 20  Published in Hiberno-Latin Newsletter no. 1, and referred to in later issues.

10

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

indicated. This led to the foundation of the “Society for Hiberno-Latin Studies”, which organized sessions at Kalamazoo under the title “Hiberno-Latin Texts and Manuscripts” from 1986 until 2008. Over these twenty-three years sixty-eight papers on the subject were delivered by twenty-eight speakers.21 The series of lectures was one of the casualties resulting in basic changes to the priorities in the funding of humanities in North American universities from the mid-1990s, combined with other circumstances that obliged many, particularly younger scholars, to shift the focus of their scholarly work. A further creation of the Society for Hiberno-Latin Studies was the Hiberno-Latin Newsletter, edited by Denis Brearley and Martin McNamara, the first number of which was published on A4 paper in 1986, and the following five (the last in 1993) printed and distributed by Brepols Publishers. Such newsletters are an invaluable means of dissemination of information on developments and current study on a subject, and through the papers of interested persons of facilitating communication. The model for the Hiberno-Latin Newsletter was, in part, the very successful Bulletin de l’AELAC, also published by Brepols Publishers, and now in nos. 20-21 (2010-2011). In 1986 the present writer spent some months researching the biblical text of Irish Gospel manuscripts, leading to the publication of a book on it later. During this decade he also published a number of essays and works on these subjects. Some were on the biblical text, a matter to which insufficient attention has been given. One essay was a general review of the subject,22 another on the Echternach and Mac Durnan Gospels.23 An overall view of the 21  Thus (with number of papers within brackets). T. Amos (4) ; D. Brearley (3) ; M. Cahill (3) ; J. Contreni (1) ; C. De Santos Carracedo (1) ; P. Dutton (1) ; A. Harvey (1) ; M. Herbert (1) ; M. Herren (5) ; L. Holz (2) ; D. Howlett (1) ; S. Kealy (1) ; J. F. Kelly (2) ; S. B. Killian (1) ; K.A. Kirkwood (1) ; B. Löfstedt (6 ; 1990, 1991 ; 1990. “The sources of the Collectaneum in Mattheum of Sedulius Scottus”) ; M. McNamara (5) ; L. Martin (1) ; M. Martin (1) ; A. O’Leary (1) P. P. Ó Néill (1) ; J. Reid (1) R. Reynolds (1) ; J. Rittmueller (5) ; Danuta Schanzer (3) ; C. Scheppard (3) ; M. Smyth (5) ; C. Wright (3). 22  M. McNamara, “The Text of the Latin Bible in the Early Irish Church. Some Data and Desiderata”, in Irland und die Christenheit/Ireland and Christendom, pp. 7-55. 23  M. McNamara, “The Echternach and Mac Durnan Gospels. Some common readings and their significance”, Peritia 6-7 (1987-1988), pp. 217-22.

introduction

11

biblical text and commentaries during the early period of Irish exegesis was also given,24 and of some tendencies emerging,25 as well as the evidence for tradition and creativity.26 There was an analysis of the plan and source of the Old Testament section of one of the major Bischoff manuscripts, the “Reference Bible”.27 A critical edition of the Vatican Psalter Glossa in Pal. lat. 68 was published, 28 and an essay on the Psalter in monastic spirituality.29 With regard to the apocrypha, I contributed an introduction and notes to Máire Herbert’s excellent translation of selected Irish biblical apocryphal texts, 30 and an essay on the possible relations between a bird reference in a vernacular Irish text and an earlier Latin text. 31 There was treatment of theological matters in a study of a rare inverted Eucharistic formula, 32 and current developments in the field were covered in special bulletins. 33

24  M. McNamara, “Celtic Scriptures : Text and Commentaries”, An Introduction to Celtic Christianity, ed. by J. P. Mackey, Edinburgh, 1989, pp. 414440. 25  M. McNamara, “Early Irish Exegesis”, pp. 57-96. 26  M. McNamara, “Tradition and Creativity in Early Irish Psalter Study”, in Irland und Europa/Ireland and Europe. Die Kirche im Frühmittelalter/The Early Church, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin and M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 328-89. 27  M. McNamara, “Plan and Source Analysis of Das Bibelwerk. Old Testament”, in Irland und die Christenheit/Ireland and Christendom, pp. 84-112 – this volume pp. 93-130. 28  M. McNamara, Glossa in Psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus Latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11-151.7) (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1986. 29  M. McNamara, “The Psalter in Early Irish Monastic Spirituality”, Monastic Studies 14 (1983), pp. 179-205. 30  Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, ed. by M. Herbert – M. McNamara, Edinburgh, 1989. 31  “The Bird hiruath of the ‘Ever-new Tongue’ and herodius of gloss on Ps. 103.17 in Vatican Codex Pal. lat. 68”, Ériu 39 (1988), pp. 87-94 – this volume pp. 513-24. 32  M. McNamara, “The Inverted Eucharistic Formula conversio corporis Christi in panem et sanguinis in vinum. The Exegetical and Liturgical Background in Irish Usage,” PRIA 87 C (1987), pp. 573-93 – this volume pp. 653-86. 33  M. McNamara, “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin”, PIBA 11 (1988), pp. 88-96 ; McNamara, “Hiberno-Latin Writings 1200-1500”, Hiberno-Latin Newsletter 3 (1989), pp. 9-12.

12

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Developments during the 1990s The first fruits of the Scriptores Celtigenae project (within the series Corpus Christianorum, Latin series) began to appear in the 1990s : one by a Spanish author, 34 the other a critical edition of an early medieval commentary on Mark that Bernhard Bischoff believed was composed by the Irish scholar Comianus. 35 In 1990 I published in book form the results of my researches from 1986 onwards on the Irish Latin Gospel texts, 36 also an essay with reflections on the Mixed Celtic-Irish Gospel text to commemorate the centenary of its original identification, 37 and other essays on the collation of Matthew’s Gospel in a manuscript in an Irish hand. 38 There was a general essay on very early monastic schools, 39 and on the early Irish tradition of biblical exegesis ;40 an essay on the presence of the spiritual and academic approach to Scripture,41 with illustra34  Liber de ortu et obitu Patriarcharum, ed. by J. Carracedo Fraga (CCSL 108E ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars I), Turnhout, 1996. 35  Expositio Evangelii secundum Marcum, ed. by M. Cahill (CCSL 82 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars II), Turnhout, 1997. 36  Studies on Latin Texts of Early Irish Gospels (A.D. 600 – 1200) (Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 20), Steenbrugis. In Abbatia S. Petri  – Dordrecht, 1990. 37  “The Celtic-Irish Mixed Gospel Text. Some Recent Contributions and Centennial Reflections,” in Filologia mediolatina 2 (1995), pp. 69-108  – this volume pp. 289-327. 38  “Non-Vulgate Readings of Codex AMB I.61 sup.”, in Sacris Erudiri 33 (1992-1993), pp. 183-257 ; McNamara, “Non-Vulgate Readings of Codex Ambrosianus I.61 sup. The Gospel of Matthew”, Philologia Sacra. Biblische und patristische Studien für Hermann J. Frede und Walter Thiele zu ihrem siebzigsten Geburtstag, ed. by R. Gryson, Freiburg, 1993, vol. I, pp. 177192 ; McNamara, “Irish Gospel Texts, Amb. I 61 sup., Bible Text and Date of Kells.” in The Book of Kells. Proceedings of a Conference at Trinity College Dublin 6-9 September 1992. Aldershot, 1994, pp. 78-101. 39  “Monastic Schools in Ireland and Northumbria before A.D. 750”, Milltown Studies 25 (1990), pp. 19-36. 40  “The Irish Tradition of Biblical Exegesis, A.D. 550-800”, in Iohannes Scottus Eriugena. The Bible and Hermeneutics (Proceedings of the Ninth International Colloquium of the Society for the Promotion of Eriugenian Studies held at Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve June 7-10, 1995), ed. by G. van Riel – C. Steel – J. McEvoy, Leuven, 1996, pp. 25-54. 41  “The Bible in Academe and in ecclesia. Antiochene and Early Irish Exegesis of Messianic Psalms”, Milltown Studies 39 (1997), pp. 112-29

introduction

13

tions of this for particular psalms (Pss 8, 16).42 There was also an extensive essay on the more recent research on psalm study, with emphasis on one particular Psalter specifically, the Psalter of Charlemagne.43 The best known of Irish Psalters is that known as the Cathach of St Columba. It has a series of Christological psalm headings, the oldest of the known series of such headings. An attempt was made to identify the sources, or at least affiliations, of these Cathach headings.44 Attention was also drawn to the patristic background in Irish religious texts,45 and to such aspects inherent in these Irish texts as eschatology46 and Christology.47 One of the dated (10 th-century) sources for early Irish religious material is found in the Vatican manuscript Reginensis 49 (probably of Breton origin), described and entitled by one the most competent scholars who examined it (André Wilmart) as “Catéchèses Celtiques” (although it is more aptly described as a florilegium than a catechesis), generally now given the title Catechesis Celtica. The present writer (as others) has paid some attention to its Irish affiliations.48 During this decade some attention was paid to the 42  “Psalm 8 in the Bible, in Earlier and Irish Tradition”, Milltown Studies 32 (1993), pp. 24-41 ; McNamara, “Psalm 16 in the Bible, in Earlier and Irish Tradition”, Milltown Studies 36 (1995), pp. 52-63. 43  “The Psalms in the Irish Church ; The Most Recent Research on Text, Commentary, and Decoration  – with Emphasis on the so-called Psalter of Charlemagne”, in The Bible as Book. The Manuscript Tradition, ed. by J. L. Sharpe III – K. van Kampen, London, 1998, pp. 89-103. 44  “Some Affiliations of the St Columba Series of Psalm Headings : A Preliminary Study”, PIBA 21 (1998), 87-111 ; 22 (1999), pp. 91-123. 45  “Patristic Background to Medieval Irish Ecclesiastical Sources”, in Scriptural Interpretation in the Fathers. Letter and Spirit (The Patristic Symposium 2), ed. by T. Finan – V. Twomey, Dublin, 1995, pp. 253-281. 46  “Some Aspects of Early Medieval Irish Eschatology”, in Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Bildung und Literatur/Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, pp. 42-75 – this volume pp. 717-62. 47  “Christology and the Interpretation of the Psalms in the Early Irish Church”, in Studies in Patristic Christology, ed. by T. Finan  – V. Twomey, Dublin, 1998, pp. 196-233. 48  “The Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp. 291-334 ; McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica (MS Vat. Reg. 49)”, Sacris Erudiri 34 (1994), pp. 185-237  – this volume pp. 329376 ; McNamara, “Affiliations and Origins of the Catechesis Celtica. An ongoing

14

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

ongoing study of Irish Apocrypha,49 and advances in the various fields continued to be chronicled in the Hiberno-Latin Bulletin.50 A major event in this decade for the studies that concern us was the 1993 Maynooth Conference on “Early Irish Exegesis and Homiletics” sponsored and organized by the Society for Hiberno-Latin Studies. Twenty papers from the conference were in due course published.51 The papers were in the main by scholars already involved in the Scriptores Celtigenae project. Through the good offices of Professor Denis Brearley it was possible to have Fr Leonard Boyle, O.P., Prefect of the Vatican Library, as Patron of the Conference and as guest speaker. Participants at the conference were from nine countries : Belgium, Canada, England, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Sweden, the United States of America, the Vatican and Wales. Developments 2000-2010 The millennium opened with the publication of two further volumes in the Scriptores Celtigenae series : a critical edition of the Pentateuch section of the “Reference Bible” (De enigmatibus)52 and a critical edition of a text left by Robert McNally with a “catechesis” preserved in a Verona manuscript.53 The next volume in this series would follow some years later. This was a major commentary on Matthew, listed by Bischoff in his 1954 essay, and according to its editor, J. Rittmueller, written in Ireland in the

Quest”, The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland, ed. by T. O’Loughlin (Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 31), Steenbrugis, in Abbatia S. Petri ; Turnhout, 1999, pp. 179-203. 49  “Two Decades of Study on Irish biblical Apocrypha”, Hiberno-Latin Newsletter 5 (1991.2), pp. 2-5. 50  “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin”, PIBA 16 (1993), pp. 114-124. 51  Published in O’Loughlin, The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland. 52  The Reference Bible – Das Bibelwerk. Inter Pauca Problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis nunc prompta sunt Praefatio et Libri De Pentateuch Moysi, ed. by G. MacGinty, (CCCM 173 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars III), Turnhout, 2000. 53  Homiliarium Veronense, ed. by L. T. Martin (CCCM 186 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars IV), Turnhout, 2000.

introduction

15

first half of the eighth century.54 For many years I have been working with Luc De Coninck, now Professor Emeritus, Catholic University of Louvain, on the glosses of the Double Psalter of St.Ouen (MS Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale 24 [A.41]), written in Ireland in the tenth century, on the Latin glosses in relation to other Irish texts, and later in particular on the relationship with the glosses in the so-called Psalter of Caimin. Luc had edited a set of especial importance of these glosses (on Pss 1.1-16.11a) as a preprint in 198955 and has edited a new critical edition of these, together with an edition of all the non-Epitome of Julian literal glosses and a detailed introduction to the manuscript itself, in the Scriptores Celtigenae series.56 The first year of the new millennium saw the publication of my collected essays on the Psalms,57 and nine years later my later studies on the same subject.58 In 2001 as part of an International Conference on “La città e il Libro” in Florence I read a paper on “Irish Psalters and Bibles”, which was made available electronically.59 I paid further attention to the text of the Irish Latin Gospels in a paper read at a conference on the earliest Christian Gospels at the Chester Beatty Library, Dublin, in 2000,60 and that same year 54  Liber questionum in Evangeliis, ed. by J. Rittmueller (CCSL 108F ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars V), Turnhout, 2003. 55  Incerti auctoris expositio psalmorum I.1 – XVI.11a iuxta litteram. An Anonymous “Historical” Commentary on Psalms 1.1-XV.11a. Pars prima. Praefatio editoris ; pars altera. Textus¸ ed. L. De Coninck (Catholic University of Leuven Campus Kortrijk), Kortrijk, preprint 1989. 56  Expositiones Psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adservantur, ed. by L. De Coninck (CCCM 256 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VII), Turnhout, 2012. 57  The Psalms in the Early Irish Church (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 165), Sheffield, 2000. 58  “Five Irish Psalter Texts”, PRIA 109 C (2009), pp. 37-104 – this volume pp. 131-209. 59  M. McNamara, “Irish Psalters and Bibles”, at International Conference “La Città e il Libro” (International Conference at La Certosa di Firenze 30, 31 Maggio, 1 Giugno 2001 (published electronically in http://www.florin.ms/ aleph3.html). 60  “The Latin Gospels, with Special Reference to Irish Tradition”, in The Earliest Gospels. The Origins and Transmission of the Earliest Gospels. The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P45 (Journal for the Study of the

16

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

gave a list of the twenty-seven Irish Gospel texts, and some related ones.61 Other essays treated of the illumination and biblical text of Codex 51 of St Gall Stiftsbibliothek.62 The biblical commentaries and homilies at times may contain information on earlier and later Christian devotion, such as the Forty Hours devotion.63 The so-called Catechesis Cracoviensis The decade ended with the publication of the so-called Catechesis Cracoviensis, a text extant in the manuscript Cracow, Cathedral Library MS 43 (now numbered 140 [43]). This Cracow manuscript was published in 2010.64 It is one of the three catecheses accepted by Robert McNally as Irish or with Irish connections and he called it the Catechesis Cracoviensis, the other two being Catechesis Veronensis and Catechesis Celtica, all three as known to him existing in a single manuscript. The critical edition of the work had been assigned to Thomas Amos, Western Michigan University. He had done quite an amount of research on its tradition before his untimely death in 2005. The manuscript was first New Testament Supplement Series ; Proceedings of the Chester Beatty 2000 Conference), ed. by C. Horton, T & T Clark International, 2004, pp. 88-106 – this volume pp. 263-288. 61  “Irish Gospel Books and Related Texts”, PIBA 23 (2000), pp. 61-66. 62  M. McNamara, “Bible Text and Illumination in St Gall Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51, with Special reference to Longinus in the Crucifixion Scene”, in Pattern and Purpose in Insular Art (Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Insular Art held at the National Museum Gallery Cardiff 3-6 September 1998), ed. by M. Redknap  – N. Edwards et al., Oxford, 2001, pp. 191-202  – this volume pp. 525-48 ; McNamara, ‘Sankt Gallen Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51. with Special Reference to the Biblical Text of the Fourth Gospel”, in Ogma. Essays in Celtic Studiers in Honour of Proinséas Ní Chatháin, ed. by M. Richter & J.-M. Picard, Dublin, 2002, pp.262-267. 63  “Christ Forty Hours in the Tomb and the Forty Hours Devotion”, Cel­ tica 24 (2003), pp. 205-212. 64  “Kazania na różne dni postne i inne teksty z kodeksu krakowskiego 140 (43) [Sermons for different fast days and other texts from Cracow MS 140(43)]”, in Monumenta Sacra Polonorum, vol. 4, ed. by B. Kürbis – M. Sobieraj, Cracow, 2010. On the manuscript see M. Krasnodębska-D’Aughton, “The Homily on the Epiphany in the Catechesis Cracoviensis and the Four Epiphanies on Irish High Crosses”, Peritia 17-18 (2003-2004), pp. 471-494, with a description of the manuscript, contents of the (27) homilies, fol. 5r-100 ra and a diplomatic transcript of the homily on the Epiphany (pp. 487-494).

introduction

17

brought to the attention of scholars by Pierre David in 1937, who believed its contents were monastic conferences, and understood by him to be the work of an Irish scholar of the eighth century.65 Bernhard Bischoff (1954) disagreed. In his view, although Irish elements can be traced in the collection, the language is to a considerable degree romanised. In his view the manuscript is Italian, not French, after 800.66 Raymond Étaix drew attention to two other manuscripts of this collection, and to some extracts in other manuscripts.67 Tom Amos’s researches have revealed that besides the Cracow text eight other manuscripts containing all or parts of this collection have been located.68 Only one of them, Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Codex Augiensis CXCVI, is complete. Amos observes that the Cracow manuscript, dated by Bischoff to around 800, helps us to date this collection. Since interpolations in the Cracow text preclude its being the archetype, we know that the sermons were written before 800. A number of the sermons employ Bede’s Expositio in Lucam, which sets our other terminus at 716. A date in the second half of the eighth century seems likely. The distribution of manuscripts places the collection across France and central Europe, as surviving manuscripts come from north Italy, Reichenau, Austria, Germany, Corbie, Laon, Fleury-sur-Loire and one unknown site. The evidence indicates that it was a popular collection, and Amos remarks that it was copied at centres or areas connected with the Irish, and its distribution almost exactly retraces the Irish pilgrimage routes from Picardy to Rome. It will be for future research to take up from where Tom Amos left off. Only when the original form is reconstructed from the different manuscripts, from so many diverse provenances, can any proper assessment be made of its Irish origin or affiliations.

65  P. David, “Un recueil de conférences monastiques irlandaises du VIIIe siècle”, Revue Bénédictine 49 (1937), pp. 62-89. 66  Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, pp. 59 and 159, note 124. 67  R. Étaix, “Un manuel de pastorale de l’époque carolingienne (Clm 27152)”. Revue Bénédictine 91 (1981), pp. 105-130, at 126, note 4. 68  T. L. Amos, “Miracle, Myth or Middle Ground ? The Catechesis Craco­ viensis as a Hiberno-Latin Exegetical Text” (unpublished).

18

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Hiberno-Latin Commentary on the Apocalypse ? In 1999 David Ganz brought to my attention the existence of a commentary on the Apocalypse in the manuscript Dd X 16 of Cambridge University Library, a tenth-century manuscript, written probably in Brittany and full of Insular or Irish abbreviations. I examined the text in question and found that it carried essentially the same commentary as did the “Reference Bible” (De enigmatibus), but was not identical with it, being much more extensive than the latter (about 23,500 words as against 13,500). In an essay on the subject, I published parallel sections of both works.69 Both complete commentaries merit publication. Soon after publication of the essay I received an email message from Guy Lobrichon requesting that I leave publication of the work to himself, as he had been working on it. Lobrichon later got an academic position that made completion of this edition impossible and he passed it on to another, who in turn passed it on to Professor Roger Gryson, of the Vetus Latina Institut, Beuron, who was interested in editing it from the very beginning. Gryson was in the process of preparing a critical edition of the Vetus Latina text of the Apocalypse, and as part of this was keen on editing new texts and in re-editing earlier defective editions of commentaries on the Apocalypse. He has projected completion of his edition by 2012, with publication foreseen in early 2013.70 Gryson was also interested in reconstructing from these texts the original text of the lost commentary of Tyconius on the Apocalypse on which all later Latin commentaries depend. He edited the “Reference Bible” (De enigmatibus) commentary on the Apocalypse,71 and later the reconstructed commentary of Tyconius (and a French translation).72

69  “The Newly-identified Cambridge Apocalypse Commentary and the Reference Bible. A Preliminary Enquiry”, Peritia 15 (2001), pp. 208-260  – this volume pp. 377-450. 70  R. Gryson, in Vetus Latina. 55. Bericht der Stiftung 44. Forschungsbericht des Instituts, Beuron, 2011, p. 37. [See now CCSL 108G, 2013.] 71  In variorum auctorum Commentaria Minora in Apocalypsin Johannis, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 107), Turnhout, 2003. 72  Tyconius, Expositio Apocalypseos, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 107A), Turnhout, 2011 ; R.  Gryson, Tyconius, Commentaire de l’Apocalypse (Corpus Christianorum in Translation 10), Turnhout, 2011. See also R. Gryson, “Le com-

introduction

19

A Kalamazoo session in honour of Professor James E. Cross presented an opportunity to read a paper on Irish homilies,73 and an invitation from Professor Jörg Frey, Munich (now in Zürich) presented another to examine the evidence of Irish apocrypha on Jesus in Irish theology and devotion.74 The beginning of the millennium saw the first volume in the Apocrypha Hiberniae project (2001), with texts of Irish Infancy narratives and corresponding Latin ones, including the first edition of the only known Latin translation of the very early apocryphal Protevangelium of James.75 In the 1990s the Royal Irish Academy had a Consultative Committee on the Bible and Near eastern Studies. An abiding question in the study of early Irish monastic and ecclesiastical studies is the possible or probable presence of eastern influences. This holds good also for the Irish apocrypha. To make its contribution to the celebration of the millennium this Consultative Committee decided to hold an international Conference on the topic, the proceedings of which were published. One of the papers was by the present writer.76 The second volume of the series Apocrypha Hiberniae was to contain material on “Apocalyptica et Eschatologica”. Preparation for this volume was the inspiration for preparatory essays on the traditions on Antichrist,77 and the signs before Doomsday.78 This second volume was mentaire de Tyconius sur l’Apocalypse”, in Vetus Latina. 54. Bericht der Stiftung 43. Forschungsbericht des Instituts, Beuron, 2010, pp. 25-34. 73  “Irish Homilies A. D. 600–1100”, in Via Crucis. Essays on Early Medieval Sources and Ideas in Memory of J. E. Cross (Medieval European Studies 1), ed. by T. N. Hall, Morgantown, 2002, pp. 235-84. 74  “Jesus in (Early) Irish Apocryphal Gospel Traditions”, in Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, ed. by J. Frey  – J, Schröter, Tübingen, 2010, pp. 685-739 – this volume pp. 585-651. 75  Apocrypha Hiberniae. I. Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al., 2 volumes (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13-14), Turnhout, 2001. 76  McNamara, “Apocalyptic and Eschatological Texts in Irish Literature : Oriental Connections ?”, in Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage. The Middle East and Celtic Realms, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 2003, pp. 75-97  – this volume pp. 687-715. 77  M. McNamara, “The Irish Legend of Antichrist”, in Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome. Studies in Ancient Intercultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst, ed. by F. García Martínez and G. P. Luttikhuizen (JSJSup 80) ; Leiden, 2003, pp. 201-19  – this volume pp. 763-782.

20

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

designed to be in three parts. The first part carried a critical edition and translation on In Tenga Bithnua. The Ever-new Tongue by John Carey.79 The remaining two volumes will contain editions, translations, introduction and textual notes on Fís Adomnáin The Vision of Adomnan and Dá Brón Flatha Nime The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven by John Carey, the Transitus Mariae, the Irish Visio Sancti Pauli, various texts on the Signs before Doomsday, the Scéla Laí Brátha, and a Poem on the Day of Judgment, by various editors with introductions by the present writer. Invitations to contribute papers to conferences gave me the opportunity to prepare essays on the transmission of the Infancy Narratives,80 and on possible apocryphal references in the Navigatio Sancti Brendani.81 Surveys over this period helped to indicate the role of the Irish Biblical Association in this ongoing research.82 Current and Future Developments 2011-2014 (Sixty years of “Wendepunkte”) The latest volumes in the Scriptores Celtigenae series presented a major work on the Irish Southampton Psalter (St John’s College, Cambridge, MS C. 9), by P. P. Ó Néill, with a critical introduction and an edition of all the glosses, Latin and Old-Irish, and the edi78  M. McNamara, “The (Fifteen) Signs before Doomsday in Irish Tradition”, in Miscellanea Patristica Reverendissimo domino Marco Starowieyski septuagenario professori illustrissimo viro amplissiom ac doctissimo oblata (Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne XX/2), Warsaw 2007, pp. 223-54 – this volume pp. 783-828. 79  In Tenga Bithnua. The Ever-New Tongue, ed. by J. Carey (Apocrypha Hiberniae II. Apocalyptica 1, CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2009. 80  “Apocryphal Infancy Narratives. European and Irish Transmission”, in Ní Chatháin – Richter, Irland und Europa, pp. 123-46  – this volume pp. 549-83. 81  “Navigatio Sancti Brendani. Some Possible Connections with Liturgical, Apocryphal and Irish Tradition” in The Brendan Legend. Texts and Versions, ed. by G. S. Burgess  – C. Strijbosch, Leiden, 2006, pp. 159-88  – this volume pp. 829-863. 82  M. McNamara, “The Irish Biblical Association and its Publication Committee”, PIBA 25 (2002), pp. 9-17  – this volume pp. 72-81 ; McNamara, “Twenty-Five Years of the IBA Special Publications Trust”, PIBA 32 (2009), pp. 131-35.

introduction

21

tion of the non-Epitome literal glosses of St.-Ouen (Rouen) by Luc De Coninck already referred to.83 Faddan More Psalter In 2006 a Psalter was discovered in Faddan More bog, near the town of Birr, Co. Tipperary. A process of conservation and decipherment was carried out by the National Museum of Ireland.84 About 15% to 20% of the Psalter text is legible. Through Carbon 14 dating and by palaeography the date of the Psalter’s composition can be ascertained as shortly before A.D. 800. It would then be the second oldest Irish Psalter text known to us, the oldest (from the early 7th century) being the Cathach of St Columba. The Faddan More Psalter text throughout is clearly the Vulgate (Gallicanum). In 2011 I was requested by the National Museum to join the Steering Committee for the publication of the work. I occupied myself principally with the collation of the biblical text, which was clearly Vulgate. I first did this against the full apparatus of the Benedictine critical edition of the Vulgate, and was surprised to find that a number of the readings were attested not in the better Gallicanum manuscripts, but rather in later Vulgate texts, which would become the textus receptus (the rell. codd. et edd. of the apparatus of the Vulgate critical edition). Some of Faddan More variant readings were not attested even in these. At a second stage, I compared these readings with the critical edition and the Old Latin Psalter, to find that almost all these readings were Old Latin, accepted as the central text of the critical edition or its variants. This indicates that there might have been a far greater influence of the Old Latin readings on early Irish Psalters than had earlier been suspected. “Wendepunkte” : Support, Queries and Rejection Clare Stancliffe expressed serious reservation on Bischoff’s list, concluding after consideration that the corpus and its contents

83  See Psalterium Suthantoniense, ed. by Ó Neill (CCCM 240 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VI), Turnhout, 2011 ; De Coninck, Expositiones Psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adservantur. 84  For an initial report see A. Read, The Faddan More Psalter. Discovery, Conservation and Investigation, Dublin. National Museum of Ireland, 2011.

22

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

contained nothing particularly Irish or indeed special.85 A detailed examination of the corpus and a rejection of its value was presented by Edmondo Coccia in 1967.86 In 1993 in a paper read at the Maynooth Conference on Medieval Irish Exegesis and Homiletics Thomas L.  Amos took issue with Coccia, and after a detailed examination of the Catechesis Cracoviensis (MS Cracow Cathedral 140 [43]), comments as follows : “What we are now learning about such works begins to provide us with a clearer understanding of Pre-Carolingian Irish culture. Neither miraculous nor mythical, that culture should be seen to occupy a middle ground, important in its own right and for what it can tell us about Irish contributions to a larger early medieval culture”.87 Most notable among the critics of Bischoff’s position was the essay of Michael Gorman in 1997.88 There were some strongly expressed responses to this essay,89 and for some time debate on the issue, sometimes acrimonious, followed. Doubts still remain in the minds of a number of scholars regarding the Irish origins or affiliations of some, or even many, of the texts listed in the “Wendepunkte” essay, especially with regard to texts not clearly written or transmitted in Ireland. This is something to be borne in mind in the study of the learning, 85  C. Stancliffe, “Early ‘Irish’ Biblical Exegesis”, in Studia Patristica XII. Papers presented to the Sixth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford, 1971. Part I. Inaugural lecture, editiones, critica, biblica, historica, theologica, philosophica, liturgica, Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 115, ed. by E. A. Livingstone, Berlin, 1975, pp. 361-70. 86  E. Coccia, “La cultura irlandese precarolingia miracolo o mito ?”, in Studi medievali 3a serie, 8, 1 (1967), pp. 257-420. 87  Amos,”Miracle, Myth or Middle Ground ?” (above note 68). 88  M. Gorman, “A Critique of Bischoff’s Theory of Irish Exegesis. The Commentary on Genesis in Munich Clm 6302 (Wendepunkte 2)”, Journal of Medieval Latin 7 (1997), 178-233 ; also Gorman, “The Myth of Hiberno-Latin Exegesis”, Revue Bénédictine 110 (2000), 42-85. 89  For instance, G. Silagi, “Notwendige Bemerkungen zu Gormans “Critique of Bischoff’s Theory of Irish Exegesis”, Peritia 12 (1998), 87-94 ; C. Wright, “Bischoff’s Theory of Irish Exegesis”, Journal of Medieval Latin 10 (2000), 115-175 ; see also M. W. Herren, “Irish Biblical Commentaries before 800”, in Roma, Magistra Mundi. Itineraria Culturae Medievalis. Mélanges offertes au Père L. E. Boyle à l’occasion de son 75e anniversaire, ed. by J.  Hamesse, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1998, pp. 391-497.

introduction

23

theology or spirituality of the early Irish church. The material on the Psalter is clearly Irish. As for the other texts, even if there are “Irish symptoms” in texts preserved in manuscripts written on the Continent, the question arises whether they are Irish or from Irish centres on the Continent, with a combination of Irish and Continental learning. Where from here in Early Irish biblical Interpretation  ? Towards 2014 – Sixty Years of “Wendepunkte”. Importance of the Gospels of Máel Brigte One of the first requirements for an assessment of the Bischoff material is the critical edition of the individual texts, which is as yet far from complete. Pending this, interested scholars can work from the manuscripts, through microfilms, digitized texts or copies. From this point of view, one of the most important manuscripts is “The Gospels of Máel Brigte” of the British Library Harley 1802 (written in 1138), which will be considered in greater detail further below. The procedure could be to go from the known to the unknown or the doubtful ; for instance one may go from Harley 1802 or Sedulius Scottus, available for Matthew and Paul respectively in the critical editions of Bengt Löfstedt and Hermann Josef Frede and Herbert Stanjek. Deeper study of the works of Sedulius Scottus with a view of exploring their Irish connections might well pay dividends, both with regard to exegetical and apocryphal traditions and exegetical technique, such as passing from Jerome’s to Bede’s commentaries. I believe that research of this sort could shed further light on Irish exegetical activity at home and abroad as we move to commemorate in 2014 the diamond jubilee of Bischoff’s renowned 1954 essay. Postscript 2014 This narrative has taken us to the year 2014. More recent developments in this field of research will be given in the final essay in this volume.

PART I

The Bible : Texts and Commentaries

Robert T. Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012 Part II (unpublished).

INTRODUCTION THE BIBLE IN IRELAND AND ABROAD : SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 2012 The Bible in Ireland and Abroad A.D. 600-800 Biblical Text and Commentaries When we come to study the question of the Bible in Ireland and abroad we must first of all examine the texts that can with certainty or high probability be taken as composed or written in Ireland, and then examine the influence of these on Continental tradition, or inversely Continental influence on them. It seems best to first examine the Latin biblical texts, and after that commentaries on these texts. Irish Psalter Biblical Texts, Gallicanum and Hebraicum1 The biblical Psalter texts taken by the first Christian missionaries and St Patrick (A.D. 432) can be supposed to have been the Vetus Latina, the Old Latin version. The Psalter biblical text of Patrick’s writing is the Old Latin. According to Adomnán Columba of Iona died while transcribing the Psalter text inquirentes autem Dominum non deficient omni bono (Ps 33.11), which is Old Latin, not Vulgate (which has minuentur for deficient ). Apart from this, there is no evidence of the Old Latin Psalter in any early Irish writer or manuscript. It must early have fallen out of use as a biblical text. Gallicanum (Vulgate) Psalter texts in Ireland The oldest Irish Psalter text we know is the Cathach of St Columba (probably early 7th century), given the siglum C. Further Irish Psalter texts are preserved in British Library Codex Cotton Vitellius 1  For this section see M. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (A.D. 600-1200)”, PRIA 73 C (1973), pp. 201-98, at 259-64 (=The Psalms in the Early Irish Church (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 165), Sheffield, 2000, pp. 98-104).

28

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

F. XI (about A.D. 920), the glossed Southampton Psalter (manuscript late tenth or early eleventh century ; glosses apparently about mid-ninth century), the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen, Rouen (the Vulgate and Hebraicum texts ; tenth century), both given the siglum I ; the fragmentary Psalter in the Vatican Library Codex lat. 12910 (eleventh century) ; the glossed Psalter Caimin fragments of Psalm 118 (eleventh-twelfth century) ; British Library Codex Cotton Galba A.V. (twelfth century) ; the Coupar Angus Psalter (MS Vatican Library Pal. lat. 65 ; about 1170) ; the Psalter of Cormac (MS British Library Additional 36929, about 1150-1200). To these we may now add the fragments of the Faddan More Psalter, recently discovered (National Museum of Ireland ; about A.D. 800). Hebraicum Psalter texts in Ireland For Psalters with the text of Jerome’s Hebraicum we have : the Hebraicum side of the Double Psalter of Rouen (as for the Gallicanum given the siglum I) ; the Paris fragments in Codex Bibliothèque nationale de France MS fr. 2450 (tenth century) ; the Edinburgh Psalter (Edinburgh University Library MS 56 ; about A.D. 1025) ; the Psalter of Ricemarch (soon after A.D. 1055). To these we may add, although not an Irish manuscript, the Psalter text of the Codex Amiatinus (given the siglum A). While the codex was written at Wearmouth-Jarrow (Northumbria) in the eighth century, its Psalter text represents the specifically Irish recension of the Hebraicum. For the Irish Hebraicum we must also note the MS Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek Aug. XXXVIII (for Vetus Latina purposes given the number 316), a triple Psalter, Old Latin, Gallicanum and Hebraicum. The Gallicanum text is close to that of the Palatine School type, but is recognised as depending quite a bit on the Irish tradition, as do the Utrecht Psalter (Old Latin 423) and the Psalter of Wolfcoz (Old Latin 427).2 The Hebraicum text of the Karlsruhe manuscript (given the siglum K) is entirely of the Irish Hebraicum tradition. The Caimin Gallican Psalter fragments of Ps 118 (eleventh-twelfth century) carry on the upper margins the corresponding Hebraicum text in abbreviation, sometimes words represented by their initial letter. The most 2  See R. Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften, Manuscrits Vieux latins. Répertoire descriptif. Deuxième partie. Mss. 300-485 (Manuscrits du psautier), Freiburg, 2004, p. 58.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 29

recent addition to the Irish Hebraicum family are the fragments Codex Bibliothèque nationale de France MS fr. 2452 (tenth century). The existence of the fragments as Irish, and as containing the Hebraicum text has for long been known. Only recently, however, have they been recognized as carrying the specifically Irish recension, and although in a later manuscript (tenth century) of a purer form than in AKI.3 Some Specific Features of Irish Psalter Texts The Gallican Psalter texts of the Cathach (C) and the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen (I) are recognized as practically identical and as good representatives of Jerome’s original revision, and used among the chief manuscripts for the Benedictine critical edition of the Vulgate Psalter. They are also accepted as constituting a specific Irish Recension within Vulgate Psalter texts. Both these texts have been fully collated. The same is not true of the later Irish Psalter texts. Partial collation shows that they have a number of specific Irish CI readings, but others that seem to belong to what will later be known as the textus receptus¸ which at first sight might indicate influence from later Continental texts, with more Old Latin variants. What the variant readings of the Faddan More Psalter fragments reveal is that these variant readings may have been present already in early Irish Psalters more influenced by the Old Latin than in the CI recension. The Irish texts AKI also contain a specific Recension of the Hebraicum, known as the Irish recension. One feature of the Irish family is the omission of certain words and phrases. The most notable omission is at Ps 89.17 where the entire half-verse et opus manuum nostrarum fac stabile super nos is omitted, and this only in the AKI witnesses of the Hebraicum. The other Irish texts of the Hebraicum also seem to belong to this family. A feature of the Cathach text is the apparently unusual location of the obelus sign. In his original revision of the Psalter, to become the Gallicanum, Jerome inserted the critical obelus sign (÷ ; the division sign) to indicate words or phrases in the Septuagint and Old Latin being revised but not in the Hebrew. Though

3  See M. McNamara, “Five Irish Psalter Texts”, pp. 60-62, 94-104  – this volume pp. 157-61, 199-209.

30

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

he also instructed copyists to carefully reproduce these critical signs, few of the extant manuscripts contain them to any signi­ ficant extent. There are twenty-five occurrences of the obelus in the Cathach. Their presence should mark material in the Latin but not in the Hebrew Text. In the Cathach, however, this is not the case. It has been ascertained that the Cathach’s obeli do not reproduce the obeli of Jerome, but represent a later revision of the Gallicanum text against Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew (the Hebraicum). Furthermore, this revision was not against the genuine (critical edition) of Jerome’s text but against a specifically Irish text form. The most notable example is the obelus at Ps 89.17, where the entire half-verse et opus manuum nostrarum fac stabile super nos is omitted, and this only in the AKI witnesses of the Hebraicum. There is nothing specifically noteworthy about the Vulgate, much less the Hebraicum, texts in the Psalter of Caimin. There are, however, occurrences of the obelus, and possibly some of the asterisk, in the fragments.4 Caimin has eleven instances of the obelus attested in no other text of the Gallicanum. In seven other occurrences of the obelus in Caimin, it indicates words so marked in the second hand on Codex Sangallensis 20 (Vetus Latina no. 427), but in no other text of the Gallicanum. This seems to indicate some relationship between the biblical text of the Gallicanum text of the Psalter of Caimin and the Codex Sangallensis 20, written in the ninth century by the scribe Wolfcoz. It is recognized that Sangallensis 20 is closely related to the Gallicanum of the Triple Psalter of Reichenau, MS Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek Aug. XXXVIII (Vetus Latina no. 316), which has the Gallican text of the Palatine school, but borrows considerably from Irish tradition. 5 It may be that this limited Psalter Caimin evidence indicates a hidden relation between the Irish Gallicanum text and the Palatine School.

4  See M. McNamara, “End of an Era in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis. Caimin Psalter Fragments (11th-12 th Century) and Gospels of Máel Brigte (A.D. 1138)”, PIBA 33-34 (2012), pp. 76-121, at p. 83  – this volume pp. 211-61, at p. 219. 5  See R. Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften, p. 241.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 31

The Irish Hebraicum Psalter Text, Origin and Transmission The Cathach (early seventh century, if not earlier), written in Ireland, represents a revision of the Gallicanum, through the critical obelus signs, against a specifically Irish recension of the Hebrai­ cum. This would seem to indicate that this Hebraicum recension was known in Ireland in the sixth century. One can only speculate as to the scholarly circles that produced this recension, and the history behind it. A somewhat corrupt form of it was copied in the Codex Amiatinus (early eighth century). A very pure early form of this Irish recension appears to be preserved in the tenth century codex Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France fr. 2452, fols 75-84 (fragments only).6 The recension continued to be copied and used in Ireland down to the end of the pre-Norman period, as the top margin of the Psalter of Caimin (eleventh-twelfth century) shows. It was probably used in monastic instruction, and possibly for devotional purposes as well. Irish Psalter Commentary Material Antiochene Influence The existence of Antiochene influence in early Irish Psalms exegesis has for long been noted. This arose from the use of the translation of the Psalms commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia made by Julian (386-454), bishop of Eclanum. Julian was born in Apulia, Southern Italy, and was consecrated bishop of Eclanum (near present day Benevento, north-east of Naples) in 417. His support of Pelagianism had him driven from his see in 418. He went east to Cilicia and resided with Theodore of Mopsuestia and was involved in the Pelagian controversy until 431 (the Ephesus conciliabulum ; Nestorius and Nestorianism) and later. He returned to the west and died in Sicily. His full Latin translation of Theodore’s commentary has been preserved only in sections, and in an abbreviation (known as the epitome), both transmitted and preserved mainly in Irish sources. The Irish sources in question are the Milan Commentary on the Psalter (Amb. C 301 inf.), with the Epitome from Ps  16.11b to the end, and the full translation of 6  See M. McNamara, “Five Irish Psalter Texts”, PRIA 109 C (2009), pp. 37-104, at 60-63, 94-104 – this volume pp. 131-209, at 156-61, 199-209.

32

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Theodore’s commentary for the beginning ; the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen, Rouen, with glosses from the Epitome from Ps 16.11b to the end, and for Pss 1.1-16.11a from an otherwise unknown Antiochene-type commentary, understanding the psalms mainly of David and his times.7 The glosses on the Psalms in the Hiberno-Latin text Eglogae tractatorum in Psalterium (Ireland, from about the end of the eighth century) are in the tradition of the Milan Codex – from the Epitome for Ps 16.11b to the end, from the full translation of Julian for the beginning. The glosses in the section of the “Reference Bible” (De enigmatibus) on the Psalter (from the mid-eighth century) are in the same tradition as the glosses of the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen  – from the same unknown commentary for the earlier part (Pss 1.1-16.11a), from the Epitome, for the remainder. The glosses in the Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican codex Pal. lat. 68 (extant only for Pss 39.11-151) are heavily dependent on the Epitome of Julian. The Argumenta section of the work De titulis psalmorum sometimes attributed to Bede (possibly of eighth-century origin) are also drawn from the Epitome, but from an already fragmentary text.8 We cannot really say when Julian translated Theodore’s commentary into Latin, presumably after his departure from Italy in 421, possibly during his sojourn in the East and with Theodore until about 431, but also possibly later on his return to Italy. The Epitome deserves study in its own right, more than it has

L. De Coninck has edited the first set of glosses. Incerti auctoris expositio psalmorum I.1 – XVI.11a iuxta litteram An anonymous historical commentary on Psalms I.1 – XVI.11a. Pars prima. Praefatio editoris ; pars altera. Textus¸ ed. by L. De Coninck (Catholic University of Leuven Campus Kortrijk), Kort­rijk, preprint 1989. He later reedited this set of glosses, and also all the glosses with a literal interpretation (mainly interpreting the Psalms of David), other than those from the Epitome of Julian, in the publication already noted above : Expositiones Psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adservantur (CCCM 256 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VII), Turnhout, 2012. 8  See Theodori Mopsuesteni Expositionis in Psalmos Iuliano Aeclanensi interpretete in latinum versae quae supersunt, ed. L. De Coninck  – M.-J. D’Hont (CCSL 88A), Turnhout, 1977, pp. xxxix-xl ; On the Argumenta and De titulis psalmorum see also M. McNamara, “Five Irish Psalter Texts”, pp. 42-50  – this volume pp. 133-43. 7 

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 33

received, even an English translation.9 It is difficult to determine when and where the Epitome was made, and how both the original translation and the Epitome were introduced into Irish monastic circles. Julian’s full translation probably circulated in Italy, and apparently northern Italy, within limited (and probably Pelagian) circles in the late fifth, sixth and early seventh centuries. An abbreviation, an epitome, of the full translation was made there, and both seem to have circulated side by side within the same circles, and in a limited number of manuscripts. The beginning of possibly the sole surviving manuscript got lost, and was replaced in one branch of the transmission by the relevant text from Julian’s full translation, in another by the required section of another Antiochene-type David-centred commentary, taken from what appears to have once been a full Psalter commentary, now preserved only for the glosses of Ps 1.1-16.11a in the Bible Psalter of St.-Ouen, the Psalter section of De enigmatibus, and possibly attested to in the glosses of the Vatican Glossa in Psalmos. When, and through what channels, the Epitome came to Ireland is also uncertain. It seems to have been known there by A.D. 700 at the latest, since the tradition preserved in the glosses in the same Vatican codex, written in Ireland or Northumbria, in the early eighth century draw on it. Irish monastic tradition prized this Antiochene tradition of literal interpretation. The Antiochene glosses of the Vatican Glossa in psalmos (written about A.D. 700) were in particular demand. The greatest single source for the glosses in the left-hand margins on the Psalter of Caimin (eleventh-twelfth century) is the Glossa in Psalmos of Pal. lat. 68. About half (153 out of a total of 315) of the marginal and interlinear glosses of this Psalter are from this source, or from its source. These glosses, we may note, reproduce the Glossa in Psalmos text with extreme fidelity. This is clear proof that this early text still circulated in the eleventh-twelfth century. The glosses in the Irish Double Psalter of St.-Ouen (tenth century) are particularly revealing. Those on the Hebraicum, as already noted, are from the Epitome of Julian, and from two other Antiochene-type literal commentaries. One of those is that 9  For a fine initial study of the epitome see De Coninck  – D’Hont, Theodori Mopsuesteni, pp. xxv-xxxvii.

34

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

represented by the glosses on Pss 1.1-16.11a, already mentioned. It is the work of an unknown author, the Incertus Auctor as Luc De Coninck names him. The other Antiochene-type commentary has been preserved in what De Coninck calls the third series of glosses. It is a Davidic commentary, interpreting the psalms of David, without a messianic reference in any of them. This series of glosses was added by at least two hands, and possibly more. Apart from two major hands in the glosses of this series, De Coninck observes, a certain individual (given by De Coninck the siglum R3) corrected some of the glosses of all the series he has listed. But this is not all that R3 did : he also added other glosses, all of them coinciding with or similar to the literal exegesis of the Vatican Pal. lat. 68 commentary, indicative of the particular regard for the historical interpretation of this text.10 The Irish Psalter of Southampton (MS Cambridge, St John’s College, C. 9) has two strata of glosses ; the second (on Pss 41-91) reflects a historically-oriented type of exegesis very close to that contained in the Glossa in Psalmos of codex Pal. lat. 68.11 Spiritual and Christological Approach Respect for the presumed literal sense of the psalms does not mean that the allegorical, the spiritual, the Christological, was neglected. The Argumenta of the Tituli Psalmorum, sometimes attributed to Bede, attempts for each psalm to give the literal, spiritual and moral sense. The best known of the series of psalm headings is that of the Cathach of St Columba, which understands the psalms chiefly of Christ, the Church and Christian life. The Vatican Glossa in Psalmos, while chiefly in the literal or historical tradition, tries to combine both literal and spiritual traditions, and at times reacts strongly against, and rejects, the non-messianic interpretation of certain psalms (for instance Pss 44 and 109,

10  L. De Coninck has edited all the glosses of this third series Expositiones Psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adservantur ; see pp. xxi and xli-xlvii for the glosses of the third series and their relation to the Glossa in Psalmos of Pal. lat. 68. 11  For this information on the Southampton Psalter glosses see Psalterium Suthantoniense, ed. by P. P. Ó Neill (CCCM 240 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VI), Turnhout, 2011, pp.xlviii, lxvi-lxxxviii.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 35

Vulgate numbering). The Double Psalter of St.-Ouen gives ample place to both traditions, as do the glosses of the Caimin Psalter. The Psalter was really at the centre of Irish monastic life, as of monasticism in general. In the best tradition of the vision of Athanasius, Ambrose, Augustine and others it was viewed as a guide in Christian living, and an object of love and devotion. This becomes clear in a poem by the Máel Ísu Ua Brollacháin (†1086), a scholar from Armagh in the north of Ireland as he came in the monastery of Lismore in the south on a tattered old copy of a Psalter from which he had learned the rudiments of learning and monastic life in Armagh. He calls the Psalter fragments Crinoc, “ancient young one”. Crinoc, lady of measured melody, not young, but with modest maiden mind, together once in Niall’s northern land we slept, we two, as man and womankind. You came and slept with me for that first time, skilled wise amazon annihilating fears and I a fresh-faced boy, not bent as now, a gentle lad of seven melodious years .... Your counsel is ever there to hand, we choose it, following you in everything : love of your word is the best of loves, our gentle conversation with the King .... Seeking the presence of elusive God wandering we stray, but the way is found, following the mighty melodies that with you throughout the pathways of the world resound. Not ever silent, you bring the word of God to all who in the present world abide, and then through you, through finest mesh, Man’s earnest prayer to God is purified.12

Irish Gospel Texts We know of twenty-seven Gospel texts or fragments of texts written in Ireland or by Irish scribes abroad in Irish centres 12  See Medieval Irish Lyric s Selected and Translated, ed. and trans. by J. Carney, Dublin, 1967, pp. 74-79, and xxvii-xxviii.

36

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

between the seventh and the twelfth centuries.13 Two of these can be assigned to the seventh century, five to the eighth, three to the twelfth and the remainder to the eighth-ninth. One of them (the Ussher Gospels ; Usserianus Primus) has the Old Latin Gospel text ; one of them (the Book of Durrow) a true Vulgate text ; the remainder a mixture of Vulgate and Old Latin. The manuscripts vary in format and style from the grand illuminated codices (Kells, Durrow, St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek codex 51, in the tradition of the great codices, the Lindisfarne Gospels, the Echternach Gospels, the Durham Gospels, the Lichfield Gospel Book of St Chad), probably display copies, to the small humble Irish pocket gospels, probably intended for itinerant missionaries, or as gifts. To this list we can add seven or so others, from outside of Ireland but linked to the Irish tradition with regard to the biblical text and other ways. From the point of view of textual biblical type, as just noted, one has a true Old Latin text, and another a true Vulgate text. The Mixed Text of Irish gospels can be of different sorts : chiefly Vulgate with variant (probably Old Latin) readings, chiefly Old Latin with Vulgate readings, or a mixture with some sections Old Latin and others Vulgate. The chief Irish/Celtic Mixed Gospel text is Vulgate with variant, chiefly Old Latin, readings. In the preparation for the critical edition of the Vulgate Gospels, studies during the nineteenth century led to the grouping of the five manuscripts, assigned the sigla DELQR (that is, the Book of Armagh, BL Egerton 609, the Lichfield Gospels, the Book of Kells, the Rushworth or Mac Regol Gospels ; two of which are not Irish) as a family apart, and given the name the Celtic (or Irish) Mixed Text, which in the view of the editors of the Vulgate Gospels may have originated in Ireland, Gaul or Britain. A similar mixed text is found in Continental manuscripts. The origin of this Irish Mixed 13  For this section see. M. McNamara, “The Latin Gospels, with Special Reference to Irish Tradition”, in The Earliest Gospels. The Origins and Transmission of the Earliest Gospels. The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P45 (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series ; Proceedings of the Chester Beatty 2000 Conference), ed. by C. Horton, London-New York, 2004, pp. 88-106  – this volume pp. 263-88. The texts are listed in M. McNamara, “Irish Gospel Books and Related Texts”, PIBA 23 (2000), pp. 61-66.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 37

Text is not clear. Samuel Berger in his history of the Vulgate (1893)14 put forward the view that the European Mixed Text of the Gospels was due to the influence of Irish manuscripts, brought to Europe by Irish missionaries. This view is no longer accepted. Mixed texts of the Gospels have a long history in Europe. The Irish Mixed Text does not constitute a family, with the same variants, descending from a common ancestor. The relationship of the Irish to the Continental Mixed Text probably has to do with cultural contacts, especially between Ireland and Brittany. Desiderata re Irish Gospel texts. Full collation A pre-requisite for an understanding of the interrelationships of Gospel texts with one another, or the broader tradition, is a full collation of each of the texts. This has been done for some major texts, but remains a desideratum for most. While some of these Irish Gospel texts have been digitized, for collation, using electronic modern aids, what is required is computerization of the individual texts. Progress can be reported in this regard, as currently in Agreement with Dr Hugh Houghton, The Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing, University of Birmingham, work has begun on the computerizing of selected Irish Gospel manuscripts, which when finished for each gospel will make possible the production of automatic collation against the Vulgate, and eventually, the other witnesses.15 Gospel Glosses and Commentaries Most of the manuscript Gospel commentaries brought to our attention by Dr Bischoff have not yet been critically edited. The commentary on Mark, believed by Bischoff to be Irish, and possibly by the scholar Comianus, has been critically edited by Michael Cahill.16 Glosses on Matthew’s gospel in MS Würzburg, Universi-

S. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate pendant les premiers siècles du Moyen Âge, Paris, 1893 ; reprint New York, 1961. 15  This has been done for the four Gospels in St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek codex 51, in a companion volume to the facsimile edition of the Codex (forthcoming). 16  Expositio Evangelii secundum Marcum, ed. by M. Cahill (CCSL 82 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars II), Turnhout, 1997. 14 

38

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

tätsbibliothek M.p.th.fol.61 (8th-9th century) seem related to the Latin commentary on Matthew (Hiberno-Latin), Vienna 940. Beginning of Irish glossing : Dry-Point glosses on Codex Usserianus Primus  – Seventh century In his 1954 essay “Wendepunkte” Bernhard Bischoff notes that already in the seventh century we have clear evidence of various forms of Irish biblical interpretation. We have a particularly early example in interlinear glosses in the Old Latin Gospel manuscript Ussserianus I (early seventh century) of Trinity College Dublin. Here we have interlinear glosses written in with a stylus. Among them we have a gloss in Old Irish (probably the oldest of the Irish glosses preserved in a manuscript)  – focrici (“rewards”) over the Latin word stipendiis of Luke 3.14.17 Pádraig Ó Néill has made a special study of the dry-point glosses of this codex.18 These dry-point glosses were entered by a scribe using a metal stylus. Although the stylus was used primarily as an instrument for writing on wax-tables, such stylus glossing was widespread in early medieval manuscripts, and is found in some other Irish texts as well as Usserianus Primus. In Ó Néill’s view the combined evidence of content, language and script broadly harmonize for a seventh-century date for these Usserianus Primus glosses. Ó Néill edits 137 of these glosses. There are 112 glosses on Luke, ten on Matthew, one on John and none on Mark. Of the ten on Matthew seven belong to a single, short episode narrating the preparations for the Last Supper and the occasion itself (Mt 26.17-29)  – a passage, I may observe, that will later be the subject of detailed homiletic treatment in Irish tradition. With regard to sources Bischoff remarked that the glosses do not seem to have been taken from any of the known commentaries.19 In Ó Néill’s opinion this obser-

17  B. Bischoff, “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, by Dr B. Bischoff, translated into English by Colm O’Grady, in Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, ed. by M. McNamara (PIBA 1), Dublin, 1976, pp. 78-79. 18  P. Ó Néill, “The Earliest Dry-Point Glosses in Codex Usserianus Primus”, in “A Miracle of Learning”. Studies in Manuscripts and Irish Learning. Essays in Honour of William O’Sullivan, ed. by T. Barnard et al., Aldershot, 1998, pp. 1-28. 19  Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, p. 79.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 39

vation needs to be revised. Dependence can be established with reasonable certainty for the following patristic sources : Jerome’s commentary on Matthew and his interpretation of Hebrew names ; Ambrose’s commentary on Luke ; Chromatius’s Tractatus in Matthaeum ; Gregory’s 40 homilies on the gospels, Eucherius’s Formula spiritalis intellegentiae, possibly Benedict of Nursia’s Regula, and the apocryphal Descensus ad infernos. Although glossing an Old Latin text, the single source most frequently used by the glossator was almost certainly Jerome’s Vulgate. It appears that the Vulgate was his gospel of habitual use. Sedulius Scottus’s Commentary on Matthew’s Gospel In studying the Gospels of Máel Brigte, treated of later in this volume, I have noted certain links between it and the commentary of Sedulius Scottus on Matthew’s Gospel. The phenomenon calls for further enquiry. It may be that Sedulius’s commentary, composed on the Continent, is heavily dependent on earlier Irish tradition. Only further research can answer this. The Glossed Gospels of Máel Brigte (A.D. 1138) With an interest in comparing continuity, and possibly discontinuity, between what we know of early Irish exegesis in the early (A.D. 600-800) and the later (A.D. 1100-1200) periods, I have recently paid attention to two Irish texts from the very end of the pre-Norman period, the glossed Psalter of Caimin (eleventh-twelfth century) and the Gospels of Máel Brigte (A.D. 1138), in manuscript BL Harley 1802. The first carries forward the early Irish tradition of Psalter study, a field that has been rather fully explored. In this there seems to have been almost complete continuity, with no later foreign influences after the earlier known texts. The chief source of the glosses in the Psalter of Caimin is the Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican Codex Pal. lat. 68. A notable feature of the interlinear glosses is the very close relationship of many of them with interlinear glosses in the Gallicanum of the Rouen Double Psalter of St.-Ouen (Ireland tenth century), a series of glosses otherwise unattested, indicating the presence of this series of glosses in Clonmacnois (where the Psalter of Caimin was probably written). The importance of the Gospels of Máel Brigte lies in the fact that in them we have a work definitely written in Ireland by an

40

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Irish scholar at a clearly definable date (A.D. 1138), a work with a wealth of glosses (about two thousand), drawn from a rich variety of sources. This late Irish evidence can be used to compare with the material brought to scholarly attention by Bischoff, and may help to evaluate its Irish origins or connections. J. Rittmueller has shown the close relationship of the section of these glosses on the institution of the Eucharist narrative in Matthew’s Gospel with other vernacular Irish and Hiberno-Latin texts.20 In a recent essay I have given a survey of the contents of these Máel Brigte Gospels, which have lengthy introductions and prefaces to the Gospels themselves.21 One of these prefaces is verbatim identical with a preface in Frigulus, a preface not attested elsewhere but apparently the source of other texts regarded by many scholars as Hiberno-Latin : the Commentary on Matthew in Vienna 940 ; Pseudo-Jerome, Expositio Quatuor Evangeliorum ; the work titled “Pauca de libris Catholicorum scriptorum in euangelia excerpta” (MS Clm 6235, fol. 32r). The Gospels of Máel Brigte have a text on the Magi, ascribed to the “Gospel according to the Hebrews”, from a passage cited at greater length in Sedulius Scottus’s commentary on Matthew, with the same attribution. Máel Brigte also has texts under the name of “Origenes”, by which Pseudo-Origen’s Homilies on Matthew must be understood. These also occur in Sedulius’s commentary on Matthew, again under the same ascription. In fol. 11r, on Matthew 2.11 we have a very interesting gloss on the words per aliam uiam, id est per Tarsum Ciliciam ut Cas(siodorus) (one character and continuation illegible). The inclusion of the reference to Cassiodorus is very interesting. It is also mentioned by Sedulius Scottus in his exposition of the text : “per aliam uiam”, per Tarsum scilicet Ciliciam ... ut Cassiodorus in expositione XLmi septimi psalmi ostendit. Máel Brigte’s extended 20  J. Rittmueller, The Leabhar Breac Latin and Middle-Irish Homily “In Cena Domini”. an Edition and Source Analysis (Ph.D. Dissertation Harvard University 1984) ; published University Microfilms International, Ann Arbor MI, 1989) ; Rittmueller, “The Gospel Commentary of Máel Brigte Ua Máeluanaig and its Hiberno-Latin Background”, Peritia 2 (1983), pp. 185-214 ; Rittmueller, “Afterword. The Gospel of Máel Brigte”, Peritia 3 (1984), pp. 215-218. 21  M. McNamara, “End of an Era in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis. Caimin Psalter Fragments (11th-12 th Century) and Gospels of Máel Brigte (A.D. 1138)”, PIBA 33-34 (2012), pp. 76-121  – this volume pp. 211-61.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 41

glosses on the text of Matthew pass easily from Jerome’s commentary on Matthew to Bede’s commentary on Luke for parallel texts – a feature also present in some passages at least of Sedulius’s commentary. A possible relationship between Máel Brigte’s glosses and Sedulius’s commentary on Matthew seems worth exploring. Pauline Epistles : Predominance of Pelagius ; commentary material ; new questions Würzburg glosses Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek M. p. th. fol. 12. The text was written in Ireland in the eighth century. It has the Latin text of the Pauline Epistles, including Hebrews, and is heavily glossed, both interlinearly and in the margins as far as Hebrews 7.9. The manuscript was intended as a school text. It was probably taken to Würzburg by Clemens Scottus, head of the Palace School under Charles the Great and Louis the Pious. Clemens died in Würzburg in 826. The glosses are excerpts from Origenes (in the translation of Rufinus), Hilarius (=the Ambrosiaster), Hieronymus, Augustinus, Cassiodorus, Gregorius, Isidore, and above all else Pelagius, from whose commentary alone 1311 glosses are taken.22 For the critical edition of Sedulius’s commentary, Herbert Stanjek has compared the glosses of this manuscript with all of the relevant texts in Sedulius.23 Sedulius Scottus The major commentator on Paul in the ninth century is Sedulius Scottus, who composed commentaries on the Epistles of Paul as well as on Matthew’s Gospel. Sedulius migrated from Ireland to the Continent about 840 and produced his extensive literary work on the Continent. It has for long been a matter of debate whether his very considerable acquaintance with classical authors

22  See J. F. Kenney, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland : Ecclesiastical, Columbia University Press, 1927 (and later reprints), pp. 635-636. 23  These are listed in the indexes of both volumes. Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. I. In Epistolam ad Romanos, introd. and ed. by H. J. Frede – H. Stanjek, Freiburg, 1996. p. 328 ; Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. II. In Epistolas as Corinthios usque ad Hebraeos, introd. and ed. by H. J. Frede  – H. Stanjek, Freiburg, 1997, pp. 832-833.

42

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

was obtained by him after coming to the Continent or already in Ireland. For his commentaries on Paul he used a wide range of authors, and the richness of his commentary is due to access to a rich library, whether personally acquired or at his main place of activity, Liège, or elsewhere. The question of the extent, if any, of his dependence on Irish exegetical tradition remains to be explored.24 We shall attend to some possible relationships in the study of the manuscripts considered just below. Fragments of a glossed texts of Epistle to the Colossians in St Gall Stiftsbibliothek, MS 1395, pp. 440-441 To the texts hitherto known with regard to the Pauline Epistles, the above text St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 1395, pp. 440-441 has been brought to my attention by the young North American scholar Brandon W. Hawk.25 Saint Gall Codex 1395 is a composite volume (Veterum fragmentorum manuscriptis codicibus detractorum collectio – Tomus II), put together by Ildefons von Arx, Abbey Librarian in 1822, who added the pagination in ink. In this composite volume there are various fragments of which seven are Irish.26. Of these a number of texts have Irish miniatures (pp. 418419, 422-423, 426-427). These and some liturgical texts (pp. 430433, 444-447) have received the attention of specialists in this

24  Sedulius’s sources for his commentary on Paul have been listed by A. Souter, “The Sources of Sedulius Scottus’s Collectaneum on the Epistles of Paul”, Journal of Theological Studies 18 (1917), pp. 184-228 ; see also Frede, Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. I. In Epistolam ad Romanos, pp. 35*48* ; B. Bischoff, “La Scuola nell’Occidente Latino nel’alto medioevo”, in Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo 19, Spoleto, 1972, pp. 385-415 = in German in B. Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien, vol. 3, Stuttgart, 1981, pp. 213-233 (at 225). Bischoff remarks that in Sedulius Scottus’s work, which brought to an end the older Irish exegetical literature, many weaknesses of the pre- and early-Carolingian Irish were overcome (see B. Bischoff, “Theodulph und der Ire Cadac-Andreas”, in Historisches Jahrbuch 74, 1955, pp. 92-98, reproduced in Mittelalterliche Studien II, 1967, pp. 19-25, at 24). 25  The text of this St Gall manuscript has been digitized, and is available online at : http://www.e-codices.unifr.ch/en/doubleview/csg/1395/440. 26  See J. Duft  – P. Meyer, The Irish Miniatures in the Abbey Library of St. Gall, Olten, Berne and Lausanne, 1954, p. 76.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 43

field.27 In pages 440-441 Brandon Hawk has identified an Irish-associated fragment of Paul’s Letter to the Colossians with commentary. This fragment includes, in Irish script, Colossians 3.5-24, accompanied by a series of marginal comments around the text. It has been largely overlooked in scholarship, but a few brief references to it do exist.28 The biblical text is in heavy Irish cursive script, and the glosses on both margins, in smaller Irish cursive. As Scherrer has already noted in his register of the manuscript, it is probably the remains of the Epistolae Pauli in vol. 1, as catalogued under the Libri scottice scripti of the old, mid-ninth century, catalogue of the St Gall library.29 This would seem to indicate an eighth or early ninth century date for the manuscript. The glosses have no source ascription, but most are verbally from Pelagius’s commentary. The source of the others has yet to be determined. A critical edition of the text, with analysis, has been published by Brandon Hawk. 30 MS St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek 73 Another work that merits examination for its relationship with Sedulius is a commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, again listed by Bischoff (“Wendepunkte” 34A, 34B). It has been transmitted in two forms, one (form A) in Ms St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek

27  See Duft  – Meyer, The Irish Miniatures, pp. 76-80 ; J. J. G. Alexander, Insular Manuscripts 6th to the 9th Century (A Survey of Manuscripts illuminated in the British Isles  – General Editor J. J. G. Alexander), London, 1978, p. 79 (nos. 57, 58). 28  See Veterum Fragmentorum Manuscriptis Codicibus detractorum collectio ; G. Scherrer, Verzeichniss der Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek von St. Gallen, Halle, 1875, pp. 461-464. 29  Text of the catalogue in St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, MS 728, page 4. See Scherrer, Verzeichniss, p. 464. Duft  – Meyer¸ The Irish Miniatures, p. 42, seem to cast doubt on this, since the Libri scottice scripti text says nothing as to a glossed volume. However, they have no trouble in identifying a glossed Irish text of Ezekiel in the Staatsarchiv, Zurich, with the entry in the same catalogue of Ezechiel propheta in volumine I, without any mention of a glossed text. 30  B. W. Hawk, “A Fragment of Colossians with Hiberno-Latin Glosses in St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 1395”, Sacris Erudiri 51 (2012), pp. 233-256.

44

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

73, pp. 231-260 (ninth century), the other (form B) under the name of Hieronymus, in a variety of manuscripts. 31 The St Gall manuscript has been edited by Heinrich Zimmer. 32 Bischoff stresses the Irish connections of this commentary on Hebrews. 33 His view is that the commentary originated in the eighth century at the latest, going on the evidence of the oldest manuscripts (of form B). Arguments in favour of an Irish origin for the work, he writes, are to be derived not merely from the common transmission with Irish branches of the Pelagius tradition and from the close relationship between the commentary of Sedulius Scottus on the epistle to the Hebrews and the St Gall manuscript. 34 He draws further arguments for Irish origin from the comparison between the seven epistles and the seven trumpets at Jericho (on 11.30), 35 a comparison not very appropriate in the contexts in which it is found but one we meet in two commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, both probably of Irish origin. The St Gall MS 73, together with the views of Zimmer, Riggenbach and Bischoff, have been the subject of discussion in recent years. 36 The specialist in this field, Hermann Frede earlier (1961, 1973) accepted Irish origin, but later research (1987, after an initial, 1982, study by H. Boese of a newly identified work “Glosa psalmorum ex traditione seniorum”) led him to the belief that it originated in the same place and time as the Glosa Psalmorum ex 31  For the manuscripts see E. Riggenbach, Die ältesten lateinischen Kommentare zum Hebräerbrief : ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Exegese und zur Literaturgeschichte des Mittelalters, Leipzig, 1907, pp. 205-06. 32  H. Zimmer, Pelagius in Irland. Texte und Untersuchungen zur patristischen Litteratur, Berlin, 1901, pp. 420-448 ; reproduced in Patrologiae Latinae Supplementum, vol. 4, col. 1627-1653 ; see Clavis Patrum Latinorum 1122a. 33  In “Turning-Points”, pp. 140-141. 34  With reference to Riggenbach, Die ältesten, pp. 218ff. (thus Bischoff). The connections with Sedulius have been noted, and indexed, by F. J. Frede and H. Stanjek in their critical edition of Sedulius’s commentary on Hebrews, in F.J. Frede  – H. Stanjek, Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. II, pp. 835-837. 35  In Pelagius in Irland, ed. Zimmer, p. 442 ; with reference to Riggenbach, pp. 225-226. 36  I have given a survey of these views in the review “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin. 6. How Irish is the Commentary on Hebrews in St Gallen 73 ?”, PIBA 12 (1989), pp. 90-94.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 45

traditione seniorum, that is, southern France, probably Provence, in the first half of the seventh century. This was because an important source for the St Gall 73 commentary proves to be this Glosa Psalmorum. He discusses the question in detail in his introduction to the Vetus Latina critical edition of the Epistle to the Hebrews (1987), in which he replies to Bischoff’s arguments for an Irish origin. 37 This prompted a note from Liam Breatnach, a specialist in Old Irish law, observing that the text of St Gall 73 on Hebrews 9.17 is cited verbatim in an Old Irish law text which can be dated to the eighth or ninth century. 38 Hebrews 9.17 says : Testamentum enim in mortuis confirmatum est. This is glossed in St Gall 73 as : Testamentum tunc firmum erit postquam homo de hoc seculo migrauerit, 39 a text found also in the commentary of Sedulius Scottus.40 The purpose of Liam Breatnach’s note is to draw attention to a passage clearly derived from the Pauline text together with the above commentary which appears as one of two passages in a glossed Old Irish text on oaths, a text that can be dated to the eighth or ninth century. Immediately after a sentence in Old Irish, which can be translated, “an oath sworn when making a will at the moment of death is of most worth”, the following comes, in Latin : Confirmatum est testamentum enim in morte (Hebr 9.17). Tunc testamentum firmum est quando homo a seculo migrauerit. The Latin is translated in two glosses in Irish, which may be translated. (1) “The will a person makes when dying is that which is in force” ; (2) “It is then that the will is certain, when a person departs from the world”.41 While this does not prove that St Gall 37  See in particular H. J. Frede, in Vetus Latina, vol. 25, pars II, fasc. 3 (introduction to the edtion of Hebrews), Freiburg, 1987, pp. 1022-1026 ; repeated in the author index to St Gall 73 AN Hbr in H.J. Frede – H. Stanjek, Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. II. In Epistolas ad Corinthios usque ad Hebraeos, introd. and ed. by H. J. Frede  – H. Stanjek, Freiburg, 1997, p. 835. 38  See L. Breatnach, “How Irish is the Commentary on Hebrews in MS St Gallen 73 ? A Note by Liam Breatnach”, PIBA 16 (1993), pp. 122-24. 39  Ed. Zimmer, Pelagius in Irland, p. 437. 40  Frede  – Stanjek, Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. II, p. 555, 56-57. “Testamentum enim in mortuis confirmatum est (9,17). Quia testamentum tunc firmum erit, postquam homo de hoc saeculo migrauerit”, with reference to “an Hebr” (= St Gall 73), 9,16-23 (437) in apparatus. 41  See Breatnach, “How Irish”, pp. 123-24.

46

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

73 was composed in Ireland, it indicates that this text or one similar to it circulated there, to be drawn on in native Irish law circles. It is something to be taken into account in assessing the origin of the commentary in St Gall 73. The various arguments of Hermann Frede against such origin will have to be addressed. One is the relationship of St Gall 73 to the Glosa Psalmorum ex traditione seniorum. Until recently any use of this work in Irish text was unknown. Matters are now different with Padraig Ó Néill’s critical edition of the glosses of the Southampton Psalter. His view is that the glosses seem to have been composed around the mid-ninth century. It has been recognized that there are two strata in these glosses. The first and primary stratum is spread throughout the Psalter ; the second, and slightly later, stratum, has a smaller compass (Pss 41-91), with its main concentration in Pss 67, 68, 73, 74 and 77. The glosses of the first stratum depend overwhelmingly on a single source, namely, the early seventh century work known as Glosa Psalmorum ex traditione seniorum, an explanation of the Psalms widely used all over Continental Europe in the eighth century and later, with an allegorical rather than a historical approach. This, however, is not likely to affect the question of the possible Irish origins or affiliations of the manuscript St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek 73. Manuscript evidence for early Irish interest in the Apocalypse We have very clear evidence for early Irish interest in the Apocalypse of John from the list of Libri scottice scripti in the St Gall manuscript, Stiftsbibliothek 728, page 4.42 There we find listed three copies of the Apocalypse : line 5 : “Apocalypsis in uol. 1” ; line 6 : “Item Apocalypsis in uol. 1”, and finally in line 17 : “Actus Apostolorum et Apocalypsis in uol. 1 veteri” (“Acts of the Apostles and the Apocalypse in one old volume”).43 This text is from a midninth-century codex, indicating an early-ninth or an eight-century date for the manuscripts of the Apocalypse in question. The “very 42  On the “Libri scottice scripti”, see Duft  – Meyer, The Irish Miniatures, pp. 40-43, with transcription of the text (pp. 40-41) ; black and white reproduction of page 4 plate XLIII. 43  The text is digitized and online at. http://www/e-codices.unifr.ch/en/ csg/0728/4 DOI 10.50.5076/e-codices-csg-0728.

   the bible in ireland and abroad: summary of evidence 47

old volume” in which the Apocalypse is joined with the text of the Acts of the Apostles may be from the early eighth century. We do not know whether these texts were glossed, as is the case with the fragments from Colossians in St Gall Codex 1395, pp. 440-441. It would appear, however, that the texts carried the biblical text of the Apocalypse rather than commentaries on it. That this is so would seem to follow from the title of the last item of the Libri scottice scripti (line 21) : “Expositio in Canticum Cant(icorum)”. A miniature believed to be connected with one of these texts of the Apocalypse was once considered preserved in the St Gall Codex 1395, p. 418, with a person seated and writing, with an angel in front of him, in the known manner of Irish miniatures. This fragment is from the end of the eighth century.44 Following von Arx (1822), in the library catalogue the miniature is taken as probably that of John, author of the Apocalypse, and as a remnant of one of the three Apocalypse texts in Irish script in Codex 728, p. 4.45 In recent scholarship the miniature is taken rather as that of St Matthew, and compared to that of St Matthew and the inspiring figure of the evangelist in the Book of Lindisfarne.46 The reverse side (p. 419) of the miniature, we may note, has nothing to do with either Matthew or John, containing charms against illness in Old Irish and Latin written by three hands in the 9th century.47 Roger Gryson has postulated an early eighth-century Hiberno-Latin text as standing behind the commentaries on the Apo­ calypse he has examined and published. Given the evidence from the three Latin, and probably eighth-century, clearly Irish texts

44  Duft – Meyer, The Irish Miniatures, p. 76 ; Alexander, Insular Manuscripts, p. 79, dates “8th to 9 th century”. 45  See Scherrer, Verzeichniss, p. 462. The miniature in p. 418 is available on the internet at. http://www.e-codices.unifr.ch/en/csg/1395/418 (accessed 27 August 2013). 46  See Duft – Meyer, The Irish Miniatures, p. 76 (with reproduction of the miniature, Plate XV) ; Alexander, Insular Manuscripts, p. 79 (with reproduction of the miniature, Illustration no. 281). 47  See Alexander, Insular Manuscripts, p. 79. These texts from p. 419 are edited and translated in Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus. A Collection of Old-Irish Glosses Scholia Prose and Verse, vol. 2, Non-Biblical Glosses and Scholia, ed. by W. Stokes  – J. Strachan, Dublin, 1975 (reprint of original publication, Cambridge, 1903), pp. 248-249, with introduction p. xxvii.

48

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

of the Apocalypse we have adverted to, early Ireland would be a place for such a commentary. The Latin biblical texts show an early Irish interested in reading the work. As with other biblical works, interest in understanding a work went with the reading of it. Given this, an explanation of the Apocalypse, whether as glossa, expositio or commentary, in early eighth-century Ireland would be no surprise. Postscript 2014 The issue will be further developed in the last essay of this work.

| A PLEA FOR HIBERNO-LATIN BIBLICAL STUDIES*

I. Introduction The history of the Bible and of the apocrypha in Ireland still remains to be written. Before the history of one or other is written a good amount of preliminary research remains to be done, research above all on the available manuscript material. In the present essay I intend to confine myself to a consideration of the available material bearing on the place of the Bible in the early Irish Church ; the apocrypha merit consideration apart. That the Bible enjoyed pride of place in the early Irish schools is beyond question. The evidence of native Irish, of British and other sources, puts this much beyond doubt. These schools, in fact, were renowned for their biblical studies. Professor James F. Kenney summarizes the evidence : The chief subject of study in the monastic schools of early Christian Ireland was the Bible. With the exception of such study as was of practical necessity for carrying on the services of the Church, all other studies, including that of the Fathers of the Church, were ancillary to the reading, comprehension, and exposition of the Scriptures. The predominance thereof is witnessed to by the whole literary remains of the early Irish Church. The monastic traditions as set down by a later age in almost innumerable Lives of saints tell the same story : the important element in an ecclesiastic’s education was the reading of the Scriptures, and  – it may be remarked  – in especial the reading of the Psalms. Nor, even if other evidence were lacking, could it be said that these represented the ideas of the twelfth century reflected onto the sixth and seventh : the seventh-century texts offer identical testimony.1

First published in : Irish Theological Quarterly 39 (1972), pp. 337-353. J. F. Kenney, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland. Ecclesiastical, Columbia University Press 1929 ; reprint 1969, p. 624 ; likewise L. Gougaud, Christianity in Celtic Lands, London, 1932, pp. 256-57 ; J. Ryan, Irish Monasticism. Origins and Early Developments, Dublin and Cork, 1931, pp. 379-80. *  1 

337

50

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

The student and the ordinary educated layman would like to know how extensive are these “whole literary remains of the early Irish Church”, as | far as the Bible is concerned at any rate. What 338 are these seventh-century texts that give evidence of the special position enjoyed by the Bible in early Ireland ? What texts were used by these early Irish ecclesiastics in their exposition of the Scriptures ? Were they just copies of earlier patristic texts or did they themselves compose commentaries on the Bible ? How original were these Irish scholars and did they contribute anything to European scholarship of their day ? No satisfactory answer to these questions can be given without a prior analysis of the written evidence. But what are these texts ? M. R. James puts himself questions similar to those posed above and is forced to admit that the evidence at our disposal is very meagre for the earlier period. “The scanty list of their (the Irish) Latin writers”, he remarks, “between the end of the sixth and the beginning of the eighth – between Columba (+ 597) and Adomnán (+ 704) – includes besides penitentials, lives of saints, and hymns of no very marked excellence, several writings which are without rival in their time”.2 Yet of works from this period relating to the Bible he lists only De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae (of the Irish Pseudo-Augustine), the “Interpretation of the Names of Christ’s Ancestors” of Aileran the Wise (“in which there is not so much sound philology”) and De Locis sanctis of Adomnán. This is very limited evidence indeed. To these few items noted by James we could, however, with Kenney add the following from the seventh century : the Kanon Evangeliorum of the same Aileran ;3 Laidcend’s abbreviation of the commentary of Gregory on Job ;4 a commentary on the Catholic Epistles5 and a Turin fragment of a commentary on Mark’s Gospel.6 (We now know that this piece is from the Commentary of Pseudo-Jerome, most probably an Irishman named Cummeanus.) From the “earlier period” Kenney also 2  M. R. James, in “Learning and Literature till the Death of Bede”, being chapter 19 of the Cambridge Medieval History, vol.  3, Cambridge University Press, 1922, pp. 506-07. 3  Kenney, The Sources, pp. 280-81 ; cf. III, 12 below. 4  Kenney, The Sources, pp. 278-79 ; cf. III, 5 below. 5  Kenney, The Sources, pp. 277-78 ; cf. III, 35 below. 6  Kenney, The Sources, pp. 660-61 ; cf. III, 27 below.

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

51

lists the commentaries of Pelagius, which were used in Ireland.7 To these we can add a copy of a commentary of St Ambrose on Luke, “said to be in early Irish minuscule.”8 While this material is more extensive than that of Professor James, it is still very limited and very meagre indeed when compared with the thirty-nine items identified as Irish by Dr Bischoff, which we are to consider below. Fr Robert McNally, s.j. has for long been interested in early Irish exegetical material.9 With him, and others, to the above list from the | earlier period we could add the pseudo-Isidorian works 339 Liber de numeris10 and the Liber de ortu et obitu patrum11 and also possibly the pseudo-Bedan Collectanea vel flores, although from a study of the Signs of Doomsday in this work W. W. Heist believes that some of the pieces that go to compose it (as that on the Signs of Doomsday) are from a later period and that the compilation as such cannot be proved to have existed before the Basel edition of Bede’s works in 1563.12 II. Bernhard Bischoff’s researches for the period A.D. 650–800 A new era in the study of Hiberno-Latin exegesis began in 1954 when Dr  Bernhard Bischoff of Munich published the results of years of research work in his “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”,13 a second revised edi-

Kenney, The Sources, pp. 661-62. Kenney, The Sources, p. 661. 9  His work The Bible in the Early Middle Ages (Woodstock Papers, no.  4, 1959), treats mainly of Irish exegesis. 10  Cf. McNally, Der irische Liber de numeris (Munich 1957) ; The Bible in the Early Middle Ages, p. 27 ; R. Flower, Catalogue of the Irish Manuscripts in the British Museum, vol.  2, London, 1926 (reprint Dublin 1992), pp. 488-89, 521. 11  PL 83, 1775–94 (partial edition) ; for the Irish origin of the work see r. McNally, “Isidoriana”, in Theological Studies 20 (1959), pp. 432-42, at p. 436 ; see also McNally, “The ‘Tres linguae sacrae’ in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis”, Theological Studies 19 (1958), pp. 395-403, at p. 396, n.  8 and in The Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Westminster, MA, 1966, p. 92. 12  Cf. W. W. Heist, The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, East Lansing, 1952, pp. 95-96, 205, etc. 13  Published in Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), pp. 189–281. 7  8 

52

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

tion of which appeared in 1966.14 In this study Bischoff communicates the results of his unparalleled knowledge of medieval Latin manuscripts. He begins by noting how the names of the great Anglo-Saxons Bede and Alcuin (which latter on the invitation of Charles the Great transplanted Anglo-Saxon learning to France) put the memory of the Irish exegetical school in the shade. Bischoff goes on to trace, as far as is possible, the history of biblical scholarship during the period a.d.  650–800. From a very early period we know that Irish scholars used the authentic text of Pelagius’s commentary on the Pauline Epistles. They also had parts at least of the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Psalms – in Latin translation naturally. From the seventh century we have traces of native Irish biblical interpretation, evidenced by the brief glosses found in the Old Latin Codex Usserianus I of the Gospels (now in Trinity College, Dublin). These glosses, with one exception, are in Latin and are of a moral nature, applying the biblical text to Christian life. The earliest Irish attempts to understand the biblical text may have been expressed in the form of such glosses, first brief ones and then more extensive as is the case in the older layer of the Würzburg glosses on the text of Paul’s epistles (glosses coming from about a.d.  750). These glosses, we may note, are in Irish or in a mixture of Irish and Latin. | By the mid-seventh century Irish scholars had passed beyond 340 brief glosses to entire works on the Bible or on individual biblical books. Ladchen who died in 661, composed an abbreviation of Pope Gregory’s commentary on Job (no. III, 5, below) and Aileran the Wise (died 665) composed the works we have already noted above (see also below nos. III, 12, 25). In 655 the Irish Augustine, a disciple of Man-chén (Manchianus), wrote De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae in which he seeks to explain the miracles of the Bible as natural phenomena. From the same period we have a commentary on the Catholic Epistles by an anonymous Irishman in which the

14  In Bischoff’s collected essays. Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, vol.  2, Stuttgart, 1966, pp. 205–73 ; translated into English by Colm O’Grady, MSC, and published as “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, in Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, ed. by M. McNamara (PIBA 1), Dublin, 1976.

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

53

exegetical opinions of Man-chén, Lathcen, Banbán (died 685 or 686) and one or two other Irish teachers are given (see no. III, 35 below). Only rarely, however, is the name of an author of these works known to us. Most of them bear no name or, as in the case of the Irish “Augustine”, a pseudonym. Some of them had the names of greater exegetes (e.g. Jerome, Gregory) attached to them in the course of their transmission. Bischoff believes that he is able to identify the author of a commentary on Mark (no. III, 27 below) as a certain Cummeanus, who could be one of three seventh-century Irishmen bearing this name : Cuimíne Ailbe, abbot of Iona (657–669), Cuimíne Fota (who may have been abbot of Clonfert, 591/2–662), author of a Hymn on the Apostles, or Cummianus of the paschal controversy, who in 632 wrote a letter to the Abbot of Iona and another letter to the recluse Beccán. Bischoff (and others we may add) argues to Irish authorship despite anonymity and pseudonymity through the presence in the compositions of certain characteristics which are recognized as typically Irish. These characteristics or “Irish symptoms” are many and varied. Sometimes it is found in the very title of the work, in such a word as Eclogae or Pauca. We have the Eclogae Moralium Gregorii in Iob of Lathcen and the Eclogae tractatorum in Psalterium, as well as a number of works and subdivisions of works with Pauca (or Paucae) in the title. Another Irish “symptom” is seen in questions on the locus, tempus, persona of a given work, to which a fourth on the causa scribendi (or scriptionis) is sometimes added. Such questions are extremely frequent in works in the Irish language. The system did not originate with the Irish. What is peculiar in Irish works, whether they be in Latin or Gaelic, is the frequency of the questions and the fact that they have become a received schema when considering a work’s composition. An Irish ‘symptom” in works on the Gospel is the attribution of a given section of the Gospel to a particular place in the Eusebian Canons. A further Irish symptom is the repeated use of non difficile in answers to questions. This is the Latin rendering of the Irish ní (h)anse, which is | found very frequently in all branches of Irish 341 literature.

54

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Another is the use of comparison, introduced by the Latin word more. It is not the comparisons as such, but their frequent use, that indicate Irish authorship. A particularly favourite ornament of Irish erudition and an indication of Irish authorship of a work is the rendering of certain words or phrases in the tres linguae sacrae, Hebrew, Greek and Latin. Together with these there are some other characteristics which lead one to surmise that a given work is an Irish composition. What leads one from a mere surmise or the possibility of Irish authorship to probability or even certainty is the combination in a single work of several of these symptoms. Then there are other indications besides, as for example the presence of certain Irish peculiarities in the text, peculiarities in the abbreviation of words, of spelling, etc. Putting all these together we can form strong arguments for Irish authorship. The contents of the writings also help as they may reveal peculiarly Irish theological or moral preoccupations. Bischoff also seeks to establish a chronological arrangement in the Irish exegetical works he has studied. The most extensive of them comes from the end of the period, shortly before a.d.  800. This work, which Bischoff calls “The Reference Bible” (Das Biblewerk) is a commentary on the entire Bible from Genesis to the Apocalypse. It both sums up and brings to a close the exegetical work of a century and a half, a period of really intense exegetical and scribal activity. Dr  Bischoff writes of it : These works [which he has studied in his essay], among which there are nine commentaries on or introductions to Matthew alone, are still only a fraction of the total amount. The fact, however, that so many writings are concentrated within a period of some hundred and fifty years provides an insight into a literary activity which differs essentially from that of the patristic age and from that of the earliest continental Middle Ages. Anonymity and real mass production seem to have predominated in Ireland. The purpose behind their composition was not the production of scholarly and original works, beautifully transcribed. To such a task but few are called. There was no aversion to repetition and many of the works apparently owed their origin to the mere transcription of earlier works or to a new formulation of teaching widely accepted in the schools. In fact a great part of this literature is made up of scholastic teaching and contains different presenta-

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

55

tions of similar material. What is remarkable is that so much of it has been written down.15

| The same writer goes on to remark that the effect of this litera- 342 ture was not limited to Ireland and Irish circles on the Continent. That it did reach the Continent is proved by the fact that most of the manuscripts studied by Bischoff are found only in continental libraries. Since these manuscripts are not in Irish script they must have been copied outside Irish circles on the Continent. “Indeed”, he continues, the very preservation of these texts “is due to the fact that, after their transportation to the Continent by Irish monks, they were considered worthy of transcription in continental scriptoria like Tours, Verona and Salzburg. They were known therefore to the Carolingian scholars and were also used by them”.16 This latter point he proves in particular from a study of the pericope on the star of Bethlehem and the Magi (Mt 2.1–12) in Irish texts and in the writings of Paschasius Radbertus and Christian of Stablo, the two most learned of the Carolingian interpreters of the Bible. These, he remarks, owe much of what was considered proper to themselves in their treatment of this passage to Irish sources. Paschasius is dependent on Irish sources and Christian reveals undeniable contacts with the Irish commentaries. It may well be that the influence of early Irish biblical scholarship on continental writers of the Carolingian period is far more extensive than we have imagined. In any event what Bischoff has to say on the point should convince us of the need to study these texts, which we now list, indicating whether or not they have been published. III. Bischoff’s catalogue of Hiberno-Latin exegetical writings (A.D. 600–800) The Old Testament 1. The Reference Bible ; a commentary on the entire Bible from Genesis to the Apocalypse. Two manuscripts of the entire work are extant, one in two volumes at Munich and another (of 217 folios) at 15  Sacris Erudiri, p. 213 ; Mittelalterliche Studien, vol. 2, pp. 223-34 ; “Turning-Points”, pp. 89-90. 16  Sacris Erudiri, p. 213 ; Mittelalterliche Studien, vol. 2, pp. 223-34 ; “Turning-Points”, p. 90.

56

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Paris. Other MSS. carrying portions of the text are known. Apart from brief excerpts, the work is unpublished, but I understand that an edition of the section on Genesis (MS Lyons 447 ; Bischoff’s 1C) is being prepared. 2.  A commentary on Genesis, chapters 1–34 ; extant in MS Munich, Clm 6302, fols 49r–64r. Unpublished, but I understand that an edition of it is being prepared. 3. A commentary on Genesis 1.1–9.6/7 ; extant in MS Paris B.N. lat 10457, fols 2r–159. Unpublished. 4. A discussion of selected passages on the creation and the fall. Found in MS St Gall, pp. 1–27. Unpublished. 5.  Lathcen (Laid-cend), Eclogae Moralium Gregorii in Iob, Ed. by M. Adriaen in Corpus Christianorum, vol. CXLV. 6a. The Vatican (Vat. Palat. lat. 68 fol. 1–46r), Catena on the Psalms (Pss 39.11–151). The work is composed of excerpts from the Theodorean commentary found in Codex Amb. 301 inf., from Jerome and from another source said to | be Hilary. The present text (from 343 the eighth cent.) or its original was written by a Northumbrian scribe who signs himself Edilbericht filius Berictfridi. It has some Irish glosses. Apart from fol. 27v and 46 the work is unpublished. 6b.  Eclogae tractatorum in Psalterium  ; extant in MSS. St Gall, Stiftsbibl. 261, pp. 146–274, and Clm 14715, fols 1r–56v. This work also draws heavily on the commentary found in Amb. C 301 inf. The work is unpublished, but see below Appendix, no. 2. 7. Fragment of a commentary on the Canticle of Canticles (7.4–7 ; 8.8–12) ; MS consists of a mutilated double leaf in Marburg. 8.  An abbreviation by Josephus Scottus of Jerome’s commentary on Isaiah. Edited by G. Morin and published in Corpus Christianorum,, vol. LXXIIIA. 9. Fragment of a commentary on Ezekiel (2.6–3.12 ; 4.1–6, 9). A brief text of four pages in a Zürich MS. Unpublished. 10.  A fragmentary text of a commentary on Amos (1.6–3.12 ; 4.1–6, 9) found in a folio of a MS at St Omer. It has some Irish glosses, published by Bischoff. Otherwise unpublished, but E. A. Lowe, Cod. Lat. Antiq., VI, 828, has a facsimile of it.

The Four Gospels 11a, 11b, 11c. Expositio IV Evangeliorum ; Expositio Sancti Evangelii ; Traditio Evangeliorum. Three recensions of the same work, which was a very popular one in the West : Recension I has been published in Migne, PL 30, 531–90 and 114, 861–916 ; Recension III by Br. Griesser. While its Irish origin is uncertain, it seems to have been used in Ireland. Detailed study of the work, in origins and its recensions, is called for.

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

57

12. The Canon Evangeliorum of Aileran the Wise. The piece has been edited. 13. The short piece (of a few folios) Pauca de libris catholicorum scriptorum in evangelia excerpta. It has been edited with commentary by R. E. McNally, in Traditio 15 (1959), pp. 387 ff. 14 I. Questiones vel glosae in evangelio nomine. MS Angers 55, fols 1r–12v. An introduction to the Gospels. Unedited. 14 II.  Quaestiones Evangelii. MS Angers 55, fols 12v–(16r). The piece is unedited. 15.  De quatuor evangeliis seu de aliis questionibus. MS St Gall, Stiftsbibl. 230, pp. 438–40. Unedited.

Matthew 16 I. Liber questionum in evangeliis. MS Orléans 65(2), pp. 1–269 (complete work) and incomplete in other MSS. On Matthew’s Gospel. Apart from small sections, the work is unedited. 16 II.  Fragment (two pages) of a commentary on Mt 7.26–8.13. 17 I. Commentary without title on Matthew. MS Vienna 940, fols 13r–141v. Unpublished. 17 II. Fragment of a commentary on Mt 3.3–6.8, 18–28. Edited with complete facsimiles by E. A. Lowe, “An Unedited Fragment of Irish Exegesis in Visigothic Script”, Celtica 5 (1960), 1–7. 18. The piece titled Ex dictis sancti Hieronymi in MS Clm 14426, fols 3r–5v(6v). Unpublished. 19. Sedulius (Senior), Tractatus Mathei. The existence of this commentary, now lost or unidentified, is deduced from a reference to it in MS St Gall 908, | pp. 23–4 of the 8th–9th cent. The early date of the MS seems to rule out the identification of Sedulius in question with the ninth-century exegete of the same name. 20.  Frigulus (Figulus), (Commentary on Matthew ?). The existence of this work is known only from a writing of Smaragdus of St Mihiel. Bischoff is of the opinion that the lost commentary was probably an Irish work. 21.  A lost commentary on Matthew. The existence of a further commentary on Matthew can be deduced from a statement in the Vienna “historical” commentary on Luke (no. 29 below), where such a work is referred to. 22a and 22b.  Longer explanatory notes (22a) on Mt 1–27 and interlinear glosses (22b) on Mt 1.1–16.18. Both found in MS Würzburg, M. p. th. fol. 61. Published (with serious omissions) by K. Köberlin in 1891. 23. A commentary (without title) on Mt 1.1–6.24. MS Clm 6233, fol. 1r–110v (MS 8th cent.). An important work because of its theological content and references to unorthodox teaching. Unpublished. 24. Comments on Mt chaps. 1–5 ; 7 ; 10 ; 13 ; 17 ; 27. Found in MS Clm 6302, fol. 28v–46v. Unpublished, but I understand that an edition is being prepared.

344

58

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

25. Aileran the Wise, Interpretatio mystica progenitorum Christi and Interpretatio moralis progenitorum Christi. Published. See Kenney, Sources, pp. 279-81. 26.  De questione porcorum ; a piece on Mt 8.28 ff. ; Mk 5 :1ff. ; Lk 8 :26ff. MS Milan, Amb. F. 60 sup., fol. 7v. Published by Bischoff, in his study of this no. and by J. H. Bernard–R. Atkinson, The Irish Liber Hymnorum I (London 1898), p. 128 from the TCD MS of the Liber Hymnorum.

Mark 27.  Pseudo-Jerome (Commeanus ?), Commentarius in Evangelium Marci. Published in Migne, PL 30, 589–644 ; the Turin fragment from it in Stokes and Strachan, Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus I, pp. 484–94. This work is extant in over a hundred MSS. A new critical edition is called for and is being prepared as a Ph.D. dissertation for University College, Dublin. On the Irish origin of this work see above, section II. 28.  Praefatio secundum Marcum. MS Clm 6235, fol. 48v–49v. Not published.

Luke 29.  Historiaca ( !) investigatio evangelium ( !) secundum Lucam. MSS. Paris, B.N. lat 1841, fols 136v–158v (with Irish glosses) ; Clm 6235, fol. 49v–65v (also with Irish glosses). The Irish glosses published by R. Thurneysen, in Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 21 (1939), p. 287 ; an additional Irish gloss published by Bischoff in “Wendepunkte”. The Latin text itself is unpublished. 30.  A consideration of the Gospel of Luke (without title) in the form of compact glosses and some detailed commentary. MS Vienna 997, fol. 1r–66r. Unpublished, but see below Appendix, No. 3.

John 31. A commentary on John (without title) similar to the preceding one, no. 30, on Luke ; MS Vienna 997, fol. 67r–84v. Probably by the author of the preceding piece. Unpublished, but see below Appendix, no. 3. 32.  Expositio Iohannis iuxta Hieronimum. MS Angers 272, fol. 30r– 44v. Detailed glosses on John, partly dependent on Augustine’s Tractatus in evang. Ioh. Unpublished.

| Pauline Epistles, including Hebrews 33.  Pauca ex commentario beati Hilarii et sancti Hieronimi et beati Augustini et aliorum eruditorum virorum expositionibus in epistolas beati Pauli apostoli excerpta. MS Clm 6235, fol. 1v–31v (with Irish glosses). The Irish glosses have been published by R. Thurneysen in Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 21 (1939), pp. 284–87. Three further glosses (two

345

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

59

of them certainly Old-Irish) passed over by Thurneysen have been published by Bischoff in “Wendepunkte”. The Latin text is unpublished, but I understand that an edition is being prepared.

Epistle to the Hebrews 34a and 34b.  Two forms of the same commentary. 34a found in MS St Gall, Stiftsbibl. 73, pp. 231–60 and published by H. Zimmer, Pelagius in Irland, Berlin, 1901, pp. 420–48. Item 34b is found in more than one MS. Excerpts from it are published in Riggenbach, Die ältesten lateinischen Kommentare zum Hebräerbrief, Leuipzig, 1907, pp. 206–12.

Catholic Epistles 35.  Commentarius epistolae Iacobi (etc.). MS Karlsruhe, Aug. CCXXXIII fol. 1r–40v. It has been edited by R. E. McNally and is being published together with no. 36 below in Corpus Christianorum, vol. CVIIIB. 36. Pseudo-Hilary, Expositio in VII Epistolas canonicas. It has been published in Spicil. Cas. 3, 1897, pp. 207–60, which text is reproduced in Migne, PL Supplementa, vol. 3, 1963, cols. 59–131. A new edition has been prepared by R. McNally for publication with preceding no. in Corpus Christianorum, vol. CVIIIB.

Apocalypse 37. Pseudo-Jerome (Pseudo-Isidore), Commentarius de Apocalypsi. Edited by K. Hartung, Ein Traktat zur Apokalypse des Apostels Johannes, Bamberg, 1904 (from a Bamberg MS ; more MSS. of the work are now known).

From various books of the Bible 38. Pseudo-Augustine, De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae libri III. We have already spoken of this work in section I above. P. Grosjean (Sacris Erudiri 7 (1955), pp. 67 ff.) put forward the view that it was composed for St Carthach’s (Mo-Chuta) monastery at Lismore. The text has been published by Migne, PL 35, 2149–200. Fr G. MacGinty, osb. has prepared a critical edition of the work under the direction of Dr Ludwig Bieler and has arrived at conclusions different from those of Grosjean. He believes it was composed rather in the West of Ireland, probably in a monastery at the mouth of the Shannon. Dom Gerard’s critical edition will be published in the Scriptores Latini Hiberniae series. 39.  Virtutes quas Dominus dominica die fecit. Edited by R. E. McNally in Traditio 22 (1960), pp. 359-60 ; cf. pp. 355 ff.

This list should be sufficient evidence of the rich literary output of the early Irish monastic schools. Its especial importance lies in the fact that it represents the work of the earliest Irish biblical

60

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

tradition. It is the product of the formative age of that tradition. Before we consider its | importance in detail we shall first list the 346 works of biblical and exegetical interest from the centuries that follow. IV. Irish exegetical texts from the ninth to the eleventh centuries From the ninth century we have exegetical works from two wellknown figures, i.e. Sedulius Scottus and John Scotus Eriugena. Sedulius Scottus (about A.D. 850) 1.  Explanatiuncula de breviariorum et capitulorum canonumque differentia. Editions : PL 103, 271–2 ; M. Esposito, PRIA 28 C (1910), pp. 91–5. See also R. E. McNally, The Bible in the Early Middle Ages, 1959, p. 93. 2.  Expositio argumenti Hieronymi in decem canones. Ed. : PL 103, 346–8. See McNally, The Bible, p. 93. 3.  Expositio in epistolam Hieronymi ad Damasum Papam. Ed. : PL 103, 331–45. See McNally, The Bible, p. 93. 4.  In epistolam Eusebii Caesariensis ad Carpianum de canonibus evangeliorum. Ed. : M. Esposito, PRIA 28 C (1910), p. 63. See also McNally, The Bible, p. 93. 5.  In prologum quatuor evangeliorum excerptio. Ed. : PL 103, 348–52. See also McNally, The Bible, p. 93. 6.  Collectaneum in Mattheum. MS : Berlin, Staatsbibl. Phill. 1660, fol. 1–190. Not published. 7.  Collectaneum in omnes beati Pauli epistolas. Ed. : Migne, PL 103, 9–270. H. J. Frede has critically edited the Prologue and the Collectaneum in epistolam ad Effeseos in Pelagius, Der irische Paulustext, Sedulius Scottus (Aus der Geschichte der Lateinischen Bibel, 3 ; Herder, Freiburg 1961), pp. 107–55, and is preparing a critical edition of the entire work for the Corpus Christianorum. 8.  In argumentum evangelii Matthaei expositiuncula. Ed. : PL 103, 273–80. See also McNally, The Bible, p. 107. 9.  In argumentum secundum Marcum expositiuncula. Ed. : PL 103, 279–86. See also McNally, The Bible, p. 107. 10.  In argumentum secundum Lucam expositiuncula. Ed. : PL 103, 285–90. See also McNally, The Bible, p. 108.

John Scotus Eriugena (about 867) 11.  Commentarius in sanctum evangelium secundum Iohannem. MS : Laon, Bibl. Munic. 81. Ed. : PL 122, 297–348 ; 1241–4. The text is incomplete, the only passages commented on being John 1.11–29 ; 3.1–

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

61

4.28a ; 6.5–14. For literature see McNally, The Bible, p. 108. Édouard Jeauneau, Jean Scot. Homélie sur le prologue de Jean (Sources chrétiennes 151), Paris, 1969, pp. 51-52. Jeauneau is of the opinion that the author died before completing his work. He has promised us a critical edition of the fragments. 12.  Homilia in prologum evangelii secundum Iohannem. Ed. : Migne, PL 122, 283–96. Critical edition by Édouard Jeauneau, Jean Scot. Homélie, pp. 200–317 (with French translation, copious notes and excellent introduction on the life and writings of Eriugena).

Texts from a later period 13. The glosses of the Gospels of Máel-Brigte. MS BL, Harley 1802 ; written | in Armagh by Máel-Brigte, a.d. 1138. These glosses are mainly on Matthew’s Gospel (chaps. 1–27) but also on those of Mark and Luke. While most of them are in Latin, some are in Irish and some in a mixture of Latin and Irish. The glosses are given as drawn from Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, Jerome, Leo, Gregory, Gennadius, Priscian, Bede and another source abbreviated as “M”, “Ma” or “Man”. This abbreviation is generally expanded as Manchén or Manchianus and the person generally identified with the seventh-century Irish scholar whom we have already encountered. He is mentioned as a teacher in the Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Catholic Epistles (no. III, 35 above) and in the Irish Augustine (no. III, 38 above). In an appendix to “Wendepunkte” Bischoff makes a special study of these “Man” glosses and shows that they are in the tradition of the earlier Irish exegesis. Clear dependence on Paschasius Radbertus (about a.d. 860), however, rules out the presumed identification of their author with the seventh-century Manchén. Bischoff opts for a ninth or tenth century date. All glosses of the Gospels of Máel-Brigte merit study as they most probably have much light to shed on the study of the Bible in Ireland in the later period. They are also important for an understanding of the contacts between Armagh and the new learning in Europe in the era of the glosses. See further, Kenney, Sources, p. 648. 14. Glosses on Paul’s Epistles by Marianus Scottus. MS Vienna, Nationalbibl. lat. 1247. The text was written by Marianus (Muiredach Macc Robartaig) a.d. 1079 and has glosses said to be drawn from St Gregory, (Pseudo-) Ambrose, St Jerome, St Augustine, Fulgentius, Origen, Cassian, Haimo, Leo, Pelagius, Alcuin, the Liber Pastoralis and Petrus Diaconus. See Kenney, Sources, pp. 618-19.

Texts on the Psalter To conclude this section I list here all known Irish and Hiberno-Latin texts on the Psalter not already given, texts which I study in greater detail elsewhere.

347

62

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

15.  The Milan Commentary (Amb. C 301 inf.) and the Irish glosses on it : written about a.d. 800. 16. The Turin Fragments of a Latin translation of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Psalms. 17. The Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter (about a.d. 800–850). 18. Airbertach Mac Coisse’s verse rendering of the introduction to the Psalter in the Old-Irish Treatise (a.d. 982). 19.  The Double Psalter of Rouen (Gallican and Hebraicum) with its glosses ; 10th cent. The glosses on the Hebraicum, on the latter part of the Psalter (from Ps 17 onwards), are drawn from the Milan Commentary. The Latin glosses have not been published. 20.  Dublin fragments (Trinity College) of a sister codex of the Double Psalter of Rouen ; 10th cent. Published by L. Bieler – G. Mac Niocaill in Celtica 5 (1960), pp. 28–39. 21. The glosses on the Psalter of Southampton. After editions by Whitley Stokes (1866) and Heinrich Zimmer (1881) these Irish glosses were published in Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus, vol. 1, ed. by W. Stokes and J. Strachan, Cambridge, 1901 (reprint Dublin, 1975), pp. 4-6. 22.  Glosses of the Psalter of St Caimín. These are mainly composite glosses, some of them taken from the Milan Commentary. Only a few of these glosses have been published. 23. The glosses of the Psalter of Coupar Angus, drawn from the Glossatura Maior of Peter the Lombard. The glosses have not been published.

| V.  Importance of these Hiberno-Latin exegetical texts

The material to which Bischoff has drawn our attention, and the other early texts as well, are important for a variety of reasons. Obviously it is only through a first-hand acquaintance with the texts that we can form a true opinion of the quality of early Irish biblical scholarship. From this new evidence we can form a better image of the education given to Irish and foreign students in the ancient Irish monasteries. This more accurate knowledge can help us to correct some earlier and current generalizations. To take but one example. The English writer Aldhelm (about a.d.  640–709), abbot of Malmesbury and bishop of Sherborne, says that in these early Irish schools the scriptures were interpreted according to the allegorical method. Had we but the word of Aldhelm to go on we should be led to believe that the historical sense of scripture was neglected by the Irish. That the allegorical method of interpretation was used in Ireland, as was then generally the case in Europe, can hardly be doubted. Many of the commentaries listed

348

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

63

by Bischoff, in fact, follow this method. But the literal method of exegesis, an interest in what the sacred writer wanted to say, was also very much at home in early Ireland. This, the Antiochene method, is particularly noticeable in the exposition of the Psalms and this principally through the Latin translation of the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia and through the general influence of his exegetical method. We find this method in the Latin text of the Milan Commentary on the Psalms and in the numerous Irish glosses on the Latin text. We also find it in the Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter and in the Latin glosses in the other later Irish Psalters we have noted above. Literal, or historical, exegesis is also found in some of the other commentaries noted above. With the entire western Church of the Middle Ages the early Irish Church knew of the manifold sense of scripture, particularly the fourfold sense. The fourfold sense is given in the Old-Irish Treatise as follows : There are four things that are in the psalms, to wit, the first story (stoir), the second story, the sense (síens) and the morality. The first story refers to David and to Solomon and to the above-mentioned persons, to Saul, to Absalom, to the people, to the persecutors besides. The second story to Hezekiah, to the people, to the Maccabees. The meaning (or sense, síens) (refers) to Christ, to the earthly and heavenly Church. The morality (morolus) to every saint.17

The same fourfold sense is also found in the Milan glosses, pride of place being given to the “first story” or the literal sense of the passage, “for it is the history (stoir, i.e. the literal meaning of the passage) that is the most | desirable for us to understand” 349 (gloss 14d7). Another meaning can be added to this literal sense but only “if it is not at variance with the history (i.e. the literal meaning) which we narrate” (gloss 14d10). Here we have the teaching formulated by Thomas Aquinas four centuries later that all the senses of scripture must be based on the literal one. An analysis of the sources used in these writings may provide us with a clue to the books on the shelves of Irish monastic libraries. They may tell us which of the earlier writers were known in 17  Ed. by K. Meyer, in Hibernica Minora (Anecdota Oxon., Med. & Mod. Ser. pt. VIII, Oxford 1894), pp. 30-31.

64

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Ireland. A knowledge of the particular recension of a patristic text to which the Irish copies of it, or citations from it, belong may well throw light on the channels through which these works first came to Ireland. In this manner these exegetical texts may well provide us with historical information for the history of early Irish monasticism. From what we know from Bischoff’s source analysis the Irish monasteries appear to have been well provided with books. This corroborates native Irish evidence which speaks of “the hosts of the books of Ireland”. We get a good example of the books to which an Irish writer had access from the Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter. On this W. L. Ramsay writes :18 The subjects treated, and still more the authorities used and named, give a flattering impression of the state of Irish learning and Irish libraries at the time. Nearly every Latin commentator on the Psalter whom we know to have written before 75019 is mentioned and quotations made from his work ; and there are a number of references which can no longer be identified and which perhaps are to books that have perished.

The presence in Ireland of some of the sources used in these works presents something of a problem. How precisely did the Latin translation of eastern writer Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Psalms and the works of Junilius make their way to Ireland ? Was it through Pelagian circles ? The use of the genuine works of Pelagius in Ireland would tend to indicate that this was so. Ireland, it would appear, was connected to the East through Latin sources. The many exegetical texts at our disposal also show that the early Irish Church was very much part of the Latin Church of the West, something that defenders of oriental influences on Irish writings and Irish civilization must bear in mind. This Hiberno-Latin exegetical material is not without relevance for the study of religious texts in the vernacular Gaelic. An obvious example of | this is the Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter, which 350 is intimately connected with the section on the Psalter in the Irish Reference Bible. The Old-Irish Treatise itself may indeed well be a 18  R.L. Ramsay, “Theodore of Mopsuestia in Englnd and Ireland”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 8 (1912), pp. 452-97, at 466. 19  At that time a.d. 750 or so was taken as the date of composition for the Old-Irish Treatise. The work is now considered to be more recent, from the first part of the ninth century.

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

65

translation from a Latin original. Again, it is only to be expected that a number of the concise Irish glosses in the Würzburg and Milan codices are more clearly understood when studied in the larger context of the biblical exegesis of the monastic schools. Another point on which this early Hiberno-Latin exegetical literature may well have some light to shed is the continuity in Irish civilization. The “Irish symptoms” one can notice in seventh or eighth-century texts occur occasionally in Gaelic texts of a much later age. We have one example of this in the predilection for the form of certain words in the tres linguae sacrae, Hebrew, Greek and Latin. It has already been remarked that the quest for equivalents in these three languages is a feature of the early Irish exegetical texts. One example is the name for evangelium in “the three languages” : Quomodo vocatur evangelium in tribus principa­ libus linquis ? Ita : ethloeum vel ethleum in Ebraica, evangelium in greca, bona adnuntiatio in Latina (Clm 6235, fol.  32v ; an 8th-cent. work). There are other occurrences of this “etymology” also, with ethlium, ethleum and euthelium as variants for ethloeum. The origin of the word ethloeum, etc. is quite unknown. It is not Hebrew. Bischoff surmises that it may derive from the Latin word euangelium ! What is extremely interesting, however, is to find the same interest in the forms of the word in as late a text as the Leabhar Uí Máine (compiled between a.d.  1360 and 1427). In the fifth of six quatrains devoted to the forms of the names of the ecclesiastical orders and other important words in the three sacred languages we read : Ethlium in t-ebra thair, evangelium ic grecaib, bonum nuntium, rud nach nar, ic auctaraib na Rómán.20 (“Ethlium the eastern Hebrew ; evangelium among the Greeks ; bonum nuntium, a thing not shameful, in Roman authors.”)

Another example of the continuity of tradition can be seen in the curious explanation of the Latin word sol (“the sun”) through the Hebrew ( !) word sam in the Irish Reference Bible (about a.d.  800) and in two later Irish glossaries. In “Wendepunkte” Dr  Bischoff 20  Fol.  132 (73) v,b ; ed. by K. Meyer, “Hebräische Wörter erklärt“, in Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 8 (1912), p. 113.

66

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

cites the following curious piece of early Irish erudition from the Reference Bible : Sam in Eb(raico), eleos in Greco , sol aput Latinos. The Greek (helios) and Latin words for ‘sun” are quite exact. Sam in the text represents the Hebrew word shemesh or the Aramaic shimsha of our present-day Masoretic, “Tiberian”, vocalization. In the earlier pre-Tiberian vocalization the Hebrew word | would be 351 represented with an initial vowel a – shamesh or sames. This latter is the transcription we find in Jerome. And in a Hebrew-Latin glossary of Spanish origin we find Samus vel sames  – sol. Sam of the Reference Bible must depend on some such glossary. The curious thing about its form of word, however, is the loss of the final us or es. Now, in the Irish glossary Sanas Cormaic, ascribed to Cormac mac Cuileannáin, bishop and king of Munster (died 908), the Irish word samrad (‘summer”) is explained as a combination of the Hebrew word sam and the Irish word riadh (“course”) :21 samrad .i. sam ebraice, sol latine … .i. riad rithes grian… (‘samrad, i.e. sam in Hebrew, sol in Latin ; i.e. the course the sun runs …”). Likewise in O’Mulconry’s glossary from a later period : samhradh .i. focal comsuidig[th]e ō Ebra 7 ō Scotic, samh ebraice, sol latine 7 riadh .i. rith. Samhrad didiu rith solis.22 This curious phenomenon is probably to be explained by the assumption that the Old Irish learning which gave birth to the Reference Bible towards the end of the eighth century was still a living force when Cormac compiled his work a century or so later. Professor Bischoff also notes the interest of these early Irish writers in the first person to do some particular thing, or in the first time a particular thing was done.23 Thus, commenting on Genesis 3.1 and 4 the Irish Reference Bible notes that in the texts we meet the first interrogation, the first lie, the first mention of the divine name and of the serpent. Questions as to whom or what

21  “The Sanas Cormaic of the Yellow Book of Lecan”, in Anecdota from Irish Manuscripts, vol. 4, ed. by K. Meyer, Halle, 1912, no. 1154, p. 101. 22  “O’Mulchonry’s Glossary”, in Archiv für celtische Lexikographie, vol.  1, ed. by W. Stokes, Halle, 1900, pp. 232-324, at 270 (no.  860). Both this and the preceding text can also be seen in Contributions to a Dictionary of the Irish Language, fascicle on letter “s”, Dublin, 1953, col. 53. 23  Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”, Sacris Erudiri, pp. 211, 230 ; Mittel. Stud., vol. 2, pp. 222, 235-36 ; “Turning-Points”, pp. 87-88, 102.

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

67

was the first were typical of the Ioca Monachorum of the period.24 Such questions and remarks are very much a feature of certain Irish texts from a much later period, as Robin Flower notes in his Catalogue of the Irish Manuscripts in the British Museum (vol.  2). In MS Egerton 1782 (fol.  49b–50a) of the British Museum written a.d.  1517, we have a poem in 23 quatrains, consisting in questions chiefly on Old Testament history (or pseudo-history), the answers being given in glosses. As Flower says, this work “is a typical example of the mnemonic verses used in the irish schools  … The glosses contain a quantity of miscellaneous traditions of the type that forms the various texts known as Collectanea, Joca Monachorum and the like”.25 In this text we read that Cain performed the first tillage and the first reaping : “Cáin dorigne cét-ar 7 cédbúain”.26 In MS Harley 5280, fol. 41 (16th cent.) we are told that “it was Methusalah who made the first feast and the first banquet. It was Enoch who made the first belfry (or round tower)”.27 In the same MS (fol.  47) we read that “it was by Cain the Son of Adam that a mill was first made ; it was Camen who made the first theft, i.e. a white sheep he stole from Adam”.28 As Flower has aptly noted,29 such Irish compositions are closely related in content with the Collectanea (of pseudo-Bede), the Joca monachorum or the like, or the pseudo-Isidorian De numero, works which may have Irish associations and may be of Irish composition. When the texts we are considering were being composed, theology had not yet become an independent science and the theological views of the period were expressed to a good extent in the biblical commentaries. It follows that when authors are not merely transcribing texts from earlier writers these commentaries can inform us of the theology of the men who compiled them. These Hiberno-Latin exegetical works, then, can be a source of information 24  Cf. mcnally, The Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Westminster, MA, 1966, pp. 38-39. 25  Catalogue, p. 280. The text has been published by K. Meyer in Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie  4 (1903), p. 236. 26  Flower, Catalogue, p. 281, 27  Flower, Catalogue, p. 322. 28  Flower, Catalogue, p. 323. 29  Flower, Catalogue, pp. 280, 322,, 521 ; cf. also pp. 487–89.

68

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

for the theological ideas, devotional practices and even for the liturgy of the early Irish Church. Conclusion My purpose in writing this essay was to indicate the extent of the known Irish material on biblical exegesis, particularly from the earlier period. It is a heritage of which Ireland can well be proud, one which merits deeper study. It is indeed unfortunate that the greater part of the writings we have listed in the course of this essay are as yet unpublished and are thus not readily available to scholars. What is now called for is that this entire body of exegetical material be speedily made available, first in preliminary publication and later in critical editions. Appendix Professor Robert McNally, s.j., of Fordham University, who has done so much work in this field, very kindly communicated to me in 1972 the following information on Hiberno-Latin texts being currently edited by himself or students of his.     1.  Prebiarum, Clm.  6302, fols  64r–69v. (Bischoff, Sacris Erudiri, pp.  221-222 f. = Mittelalt. Stud., p.  230). This is finished and is in the hands of the publisher.     2.  Eclogae, Clm.  14715, fols  1r–56v, and St  Gall 261, pp.  146– 274. A student of mine, Mr.  Arthur C. Bender, s.j., has just completed this work and is preparing it for publication.     3.  Comment. in Lucam et Ioannem, Vienna lat. 997, fols 1r–66v ; 67r–84v ; and Comment. in Lucam, Clm. 6235, fols 49v–65v. In the course of the weeks ahead | these works will be submitted as a doctoral dissertation by a student of mine, Mr.  Joseph F. Kelly. Dom Dekkers has accepted it for publication.     4.  Catechesis Celtica, Vat. Reg. lat.  49 ; Verona, Bibl. Capit. LXVII (64), fols 33r–81v ; Cracow, Cath. Library 43. I have finished more than half of this material which has been accepted by Dom Dekkers for CC.     5.  Angers 55, fols  1r–12v. This is finished and has been submitted for publication.     6.  I am currently working on the Collectaneum of Pseudo-Bede. The character of the problems which this work poses indicates that it will take at least another two years for solution, if there is any. I do not foresee the possibility of working further with these texts (other than those listed above). I have to fulfill a contract to write a history of biblical exegesis in the Early Middle Ages.

353

a plea for hiberno-latin biblical studies

69

Postscript 2014 The text as first presented in 1972 has been allowed to stand, with minor adjustments, apart from adding references to the English translation of Bischoff’s “Wendepunkte”, published in 1976. Much progress has since been made in this field, as has been made clear above in the introduction. The present situation with regard to the edition of the texts mentioned can be seen below in Appendix 2 : “Critical Editions of Irish Biblical and Apocryphal Texts”.

| THE IRISH BIBLICAL ASSOCIATION

AND ITS PUBLICATION COMMITTEE1 With this issue of the Proceedings the Publications Committee of the Irish Biblical Association is commemorating the twenty-fifth issue of its publication, a little over twenty-five years and the silver jubilee of publication of the first number in 1976. The Association itself has paid but little attention to its own history and development, and the documents for any such narrative have yet to be assembled. This is true in particular for the more recent life of the Association. Thanks to the devoted services of the Association’s first secretary, Dr  John A.  O’Flynn, the Irish Ecclesiastical Record and the Irish Theological Quarterly carry reports of the foundation and of the proceedings of the early years of the organisation. The Catholic Biblical Association of Ireland The report on the establishment of the Association (under its original title) in 1966 is as follows (Irish Theological Quarterly vol. 33, 1966, p. 165, in the section “Notes and Comments”) : The Catholic Biblical Association of Ireland On 22 February 1966 a meeting was held at Maynooth with a view to establishing a Biblical Association. The request for the formation of such an association  – to be known as “The Catholic Biblical Association of Ireland”  – had come from the Irish hierarchy. Invitations to the meeting had been sent to professors of Scripture and others with a Licentiate in Scripture. Thirty-five priests attended. Monsignor P. Boylan was invited to take the chair for the meeting. At the preliminary session Father J. A. O’Flynn (Maynooth), who had been requested by the hierarchy to arrange for the meeting, gave a report on events leading up to it. In the afternoon Cardinal Conway addressed the meeting. He conveyed the best wishes of the Irish hierarchy for the success of 1  First published in : Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association 25 (2002), pp. 9-17.

9

72

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the association. They were confident, he said, that the Catholic Biblical Association of Ireland and the Irish Theological Association, which had held its inaugural meeting at Carlow in January, would make a valuable contribution to the development and enrichment of studies in the sacred sciences. These two associations, coming at a time when the Church looked to her experts for so much, could do very important work in the harvesting of the texts of |Vatican II. The cardinal paid a special tribute to Monsignor Boylan for his universally-acknowledged contribution to biblical scholarship.     After the cardinal’s address the Constitution submitted to the meeting by the hierarchy was discussed. The Association aimed at promoting the knowledge and study of Scripture at both the scien­ tific and more popular levels ; it would organize congresses and conferences and support the publication of works in furtherance of this aim. Three categories of membership were envisaged in the Constitution : ordinary membership, open to those with the Licentiate in Scripture or its equivalent (in teaching experience or published work) ; associate membership for people who have a special interest in biblical studies ; general membership, open to all who would wish to support the work of the Association. The Constitution was adopted and the following were elected to the Executive : Monsignor P. Boylan (Chairman) ; Rev. W. Harrington, O.P. (Vice-Chairman) ; Rev. J. A. O’Flynn, Maynooth (Secretary) ; Rev. M. McNamara, M.S.C. (Treasurer) ; Rev. Dermot Ryan, L.S.S., University College, Dublin ; Rev. K. Condon, C.M., L.S.S., All Hallows College, Dublin ; An tAth. T. Ó Curraoin, S.S.P., L.S.S., St Patrick’s, Kiltegan.

The first President (Chairman) of the Association was, as stated, Mgr Patrick Boylan, with Wilfrid Harrington as Vice-Chairman. At the Annual general Meeting in 1969 Wilfrid was elected President, with Dermot Ryan as Vice-President, and the present writer as Treasurer. The Annual General Meeting in 1972 met at Tramore. The name for the next President would normally have been that of Fr Dermot Ryan, Vice-President. However, he had recently been nominated as Archbishop of Dublin, to succeed Archbishop John Charles McQuaid. Given the circumstances, the name of the present writer was put forward for Chairman and Andrew Mayes was elected as Treasurer. It would seem that it was at this stage (1972 at the latest) that the Association reverted to the title “Irish Biblical Association” (IBA) which was the name of an earlier bib-

10

the irish biblical association

73

lical association which was in existence from 1953-1966. The history of this earlier association and of the present Irish Biblical Association has still to be recorded. | The Publications Committee and the Proceedings

From its commencement the Irish Biblical Association was interested in the publication of the proceedings of its meetings. In a draft copy of a revised text of the constitution circulated in January 1974 article VII, 1, read as follows : “Publications. 1. All Proceedings of the Association shall be published annually in a suitable publication. 2. Responsibility for the publication shall be entrusted to an editorial committee whose members will be selected from the Association.” The Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association as we now have the publication goes back to the General meeting of the Association held at the Dominican Retreat and Conference Centre, Tallaght, April 26-28, 1974. Most members of the Association would have been aware of the renown enjoyed by the early Irish Church for the study of Scripture. The available evidence for the nature of the material taught or written in these monastic schools, however, was meagre indeed : an allegorical commentary on the forebears of Christ by the scholar Aileran of Clonard, the Mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae of the Irish scholar calling himself Augustine (hence known as the Irish Pseudo-Augustine), the De locis sanctis on the Holy Places by Adomnán, abbot of Iona, from a description of the Frankish bishop Arculf and precious little else. Twenty years earlier, in 1954, the German scholar Bernhard Bischoff, Professor at Munich, had published a work on many newly identified manuscripts with biblical compositions which he believed were written in Ireland, or connected with Ireland, during the formative period of Irish biblical learning in 650-800. Bischoff’s essay is now the renowned “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, published in the Belgian journal Sacris Erudiri. The executive believed that a conference on the matter twenty years later (1974) would be fitting. The conference had the title “Biblical Studies – The Irish Contribution”, with papers from Dr. James of the Chester Beatty Library on “Material of Biblical Interest in the Chester Beatty Library” ; by Dr Joseph Kelly (John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio) on “The Study of

11

74

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

the Gospel of Luke in Early Christian Ireland” ; by Peter Doyle on “The Bible Text in Ireland” ; by Brian Grogan, S.J. on “Eschatological Teaching in the Early and medieval Irish Church” ; by Frederick Mac Donncha, O.F.M. on “Early Irish Homilies”. There was a short communication by An tAth. Diarmuid Ó Laoghaire, S.J. on “A New Irish Infancy Narrative”, another by Pádraig Ó Fiannachta on “Würzburg Glosses”, and a third by Kevin Kennedy, Clonliffe College, on “Some Recent Writing Relating to the Theme of the Conference”. Diarmuid Ó Laoghaire’s paper presented an account of a hitherto unidentified apocryphal Life of Mary and of the birth of Christ. It has proved to be | a very sig- 12 nificant work, and has later been critically edited by An tAth. (Fr.) Diarmuid, appearing in print with introduction and notes in the recently published Apocrypha Hiberniae. I. Evangelia Infantiae (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13 ; Turnhout : Brepols, 2001). The Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association After the conference the Association’s executive believed that the papers delivered should be published, if at all possible. A Publications Committee was to attend to this. Thus was born the Association’s Publications Committee, with members Wilfrid Harrington, Andrew Mayes (also Treasurer of the Association) and Martin McNamara. Dominican Publications kindly took on the task of publishing the work, for which a deep debt of gratitude is due to the vision and helpfulness of Austin Flannery, O.P., Director of Dominican Publications. Since the papers alone would not be sufficient to make a reasonable-sized book it was decided to add an English translation of the revised German edition of Bischoff’s “Wendepunkte”, a translation made by Colm O’Grady, M.S.C. who himself had died tragically in a plane accident in January 1974. This first number of the journal was published in 1976 (although the copyright date is given as 1975). A thousand copies were printed. The second number of the Proceedings was also published by Dominican Publications. It contained the papers on Church Ministry read at the 1973 meeting of the Association. This was published in 1977. The problems inherent in this venture soon emerged. The contents of the volumes were quite different from that to which the clients of the regular volumes of Dominican Publications were

the irish biblical association

75

accustomed. Despite intense publicity by Dominican Publications, sales remained very low. A more apt means of publication and distribution was indicated. A further problem also emerged in that the papers presented at Association meetings of any given year would scarcely be sufficient material for any single issue of the Proceedings. There was no issue published in 1978. The next issue (no. 3, 1979) was published by Koinonia Press (Peter Purdue) in paperback and carried the papers read at three of the Association’s Annual General meetings. The same fundamental problems still remained, and from now on the Publications Committee had to attend both to the publishing and the procurement of the required finances for this. This was the situation from issue no 4 (1980) onwards for a number of years. Issue no. 4 proved particularly difficult, as it was set on compositor with little facility for proof correction. Later the printing was expertly done by Leinster Leader, which made matters much easier. The editorial | work on 13 issues 1 to 12 was done by Martin McNamara, Andrew Mayes and Wilfrid Harrington, generally in rotation. With regard to finances, when in trouble we were very generously helped by Dominican Publications, the Dominican Order, the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart Provincial administration, and Mgr John Greehy who very kindly told us to call on him whenever in financial troubles. For some time the publication problem was eased when Sean O’Boyle and Columba Books kindly took over the task. This, however, did not last for long, again by reason of the very low sales of the journal. Despite these and other problems the Publications Committee succeeded in bringing out a volume every year except for 1987. The financial situation was partly eased by an understanding whereby part of the annual membership subscription to the Association was agreed to contain a subscription for the Proceedings. This, however, did not help the Association’s own financial difficulties and had to be discontinued. The problem was made more acute when the papers read at the yearly meetings were no longer offered for publication to the Proceedings. The financial situation, as well the burden on the editors, were seen to be acute in 1993, when funds were low and the recorded sales equally so. Two things were required. financial help in the short term and an attempt to boost sales. Financial help was generously given by the Theologi-

76

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

cal faculty, Maynooth, by Mgr Pádraig Ó Fiannachta and by An Sagart publishing organisation. Through the kind offices of David Clines the Journal for the Study of the Old Testament included fliers for our publication in a number of issues, which boosted our sales significantly, especially in the United States. As the time came for the initial members of the Publications Committee to withdraw from their active participation, the Committee did its utmost to have the major problems of finances in reasonably good shape before doing so. This goal was more or less achieved by the year 2000, when financially the journal broke even through sales of current and back issues, without any direct subsidy. Much, however, remains to be done in a number of areas, if the Association’s annual publication is to survive and thrive as a learned journal of international standing. The Special Publications Trust During the 1970s interest in Hiberno-Latin literature and in the unpublished material highlighted by Professor Bischoff increased considerably both in Ireland and among scholars of medieval culture worldwide. The unpublished material was of particular interest to two bodies involved in the compilation of Medieval Latin dictionaries. One was the team working on the Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources, working under the general editorship of Dr David Howlett. The material | was, naturally, 14 of interest to the Irish counterpart of this, the Dictionary of Medieval Latin from Celtic Sources, centred in the Royal Irish Academy, with Prionsias Mac Cana as Chairman of the Editorial Board. The present writer was in contact with this latter group in particular. On 22 February 1983, in the course of a discussion of a report on the editorial work of the Irish Dictionary project, the present writer raised the question of the possibility of publishing the hitherto unedited exegetical material, and agreed to submit a proposal to the Editorial Board. The document submitted was in the form of a memorandum on the desirability of a plan to publish hitherto unpublished Hiberno-Latin commentary material. The memorandum was accompanied by a list of the manuscripts in question. The memorandum was brought to the attention of the Editorial Board at a meeting in March 1983 and note was taken of it. Thanks to the keen interest and good offices of Professor Proinsias

the irish biblical association

77

Mac Cana and Dr David Howlett in particular, contact was maintained between the present writer and the Editorial Board concerning the project. The matter was discussed again at the October 1983 Meeting of the Editorial Board and the present writer was kindly invited to speak to the Editorial Board on the matter at its meeting of 19 October, 1984. It was decided on principle to go ahead with the publication project. The Irish Biblical Association returned to the subject of Hiberno-Latin exegesis and unedited material at its Annual General Meeting in May 1984, a decade after the 1974 Seminar on the subject. A paper was read on developments during the intervening decade and a proposal was put to the Meeting to set up a Special Publications Trust. This Trust would have as aim “to edit and publish and “to assist in editing and publishing, material of historical interest relating to the Bible in Ireland, with special reference to the commentary material, the Apocrypha and the text of the Latin Bible in Ireland”. It would explore the possibility of cooperating with other bodies interested in the same fields of research, seek co-publishers for works which it believed merit publication. It would have the task of raising funds for this publication project. The trust was to be administered by the Publications Committee of the Irish Biblical Association. The Publications Committee of the Irish Biblical Association began fund-raising in June 1984, with positive and encouraging results. In June it got contributions from His Grace, the late Archbishop Dermot Ryan, and from the Furrow Trust. In September a substantial contribution came in the form of a donation of US $2000 from the Catholic Biblical Association of America. In the first part of 1985 there was a very positive response to requests made to Major Religious Superiors of Ireland, which by June 1985, had brought in about £5,000. Some commercial firms | also helped. A further approach to the Roman Catholic clergy, 15 Sisters, Brothers and some lay persons in September 1985 was equally successful. Contributions came from nine members of the Hierarchy. By the end of 1985 the fund stood at £13,000. With this amount in 1986 it was agreed between the Editorial Board of the Royal Irish Academy and the Irish Biblical Association’s Publications Committee that a formal agreement could be entered into between the Academy and the Irish Biblical association for “the production and publication of critical editions of

78

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Hiberno-Latin texts containing material of biblical interest : commentaries, homilies, and works of a biblical-theological nature”. A joint editorial board from the Academy and Association would supervise the project, which would be financed by the Irish Biblical Association’s Publications Committee. A major development came in 1987 when an approach was made by the prestigious Belgian publishing house Brepols (Turnhout) that instead of going it alone we enter into an agreement with them to have the volumes published in the series Corpus Christianorum. Brepols would attend to all the cost of publishing and distribution, while the Irish Biblical Association would have to cover only the costs of the Irish joint Editorial Board. A formal agreement to this effect was entered into on 3 April 1987 between the Royal Irish Academy/The Irish Biblical Association on the one hand and Brepols Publishers on the other. A further development came in 1988 when the Publications Committee entered into a further agreement with Brepols Publishers for the production of critical editions of the Irish apocryphal texts relating to the New Testament. These texts would be prepared in conjunction with the Association for the study of this literature  – L’Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne (AELAC). The texts would be published in the Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum. The Irish Publications Committee would only have to bear the Editorial Board costs. The machinery for the critical editions of these texts has now been established. The Latin texts will appear in a subsection of the Corpus Christianorum under the heading Scriptores Celtigenae. The Latin texts published in the Corpus Christianorum series are in two divisions : those from the Patristic period (before A.D. 800), known as the Series Latina, and those from the later period known as the Continuatio Mediaevalis. Most of the Hiberno-Latin texts will probably be from the later period, but all together will form a unity with the sub-series heading Scriptores Celtigenae. Editorial supervision is by an editorial board with two members chosen by the Royal Irish Academy (from members of the Academy’s |Committee on its Dictionary of Medieval Latin from Celtic Sources), 16 two by the Irish Biblical Association and one independent agreed member.

the irish biblical association

79

The editorial arrangement for the edition of the Irish New Testament Apocrypha is somewhat different. For this the central editorial work is in direct conjunction with AELAC and its Editorial Board centred at the University of Lausanne. All the basic work on the Irish texts is done by a very dedicated Irish team, all leading specialists in their field. Currently the Irish editorial board is : Professor Máire Herbert (UCC ; Chair) ; Prof. Pádraig Breatnach (UCD), Dr John Carey (UCC), Dr Caoimhín Breatnach (UCD) and the present writer who was the organising secretary for the first volume. Each year AELAC has a three-day “Réunion” at Dole, near Dijon, in France at which papers are read and the various publishing projects reviewed. It is usual (and rather expected) that a representative of the Irish Editorial Board be present. The Special Publications Trust attends to the travel costs, AELAC itself to the accommodation at Dole. The two publication projects, formally initiated respectively in 1987 and 1988, are slowly bearing fruit. To date four volumes have appeared in the Scriptores Celtigenae series, with another due to be launched next year, to be followed by a further volume the following year. It is hoped that a new volume will be launched every year. The first volume in the Apocrypha Hiberniae : Evangelia Infantiae was published in 2001 (after twelve years of dedicated work by the entire team !) having the main Irish apocryphal Infancy Narrative texts, with extensive introductions and explanatory notes. The second volume of this (with continuous pagination) with minor texts and indices is to be published in late 2002. Work on the second volume of Irish Apocrypha (with apocalyptic and eschatological texts) is well under way. Before completing its term in office, the IBA Publications Committee was eager to have financial arrangements with regard to the publication project all in order. There was agreement among Committee members that there would be no further appeal to the public for financial aid for the projects. Royalties are paid by Brepols Publishers for volumes in the Scriptores Celtigenae series. Representatives of the Publications Committee (including Oliver Maloney, Treasurer of the Committee) discussed the matter with Patrick Buckley, Executive Secretary of the Academy, and Dr Anthony Harvey, the Editorial Secretary of the Dictionary of Medieval Latin from Celtic Source (DMLCS) and a very equitable

80

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

agreement acceptable to both sides was agreed. The Editorial Secretary of the DMLCS would pass on to the IBA Publications Committee a bill for the time spent at work on the Scriptores Celtigenae project, which the Committee would pay from the Special Publications Trust fund. On receipt of royalties from Brepols for the sales | of the volumes, the Academy would first reimburse the 17 Publications Committee for this amount. The remainder of the money from the royalties would then be evenly divided between the Academy and the IBA Publications Committee. The money received from the royalties is greater that the secretarial expenses. Thus the future of this publication project is financially assured. After some twenty-seven years’ association with the Publications Committee, I avail of this opportunity to pay thanks and tribute to those who have worked so devotedly over the years to make its undertakings a success. I mention in particular Andrew Mayes and Wilfrid Harrington who were there from the beginning and attended to editorial, financial and other matters. Our gratitude, too, is due to the various editors of the Proceedings, those already mentioned, and in later times Kevin Cathcart, Ciarán O’Callaghan, CSsR, and Céline Mangan, to the members of the Publications Committee over these years, and so many others who have helped in various ways. Postscript 2014 The Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association, in 2012 at no. 35, is proceeding very well. The contents are also as intended by the original idea of the publication, which was to carry the papers read at meetings of the Association. Currently under the expert editorship of Dr Fearghas Ó Fearghail (Fergus Farrell), the quality of the contributions is of a very high level. Although the circulation is still limited, it is sufficient to cover production costs. Three more volumes have been published in the Scriptores Celtigenae series, all of great importance for a knowledge of the study of the Bible in Ireland : Liber questionum in euangeliis (2003), the glosses in the Southampton Psalter (2012), and the literal gloss on the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen (MS Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale 24) (2012). Publication in the Apocrypha Hiberniae series has been slower, with only one new publication : Apocrypha Hiberniae II, Apocalyptica I. In Tenga Bithnua. The Evernew-Tongue, ed. by

the irish biblical association

81

John Carey (2009). Preparations for further volumes in Apocrypha Hiberniae II, however, are well advanced. The original aim of the Irish Biblical Association’s Special Publications Trust, together with the commentary material and Apocrypha, also included “the text of the Latin Bible in Ireland”. The Publications Committee has never really attended to the question of the Latin Bible text. The Publications Committee has now very little to do with the ongoing work of the editorial committees of either the Apocrypha or the Scriptores Celtigenae, apart from appointing or renewing membersip of the the latter Editorial Committee as indicated.

| THE BIBLE IN IRELAND (A.D. 600–1150)*

Some Eleventh Century Evidence. One of the noblest gifts of the Holy Spirit (to the Church) is the Holy Scripture, by which all ignorance is enlightened, and all terrestrial sorrow comforted, by which all spiritual light is kindled, by which all debility is made strong. For it is through the Holy Scripture that heresy and schism are banished from the Church, and all contentions and divisions reconciled. In it will be found well-tried counsel and appropriate instruction for every degree in the Church. It is through it that the snares of demons, and vices, are banished from every faithful member in the Church. For divine Scripture is the mother and benign nurse of all the faithful who meditate and contemplate it, and who are nourished by it until they are chosen children of God by its advice.   For wisdom bountifully distributes to her children the variety of her sweetest drink, and the choicest of her spiritual food, by which they are perpetually intoxicated and cheered.

These words on the role of scripture in the Church might appear to be drawn from a document of the Second Vatican Council. In point of fact, the passage comes from the Leabhar Breac (a 15th-century compilation, with material of a much earlier date) where it serves as an introduction to a text in Irish and Latin on the symbolic interpretation of the ceremonies of the Mass. The introductory piece opens with a profession of faith in the Catholic Church, in the faith that conducts believers to see God in the glory and the dignity in which he abides. The pledge that we shall have such vision of God, the text continues, is the Holy Spirit which has been given to the Church on earth to comfort her and strengthen her with all virtues. Immediately following on this we have the text just cited on Holy Scripture as the noblest of the Spirit’s gifts to the Church.

* 

First published in : Scripture Bulletin 6.2 (1975-1976), pp. 36-39.

36

84

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Nor is this text unique in the Leabhar Breac. Similar sentiments occur in other passages in the book which probably date from the eleventh century. Holy Scripture is even called the Body of Christ. It is called heaven itself because of its nobility and splendour. The pierced side of Christ into which Thomas was invited to put his hand is interpreted symbolically as the Holy Scripture. It is from it through faith that the depths of wisdom are to be drawn from this treasury of faith. Another text says that we shall journey through life without stumbling if the course of our entire life is lived according to the divine Scripture. The Church draws her faith from Scripture we are told in a further text. But God’s words need interpretation, and respect |for Scripture 37 implies respect for those who explain it to the faithful, in accord with Catholic tradition naturally. The beautiful eleventh-century homily on the Gospel for Low Sunday (on “Doubting Thomas”) from which I have already given texts, sees in the Apostle Thomas the Church coming from doubt to faith through the understanding of the Scripture. Thomas is interpreted allegorically as “the abyss of knowledge”, and is taken to stand for the Church’s teachers (doctores). In a Latin text of this sermon, the homilist remarks that just as the head is sick without its teeth, so is the Church unhealthy (non valet) without teachers. The Irish section of the homily (which is probably the original, summarized in the Latin) is much more explicit. Thomas, whose name signifies “the abyss of knowledge” means the learned teachers whom the Church follows. “For just as the head is of no use without its teeth through which the food is broken down (mínigther) for the members of the body, in like manner the Church is of no use without its sages ; they explain (mínigid) the pure mysteries of the Scriptures for believers”. Bridging the Centuries. The passages I have quoted give us an idea of the respect paid to Scripture and the regard in which the doctores, the teachers of sacred doctrine, were held in eleventh-century Ireland. This is towards the end of the period we are considering. The situation was no different at the beginning of this period. This can be easily shown from the material now at our disposal. The tradition in Irish Scripture studies over the intervening centuries seems to

the bible in ireland (a.d.

600-1150)

85

have remained essentially the same. In a Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Psalms, composed between A.D.  700 and 750 (in Cod. Vat. Pal. lat.  68) we already find the teachers (doctores) compared to the teeth because of their relation to sacred doctrine. The text occurs in an explanation of the Hebrew word Sen with which the second last eight-verse section of Psalm 118 begins. It reads as follows : “Sen means teeth and this is in harmony with this section (i.e. Ps  118. 161–167) ; they (i.e. the teeth) are closely packed together and in harmony and chew the food over and over again (ruminant), and help the speech. So also is it with the holy teachers (doctores). They peacefully agree among themselves against heresies ; closely knit together they meditate on (ruminant) the food of sacred doctrine.” A practically identical text is found in the so-called Psalter of Charlemagne, written on the Continent between A.D. 795 and 800, but depending on Irish tradition. The awareness of the central and sacred role of the teachers of sacred doctrine was as dear to the Irish as it was to the Pauline Church. The early Irish Church, in the compilation of canons (Collectio Canonum Hibernensis) drawn up about a.d.  725, even legislated on the matter, one entire book of the collection (book 38, with 19 chapters) being devoted to Church Teachers (De doctoribus Ecclesiae), and six chapters of this treating of sancta rusticitas (“holy ignorance”) and its relationship to sapientia and scientia (“wisdom and knowledge”). Recent Research in Early Irish Exegesis. If an essay on the early Irish contribution to Biblical scholarship were written anything over twenty years ago, the writer would have precious little tangible evidence to adduce in illustration. He would, of course, know that early Christian Ireland has been called “The Island of Saints and Scholars”. From the later Lives of Irish saints he would learn that the important element in any early Irish ecclesiastic’s education was the reading and study of the Scriptures, particularly the Psalms. From Bede’s Ecclesiastical History he would have evidence of the English students (mainly Northumbrian, we can presume) who flocked to Ireland for learning during the episcopacy of Aidan as bishop of Lindisfarne (died 651). Ireland evidently enjoyed a certain renown for the biblical instruction imparted in its monastic schools. Evidence

86

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

for the texts actually used in this instruction, and for works composed in these early Irish schools, was very meagre indeed until the researches of a few scholars appeared in print in the middle and late fifties and later still. We knew of one extraordinary and original piece of work on the miracles narrated in the Bible (De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae) composed in Ireland in 655. This work, which attempted to explain the miracles in the Bible not as the suspension of the laws of nature, but rather as the calling forth of some principle which normally lies hidden in the depths of nature, displays a distinct independence of mind. Two works of Aileran, this author’s contemporary, were also known (Canon Evangeliorum and Mystica interpretatio nominum progenitorum Christ), both of no great originality. From the seventh century we also knew the Irish Lathcen’s abbreviation of Gregory’s Moralia in Iob, likewise a Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Catholic Epistles and one or more shorter piece besides. Towards the end of the century Adomnán published his noteworthy work on the holy places (De locis sanctis). All in all, it was meagre evidence on which to base any assessment of early Irish biblical instruction or scholarship. The havoc wrought by the Danes on the Irish monastic libraries could be adduced as a reason for the loss of the books that must have once enriched Irish monasteries. While it seemed to most that the evidence of early Irish scholarship was lost, Dr.  Bernhard Bischoff was quietly working his way through early medieval manuscripts in the rich collections of continental libraries, particularly those in the Staatsbibliothek of Munich. Many of these were copies of well-known works of which several manuscripts were extant. But he also identified a number of rarer or hitherto unknown works, of which only a few manuscripts, and very often only a single one, was known. His researches led |him to realize that a certain family similarity 38 existed between these works, most of which had no author’s name attached. At times their titles were peculiar ; they repeatedly made use of uncommon phrases such as non difficile, more. They showed a special interest in such things as the first occurrence of a word or deed in the Bible ; as in the form of names in “the three sacred languages”  – Hebrew, Greek and Latin. Although not in the easily recognisable insular script, and hence written in conti-

the bible in ireland (a.d.

600-1150)

87

nental scriptoria and by continental scribes, evident mistakes in certain words showed that they were copied from originals written in Irish script. The evident inference was that these were copies of works taken by Irish monks to the continent and copied once, or more often, by continental scribes. The evidence for early Irish learning existed, after all, and was made known to the world when Bischoff published the results of his researches in 1954. The previous year Robert McNally, S.J. had come from the United States to Munich to study under Dr.  Bischoff and has since been busily engaged in the study of early Irish biblical and theological scholarship, devoting a good part of his work The Bible in the Early Middle Ages (1959) to the Irish scene. In 1955 the Bollandist Père Grosjean, S.J. published a major study on certain Irish exegetes -- Irish Augustine, author of De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae and other Irish scholars mentioned in this work and in a Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Catholic Epistles. Back in Fordham University, Robert McNally promoted Hiberno-Latin studies and Joseph Kelly, one of his students, has since published some of the commentary material identified as Irish by Bischoff. Together with the rich material brought to our attention by Bischoff, other works already known and attributed to well-known writers such as Isidore have also been either shown or claimed to have been produced by Irishmen. Irish Exegetical Output A.D. 600–1200. As a result of the researches of recent decades, particularly those of Bernhard Bischoff, we now know that the literary output of the early Irish monastic schools was very large indeed. For the period 650–800 alone we have over ten texts with commentaries on portions of the Old Testament : Genesis, Job, the Psalter, the Canticle of Canticles, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Amos. There are at least six texts treating of the Four Gospels in general ; nine texts containing either commentary material on Matthew or covering introductory questions on this Gospel ; we have a complete commentary on the Gospel of Mark from about 630, the author of which Bischoff has identified as Cummeanus. This Cummeanus is probably the same person as the Cummian who wrote a joint letter to Segene, Abbot of Iona and to Beccán the recluse about 632–633 advocating the adoption of the Roman method of cele-

88

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

brating Easter. Together with this commentary we also possess an introduction to the Second Gospel. We have two commentaries on Luke and two on the Fourth Gospel. We also have a commentary on the Pauline Epistles, including Hebrews and a separate commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. Together with these we have the copious glosses in Latin and Irish on the Pauline Epistles in the Würzburg Codex of Paul, and an equally rich corpus of glosses on Paul in a manuscript now in Cambridge, but written in an Irish centre in Northumbria. Both sets of glosses are from the first half of the eighth century. We have two commentaries on the Catholic Epistles and also a commentary on the Apocalypse. This means that during the period 650–800 separate commentaries were written on many books of the Bible. Of these at least thirty-six are known to exist. This creative period closed with the compilation of a large one-volume commentary on the entire Bible from Genesis to the Apocalypse, one in which the Irish exegetical tradition of the preceding century and a half was summarized. Together with these works of an exegetical nature we also have writings of more theological interest : The Irish Pseudo-Augustine’s De mirabilibus sacrae scripture, written in 655 has already been mentioned. From the same seventh century we have another Irish work of a more theological nature, once attributed to Isidore of Seville, but now known to be from the pen of an Irish author who used his compatriot’s De mirabilibus. This work bears the title Liber de ordine creaturarum and treats of God as creator, of the creation of spiritual beings (angels and human souls), of the creation of terrestrial beings : the waters above the heavens, the heavenly firmament and its luminaries, the space beneath the firmament, the heavenly paradise above, the atmosphere or lower firmament and the abode of demons under this. The work treats then of the earthly waters, of the earth, and the earthly paradise ; of man and his final end : hell, purgatory and eternal glory. This work was critically edited in 1972 by M. C. Díaz y Díaz. From the early decades of the eighth century we have a commentary in Latin and Irish on portion of the Sermon on the Mount which contains some teaching closely related to what we find in the Pseudo-Isidorian Liber de ordine creaturarum. This text, found in a manuscript in Lambeth Palace, London, is known as the Lambeth Commentary.

the bible in ireland (a.d.

600-1150)

89

From the early part of the ninth century we have an Introduction to the Psalter in Old Irish with part of the commentary on Psalm I. A little earlier an Irish scribe who signed himself Diarmait transcribed a lengthy Latin commentary on the Psalms accompanied by numerous glosses in Old Irish. This is now in Milan, but came from Bobbio. The Latin commentary contains in part a Latin translation of the Greek commentary on the Psalter made by Theodore of Mopsuestia (died A.D. 428) made by Julian of Eclanum, and in part an adaptation (epitome) of it. Other fragments of the Latin translation of Theodore transcribed by Irishmen are now in Turin. It is uncertain whether Diarmait and the scribe of the Turin texts made their copies in Ireland itself or in the scriptorium of Bobbio. What is certain is that the Theodorean commentary translated or adapted by Julian of Eclanum was being used in Ireland a century and more before Diarmait’s day. Irish scholars were making their presence felt on the Continent already in the eighth century. By the mid-century a group of them associated with St. Virgilius of Salzburg were producing works on biblical matters. Robert McNally has identified a number of these. The names of most of the Irish exegetes of the earlier period (A.D. 650–800) are unknown to us. Matters are somewhat different with regard to the ninth century, which has given us two renowned Irishmen – both of whom won renown on the Continent. One of these was Sedulius Scottus, the other John Scottus Eriugena. The Bible was but one of their many interests. Sedulius has left us a commentary on the Gospel of Matthew and another on the Pauline Epistles. He was also probably the scribe of a Greek text of the Psalter, now in Paris, the colophon of which says in Greek that it was written by Sedulius Scottus : Sedylios Scottos egô egrapsa. Eriugena was an outstanding figure in ninth-century continental Europe. He astounded his contemporaries by his command of Greek, and aroused them from their lethargy by his philosophical and theological writings. He got himself involved in a dispute on predestination and published a work on it in 851. He may also have composed a commentary on De consolatione philosophiae of Boethius. In 827 the Emperor Charles the Pious had received a present of the works of Pseudo-Denis from the Emperor of Byzantium. An imperfect Latin translation of the Greek was made by Hilduinus between 817 and 842 and Eriugena was requested by

90

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

Charles the Bald to make a new translation. This he did between 862 and 863, working on and perfecting the efforts of Hilduinus. He perfected his Greek in the process and went on to translate (A.D. 864–866) the Ambigua and the Questiones ad Thalassium of Maximus the Confessor from Greek to Latin. He also translated (between 862 and 864) De hominis opificio of Gregory of Nyssa into Latin, a work he refers to as Sermo (or Liber) de imagine, or simply as De imagine. This contact with the new-found world of Hellenism moulded Eriugena’s own thought and led him to produce his own philosophical and theological synthesis which he has left us in the Periphyseon, commonly known as De divisione naturae, composed while he was translating the works of Maximus. Eriugena’s exegetical work is less well known. He has, however, left us a beautiful homily on the prologue of John’s Gospel, which shows dependence on Augustine and on the works of Maximus, Gregory of Nyssa and Pseudo-Denis which he himself has translated. He also began a commentary on John’s Gospel, but death seems to have taken him before he could complete it. Both the Homily and incomplete commentary have recently been critically edited, with excellent introductions and notes, by E. Jeauneau. Other Irish ninth-century scholars on the Continent also displayed a special interest in Greek. Together with the Greek Psalter of Sedulius Scottus, there is a Greek Psalter with interlinear Latin translation extant in the University Library of Basel. It is the work of an Irishman and so is similar to the Greco-Latin texts of Four Gospels now in St. Gall and of the Epistles of St. Paul in a manuscript at Dresden that it can be surmised that all three texts originally formed one book containing the Greek text with an interlinear Latin translation of the Biblical books most frequently consulted by scholars. Working in the area of Milan in the same ninth century, another Irishman composed a treatise on the correct translation of the Psalter from Greek into Latin. The work was intended as a preface to a text of the Greek Psalter emended according to the principles he had laid down, emendations marked by five critical signs treated of in his preface. The ravages of the Danes did not spell the end of Scriptural studies in the homeland. From the tenth century we have a heavily glossed double Psalter (with the Gallicanum and Hebraicum renderings) now in Rouen, and fragment of a sister codex of this

the bible in ireland (a.d.

600-1150)

91

preserved in Trinity College, Dublin. In the latter years of the same century Airbertach Mac Coisse, fer légind (or head) of the monastic school of Ros-Ailither (Rosscarbery in West Cork) made a verse rendering of the Preface to the Psalter found in the earlier Old-Irish Treatise. He also composed a versified compendium of geography and some further poems on biblical topics. He may also have been the author of the lengthy Saltair na Rann which gives us the course of sacred history as known from the Bible and the Apocrypha. Finally, we may mention the so-called Psalter of Caimin, written c. A.D. 1100, with portion of the text of Ps 118 and copious glosses drawn from earlier Irish works on the Psalter. The chain of tradition had remained unbroken down through the centuries. The New learning of the University of Paris which came with the Cistercians and the Glossa Ordinaria is found in the Gospels of Mael-Brigte written in 1138 and the Magna Glossatura in the Coupar-Angus Psalter, written about 1170. This article is a portion of the Inaugural Lecture to mark the conferring of degrees and the official opening of the school year, the Milltown Institute of Philosophy and Theology, Dublin, 1975, under the title “Early Irish contributions to Biblical scholarship”.

Postscript 2014 The original text of 1975-76 has been allowed to stand, in order to give an indication of the general situation in this field of study at that time.

| PLAN AND SOURCE ANALYSIS OF DAS BIBELWERK, OLD TESTAMENT1

Manuscripts and Title of the Work “The Reference Bible” is an English translation of Das Bibelwerk, a commentary on the Bible from Genesis to the Apocalypse, so named by Dr  Bernhard Bischoff. In the manuscripts this single-volume commentary is entitled Pauca problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis. The work has been transmitted virtually in its entirety in two manuscripts, Paris, BN lat. 11561, fols 1v–217v, saec. ixmed.-2 (Pa) ; Munich, Clm 14276 + 14277, saec. ix in. (Regensburg), foliated consecutively (Mon). In addition, there are portions and fragments preserved. The commentary on Genesis with some lacunae is found in Codex Vat. Reg. lat. 76, fols 1–106 (Vat). It is incomplete, ending in mid-sentence at Gen 49.16 ; the other two MSS end at Gen 49.27. Fragments occur in Munich, Clm 2905 (12 pages) and Clm 29161–29167, each consisting of one slip of paper. There are excerpts in Karlsruhe, MS Aug. CXCV, fol. 37v, saec. ixmed., in Irish script,2 and in MS Vat. Reg. lat. 191, fol. 87r, saec. ix. 3 There is an excerpt from it in 1  First published in : Ireland and Christendom. The Bible and the Missions, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin – M. Richter Stuttgart : Klett-Cotta, 1987, pp.  84-112. 2  W. M. Lindsay, Early Irish Script, Oxford, 1910, pp.  57-60 ; J. F. Kenney, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland. Ecclesiastical. An Introduction and Guide, Columbia, 1929 (later reprints, New York, 1966 ; etc.), pp. 669-70. 3  See B. Bischoff, “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the early Middle Ages”, in Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin 1976 (PIBA No.  1), pp. 73-160, at 97. German original : “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), pp.  190–281 ; revised edition in Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literatur­ geschichte, vol.  I, Stuttgart, 1966, p.  205–273, at p.  231 (Essay referred to subsequently with Sacris Erudiri pagination, and the Collected Essays pag-

84

94

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

MS Paris, BN lat. 614A, fol. 3v–40v, 69r–75v, 166r–187v, saec. ix 2 or ix/x.2 A reworking of the commentary set in the form of questions and answers is found in MS Lyons 447 (376), fol. 106r–152, saec. ix. The Latin title, transmitted by all three major manuscripts and in excerpts as well, can be presumed to be the original one. (The Vatican MS reads Pauli for the difficult and rare term Pauca.) The term pauca occurs within the commentary itself, as a heading, on a number of occasions. Incipiunt Pauca de Exodo ; Incipiunt Pauca | 85 de Libro Iudicum ; Incipit Pauca de Libro Ruth ; Pauca de Praefatione Librorum Regum ; Incipiunt Pauca de Psalmis Dauid Regis Israhel ; Incipiunt Pauca de Libro Sapientiae Salomonis ; Incipiunt Pauca de Prophetis ; Incipiunt Pauca de explanatione Hier(onimi) in Hieremiam Prophetam. It also occurs as a subtitle in the New Testament part of the commentary. Dr Bischoff has observed that the word Pauca was a favourite title-form for the Irish ; he notes its frequency here in the Reference Bible, as well as in two other Hiberno-Latin works entitled (Incipiunt) Pauca de libris catholicorum scriptorum in evangelia excerpta ; (In Dei nomine) Pauca ex commentario beati Hilarii … in epistolas beati Pauli apostoli excerpta (incipiunt).4 He also notes its presence in works of a grammatical nature composed by the Irish in early Carolingian times : Pauca de grammatica, etc., and Pauca de barbarismo collecta de multis.5 To these we can add at least one example from vernacular Irish sources, the heading to the Leinster genealogies in MS Oxford, Rawlinson B. 502 : Incipiunt Pauca de nominibus Laginesium….6 ination in brackets). For the excerpts in MS BN lat.  614A, fols 3v-40v, 69v75v, 166r-187v see F. Stegmüller, Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aevi, vol. 7, Madrid, 1961, nos.  10301–10319, 10321–10322. Gen-Lev, fol.  4r–17v ; Num, 17v–19v ; Deut, 19v–20r ; Ios, 20r–21r ; Iudic, 21r–21v ; Ruth, 21v ; Reg, 21v– 23v ; Ps, 23v–26r ; Prov, 26r–26v ; Eccles, 26v–27v ; Cant, 27v ; Iob, 27v ; Sap, 28r ; Isa, 30r ; Ierem, 31v ; Ezech, 33r ; Dan, 34v ; XII Proph, 36v–39v ; Mt, 39r–40v and 69r–75. According to Stegmüller, Repertorium, nos.  10321–2, fols  172–183 have Gen and fols 183v–186r have Exod. 4  Bischoff, “Turning- Points”, pp.  84, 110, 137 : “Wendepunkte”, pp. 205, 238, 266 (217, 242, 263). 5  Bischoff, “Turning- Points”, p. 84 ; “Wendepunkte”, p, 205 (217). 6  Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae, vol.  1, ed. by M. A. O’Brien, Dublin, 1976, p.  1. I am grateful to Prof. F. J. Byrne for bringing this occurrence of Pauca in a vernacular text to my attention.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

95

Other terms in the title reflect features of Irish Latinity, as Bischoff has also demonstrated. Thus enigmatum problemata (pro­ blesmata in three MSS) ; oracula aetheralibus opacorum mellita in aenigmatibus problematum (problesmatum in five MSS)7 siticulose sumentes carpunt.8 The Ps.-Jerome (Irish, Cummian ?) commentary on Mark speaks of a quaestio problematis (PL 30, 626B). Contents The Reference Bible contains some introductory material at the beginning, and after this an exposition of parts of the books of the Bible from Genesis to the Apocalypse of John. The order for the Old Testament is as follows : Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy ; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Kings (i.e. 1–2 Samuel ; 1–2 Kings), Paralipo­mena (Chronicles), Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Job, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Esdras, Maccabees, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the Prophets (four Major, twelve Minor).

There is no treatment of Lamentations or Baruch. The order in the New Testament section is : Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Pauline Epistles (14, including Hebrews), Epistles of John, Acts, Epistles of Peter, James, Jude, the Apocalypse.

| There are indications that the original work was designed 86 as a unit from the beginning and that it is the composition of either a single compiler or of a number of people under direction. The unity of the whole is visible in the use of the term Pauca or Incipiunt (incipit) Pauca, as a title for the whole and also as title for individual sections – eight times in the Old Testament and at least once in the New. Among indications of the unity between the Old and New Testament sections we may instance at least two passages of the Old Testament exposition taken up and used in related contexts in the New. One is the comment on Hab 2.4 Iustus autem ex fide uiuet, itself composed of two passages from Jerome’s commentary, which is repeated almost verbatim in the 7  Bischoff, “Turning-Points” (as above note 2), p. 98 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 224 (231). 8  Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, p. 98 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 224 (231).

96

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

comment on Rom 1.17 (in which Paul cites this text of Hab). More significant is the Reference Bible exposition of Ps 50.6 with its use of the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore under the name of Iosepus which is repeated verbatim in the later exposition of Rom 3.4 (which cites Ps 50.6), repeated even with the inclusion of the Iosepus citation by name. These are but a few indications of an original unity with regard to authorship. A final judgement on this, as on many other matters, will have to await a critical edition and detailed analysis of the whole work. Date of Original Composition Dr Bischoff writes of it being in (and coming into) existence in the late eighth century. The evidence from the manuscripts (see above) will scarcely allow us to go later than this. An original of c. 750 with a number of copies made soon afterwards would probably be in agreement with this. More information may become available when the relationships of the extant manuscripts have been worked out. Place of Original Composition Dr  Bischoff has put forward strong arguments in favour of an Irish origin for the work, though not necessarily in Ireland. He speaks of “the Irish compiler of the late eighth century, who had possibly already worked on the Continent”.9 It remains for future research to refine this judgement. The Vatican MS (Reg. lat.  76) was written in France, and probably in Northern France, according to André Wilmart, c. A.D.  800 or not much later.10 The Munich MSS were written at the beginning of the ninth century in the episcopal scriptorium of | St  Emmeram at Regensburg.11 We may, after analysis of the 87 manuscript evidence, be able to determine the common ancestor Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, p. 88 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 211 (222). A. Wilmart, Codices Reginenses Latini, vol. 1, Vatican City, 1937, p. 170. 11  B. Bischoff, Die südostdeutschen Schreibschulen und Bibliotheken in der Karolingerzeit, Teil I. Die bayrischen Diözesen, Wiesbaden, 1974, p.  194 ; see also his “Turning-Points” (as above note 2), p. 97 ; Wendepunkte, p. 223 (231). 9 

10 

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

97

of all our present manuscripts and fragments and the place where it was transcribed. History of Research The Vatican MS was described briefly by Angelo Mai in 1841.12 He read the title as Incipiunt Pauli Problemata de aenigmatibus ex tomis canonicis and took the author to have been one Paulus Ligurus, a monk of Monte Cassino during the reign of Pope Paschal II. He thought the codex was in Paul’s own hand. He comments on the appropriateness of the inclusion of Problemata in the title, the greater part of which is concerned with questions and their resolution. A. Mai (1782–1854) lists the sources mentioned in the work – Christian, Jewish and pagan – and finds it desirable to give eleven citations from the Vatican MS, obviously rare ones which he probably thought his readers would help in identifying : thus for example from Iudas (fol. 23), Theophilus (fol. 29), Orosius (fol. 30) on the firmament, whether it stands still or moves ; Orosius again (fol. 60) on the world being like a man in a bed, formed from the head, that is from the Paradise of Adam placed in the East and the ocean between him ( ?inter se) and this world ; Faustus (fol. 66), Matthaeus apostolus (fol. 50), obviously some apocryphal writing. These unidentified citations are evidence of the difficulty presented by the text and proved too much for Mai, the celebrated philologist, palaeographer and editor of various patristic works. The Vatican MS was described again in 1937 by André Wilmart.13 The collection in Cod. Reg. lat.  76, he says, was probably originally compiled in the eighth century, but in which country or by what persons is not clear. Could it be by Irishmen ?, he asks. With regard to structure, he divides the Vatican MS into 13 sections, noting the sources given in abbreviation or written in full in each of these, and he identifies these and other anonymous texts where possible. He ends his description noting that often, it appears, the writers are not indicated, or falsely indicated, or their writings are given in abbreviated fashion. 12  A. Wilmart, “De opusculo quodam Pauli Casinensis”, Spicilegium Romanum 5 (1841), pp. 144-45. 13  Wilmart, Codices Reginenses, pp.  168–70.

98

the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

The most important work on this text, with regard to content, nature and manuscript transmission, has been made by Dr Bern­ hard Bischoff. He has identified the new manuscripts, the fragments and the excerpts. He described the Munich MSS in 1940.14 In his major essay on Hiberno-Latin biblical exegeses, first published in 1954,15 he made a study of this particular commentary. Since then the | work itself has been consulted in manuscript by 88 many scholars, each approaching it from his own particular angle. Publication of the work in toto has gradually become one of the most obvious desiderata in the field of Hiberno-Latin exegetical studies. A first step in this direction is the source analysis, which is partly being attempted here, together with a study of the structure of the work as a whole and in its individual parts, with regard to the Old Testament section. The Introductory Material After the initial Incipiunt Pauca Problesmata … the work commences (Vat 1v–9v ; Pa 1r–4va1) with chapters 1 and 2 of book VI of Isidore’s Etymologiae, with other texts of Isidore (Etym. VI, 1–4 ; De ecclesiasticis officiis I. 12. 8–9. 12). This section discusses the authors and names of the books of the Old Testament (Etym. VI. 1–2). The inserted passage from Etym. VI. 4 is on the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, a theme also considered by Isidore in De eccl. offic. I. 12. The compiler cites Isidore on the authorship of the individual books at various points throughout the work. Isidore’s canon of Scripture given here is that of the Greek, not of the Hebrew Bible. A lenient view is taken of the Apocrypha, the books not received into the Hebrew canon (Etym. VI. 2. 51–52), with a text reproduced in the Reference Bible. It is stated that the Apocrypha, although without canonical authority, can have in them a certain authority, but by reason of the many false things in them the prudent judge that they are not the work of those to whom they are attributed. It is also noted that works under the names of prophets, and recent writings under the names of apostles, were being used by heretics. The apocrypha spoken of 14  15 

Bischoff, Die südostdeutschen Schreibschulen, p. 194. “Wendepunkte”, as above note 2.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

99

here are hardly those also known as the deuterocanonical works, which are commented on in the Reference Bible. The compiler has introduced this entire section as the work of Isidore. However, before the exposition of the Epistles of Peter, while using Etym. VI. 1. 45 and 46 of Isidore, he gives as heading : HIER(ONIMUS), ISIDOR(US), probably to indicate that he was aware that Isidore’s material was drawn from Jerome. This feature recurs throughout the commentary proper, and probably for the same reason. After Isidore’s introduction to the Scriptures we are immediately presented with a contrasting one, headed De partibus diuinae legis (Vat 9v–16 ; Pa 4va–6rb ; Mon 1v–4r), in which we are given, without reference to the author, the two books of Iunilius Africanus, with the individual subsections indicated by capitals in the manuscript  : DE SIMPLICI DOCTRINA  ; DE PRESENTI SAECULO, DE ACCIDENTIBUS NATURIS, DE ACCIDENTIBUS VOLUNTATI, DE CONSEQUENTIBUS VOLUNTATI, DE FUTURO SAECULO. After this, under the heading in capitals  : DE DIUISIONE SCRIPTURAE CANONICAE (Vat 16r–18r  ; Pa 6rb14–6vb30  ; Mon 4r–6v1), we have a twelve-fold | division of Scripture which 89 I have been unable to trace to any source, but which seems to stem from different sources. It may be an Irish composition. The final division given is : Duodecima diuisio inter intus et foris ut Ezechiel (Ez 2.8 ; 3.1–3) et Iohannis (Apoc 10.9) uidit librum signatum intus et foris. id est historia et sensus … The next section is headed DE LEGE MOYSI (Vat 18–20 ; Pa 9va34 in displaced position ; Mon 6v2–7v) ; it is in six subsections, numbered consecutively. The passage really treats of law and laws in general. No. vi of the list, headed in capitals DE INUENTATORIBUS LEGUM, is from Isidore, Etym. VI, 1, 1–3. No. v, on the difference between legem et morem et consuetudinem, can also be compared to Isidore, Etym. V, 3 (PL 82, 199) and Differentiarum lib. I (PL 83, 45). Nos ii–iiii are on the lex litterae, lex naturae, lex prophetiae, lex euangelii. Quod sunt leges principales et unde incipit et finit unaquaeque de eis ? Leges quattuor sunt principales : Lex nature et lex littere, lex prophetiae et lex euangelii. Incipit lex nature ab Adam usque Moysen. Lex littere a Moysen usque ad Samuhel. Lex prophetiae a Samuel usque ad

100 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Iohannem Baptiste. Lex euangelii ab Iohanne usque ad finem mundi (no.  ii).   Quot modis constat lex naturae. Tribus. Lex enim uel promittit aliquid ut uir fortis ; petat praemium, aut uetat ut sacrarum uirginum nuptias nulli liceat aut punit et qui cedem fecerit capite plectetur. Hoc lex nature facit (no.  iii).

No. iiii treats of the lex littere in a similar fashion. The following section is headed in capitals  : DE NOMINE MOYSI (Vat 20–21 ; Pa in confused text 10rb1 + 7va ; Mon 7v5– 7v25). Although Isidore and Jerome are given as sources for different sections, the passage comes from Isidore’s De ortu et obitu patrum, ch. 25, 44 (PL 83, 137). It is taken from the genuine Isidorian work, not from the Ps.-Isidorian, and probably Irish, Liber de ortu et obitu patrum. Genesis There is a lengthy commentary on the Book of Genesis (Vat 21–106 ; Pa 7v–28v ; Mon 7v–55v), and the most of it is devoted to chapter 1, the Creation, and chapters 2–3, Paradise (Vat 23v–46 ; 46–60v ; Pa 8ra–15rb ; 15rb–19rb ; Mon 8v–23v ; 23v–31v respectively). The commentary on Genesis, before ch. 49, shows relatively little structure. The source for the brief introduction, headed in capitals DE GENESI (Vat 21–22v ; Pa 7va–8ra ; Mon 7v26–8v24), I have been unable to identify. The exposition of chapter 1 is introduced by capitals IN PRINCIPIO, the authorities or presumed authorities are also given in capitals, as are the different forms of exegesis employed [MOR(ALITER), SPI(RITALITER)]. We are informed in capitals of the proposed transition from one section to another : HUCUSQUE DE INFORMI MATERIA. NUNC FORMATIO. On one occasion the subject matter of a section is | so 90 indicated : DE DOMO ANIME AG(USTINUS) DICIT ; HIC EST INTERROGATIO ; or the end of a section, which had some special significance, e.g. after 4.26 : HUCUSQUE PRIMA LEC(TIO). A systematic structure appears only at the end, in the commentary on Jacob’s blessings in ch. 49, which is divided into twelve sections, numbered consecutively. (Vat ends in mid-sentence at no. vii.) André Wilmart16 has divided the commentary on Genesis into sections according to subject matter  – a convenient method 16 

Wilmart, Codices Reginenses, p. 169.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

101

I shall follow here, but one without any basis in the MSS themselves. He pointed out the authorities mentioned in the section on Creation, i.e. Augustine (as ag, ags, agus, agst), Ambrose (as am, amb, ambr, ambro), Gregory (as gr, greg), Gregorius Nazanzenus, Iulius, Origines (orig, orige), Jerome (hier), Isidore (isdor, is, isidr), Orosius (qui et oros, Vat  30v), Theophilus, Virgilius (Vat  26 : Scinditur auricula caeli septemplicis ethra). The compiler’s affiliations can be ascertained only through patient source analysis. Theophilus, for instance, is Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, known and cited through Jerome’s letters (e.g. Ep. 98, 12 on Gen 1.16–17). As Bernhard Bischoff has noted,17 one of the citations from Isidorus is really from the grammarian Virgilius Maro. Some of the ascribed citations have thus far defied identification, such as those under the name Orosius reproduced by both Mai and Bischoff.18 Nevertheless many of the sources in this section can be traced. The author most frequently used is Augustine : his De Genesi ad litteram ; De civitate Dei ; De Genesi imperfectus liber. Ambrose’s Hexameron is extensively used. However, Augustine and Ambrose are frequently confused, a text from one being ascribed to the other. Isidore’s works are also drawn on, De rerum natura in particular, but also the Etymologiae, and possibly the Differentiarum liber. The compiler also used Iunilius’s De partibus divinae legis and cites Iunilius by name (the Iulius of Wilmart). I have failed to trace the citations attributed to Origines and a number of texts ascribed to Gregorius. Besides these sources, there is also a relationship with Hiberno-Latin works, such as the Ps.-Isidorian Liber de numeris and the Catechesis Celtica. There is a particularly close relationship throughout with the other Hiberno-Latin commentary on Genesis, Commemoratio Geneseos (unpublished), as already noted by Bischoff.19 There is also a connection with the commentary on Genesis 1–3 in the St  Gall MS 908, pp.  1–27. The greatest source of inspiration for the compiler in the creation theology was Augustine. What synthesis the Reference Bible Bischoff, “Turning- Points”, p. 99 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 226 (233). A. Mai, Spicilegium Romanum 5, Rome, 1841, p.  144-45 ; Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, pp.  99, 100, 102 ; “Wendepunkte” pp.  225, 227, 229-30 (232, 233, 235). 19  Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, p. 104 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 231 (236-37). 17 

18 

102 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church has on the matter is typically Augustinian. It must also be noted that this Augustinian synthesis is deeply rooted in all the Hiberno-Latin works mentioned above, to which we can add the | ver- 91 nacular Irish texts which treat of the same subject, e.g. The Tenga Bithnua, Saltair na Rann, Leabhar Gabhála Éireann..20 Along with Ambrose and Isidore, Gregory and Jerome are indicated as sources for Gen 2–3. Texts ascribed to Gregory, when identifiable, are from Paterius’s arrangement of Gregory’s various interpretations : Expositio Veteris ac Novi Testamenti. I. In librum Geneseos (PL 79, 685 ff.). Jerome’s Liber quaestionum hebraicarum in Genesim is used sparingly here, but will feature extensively in the later chapters. Eucherius is used for Gen 2.3 (Instructionum lib. I, CSEL 31, p. 68), the first of many texts from one of the compiler’s favourite authors. A text on the seven sins of Adam is paralleled in a number of Hiberno-Latin texts (Liber de numeris ; Collectanea of Ps.-Bede).21 On the Cain and Abel passage (Gen 4.7) Am(brosius) is cited correctly, De Cain et Abel VI, 18 (PL 14, 350). So is Augustine, Ag(ustinus), De civitate Dei XV. 7. 1 (PL 41, 443). Four texts under Jerome’s name are given next. Then comes Greg(orius) on Gen 4.17 : Haec prima ciuitas in mundo, a text which at best has only a remote connection with Gregory’s exposition on the passage (in Paterius, Expositio V. et N. Testamenti I, 32–33, PL 79, 696-97). There follow some texts apparently from Origen, the first under the heading ORIENES in Pa (20va18), with g interlineated between i and e (written as ORIENIS Vat  65v ; as ORI Mon  34r20), next as ORI in Pa (25va25) ; ORIEN Vat ; ORI Mon 34r26 ; the third as ORI in Pa (25va38) ; and as ORIEN Vat  66r, Mon  34v8, all ending with the statement : Hucusque Originis dicit. Then we are told, on Gen 4.23 : “Occidi” uox superbiae ut Hieronim(us) et Origenis. Sulpicius 20  I illustrate this point at greater length in “Celtic Christianity, Creation and Apocalypse, Christ and Antichrist”, Milltown Studies 23 (1989), pp. 5-39. 21  For the Liber de numeris see R. E. McNally, Der irische Liber de numeris. Eine Quellenanalyse des pseudo-isidorischen Liber de numeris, Munich, 1957, pp.  109-10. For septem peccata Adam and parallels. Ps.-Bede, Collectanea, De septem peccatis, PL 94, 556A. Examples of the close relationship between the Reference Bible and Irish tradition, as found in the Liber de numeris, could be multiplied : the three things God created at the beginning, angelos, animas et informem materiam ; the teaching of both the Reference Bible and the Liber de numeris on the soul (McNally, Der irische, pp.  52-53).

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

103

uero dicit quia non de Cain hoc dicit. The reference is quite exact, from Chronicorum I of Sulpicius Severus (CSEL 1, p.  4, l.  16-17), a rarely cited work although it was used by Adomnán ; only one manuscript (Breton, saec.  x) survives, as Bischoff has noted.22 After this comes an unidentified text from FAUSTUS, then texts from Jerome ; there follows a text headed It(em) Ag(ustinus) dicit in libro De civitate Dei (XV, 10) on the variations in the Hebrew and “our” biblical text on the ages assigned to the antediluvian patriarchs. In relation to the monsters to which illicit unions gave rise (Gen 6.4) mention is made of Ulysses, Apuleius and Diomedes, from Augustine’s De civitate Dei (XVIII, 18). The existence and origin of monsters are also treated in the account of Creation, in the section De Domo Anime (Vat 42r ; Pa 13va ; Mon 20r–22r), with use of | Augustine, De civitate Dei 92 (XVI. 8) and Augustine’s Enchiridion (XXIII. 87). In two places in the Reference Bible we have the legend of antediluvian culture and magic arts being passed on to the postdiluvian generations, a very old and widespread tradition of which there are variant forms. The first form of the tradition in the Reference Bible (in the Creation account) runs thus (Mon text) : Item alii a Cham nati sunt monstra qui suas magicas artes et presti­ gias (a changed interlinearly from i) antequam introesset in archam scripsit in lapide quia cognouit suum patrem iustum non uoluisset illas magicas artes mittere in arcam. Deinde Cham ueniens de arca legit omne quod scripsit in lapide et docuit deinde per magicam artem uertantur homines in formam animalium et bestiarum ut legimus homines in lupos uel in asinos uel in aues (Pa  13vb ; Vat  42v ; Mon  21v23–22r4). (Vat variants : lines 1 : Cain, maicas, prestigias ; 2 : intrauisset, scribsit ; 3 : quod non uoluisset ; conueniens, for Cham ueniens ; scribsit ; 5. maicam ; 6. lupus, asinus).

The text is repeated, almost verbatim, for Gen 6.4 in Pa 21vb– 22ra ; Mon 36v16 ; Vat 70v (where the name is Cain) ; attempts are made in Mon and Pa through interlineated i to change Cam to Cain.23 22  Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, p.  99 and note 131 at p.  159 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 225 (232). 23  This particular piece of tradition has received attention from Prof. J. E. Cross of the University of Liverpool in a paper read to a meeting of the

104 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church These examples should suffice to show that in this section of the Bible commentary we have biblical narrative, patristic exposition, theological reflection on human phenomena and popular tradition, it would appear, of the kind current in early and medieval Ireland. Source analysis will be possible only when the entire question is studied in depth. Gregory, Jerome (Liber quaest : hebr. in Gen.) and Eucherius are used in the remaining part on Genesis. On Melchizedek in Gen 14 under the abbreviation ORI (Pa ; Vat ORIEN) we are told that Origen says he was an angel of God in human form, after which comes what Hippolytus, Jerome and Josephus say. Origen’s view comes to us from Jerome, Ep.  73,6 (which hardly represents Origen’s real position). In a comment on Gen 22.9 “Venerunt ad locum” FAUSTUS is again invoked (Vat  94v ; Pa  27vb). It has become clear that considerable work remains to be done on the identification of the sources, in particular for the earlier chapters (1–11). Exodus The commentary on the Book of Exodus is headed in both manuscripts INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE EXODO (Pa 31rb ; Mon 55r), and it is in 39 sections, numbered consecutively (Pa 31rb–35va ; Mon 55r–64r). Apart from the overall title, and | occasional 93 source references within the text itself, the following sections are indicated by capitals : DE CATALOGO (sic !) MOYSE EFRE (Pa 32rb  ; Mon 47r), after no. x  ; HAEC SUNT MIRABILIA VIRGE (Pa 33rb ; Mon 59r), followed by no. xvi : IT(EM) RECAPITULATIO DE CATALOGO (sic  !). IS(IDORUS) (Pa 33rb  ; Mon 59v). Section no. xxvii is headed  : DE TABERNACULO (Pa 34vb ; Mon 62v). The exposition opens with a citation attributed to Augustine on the Ten Words, the Decalogue – a long citation in nos. i–x from Augustine’s Sermo VIII, De decem plagis et de decem praeceptis (PL 38, 671–74). The next section on the Decalogue (De Catalogo), attributed apparently to Ephrem.24 discusses briefly the ten International Congress on Medieval Studies, Kalamazoo, a copy of which he kindly sent me. 24  On the books in the library of Tullum Leucorum (= Toul), according to the pre-1084 catalogue (item no.  103) was item liber Effrem scotticum vol. 1, cf. G. Becker, Catalogi Bibliothecarum antiqui, Bonn, 1885, no.  69 (p.  151).

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

105

commandments. It ends with a reference to the IX gradus angelorum. Three genuine citations from Eucherius follow (Instruct. I, Ex nos. xxxi, xxxii, xxxiii). There are a number of citations from GREGORIUS, i.e. Paterius’s arrangement of his exegesis in Expositio Veteris et Novi Testamenti, lib. II, Ex (PL 79, 723 ff.). Isidore is also cited by name. The texts are from his Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum. In Exodum (PL 83, 287 ff.), a work which will be much used by the compiler and which will in good part determine the layout of the Reference Bible for the remainder of the Pentateuch and of the historical books. A simple piece headed HAEC SUNT MIRABILIA VIRGE is chiefly a collection of biblical texts in which the word virga occurs. No.  xvi, headed RECAPITULATIO DE CATALOGO explicitly cites Isidore as the source (Isidore, Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum c.  29). In no.  xxiiii, concerning the adoration of the caput uituli AG(USTINUS) IN LIBRIS DE URBE CAELESTI is given as the source, and the passage is to be compared with De civitate Dei, XVIII. 5 and 6.25 No.  xxvii is headed DE TABERNACULO. The passage merits citation in full ; it brings together various texts relating to the tabernacle and gives evidence of a highly developed allegorisation : “Tabernaculum” (Ex 26.1). id est ecclesia, ubi Christiani sunt. “Columnae”, doctores. “Basses” (cf. Ex 26.19 etc.) prophete. “Caput columnarum”, Christus. “Tentorium pendit in funibus” (cf. Num  3.26). id est fides populi protegitur in fune trinitatis. ”saga cilicina” (Ex 26.7), peccatores, propter | hedos a sinistris ; uel cilicium seculares, sibi hedi nos uero pro omni temptacione defendant (corr. in Pa to -dunt). “Pelles arietum” (Ex 25.2 ; cf.  35.7, 23), protectio proposito-

25  In Augustine, ch.  5, the reference is to the sacred cow receiving divine honours as Serapis, and to the calf  – vitulus that sought to replace her at death. In the Reference Bible the text of Augustine is introduced in answer to the question : Cur caput uituli filii Israhel adorauerunt ? There may have been a fully-developed Irish tradition on some caput uituli. The Irish-Northumbrian gloss on the Psalms in Codex Pal. lat.  68, Ps 73.14, alternative exposition, speaks of caput uituli datum … in potum, de quo ante Deum fecerunt, with, as source, Augustine, Enarratio in Ps  73.14 (Enarr. no.  16 ; CSEL 39, p.  1014) where Augustine does speak of the caput uituli which Moses in ignem misit, et exterminauit, comminuit, in aquam sparsit, et dedit populo bibere – paraphrasing Ex 32.1–20. The text of Exodus in question, however, mentions only a calf, without explicit reference to his head.

94

106 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church rum in ecclesia. Alii rubri in martirio sanguinis ; alii iacinctini in adflictione corporis. “Uelum in tabernaculo” (cf. Ex 38.21). id est uelum enigmatis inter terram et caelum, ut Paulus dicit : “Nunc uidemus (Mon ; Pa uidimus, with i 2°  corr. to e) per speculum in enigmate, tunc autem facie ad faciem”. (I  Cor  13.12) Sancta autem quae in saeculo sunt, sancta sanctorum que in futuro (Mon  62v).

While some of the equivalents in this schema of allegorical interpretation had early become standard, as can be seen from Eucherius’s Formulae spiritalis intellegentiae (CSEL 31, p.  28 : arietes, apostoli uel ecclesiarum principes, etc.), the immediate source here in the Reference Bible is Isidore, Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum, Exodus (PL 83, 313–318), apart from the reference alii rubri in martyrio sanguinis, alii iacinctini in adflictione corporis. Isidore’s own allegorical interpretation of hyacinthus is quite different (PL 83, 317A). The interpretation of the Reference Bible presupposes the entire text of Ex 25.4–5. The dependence is more probably on Eucherius, who in his Formulae (CSEL 31, p.  53) interprets hyacinthus allegorically as confessorum liuores (with reference to Ex 35.5–6). It may well be that it was in such allegorical interpretation of the colours of the tabernacle furnishings that the Irish doctrine and formulation of the glasmartre, martyrium hyacinthinum (“blue” rather than “green” martyrdom) originated, with an influence from Eucherius.26 Eucherius may also have influenced Irish tradition in its repeated use of the expression lex naturae, lex litterae. The formulae occur in no. vi (Pa 32vb ; Mon 58r) : EUC. Cur Dominus uni populo Iudeorum tantum per Moysen dedit legem ? id est non uni tantum sed praecedens dedit (t interl. in Mon) legem nature omnibus hominibus per quam probabilis multi exstite­ runt (word corr. in both MSS), ut Enoch et Noe et Abraham et ex ea

26  See C. Stancliffe, “Red, White and Blue Martyrdom”, in Ireland in Early Mediaeval Europe, ed. by D. Whitelock et al., Cambridge, 1982, pp.  21–46. She believed (p.  32) that a good starting point for a consideration of the colours red (crimson) and white of the threefold martyrdom scheme is provided by the chapters in Exodus describing the tabernacle (Ex 25–28) with the constant references to hyacinthus, purpura, coccum bis tinctum and byssus. How right she was is made clear, I believe, by the Reference Bible text cited. See the review of Stancliffe’s essay by the present writer in the Heythrop Journal 26 (1985), pp.  80–82.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

107

progeniae et suis meritis fuerunt filii Israhel, et meruerunt accipere legem littere quando lex nature transiit.27

The substance of this, but not the Pelagian colouring, is from Eucherius, Instruct.  I (CSEL 31, p.  76  -77) : | Quod non Iudeis tantum lex illa prolata sit quae omnibus gentibus constitutione naturalis legis innascitur apostolo hoc etiam confirmante atque dicente  … (citing Rom 2.14)  … et ut hoc etiam exemplis probemus, ante hanc legem litterae per illam naturae legem Abel iustus agnoscitur, Enoch rapitur, Noe eligitur, Abraham pater gentium nuncupatur. quam ob rem hanc Mosi legem non sero esse prolatam praecedens efficit lex naturae per quam multi deo probabiles extiterunt.

The material in the final sections (nos. xxxi–xxxviii) is from Paterius’s arrangement of Gregory’s interpretations. Leviticus The exposition on the Book of Leviticus is headed in both manuscripts in capitals : DE LEUITICO (Pa 35va ; Mon 64r). The exposition is in 23 sections, numbered consecutively. Nos i and ii are correctly ascribed to Eucherius ; so are vii, viii and ix. No. vi, although ascribed to Jerome, is also from Eucherius, whose entire treatment of Leviticus in Instruct. I has thus been incorporated. No. iii is ascribed to Cassiodorus (stroked through and written again in Pa ; CASSI and CASSIODORUS in Mon), and no. v to AGUSTINUS. The names SYMON and PETRUS feature prominently in nos. x and xi (Item Symon dicit ad Petrum ; Petrus dicit). The source used in adapted form is the Clementis Recognitiones (PG 1, 1207–1454), the passage from book III, ch. 27 (PG 1, 1295) introduced in no. x by reason of the subject matter : why sacrifices ? 28

27  On these laws see also the text from the introductory material to “The Reference Bible” (De enigmatibus) cited above, p. 99-100. 28  In the Genesis section of the Paris MS, in a displaced piece, the Clementines are also used, concerning creation. PETRUS. In libris clementinis Petrus dicit tamquam demum unam inter iecto in medio firmamento. Alii caelum quasi caelatum, id est sideribus. Qua causa fecit Deus creaturas nisi ut bonitas eius appareret et uoluntas eius in bono. De qualitate caeli Isaias dicit : “Caelum fecit, fumum firmauit” (Pa  8va  28–35) ; cf. Ps.-Clement, Recognitiones I, c.  27–28 (PG 1, 1222A–C).

95

108 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church From no. xii to the end (xxiiii), the source is Isidore’s Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum. Numbers The exposition of the Book of Numbers, under the heading DE NUMERO (Pa  37vb–39va ; Mon  69r–72v) is in 42 sections, numbered consecutively. Excerpts from the text are to be found in MS Paris, BN lat.  614A, fols  17v–19v.29 The only sources mentioned are the two at the beginning : Isidorus. Hieronimus. The sources in question are Isidore, Quaestiones in VT, In Numeros (PL 83, | 339–360), which is almost entirely 96 from Jerome’s Epistola 78 : Ad Fabiolam. De XLII mansionibus Israelitarum in deserto, Num  33.2–49, (PL 22, 698–724 ; CSEL 55, pp.  49–87). Deuteronomy The exposition of the Book of Deuteronomy is headed in both manuscripts INCIPIT DEUTERONOMIO (sic !, Pa  39  va ; Mon  72v), with de interlineated between the two words in Mon. The exposition is in 33 sections, numbered consecutively. The only two sources noted are IOHANNIS CASSIANUS (Pa  40rb), at the end of no.  xiii and before no.  xiiii, and GREGORIUS in no.  xviii. Both nos.  xiii and xiiii can be traced to Isidore, Quaestiones in VT (PL 83, 365–67), who, however, in both places depends on Cassian, for the former on his De institutis coenobiorum, 7, 15 (CSEL 17, pp.  138-39) and on the Conlationes, V, 16 (CSEL 13, pp.  140–143) for the latter. The title in no.  xvi Octo sunt vitia principalia shows dependence on Cassian, Conlatio V.  17–27 (CSEL 13, pp.  43–51). The text is also in Isidore, Quaestiones in VT, In Deut. chap.  XVI (PL 83, 366-67), who has changed the number to seven, to coincide with the number of the gentes Canaan. The source most used for Deuteronomy, without ascription, is Paterius’s arrangement of Gregory’s interpretations (Expositio VT, PL 79, 773–784). There is also indirect use of Gregory, through Isidore. The compiler follows Isidore to the end of Quaestiones and Deut 25.3 (no. xxi), then goes over to Gregory (Paterius) and back to Deut, for an exposition of Deut 11.14 (no.  xxii) to Deut 33.9 (no.  xxxii).

29 

Stegmüller, Repertorium vol.  7, no. 10302.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

109

Joshua In both MSS (Pa  41va ; Mon  76v) the Book of Joshua is headed DE LIBRO IOSUE, in capitals. There is an abbreviation of the Reference Bible text in MS Paris, BN lat.  614A, fols  20r–21r. The exposition is in sections, numbered consecutively i–vii, followed by a section headed DE DIUISSIONE TERRE REPROMISSIONIS. Within the text the following authorities are given in capitals : HIERONIMUS ET ISIDORUS ; AGUSTINUS ; ITE(M) ISIDORUS ET IUNILIUS ; HIERONIMUS ET ISIDORUS ; CASSIANI ; ITE(M) GREG. In ordinary script Sedulius, Hieronimus, Iunilius and Isidorus are noted. The opening section is an expansion of Isidore’s Quaestiones in VT, In Iosue, ch. VI, 1–2 (PL 83, 373). Sub-section no. ii treats of the manna : Manna ubi primitus datum est … id est in qua mansione de xl duobus mansionibus in heremo … etc. The answer is given from Isidore who relies on Jerome, that it was in Alus, in X mansione. The texts of both Jerome and Isidore end : Panem angelorum manducauit homo (Ps 77.25). This leads to a further question : | Cur Dominus (dns ̄ ; sic Pa, Mon) panes (Mon ; pane, Pa) ange- 97

lorum ? Numquid angeli edunt panem ? AGUSTINUS DICIT : Ideo angelorum dicitur quia angeli ministrauerunt illum uel sicut angeli in caelo uerbo Dei pascuntur, & uerbum caro factum est, & caro in panem transfiguratur ut homo edat, ita et panes angelorum homo manduct (Mon  77v, 16–21).

The text of Augustine intended must be his Enarratio in Ps 77.25 (no. 17), which is here quite transformed. The original text of Augustine reads in its relevant part : … ut satiaret incredulos, non est inefficax dare credentibus uerum ipsum de coelo panem quem manna significabat ; qui uere cibus est Angelorum, quos Dei Verbum incorruptibilis incorruptibiliter pascit ; quod ut manducaret homo, caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis (PL 36, 995 ; CCSL 39, 1080).

The eucharistic terminology (transfigurare), used by the compiler in the comment on Mt 26.17–30, has influenced the text here. 30 30  See J. Rittmueller, “The Gospel commentary of Máel Brigte ua Máeluanaig and its Hiberno-Latin background”, Peritia 2 (1983), pp.  185–214, esp. pp.  208-09.

110 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Isidore, depending on Jerome, is the source in no. iii on Gilgal (cf. Quaestiones in VT, PL 83, 375, and Jerome, Ep. 78. 43). I have been unable to trace the reference Cassiani in no. v, where Gregory is cited by name (Paterius, PL 79, 786 ; also used by Isidore). On the miracle of the sun at Gabaon-Achilon Isidore is again used, and a citation from Sedulius is given : Ut Sedulius poeta dicit : Medioque cacumine caeli fixit solem analantem ; et quasi duos dies stetit ut filius Sirach dicit : “Unus dies in duos dies factus est :” (cf. Sirach 46.5)

The first part of this text is from Sedulius’s Carmen Paschale (PL 19, 569-570 ; CSEL 10, 28). This section of Joshua contains the views of Jerome, Junilius and Isidore on the place of this book in the canon (among prophets from Jerome, rather than among historical books as for the other two). The heading DE DIUISSIONE TERRE REPROMISSIONIS may well have been occasioned by Isidore, Quaestiones in VT, In Iosue, c. XIV : De divisione terrae (PL 83, 377). Beyond this, however, nothing of this work of Isidore has passed into the Reference Bible text here. It opens with a piece on geometry from Isidore, Etymologiae, 3, 10 (PL 82, 161), then goes on to speak of the square measure in a text from Isidore, Etymologiae, 15, 15, 1–7 (PL 82, 555-56). In the Paris MS alone there follows a full folio map of the Promised Land, with the Jordan, the twelve tribes and some cities marked in. It is headed : ITEM FIGURA TERRE REPROMISSIONIS. It may have antecedents – possibly connected with Book 15 of Isidore’s Etymologiae. A copy of the map is reproduced in the original edition of this essay. |

98

| Judges

99

In both MSS (Pa 44 ra ; Mon 79v) the Book of Judges is headed in capitals : INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE LIBRO IUDICUM. There is a summary of the Reference Bible’s text in MS Paris, BN lat. 614A, fols 20r–21r. The Reference Bible text on Judges has 13 sections, numbered consecutively. It ends with the word EXPLICIT in capitals. Sources given in capitals within it are GRE(GORIUS),

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

111

HIERONIM(US), ISIDORUS, GREGORIUS, ITEM GREGORIUS, ITEM HIERON(IMUS). The text opens with a summary of the activity of the judges, from Moses to Gideon, somewhat similar to Isidore, Chronicon 17–22 (PL 83, 1026–28). A fragment of an Antichrist legend is introduced into the account on Gideon : Ex concubina genuit (i.e. Gideon) unum filium … qui occidit lxx fratres. Id est in fine mundi erit Antichristus natus ex sinagoga meretrice inter idola, qui sibi congregatis impiis occidat ex omnibus linguis lxxii credentes Christo. Gedeon ex nobili gente filium iuniorem omnibus genuit Ioathas, qui fuit in montem Garizim in quo iussit populum Dominus benedici. Id est residuum populi Israhel sub Helia et Enoch fugiens persecutionem Antichristi ascendet in montem bene­ dictionis fidei Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti (no.  iii ; Pa  44rb ; Mon  80r) ; cf. Isidore, Quaestiones in VT, In Librum Iudicum, c.  VI (PL 83, 386-87).

Nos iv–v, although under the Name of GREG(ORIUS), come from Isidore, Quaestiones (PL 83, 387-88). No. vi, ascribed to Isidore, is from the same work (on Jepte), as is no. viii on Samson. Nos ix–x give variant understandings from Gregory, on which see Paterius (PL 79, 789). The final numbers, xi–xii, are also from Paterius’s work. Ruth The Book of Ruth has a heading in capitals : INCIPIT PAUCA DE LIBRO RUTH (Pa 45rb ; Mon 82r). There is an abbreviation of the piece in MS Paris, BN lat. 614A, fol. 21v. There are four sections in the exposition. As usual, the compiler draws on Isidore for the introductory questions ; he then gives Jerome’s and Junilius’s opinion on its place in the canon. There is a text from Jerome, In Esaiam 16.1 (CCSL 63, 179), on Ruth being called petra deserti. Kings The Book of Kings (i.e. 1–2 Sam, 1–2 Kings) receives rather lengthy treatment (Pa  45vb–52vb ; Mon  82v–93v). The entire account begins in capital letters : INCIPIT PAUCA DE PRAEFATIONE LIBRORUM REGUM. As Dr  Bernhard Bischoff has noted, here “after linguistic and grammatical remarks on the word rex, a | survey of the kingdom, its foundation and duration, is 100 given according to Isidore’s larger chronicle. At the end, the eras

112 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of the world secundum cronicos and those according to Orosius are compared.”31 (cf. Isidore, Chronica Maior, MGH AA II ; Orosius, Historiarum adversum paganos Lib.  I, 1, CSEL 5, p.  6). The next section (nos. iii–iv) is brief, with the heading in capitals : DE COMMUNIBUS NOMINIBUS REGUM. No. v is headed : DE REGNIS ET DE MILICIAE UOCABULIS (Pa 46r ; Mon 83v), which is the title of Book 9 ch. 3 of Isidore’s Etymologiae, of which we are given a section here (PL 82, 311–348). After this comes the main treatment of the Book of Kings, headed in capitals : DE LIBRIS REGUM, and treating of the subject in 46 subsections, numbered consecutively. There are two citations properly ascribed to Eucherius at the outset, on which three more follow. There is a lengthy section, ascribed to Isidore on the Phitonissa (the witch of Endor, I Sam 28.7–19), incorporating explicitly Augustine’s letter to Simplicianus (Isidore, Quaestiones in VT, PL 83, 407–410). Further texts from the same work of Isidore are ascribed to Gregory (nos. xxiiii, xxvi) or Jerome (no. xxv). Then under XXVII. we have : Heliseus salus Dei interpretatur : significat Christum. Next comes XXVIII : Heliae spiritus Helisaeo duplex datus, ending with the notice : Ille (that is Elias) XIIcim uirtutes fecit, iste XXtiIIIIor. After this comes a heading in large capitals : INCIPIUNT UIRTUTES ELIE. XII SUNT, listing twelve miracles, followed by another heading in large capitals : INCIPIUNT UIRTUTES HELISEI, listing twenty-four miracles (Pa 50ra/b– 50vb ; Mon 89v–90r). These two texts, independently transmitted but belonging together, were published by A. Amelli in 1897 with the titles : Virtutes Heliae quae eius merito a Domino factae sunt, and Virtutes Helisei. 32 The identity of these with the text of the Reference Bible was discovered by Hermann Frede. 33 The text of the Exposition of the Books of Kings takes up again after the insertion with no. XXVIIII, and from there to the end the source is principally Gregorius, i.e. Paterius’s arrangement of his interpretations. Bischoff (as above note 2), “Turning-Points”, p.  99 ; “Wendepunkte”, p. 226 (233). 32  A. Amelli, Miscellanea Cassinense I (Patristica), Monte Cassino, 1897, pp. 23–24. The text is reproduced in Patrologiae Latinae Supplementum, vol 4, col. 915-917. 33  H. J. Frede, Vetus Latina 1/1. Kirchenschriftsteller. Verzeichnis und Sigel, Freiburg, 1981, p. 91, under abbreviation AN Hel I, II. 31 

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

113

Chronicles The exposition of the Books of Chronicles is brief, headed in capitals DE PARALYPPEMENON (Pa  52vb–53rb ; Mon  93v–94v). It is in seven sections, numbered consecutively. The authorities named are Hiero(nimus), Eucherius, item Hieron(imus). The citation from Eucherius is from Instruct. I (CSEL 31, 87-88). The Psalter The Psalter is introduced by capital letters : INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE PSALM(IS) DAUID REGIS ISRAHEL (Pa  55rb ; Mon  94v). In both manuscripts this is followed by an introduction to the Psalter in 33 numbered sections ; the authorities used are | indicated 101 in capitals, sometimes written in full, at other times in abbreviated form. Thus at no.  xxv CAS of Mon is written as CASIANUS in Pa. Occasionally, though very rarely, one of the MSS indicates an authority not given by the other, as, for instance, at no.  xxvi where Pa has CAS but Mon is anonymous. The authorities indicated for this Psalm Introduction are as follows, in order of appearance : No. ii SENATUS ET ISIDOR̄ (Pa ; SENATUS … IS, Mon), iii HILARIUS (Pa ; HILA, Mon), ISIDORUS, vi AMBROS̄ (Pa ; AMB, Mon), HIERONIM, HILARIUS again (Pa ; HILAR, Mon), HIERONIMUS, GREGORIUS (Pa only ; passage omitted in Mon through homeoteleuton (historia)), HIER, ISIDOR, AGUSTIN (Mon, AGUS), xviiii HELARIUS (Pa ; HELAR, Mon), HIERON, HIERONIMUS, xxv CASIANUS (Pa ; CAS, Mon), xxvi CAS (Pa ; Mon anonymous). This section has been published by Dr Maurice Sheehy who has identified a good many sources. 34 The first part of it is closely related to the Preface of the Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter. 35 while the second depends heavily on Cassiodorus’s Introduction to his commentary on the Psalms. 34  M. Sheehy, “Introduction to the Psalter in the Irish Reference Bible”. Appendix IV of M. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (A.D. 600–1200)”, PRIA 73 C (1973), pp.  291–298. 35  Compare the text (as previous note), p.  295, with the Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter. Hibernica Minora, being a Fragment of an Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter, with Translations, Notes and Glossary (= Anecdota Oxoniensia, Mediaeval and Modern Series VIII), introd. and ed. by K. Meyer, Oxford, 1894, p.  28.

114 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The source designation, found in both MSS, SENATUS ET ISIDOR, is an obvious error for Senator Cassiodorus. Being in both MSS, the error must have been in the exemplar. The text under the name of CAS(IANUS) cannot be traced to Cassian but is of the kind found in the Old-Irish Treatise. 36 The doctrine ascribed to Hilarius and Ambrosius is also typical of Irish Psalm commentary material. Both these authors may have been Irish, rather than the two Fathers of these names. 37 After this Preface there follows a section designated in capitals as DE LAUDE PSALTERII (Pa 56ra ; Mon 99r). It is mainly from Cassiodorus’s introduction to his | commentary but has an 102 insertion on the seven things prophesied of Christ in the Psalms which is attested elsewhere in Irish tradition. 38 After this comes a brief commentary on the Psalms, headed in both MSS : INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE HISTORIA PSALMORUM (Pa 56rb ; Mon 100r), where historia may be intended to mean the historical scriptural sense. The exposition of Ps 1 is so close to that of the Old-Irish Treatise as to indicate that both derive from the same matrix. 39 Hibernica Minora, ed. Meyer, (see previous note). See M. McNamara, “Tradition and creativity in early Irish Psalter study”, in Ireland and Europe. The Early Church, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 364-65. As the first two of four sources for his Félire (Epil., lines 137–138) Oengus gives Ambrose and Hilary : “The vast tome of Ambrose. Hilary’s pious Sensus…” (pairt adbul Ambrosi, / séis Elair col-léri, / andgraib Hironimi, / martarlaic Eusébi). It is accepted that séis in this context is to be taken in the meaning of “commentary”, “an explanatory treatise”. The books ascribed to both Ambrose and Hilary by Oengus may be the same as those known to the other Hiberno-Latin writers. A well-known member of the Céli Dé community was Eláir of Loch Cré (near Roscrea) ; cf. P. O’Dwyer, Célí Dé. Spiritual Reform in Ireland 750–900, Dublin, 1981, Index s.v. He died in 807. Although best known as a director of souls, he is given as both an anchorite and scribe in the Annals, cf. AU s.a. 807. Elarius, ancorita et scriba Locha Cre¸ dormiuit. O’Dwyer (Célí Dé, p.  160) suggests the possibility of an influence of his with the writing of the Book of Dimma. The evidence would scarcely permit identification with the author of the Hiberno-Latin work on the Psalter. 38  McNamara, “Tradition and creativity”, p. 364, note 99. 39  See McNamara, “Tradition and creativity”, pp. 363 and 365 and earlier P. Ó Néill, “The Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter and its Hiberno-Latin Background”, Ériu 30 (1979), pp. 148–164. 36  37 

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

115

The sections of this part are indicated not consecutively but in general according to the psalm commented on, some psalms being omitted altogether, others commented on out of order. The authorities cited by name are, in the order of their first appearance : Hilar(ius) (Ps 1), Cassiod(orus), Eucherius, Ios(epus), Gregorius ; Agustinus in Ps 109 and Hieronimus in Ps 72. The most frequently used authors are Eucherius, Gregorius, Iosepus and Cassiodorus. Hilarius is cited in Ps 1 with regard to the first and second historical sense of the psalm, in a text almost identical with the treatment found in the Old-Irish Treatise.40 As in the introduction, probably an Irish exegete is intended. HILARIUS again appears as the authority in no.  xx on Ps 18.6 : HILARIUS. “In sole posuit tabernaculum suum.” Quomodo potest tabernaculum in sole esse et de quali tabernaculum dicit ? Id est, Symmachus dicit, “Soli posuit tabernaculum”, hoc est caelum. The ultimate source here seems to be the Latin translation of the commentary on this psalm by Theodore of Mopsuestia, a translation made by Julian of Eclanum.41 It is the full commentary, with Symmachus’s understanding of the verse, not the more popular Epitome of it, which backs this reference. HILARIUS figures again as an authority in no.  xxiii, Ps 22.4 : HILARIUS. Quid est hoc : “uirga tua et baculus tuus” reliqua ? “Virga” correptio ; “baculus” consolatio. The ultimate source here seems to be Eucherius. Instruct. I.42 I say “ultimate source” for both cases, since the Hilarius intended may well have been a later (Irish ?) exegete drawing on these earlier authorities. The texts under the rubric IOSEPUS after Ps 16.11 are all from the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s commentary.43 Texts under this rubric before Ps 16.11 all coincide with the marginal glosses on the Hebraicum in the Double Psalter of Rouen. Evidently, the author of the Reference Bible knew and used a form McNamara, “Tradition and Creativity”, p. 365. For the text of Theodore see the edition of L. De Coninck, auxiliante M. J. D’Hont (CCSL 83A), Turnhout, 1977, pp. 100, 27–29. 42  Eucherius, Instructionum Liber primus, ed. by C. Wotke (CCSL 31), Prague, Vienna, Leipzig, 1894, p. 91 ; Eucherii Lugdunensis Instructionum libri duo, ed. by C. Mandolfo (CCSL 66), Turnhout, 2004, p.116. 43  These texts are printed in Glossa in Psalmos. Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Vaticanus Palatino-Latinus 68, ed.M. McNamara (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1985, pp. 49-50, note 231. 40  41 

116 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of the | acephalous epitome (missing Ps 1.1–16.11a), completed by 103 another commentary, with historical but non-Theodorean exegesis, just as the other branch of the transmission (the Milan Commentary, Cod. Amb. C  301 inf., and the Eclogae tractatorum in Psalterium) used one where it was completed by the full translation of Theodore’s commentary. The author was accepted to be a certain “Iosepus”, also a name borne by ninth-century Irish scholars (Iosephus).44 In the Hiberno-Latin Ecloga tractatorum in Psalterium and elsewhere this work is ascribed to Hieronimus.45 The author used Cassiodorus’s commentary on the Psalms, and also Gregory the Great’s comment on the psalm texts as arranged by Gregory’s secretary Paterius, in Expositio Veteris et Novi Testamenti lib. XI. De testimoniis in Psalmis (PL 79, 819–896). De Libris Salomonis, Filii Dauid, Regis Israhel Owing to the loss of part of the original Munich MS, the section from Ps 86.2 to Canticles 6.4 is missing. Mon 108v, faded, ends with Eucherius on Ps 86.2 (Pa 61vb21), and Mon 109r begins with comment on Canticles 6.4 (Pa 68rb10). In Pa 63rb, immediately after the Psalter section, the heading in capital letters is : DE LIBRIS SALOMONIS, FILII DAUID, REGES (sic) ISRAHEL. A general introduction speaks of the three works ascribed to Salomon : Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Canticles. Solomon is said to have discovered the divine philosophy and to have divided it into three parts, id est fisis & his & lois, id est natura & mos & ratio (cf. Isidore, In libros V. et N. Testamenti Proemia 36, PL 83, 164). Under headings in capitals there is treatment of DE FISICA ; DE LOICA, DE ETHICA. There are no numbered divisions here, but quite untypically for this work we have five times in the margin, and once between the columns, is as the authority. The sources of this section can be traced : for the general introduction on the three books, Isidore, Etymologiae VI, 18 (PL 82, 231D–232B) ; for the following section under the heading in capital letters UT EUSEBIUS. ET HIERONIMUS SCRIBUNT on Solomon’s three names, cf. Jerome, Comment. in Ecclesiasten 1.1 See further below, p. 124-25. See M. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, (note 34 above) pp. 225–227 (for the Eclogae), p. 222 for the Milan Commentary. 44  45 

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

117

(CCSL 72, 250). For the reference to Pythagoras de Samia of whom it states inuenit philosophiam humanam post Adam, cf. Isidore, Etym. III, 2 (PL 83, 155). The section DE FISICA may reflect Isidore, Etym. II. 24. 4 (PL 83, 141B) ; DE LOICA (i. e. logica), Isidore, Etym. II. 24. 7 (PL 83, 141D), DE ETHICA, Isidore, Etym. II. 24. 5–6 (PL 83, 141C). The next section is headed in capitals  : DE PROUERBIIS SALOMONIS, with subsections numbered i to xii (Pa 64ra). It opens with a text from Iunilius, De | partibus divinae legis (PL 68, 104 18C). Most of the material in the first part of the comment is from this work. Junilius is named as source four times to the left of the columns. Subsection vii is headed HIERONIMUS and contains brief Vulgate texts with glosses : Bibe aquam de cisterna tua et fluenta putei tui diriuentur foras. Et bibe ea solus (cf. Vg. Prov 5.15–17, with … fluenta putei tui deriventur (v.l. diriuentur) fontes tui foras … habeto eas solus). HIERONIMUS is again mentioned as an authority in x, xi, and xii on Prov 25.1, 25.2, and 31.1. Unless HIERONIMUS is intended to designate the Vulgate rendering, I fail to find the source intended. EUCHERIUS is cited for nos. viii and viiii. The excerpts are from Instruct. I (CSEL 31, p. 104). The next section headed DE ECCLESIASTE (Pa  65rb) is divided into 14 subsections. HIERONIMUS is indicated as an authority in nos. ii, iiii, v, vii, viii, viiii, x, xi, xii, xiii and xiiii on Eccles 1.4, 7 ; 9.4 ; 12.2 ; 12.3 ; 12.4 ; 12.5 ; 12.5 ; 12.5–7. The source is Jerome’s commentary on Ecclesiastes (CCSL 72, pp.  249-50), but with the Vulgate text in the lemmata, not that of Jerome’s commentary. Eucherius is cited by name (EUCHER̄ DIC̄) in no. xiii, which has his comment on Eccles 12.5 from Instr. I (CSEL 31, p. 104-05), followed by the explanation of sicaris and amigdala, the former from Instr.  II (CSEL 31, p.  147). In no. iii a text is given as coming from APONIUS (Apolonius). It is in the comment on Eccles 1.5 : iii. APONIUS. “Oritur sol et occidit et ad locum suum reuertitur ibique renascens girat per meridiem et flectitur ad aquilonem lustrans omnia in [this word interlineated] circuitu pergit spiritus et in circulos suos regreditur.” Quomodo mensurantur iiii partes mundi contra cursum solis ? Et quomodo uocantur iiii partes in tribus linguis ? Et qualem spiritum habet et quid facit quando non uidetur a nobis ? Et sol quomodo uocatur in tribus linguis ? Et cur in circulos et non in

118 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church circulum ? Sic soluitur. A loco ubi oritur sol in xi kl Iul. usque locum ubi oritur in xi kl Ian. ipse est oriens. Item a loco ubi oritur in xi kl Ian. usque locum ubi occidit in xi kl Ian. ipse est meridies. Item a loco ubi occidit in xi kl Ian. usque locum ubi occidit in xi. kl Iul. ipse est occidens. Item ubi occidit in xi kl Iul. ab illo loco usque locum ubi oritur in xi kl Iul. ipse est aquilo ut tractauit Apolonius.

The text goes on to give the names of the four parts of the world in the three languages, and then the name for the sun in different languages – which, as Dr Bernhard Bischoff noted, is a characteristic of Irish erudition.46 The text from Aponius (Apolonius) may also have been a Hiberno-Latin composition. | After Ecclesiastes there follows immediately the Canticle of 105 Solomon under the following heading in capitals : INCIPIT DE CANONICO (sic) SALOMONIS (Pa  66vb). The commentary is done in 25 sections numbered consecutively. As already noted, the Munich manuscript resumes after the break at no.  xv (Cant 6.4 ; Mon  109r). Only two authorities are cited : HIERŌ in no.  v and ISIDORUS in no. vi. Throughout the entire commentary, however, even in these two sections, only one source is drawn on, i.e. Aponius’s commentary, In Canticum Canticorum explanatio libri XII.47 The Canticle of Canticles was held in particular esteem in early Ireland among the Céli Dé. In the Teaching of Mael Ruain we read that “when a person was at the point of death, or immediately after the soul had left him, the Canticum Salomonis was sung over him. The reason for this practice was that in that canticle is signified the union of the Church and every Christian soul  – ceangal na heaglaise agus gacha hanma Críostuidhe”.48 In Marburg, Staatsarchiv Hr  2  II, we have a fragment, in a mutilated double leaf, saec.  IX in., of a commentary on Canticles in Anglo-Saxon script copied from an Irish original. It is clear that this text is either a 46  B. Bischoff (as above note 2), pp.  85-86 ; p.  102 for this text. See also M. McNamara, “A Plea for Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies”, Irish Theological Quarterly 39 (1972), pp.  337–353, at pp.  350-51. 47  Apponiius’s text is published in Patrologiae latinae Supplementum I, 800– 1031. On Aponius see further M. McNamara, “Early Irish Exegesis. Some Facts and Tendencies”, PIBA No. 8 (1984), p. 71–73. 48  McNamara, “Early Irish Exegesis” ; p.  71 for the Céli Dé and the Canticle of Solomon.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

119

fragment of Aponius on the Canticle of Canticles or derives largely from this work, as may be deduced from the analysis and citations of this work by Dr B. Bischoff.49 From the mid-ninth-century catalogue of the St Gall library we know that among the libri scottice scripti there was an Expositio in Cantica Canticorum, in quaternionibus II.50 Going on available evidence, we can surmise that it contained Aponius’s commentary, or an epitome of it. Job On Canticles there follows a rather lengthy commentary on the Book of Job (Pa  68va–74rb ; Mon  109v–119v). In both MSS, the title DE LIBRO IOB ISI(DORUS) DICIT is in capitals and the exposition is given in 54 sections numbered consecutively. The text opens with a citation from Isidore, the entire entry on Job in De ortu et obitu patrum (PL 83, 136). Almost all this is also incorporated by the Irish scholar Lathcen in the opening of his Ecloga of Book I of Gregory’s Moralia in Iob, under | the heading 106 Dicta Isidori in libro de uita et exitu prophetarum (CCSL 145, 3). This is followed in no. ii by a treatment of the names of Job in which Jerome is cited as an authority. In no. iii Isidore and Gregory are cited on the authorship of the book, the former from De ecclesiasticis officiis I, 12 (PL 83, 747), the latter from the introduction to his work Moralia in Iob. After this no authority is named. The entire exposition, however, is drawn from Gregory’s Moralia seu Expositio in Iob (PL 75, 515–76, 782 ; CCSL 143–143A). Although Lathcen’s work was available in the seventh century, the Reference Bible used Gregory’s original, not Lathcen’s abbreviation. Wisdom After the exposition of Job there follows a brief exposition of the Book of Wisdom, in both manuscripts under the title in capitals : 49  B. Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, pp. 106-07 ; “Wendepunkte” (Mittelalterliche Studien), p. 239. 50  G. Becker, Catalogi bibliothecarum antiqui, Bonn 1885 (later anastatic reprint, no date), no.  22, p.  43 ; more recently : The Irish Miniatures in the Abbey Library of St Gall, ed. by J. Duft  – P. Meyer, Olten, Bern, Lausanne, 1954, pp.  40-41 ; the commentary on the Canticles as no.  39 of the list of 40 libri scottice scripti.

120 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE LIBRO SAPIENTIAE SALOMONIS (Pa  74rb ; Mon  119v). The treatment in both manuscripts is in 14 sections numbered consecutively. The exposition opens with an unascribed text of Isidore from De ecclesiasticis officiis I. 12. 8–9 (PL 83, 748–49) on the book’s authorship (no.  i), followed (no.  ii) by Jerome’s Prologus to the book, under Jerome’s name, being the second part of paragraph 2 of his Prologus in libris Salomonis, a text preserved by Isidore, Etym.  VI. 2. 30 (PL 82, 233). All we have after this is a series of biblical texts from the book (1.14 ; 4.3 ; 5.21 ; 5.14 ; 12.8 ; cf. 16.19 ; 16.22 ; 16.27 ; 17.2 ; cf. 19.13 ; 19.18 ; 19.20) with brief, unidentified, expository glosses. The biblical text, where comparative material is available, is Vulgate rather than Old Latin, and has a varia lectio agreeing with Amiatinus (16.27) and another with MS L (cf.  16.19), which is probably a Northumbrian MS. Sirach After the Book of Wisdom comes the Book of Sirach, headed in both MSS as : DE LIBRO IESU, FILII SERACH (Pa  75ra ; Mon 121r), in capital letters in Pa but not in Mon. The exposition, in both MSS in 19 sections, numbered consecutively, opens with a text ascribed to Jerome (no.  i), being paragraph 2 of his Prologus in libris Salomonis. Next (no.  ii) comes an attempt, in Irish fashion, to give the name of the book in the three languages – in ebreo panerethos (Mon ; Pa panesethos), taking the Greek word panaretos “model of all virtue” of Jerome’s text as the Hebrew name of the book ! This is followed (no.  iii) by a text from Isidore, Etym.  VI. 2. 31–32. The remainder is taken up with biblical texts from the Laus Patrum, from Enoch to Elisaeus (44.16–48.15), with occasional brief explanatory glosses, the sources of which I have been unable to identify. The biblical text merits examination. It does not always agree with the Vulgate. | Esdras

Next in order comes a section headed, in capitals : DE LIBRIS ESDRE (Mon 122r), and DE LIBRIS HESTRAE (Pa 75vb). In Pa this consists of 14 sections numbered consecutively. Mon’s text is as Pa, although occasionally the numbering is omitted, or inserted in the margin. Mon breaks off (in my microfilm) in the middle of no. 10 (= Pa 77rb23), fols 124v and 125r are missing,

107

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

121

the text resumes at the beginning of the following section on the Books of Maccabees. Section no. i begins with two unascribed texts from Isidore : the first from De ecclesiasticis officiis I. 12. 3 (PL 83, 747) on Esdras’s editorial work on the books of the canon, the second from Etym. VI. 1. 28 (PL 82, 233) to the effect that the Hebrews do not have 2, 3, 4 Esdras since these are regarded as apocryphal. After this, in nos. ii–vii, we have portions of the apocryphal 3 (1) Esdras (3 Esd 3.1–4, 10–12, 18, 21 ; 4.4 ; 13, 15, 17, 23, 26 ; 4.34, 37, 38, 41, 43, 45–47) with the famous story of the debate at Darius’s court on the relative virtues of wine, kings, women and truth. After this, in no. viii, there follows the account of 4 (2) Ezra 3.1 ; 4.22–45, on Ezra’s restoration of the Scriptures – a well-known narrative in early and medieval Christianity. Next, in nos. viiii–xiiii, comes the text of 4 (2) Ezra 7.75, 76, 79–114 on the state of the departed soul before and after judgement. This section is headed : De vii uiis egredientis animae de corpore, a heading not found in the printed texts of 4 (2) Ezra. The text itself differs somewhat from that of critical editions of 4 (2) Ezra and it merits examination. Maccabees After the Books of Esdras comes a section entitled, in capital letters : DE LIBRI (sic) MACHABEORUM (Pa 77va) ; MACHA­ BEORUM LIBRI (Mon 124v). It consists of seven subsections, numbered consecutively. It opens with a text ascribed to Isidore, taken from Etym. VI. 1. 33 (PL 82, 233), including the original reference on the authorship of Judith and Tobias. Then (no. ii) we are told that Jerome says that Josephus wrote I Macc and that II Macc was composed in Greek. Mattathias’s address to his sons is given (I Macc 2.49 -68), with other passages (e.g. 1 Macc 2.20 in no. v) and notes on some texts, e.g. I Macc 2.36 (in no. vi), II Macc 2.4 (in no. vii). The text ends with explanations of rare words in the books : Epheborum (II Macc 4.12). Id est sacerdotum solis ; Palistre (Mon : palestre ; II Macc 4.14). Id est homines super leones ; Epinitia [epicinia] (II Macc 8.33 ; Vulgate : epicinia : Variants : epinicia ; MS BL Add. 24142 : epinitia  ; LXX : ἐπινίκια). Id est conuiuia uel laus uictorie ; Dioscorido ([dioscori] II Macc 11.21). Id est marcius uel maius ; Casleu (I Macc 1.57 ; 4.52, 59 ; II Macc

122 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 1.9, 18 ; 10.5). Id est nouember ; Tirghos [tyrsos] II Macc 10 :7). Id est ramos ; Zanti [xandici] (II Macc 11.33, 38), Tallos (II Macc 14.4). Id est untino. Esther The Book of Esther follows (Pa 78va ; Mon 126r). The treatment is brief. It opens with an unascribed text from Isidore, Etym. VI. 1. 29 (PL 82, 233), followed by | another from Isidore, De ecclesias- 108 ticis officiis I. 12. 2 (PL 83, 747). Next comes a text from Isidore’s Chronicon 47 (PL 83, 1055) on the writing of Esther during Artaxerxes’s reign. This is followed by a note, with mention of Jerome’s name, on the writing of the book of Esther by Esdras in Assyrian letters. Next comes a note to the effect that there are two Hesdre (i.e. Esdras), the first a prophet and the other the scribe. Judith Next comes Judith, headed in capitals  : DE LIBRO IUDITH (Pa 78vb ; Mon 126r). Next under the name of Jerome there is a note to the effect that there were two Nabucodonosors. The piece ends with an explanation of the difficult word conopeum (Judith 10.19 ; 13.10, 19 ; 16.23) according to Isidore. Tobit This is headed DE LIBRO THOBIAE (Pa  78vb ; Mon  126v), beginning, as Esther, with Isidore’s note (not under his name) on the uncertainty of authorship. There follows a note ascribed to Jerome saying that there were three Tobiases. Next comes a comment on Tob 5.18 (Angelus dixit ad Thobiam) ego sum Azarias Annanie magni filius ; on “Elemosinam pone super sepulchrum iusti et ( ? ; Pa text faded) ne eam comedas (Mon : eam non – non interl. – commedis) cum peccatoribus”, 4.18. Here the Vulgate reads : “panem tuum et vinum super sepulturam iusti constitue, et noli ex eo manducare et bibere cum peccatoribus”. Under the heading HIER̄. AM̄ (Mon ; HIER, AMB) there is a discussion of the passage : Angelus et Thobias canem comitem elegerunt (cf. Tob 6.1) … ut canis diabolus expelleretur … et coiugium (Pa ; Mon. the same, but with n interl. between i and u)  … Ex Thobia coiugium (Pa ; Mon : the same, but n again interl.). The final question concerns the food the angel is said to have eaten.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

123

Prophets The Prophets receive extensive treatment. This section is headed : INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE PROPHETIS (Pa  79ra–129r ; Mon  127r–202v). The heading comes after the table of contents in Pa, but in Mon before it, the more likely order. This table of contents concerns the layout of the Introduction to the individual prophets, and reads in both manuscripts. i. ii. iii. iiii. | v. vi. vii. viii.

De nomine prophete De prophetia De primo propheta De temporibus prophetis (sic Pa ; Mon : De temporibus pf̄ ) De speciebus prophetae (Pa ; Mon  … prof̄ .) De generibus prophete (Pa ; Mon prof̄ .) De differentia historiae et prophetie, et figura et predicationis. De motu spiritus et prophetae (Pa ; Mon De motu spiritus prof̄ .) viiii. De eo quod spiritus prophetiae aliquando tangit et aliquando non tangit.

The introduction treats of each of these titles, each heading being repeated exactly as in the table of contents. No. i treats of the term of prophet in the three languages, in tribus linguis, in the Irish fashion. In no. ii we are given Cassiodorus’s description of prophecy. De prophetia Cassiodorus dicit : Prophetia est aspiratio diuina quae euentus rerum aut per facta aut per dicta quorundam inmobili ueritate pronuntiat. Item dicit : Prophetia est suauis dictio caelestis doctrinae fauos et dulcia diuini eloquii conponens, with a citation of Ps 118.103. The same quotation from Cassiodorus opens the preface to the Psalter in the Hiberno-Latin Eclogae tractatorum in Psalterium. The genera prophetiae are given as seven, ut Isodrus dicit. In no. vii De differentia etc. Iunilius is cited, and in no. viii De motu spiritus prophetiae Cassiodorus is quoted. After this there is a special section entitled in capitals : DE PREFATIONE PROPHETARUM (Pa 80rb ; Mon 128r). In this we are briefly given the lives of the Four Major and the Twelve Minor Prophets (nos. i–xvi), and of Achias, Iaddo, Azarias, Helias and Heliseus (nos. xvii–xxi). This material could derive from Isidore’s De ortu et obitu patrum (PL 83, 129–147) and possibly from the apocryphal Vitae Prophetarum of which, however, no Latin version is known.

109

124 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The exposition of the individual prophets is as follows : DE ISAIA PROPHETA Pa  81rb ; Mon  129v DE EBREICIS NOMINIBUS Pa  89va ; Mon  142r INCIPIUNT PAUCA DE EXPLANATIONE HIER IN HIEREMIAM PROPHETAM QUAM POST (Mon POSTEA) EUSEBIUS Pa  90rb ; Mon  143r DE TRACTATU HIERONIMI IN DANIELEM QUEM POSTULAUIT PAMMACHUS ET MARCELLA ROMANI Pa  108vb ; Mon  170v INCIPIT DE MINIMIS PROPHETIS Pa  117rb Mon  184       (on OSSE) ;      (on HOSEA) DE AMOS PROPHETA (lege : Iohel) Pa  118ra ; Mon  186v DE IOHEL PROPHETA (lege : Amos) Pa  118rb ; Mon  187r DE IONA PROPHETA Pa  118va ; Mon  187v MICHAS PROPHETA Pa  119ra ; Mon  188v NAUM PROPHETA Pa  119rb ; Mon  188v DE ABACUC PROPHETA Pa  120va ; Mon  190v SOFONIAS PROPHETA Pa  121rb ; Mon  192r AGGEUS PROPHETA Pa  121vb ; Mon  193r ZACHARIAS PROPHETA Pa  122ra ; Mon  193r DE MALACHIA PROPHETA Pa  126ra ; Mon  200r

As sole source for all the Major Prophets except Ezekiel, the compiler uses the commentaries of Jerome ; for Ezekiel the only source is the Homilies of Gregory on Ezekiel. | It is notable that all this evidence is in keeping with what 110 other information we have concerning the exposition of these books in the early Irish Church. With regard to Isaiah, we have an abbreviation of Jerome’s commentary made by the ninth-century Irish scholar Josephus Scottus, Epitome commentarii Hieronymi in Isaiam, a text not yet published.51 He may well be the Iosephus who is mentioned in the copy of Jerome’s commentary on Daniel, in the MS St Gall 189 (late eighth century) which appears to be based on an Irish original written in abbreviated form. F. Glorie has drawn attention to the reference Iosepus sricpsit (sic) in his edition of this commentary on Daniel (CCSL 75A, p. 759). If this is the case, Josephus Scottus has abbreviated Jerome’s commentaries on Isaiah and Daniel. We 51  Manuscripts in Stegmüller, Repertorium (as above note 28) no.  5146, vol. III (1951), and vol. IX (1977) ; see Kenney, Sources, p. 536 ; Lapidge and Sharpe, Bibliography, no. 649.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

125

should note that Iosepus is also cited in the Reference Bible as author for the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s commentary on the Psalms.52 With regard to the commentary on Ezekiel in MS Zürich, Staatsarchiv A.G. 19, pp. 61–64, we have a fragment of a late eighth-century text of Ezekiel, with glosses on the text. These are all in an Irish hand. The glosses are in the main taken from Gregory the Great’s Homilies on Ezekiel.53 The exposition of the Twelve Minor Prophets is also almost entirely from Jerome’s commentaries, exclusively so for Hosea. In both MSS the exposition on Joel is headed Amos, and that on Amos headed Joel, an error which the Munich manuscript corrects in a later hand. The exposition on Joel is also taken from Jerome, apart from the definition of locusta at the end, under the name of Isidore, taken from his Etym. XII, 8, 9 (PL 82,471). Parts of the exposition on Amos have similarities with that of Jerome. The glosses on Jonah are from Jerome, but not those on Nahum, at least not clearly so. In general, the glosses on Micah are from Jerome. The exposition on Habakkuk seems to be from Jerome in its entirety. As noted above, 54 the Reference Bible’s commentary on Hab 2.4 is repeated almost verbatim in the commentary of Rom 1.17. The Reference Bible’s text in question is a compressed form of Jerome’s exposition. Jerome’s commentaries are the sole source for the exposition of the remaining books, Zephaniah, Zechariah, and Malachy. It is noteworthy in this context that MS Kassel, Landesbibliothek Theol. fol.  22 comprises a portion of an Irish manuscript with Jerome’s work. It is described by E. A. Lowe (CLA 8, 1135) : “Irish minuscule, saec.  VIII. Hieronymus in Prophetas Minores, written in Ireland and copied from a defective exemplar. Later at Fulda and mentioned in Fulda cat. of c. A.D.  850.” In MS St Omer 342 bis, fol. B, saec. VII/VIII, Celtic (Irish or British) script (cf. CLA 6, 828) we have fragments of a commentary on Amos (ch. 1.6–3.12 ; 4.1–6.9) | consisting of concise glosses, based 111 See below pp. 164-65. Bischoff (as above note 2), “Turning-Points”, p.  107 ; “Wendepunkte” pp.  234-35 (239-40). 54  Above pp. 95-96. 52 

53 

126 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in the majority of cases on texts from Jerome’s commentary on Amos. There are some Celtic glosses, given by Bernhard Bischoff in his study of the text,55 with the note that it remained to be determined whether they were Irish or British. Conclusions This preliminary analysis of the sources of the Reference Bible shows that the compiler had access to a fairly well-stocked library, or had made notes for his work over a considerable period of time from a large section of books. In his introduction he used Iunilius’s De partibus diuinae legis as well as Isidore’s Etymologiae. For Genesis he used Augustine’s De Genesi ad litteram, De Genesi imperfectus liber, De civitate Dei and probably the Enchiridion, Ambrose’s Hexameron and De Cain et Abel, Jerome’s Liber quaestionum hebraicarum in Genesim and some of his letters (e.g. Ep.  73 and 98), the poet Sedulius, the rarely-used Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus and as yet unidentified sources such as “Faustus” and “Orosius”. In Genesis and in other books he uses Iunilius’s De partibus divinae legis, Isidore’s Etymologiae, De rerum natura, De ecclesiasticis officiis, Quaestiones in Vetus (et Novum) Testamentum, De ortu et obitu patrum as well as his Chronicle, Eucherius’s Instructionum Liber I ; Paterius’s Liber testimoniorum veteris testamenti (quem Paterius ex opusculis Sancti Gregorii excerpi curavit) ; Cassianus’s Conlationes and De institutis coenobiorum ; for the Psalter he uses in addition Cassiodorus on the Psalms, Jerome and the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s commentary ; the lost beginning to the Epitome is supplemented by another historical exposition which is not Theodorean. He uses the Moralia in Iob of Gregory the Great for the book of Job and the much less widely used Aponius for the exposition on the Canticle of Solomon. For the Prophets he has the commentaries of Jerome for practically all but Ezekiel, for which he made use of Gregory’s Homilies on this book. He also uses extensively the Clementine Recognitions in Rufinus’s Latin translation. Detailed source analysis will doubtless add to this list. The study which should accompany such analysis will 55  Bischoff (as above note 3), “Turning-Points”, p.  108 ; “Wendepunkte”, pp.  235-36 (240).

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

127

also probably inform us on the manner in which the compiler made use of his sources, and on his command of the general content of his material. It has been maintained that the compiler of the work was an Irish scholar, and strong arguments in favour of this have been advanced by Dr Bischoff. A more detailed analysis of the sources and content of the work tends to confirm this. Many of the authorities cited are known to have been studied and used in the early Irish schools. This is well known in regard to the works of Isidore.56 I have | indicated above what evidence there is for the 112 early use of some of Jerome’s works in Ireland. There is also evidence that Aponius was used by the early Irish monks and scholars. Evidence of the diligent use of the writings of Augustine is becoming clearer. We have an abbreviation of the De Genesi ad litteram which was made by an Irishman about A.D. 650, and used much later.57 Michael Gorman has recently shown the Irish role in the transmission of the Sermones of St Augustine.58 The rather widely accepted theological synthesis on creation among early and medieval Irish writers is very heavily Augustinian, evidence for intense reflection on Augustine’s thoughts on this subject in the early Irish schools. The strongest evidence of the Irish connection of the Reference Bible is its close links with other works which are certainly or very probably Irish : the Liber de Numeris, the Catechesis Celtica, the Collectanea of Ps.-Bede. This argument is particularly strong with regard to the part of the Reference Bible on the Psalter. Here the evidence for a close Irish connection is overwhelming : the use of the epitome of Julian, the use of the supplement to this in a form found only in another Irish text – the Double Psalter of Rouen, the close connection with the Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter. Finally, with regard to the general character of the work we can say, however provisionally, that it gives a commentary on the See most recently J. N. Hillgarth, “Ireland and Spain in the Seventh Century”, Peritia 3 (1984), pp.  1–16, summary, pp.  15-16. 57  M. M. Gorman, “An Unedited Fragment of an Early Irish Epitome of St  Augustine’s De Genesi ad litteram”, Revue des Études Augustiniennes 28 (1982), pp.  76–85. 58  In a paper read to the Twentieth International Congress on Medieval Studies, Kalamazoo 1985. 56 

128 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church entire Bible which relies chiefly on the accepted Latin authorities in the various branches. It departs from this approach in matters where the biblical evidence became a topic of popular interest such as the Creation narrative, Paradise and the Fall, the antediluvian history and history before the dispersion of the nations. In these matters it appears to be very closely related to Irish tradition as known to us from Latin and vernacular Irish sources. It is also closely related to Irish tradition in its approach to the Psalter. In saying this I do not necessarily mean to imply that this tradition was specifically Irish. It may well have been a much more widely accepted tradition, even if attested now principally in sources emanating from Ireland. It may have been widespread in Britain. Hence the interest in the Reference Bible by Anglo-Saxon scholars as the repository of lore which serves as one of the elements in the background of Anglo-Saxon culture. A good critical edition of the work remains a prerequisite for future research. Postscript 2014 The Munich manuscript, Staatsbibliothek, Codex Clm 14276 has been digitized and can be accessed online at http ://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/0004/bsb00046658/images/. Objections have been raised as to the appropriateness of the designation “Das Bibelwerk” for the work ; more so for the English-language designation “The Reference Bible”. The composition is now officially designated as “De enigmatibus”. Very little of the work has been critically edited : the general introduction and the commentary on the Pentateuch by Gerard MacGinty, and the commentary on the Apocalypse by Roger Gryson.59 Martin McNamara has prepared for publication a critical edition of the section on the Psalter – the main text and the abbreviation. This section is fully in the Irish tradition of Psalter introductions and commentary. Special attention has been paid to the section “Incipunt Uirtutes Elie. XII sunt” and “Incipiunt Uirtutes Helisei” by François

59 

See details below in Appendix 2.

plan and source analysis of das bibelwerk, o.t.

129

Dolbeau and É.Poirot,60 continuing the work of Ambrogio M. Amelli (1897) and Hermann Frede (1981). They have shown that Amelli’s edition (reproduced in the Supplementum to the Patrologia latina), made from the manuscript St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek 133, pp. 420-426, is defective, in that it does not reproduce pp. 425426. Together with the Reference Bible (De enigmatibus) texts of the Munich (M) and Paris (P) manuscripts, two other manuscripts of the tradition are known in MS Ecorial (El), Real Biblioteca de San Lorenzo, ç. IV. 23, fols 25-26v (fifteenth century, with siglum E) and the St Gall manuscript already mentioned (eighth-ninth century). The authors have made a thorough examination of the tradition of the miracles of Elijah and Elisha in Jewish (the fourth century convert Jew Joseph of Tiberias), in Greek traditions and the Greek and Latin Lives of the Prophets. The biblical text behind all the witnesses is not the Vulgate but a form of the Vetus Latina, which apparently presents African characteristics. The original text is preserved in E, and in S, or in ES when in agreement. M and P derive from a model related to S, which they simplify and revise. The text of MP, they note, is evidently abbreviated and secondary with regard to ES, indicating how fragile is the opinion maintaining that the text Virtutes Heliae et Helisaei would have the same origin as the Bibelwerk (the Reference Bible). In their opinion the recension of MP is without authority. It is doubtless to be attributed to the compiler of the Bibelwerk, that is to say an Irish cleric who had settled on the Continent towards the end of the eighth century. The author of MP abbreviates and simplifies. For number seven of Elisha’s miracles, through an error, he transforms centum into mille, multiplying the beneficiaries of the multiplication of the loaves tenfold. The ES recension evidently uses a pre-Jerome translation, which here and there can be compared with the African translations. In the manuscript S it follows the work Prophetiae ex omnibus libris collectae, which is attributed to a Donatist of the second half of the fourth century. In these two authors’ opinion CPL 1155e (the ES composition) is a minor African work of the fourth or fifth century. 60  F. Dolbeau – É. Poirot, “Sur les miracles d’Élie et d’Élisée (CPL 1155e)”, Sacris Erudiri 34 (1994), pp. 135-64.

130 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church They publish a critical edition of the ES text, with, a French translation, and as an appendix a critical edition of chapters XXVII-XXVIII of the Bibelwerk (Reference Bible)¸ with the miracles in question, together with a source apparatus of the introductory section, and an indication of a French translation of these chapters which has already been published.61 Thomas O’Loughlin has made a special study of the map of the Holy Land (figura terre repromissionis) in the Paris manuscript of the Reference Bible (De enigmatibus), BnF lat. 11561, fol. 43v.62 It indicates the locations of the tribes on both sides of the river Jordan, with the cities of refuge, as in Joshua 20 :7-9 : cades in neptalim, sechim in effraim, cebron in iuda ; and beyond the Jordan bossor in ruben, ramoth galaad in gath, and gaulon in demidia tribus manse. Together with these, west of the Jordan other towns are indicated : in beniamin iopen and hierusalem and the presumed original site of Jericho : ibi fuit hiericho ; in iuda, bethlem, and to the bottom left, philistim ; and in semeon¸ mare mortuum.

Translation by É. Poirot, in Le saint prophète Elisée d’après les Pères de l’Eglise, Bellefontaine, 1993, pp. 207-11 (Spiritualité orientale 59). 62  T. O’Loughlin, “Map and Text : A mid Ninth-Century Map for the Book of Joshua”, Imago Mundi 57 (2005), pp.  7-22 ; O’Loughlin, “Mapping the Book of Joshua”, in Treasures of Irish Christianity. Volume II. A People of the Word, ed. by S. Ryan and B. Leahy, Dublin, 2013, pp. 53-56. 61 

| FIVE IRISH PSALTER TEXTS1

37

Introduction In 1973 the present writer published an essay on the psalms in the early Irish Church (from ad  600 to 1200)2 and subsequently gave a survey of some later research in this field, 3 research that should continue, and which will lead ultimately to critical study and editions of all the material in question. In this present study, I intend to examine some of the material that has so far been neglected. The first item to be examined is the work entitled De titulis | psalmorum attributed to Bede, 38 the first section of which, namely the Argumenta, has been used in Irish texts from a very early age, while the final part, the Explanatione,s are used in Irish compositions of the tenth century and later. The critical editions of both the Vulgate (Gallicanum) and Hebraicum Psalter texts have identified specific Irish recensions of both – the Irish Hebraicum represented by the manuscripts with the sigla AKI (Amiatinus, Florence, Biblioteca Mediceo-Laurenziana MS Amiatino I ; Karlsruhe, Landesbibliothek MS Augienis XXXVIII ; Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale MS 24 [A. 41]). A hitherto unexamined text in Irish script in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BNF) MS fr. 2452, is examined in the pres-

1  First published in : Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 109  C (2009), pp.  37-104. 2  M. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (ad  600–1200)”, PRIA 73C (1973), pp. 201–76, with appendices by M. Sheehy, 277–98 (reproduced in M. McNamara, The Psalms in the Early Irish Church, Sheffield, 2000, pp. 19–142). 3  M. McNamara, “The Psalms in the Irish Church : the Most Recent Research on Text, Commentary and Decoration  – with Emphasis on the So-called Psalter of Charlemagne”, in The Bible as Book : the Manuscript Tradition, ed. by J.L. Sharpe III  – K. van Kampen, London and New Castle, 1998, pp. 89–103 (reproduced in McNamara, The Psalms, pp. 143–64).

132 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ent essay and shown to represent an early form of the Irish AKI tradition. The psalter section of the “Reference Bible” (Das Bibelwerk ; more recently given the official Latin title of De enigmatibus) has been shown to have close connections with Irish tradition, particularly in the general introduction and the exposition of Ps  1. The sources most frequently cited by name are Cassiodorus, Eucherius, Gregorius (Paterius) and Iosepus. From Ps  17 onwards the source cited as “Iosepus” is demonstrably the Epitome of Julian of Eclanum’s translation of the psalm commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, best known from the Milan commentary (Milan, The Ambrosian Library MS C  301 inf). The first part of the Epitome must have early been lost ; in the Milan commentary, it is replaced by the full translation of Julian’s work. Not so for Pss 1–16 in the glosses of the Double Psalter of St-Ouen (Rouen, Bibl. mun. MS  24), where for the gloss on the Hebraicum of Pss 1.1–16.11 we have another historical, “Davidic” commentary, interpreting the psalms generally of David and his times. For Pss 1–16, “Iosepus” of the “Reference Bible” has the glosses as in the Rouen text. It thus presents strong evidence for the existence in Ireland, and this at that early age, of two forms of the Julian text. The “Reference Bible” was composed at the latest about 730–50, indicating that the “Reference Bible”– Rouen “Iosepus” commentary must have been circulating by 700 if not earlier. The identity of the “Iosepus” to whom the commentary is ascribed has yet to be determined. The latest Irish psalter (thirteenth century ?), the Psalter of Cormac (British Library [BL] Additional MS  36929), with Pss 1–151, came to the library from Germany. Its script and illumination, and the scribe’s name (Cormac), are Irish. It has certain Cistercian connections (absolutio bernarddi ; opening psalm prayer), Irish affiliations (script, illumination, final psalm prayer), and other elements not necessarily Irish (Series II of psalm headings ; added antiphons, some in Gothic script). The essay examines the individual elements. Its Vulgate text, not belonging to the specifically Irish type, remains to be examined. The biblical text may determine the precise place of this psalter’s origin. The tenth-century Double Psalter of St-Ouen has still many secrets to be explored. It may be a copy of a very early Irish text. It has an elaborate back reference heret system, with a small

five irish psalter texts

133

circle over the opening words of each psalm (and subsection of Ps  118), and a corresponding circle under a word of the preceding psalm (or subsection for Ps  118). In this, it agrees with the glossa of Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Palatinus latinus (Pal. lat.) 68, even in most of the back references. Its gloss on the Hebraicum for Ps  16.11 onwards draws on the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore. For Ps  1.1–16.11a, it has the “Davidic” gloss, | used also in the “Reference Bible”. Together with this his- 42 torical gloss, it has another historical one, by a later hand, drawn from the commentary represented by MS Pal. lat.  68, or one very similar to it. This double psalter is thus a witness to the continuity of Irish psalm exegesis. The fragmentary Psalter of Caimin (Pss 118.1–16, 33–116) dates from about a.d.  1100. Its text is Vulgate, with the corresponding Hebraicum given in the top margin (generally in extremely abbreviated form). It has marginal and interlinear glosses. About half of the glosses (153 out of 315) are from the glossa of MS Pal. Lat. 68, further evidence of the continuity of tradition in Irish psalm exegesis from earliest times (700 and earlier) to c. 1100. Other glosses are from Cassiodorus, from the Epitome of Julian, from Prosper of Aquitaine and Augustine. The work De titulis psalmorum attributed to Bede Among the works of Bede (a.d.  673–735) printed in the Basel edition reproduced by Migne (PL) 93, 477–1098) there is one entitled In Psalmorum librum exegesis. In this work the exegesis of each psalm is divided into three sections : (1)  a brief Argumentum, (2)  an Explanatio dealing with the psalm in general, followed by (3)  the Commentarius proper. The third section goes only as far as Ps  121 whereas the Argumenta and Explanationes continue to the end of the psalter. The commentary itself has nothing to do with Bede and its association with the Argumenta and Explanationes, which originally circulated independently of it, is purely fortuitous. It is only these latter two which interest us here. The Explanationes depend almost entirely on the introductions which Cassiodorus prefixed to the psalms in his commentary. The Argumenta, which occur for all 150 psalms, are composite. Though brief, each Argumentum can be divided into three sections. Section (1), a historical explana-

134 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church tion, is present for every psalm except Ps 874 and almost invariably stands first. There the psalm in question is understood as speaking of the trials of David, of Hezekiah or of the Maccabees. Section (2), introduced by Aliter, gives the mystical meaning and occasionally an added note which may be liturgical or an intended reference to a related biblical (mainly New Testament) writing. What we find in this section is simply the St Columba Series of psalm headings, with variants from other witnesses of the series. Section (3), when present, gives a brief moral application, drawing from Jerome and Arnobius. The Argumenta and Explanationes have been attributed to Bede in some early manuscripts, and still by some modern scholars. The earliest literary connection of Bede with these is the Old-Irish treatise on the psalter (lines 360–8), composed about a.d.  800. In this text, with regard to Ps  1, questions are asked in Irish and answered with citations in Latin. Examples will be given further below. | It has been shown that the union of the commentary with 43 the Argumenta and Explanationes is due to Heerwagen’s editorial work, as is the immediate juxtaposition of the Argumenta and the Explanationes.5 The manuscripts used in Heerwagen’s workshop for 4  For this psalm Heerwagen’s edition (in PL 93, 947C) simply has the heading. Argumentum, and below it. Aliter vox Christi de passione sua ad Patrem, the Aliter an indication of an omission of the historical heading. The Southampton Psalter has the full Argumentum, as follows. Ex persona populi possiti in Babilone ac liberationem disiderantis formatur oratio. Aliter : Vox Christi de passione sua ad Patrem. 5  See M. M. Gorman, “The Argumenta and Explanationes on the Psalms Attributed to Bede”, Revue Bénédictine 108 (1998), pp. 214–33 (with 6 plates), at 214–15, 214–33, at 214–15 (essay reprinted in M. M. Gorman, The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Florence, 2007, pp. 20–45). See also M. M. Gorman, “The Canon of Bede’s Works and the World of Bede”, Revue Bénédictine 111 (2001), pp. 438–39 (reprinted in Gorman, The Study of the Bible, pp. 338–9). For the background and sources of the Argumenta see in particular Lorenzo Valgimogli, “La tradizione esegetica negli Argomenta dello pseudo-Beda (PL XCIII)”, Filologia Mediolatina 5 (1998), pp. 95–147. He admits the strength of the arguments in favour of attributing the Argumenta to a Hiberno–Latin area (106), but disagrees with M. McNamara and L. De Coninck that the Argumenta for Pss 1–16 require a source other than the so-called “Epitome” of Julian (106–12). Source analysis of the Explanationes has revealed that at least five passages in them have been taken from

five irish psalter texts

135

the production of this composite work ascribed to Bede have been identified, namely Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek MS Theol. et Phil., fol. 206 for the Commentarius and Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (Bay. Staatsbibl.) MS Clm 14387, fols 20–94 (written in St Amand or Salzburg in the first decade of the ninth century and preserved at St Emmeram in Regensburg) for the Argumenta and Explanationes, where these two elements are separated from one another by three other items, as we shall see. Because of the use in Irish tradition of the Argumenta and Explanationes often ascribed to Bede, it is important that we trace the manuscript history of these pieces in so far as possible. This matter has been very thoroughly explored by Michael Gorman.6 With what regards our study, he divides the available evidence into three categories : (1) Manuscripts containing both the “Argumenta” and “Explanationes” ; (2) Manuscripts containing (only) the “Explanationes” ; (3) Psalters glossed with the Explanationes. Only four manuscripts containing both the Argumenta and Explanationes seem to be extant. The first of these has already been mentioned, that used in the production of Heerwagen’s edition, namely Munich, Bay. Staatsbibl. MS Clm 14387, fols 20–94. The contents are as follows (the two sections that interest us are highlighted in bold) : the praefatio (fols 20–21v), the prologus (fol. 21v), followed by the Argumenta (fols 21v–36), catalogus diapsalmatum (fols 36–37), Interpretatio psalterii artis (fols 37–39v), Interpretatio nominum hebraeorum (fols 39v–40v), then the Explanationes (fols 40v–94). The work ends (on fol. 94)  : “Explicit Expositio Bedae Kl. Augusti fer. III. Amen”. According to Bischoff, the date in this subscription could refer to the years “809, 815, 820 (826)”.7

Bede’s work In primam partem Samuehelis libri IIII, composed c.  716, indicating a date of composition between the first quarter of the eighth century and the first quarter of the ninth, since the first known manuscript to use the Explanationes is Frankfurt am Main, Barth 32 [noted below in text], clearly produced between 800 and 820 at Fulda (an Anglo–Saxon foundation), making an Insular setting for the origin of the Explanationes likely (97). 6  Gorman, “The Argumenta”, pp. 214–33. 7  B. Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, 2  vols, Stuttgart, 1966, vol.  1, p. 113, n.  5 ; noted by Gorman, “The Argumenta”, p. 221.

136 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | This work, with the subscription and attribution to Bede, 44 is found also in MSS Paris, Bibl. Nationale (Nat.) lat. 2384, fols 98–116v (saec. IX) ; Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. 12273, fols 5–74 (saec. IX in.) and Rheims, Bibl. mun. 118, fols 1–37v (saec. IX 3/4). There are three manuscripts containing the Explanationes without the Argumenta, thus : Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. 2843, fols 1–50v (saec. X in. ; from Limoges), where fols 5–50v we have the Explanationes preceded by “Incipit breuiarium Bedae presbiteri de ti­tulis psalmorum quod de Cassiodoro sumpsit”. The same is true of MS Vatican, Pal. lat. 39, fols 44–217v (saec. XI ; from Michelsberg near Heidelberg), where the Explanationes have the heading in red : “Incipit breuiarium Bedae presbiteri de titulis psalmorum quod de Cassiodoro sumpsit”. The Explanationes are also in Reun, Stiftsbibliothek MS 74, fols 140v–171 (saec. XII), with the heading : “Incipit liber sancti Bedae de titulis psalmorum”, and the “Explicit expositio Bedae, Sexto decimo Kalendas Augusti”. The third group of six manuscripts is of psalters glossed with the Explanationes : MSS Amiens, Bibl. mun. Fonds L’Escalo­ pier 2 (saec. XI, first half) ; Angers, Bibl. mun. 18 (saec. IX 2/4) ; Frankfurt, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek Barth 32 (saec. IX, in.  ; Fulda)  ; Oxford, Bodleian Library Canonici Pat. lat. 88 [S.C. 19074], fols 45v–253 (saec. XI ex. [ ?] ; Rome [ ?] ; Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. 11550 (c. 1030 ; St.-Germain-des-Prés) ; and Rome, Biblioteca Vallicelliana E. 24, fol. 30, 201 (saec. XI, Rome). The Bodleian manuscript is a psalter which contains an explanatio before each psalm ; in the MS Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. 11550 Explanationes have been entered on the outer margins. From all this evidence it appears that in the course of the ninth century the Argumenta and Explanationes were circulating as part of the same corpus of works,8 described in the Explicit as Expositio Bedae. It is doubtful that the Argumenta with the Antiochene historical interpretation were composed by Bede. I may also note here that in the Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican manuscript Pal. Lat. 68 (composed about 700), each psalm has a brief argumentum derived from the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s commentary on the psalms, and that this is followed by the 8 

See Gorman, “The Argumenta”, pp. 221–22.

five irish psalter texts

137

Columba Series of psalm headings. This in itself does not prove that the Argumenta with the Antiochene and Columba Series of psalm headings already existed as a single document. Returning to the manuscript evidence, according to Gorman the collection limited to the Explanationes was perhaps created in the ninth century and the attribution to Bede found in the incipits of this collection probably dates from that time, as does the title (“Bedae presbiteri de titulis psalmorum”). It may be that at this time the Argumenta were jettisoned because the Antiochene material was not appreciated by those responsible for creating the new compilation.9 Gorman notes the opinion expressed by authorities like Morin, Bischoff, Laistner and Fischer that the Explanationes can be attributed to Bede. While granting that it is possible, of course, that Bede wrote them there is no proof that he actually did so. Gorman believes that for the author we should look rather in the direction of Alcuin (died 804) and Arn, | Abbot 45 of St Amand (783–821) and Archbishop of Salzburg (784–821). One of the earliest manuscripts of the Explanationes (Munich, MS Clm 14387) was written by a scribe from the St Amand/Salzburg school and two more of the manuscripts contain Alcuin’s commentaries on the psalms.10 The Argumenta and Explanationes in the Irish tradition 1.  In the Glossa Psalmorum in the Vatican Codex MS Pal. lat.  68 (c.  700). In this psalm commentary, the exposition of each psalm is preceded by a historical and a mystical (spiritual, allegorical) heading. The historical heading understands the psalms as referring to David and his contemporaries (Davidic heading) or to later Jewish history in the Antiochene tradition of the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, drawing on the Epitome of the translation of this commentary made by Julian of Eclanum. Sometimes there are two historical headings, one Davidic and the other Theodorean. The chief source of the headings in this Glossa is the Epitome of Julian’s work, or rather the Argumenta prefixed to the exposition proper in this commentary. In many cases the headings of MS Pal. lat.  68 reproduce verbatim the text of the Epitome, while in other cases they reproduce the substance, but not the wording. These historical Theodorean headings are not identical with those

9  10 

Thus Gorman, “The Argumenta”, pp. 224–45. Gorman, “The Argumenta”, p. 233.

138 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of the (Pseudo-) Bedan Argumenta series, although both depend on the same Theodorean tradition.

The mystical series of psalm headings in the Glossa belongs in the main to the Columba Series, found in the Cathach (c. 620) and in the Argumenta of (Pseudo-)Bede. 2.  In the Psalter of Charlemagne (795–800). The work known as the Psalter of Charlemagne (MS Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat.  13159) was written on the Continent under Northumbrian influence. Its psalm headings, both historical and mystical, are identical with those of the Glossa of Pal. lat. MS  68. 3.  In the Old–Irish treatise on the psalter (c.  800). The Old–Irish treatise on the psalter (OIT) is generally regarded as having been composed about the year 800. In the general introduction to the psalter and its treatment of Ps  1 it is closely related to the same material in the Hiberno–Latin work known as Das Bibelwerk or the “Reference Bible” (now referred to in scientific works as De enigmatibus).11 Its mention of Bede as author of a text of the Explanationes is often taken as evidence that the Argumenta and Explanationes circulated c.  800 as his work. The relevant texts of the OIT are as follows. 360.  Question. What is the argument of this psalm ? Not difficult. “In hoc psalmo omnes gentes generaliter hortantur, ad studia uirtutum incitat, simul eos docet quae merces bona, quae poena mala consequatur.” | 365.  Question. Why has this psalm no title ? Not difficult. “Ideo primus psalmus non habet titulum, quia titulus omnium psalmoram est :” “Primus psalmus,” says Bede, “titulum non habet, quia capiti nostro Domino Salvatori de quo absolute loquitur non debuit proponi.” For though the (other) psalms speak of Him, they do not speak of His life as this psalm speaks. “Nam licet alii psalmi de ipso multa dicunt, nemo tamen de eius conversatione quae fuit in terris sic loquitur. Hic psalmus caput totius operis ponitur, et ad eum quae dicenda sunt cuncta respiciunt.”12

First we have the question on the “argument” of Ps 1, i.e. the argumentum. The Latin citation, while not attributed to Bede, coincides almost verbatim with the first section of the “Bedan” Argumenta ; the substance of the second part of this is that of the 11  See P. P. Ó Néill, “The Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter and its Hiberno–Latin Background”, Ériu 30 (1979), pp. 149–63. 12  In the edition of K. Meyer, Hibernica Minora : being a Fragment of an Old–Irish Treatise on the Psalter, with Translation, Notes and Glossary (Anecdota Oxoniensia part VIII), Oxford, 1894, pp. 32–33.

46

five irish psalter texts

139

Columba Series of psalm headings : “De Joseph dicit, qui corpus Christi sepelivit”. The full Bedan argumentum reads (PL 93, 483B) : Omnes generaliter ad studia virtutum incitat, simul adjungens quae merces bona, quae mala gesta sequatur. Tertullianus in libro de Spectaculis asserit hunc psalmum et de Joseph posse intelligi, qui corpus Domini sepelivit, et de his qui ad spectacula gentium non conveniunt.

The second Latin text, attributed to Bede, contains almost verbatim the opening words of the Explanatio, as published by Heerwagen. Then, after a brief paraphrase in Irish, the text of the OIT continues in Latin to give the continuation of the Explanatio, without the ending and the Divisio. The Explanatio, as published by Heerwagen, reads : Primus psalmus ideo non habet titulum quia capiti nostro Domi­no Salvatori, de quo absolute dicturus est, nihil debuit praeponi. Nam licet et alii psalmi de ipso multa dicant, nemo tamen de ejus qui fuit in terris conversatione sic loquitur : et quoniam ad hunc quae dicenda sunt, cuncta respiciunt, merito caput sancti operis ponitur. Nam quidam tituli, quidam praefationis locum eum tenere dixerunt. Totius psalmi hujus propheta referre narratur textus. In prima parte vitam sanctae incarnationis exponit ; secunda vero peccatorum nequitias in futuro judicio debitas recipere commemorat ultiones (PL 93, 483C).

(This text of the Explanatio, I may note, gives the substance of Cassiodorus’s introduction and also the opening section of his Divisio.) It seems clear that the author of the OIT drew his second citation on the absence of a title for Ps  1 from a work attributed to Bede, and that the next Latin | text following almost immediately 47 was also from the same work. It may be that the “argument” of the psalm came from the same work attributed to Bede. What exactly the contents and the extent of this work, or works, were can scarcely be deduced from this scant evidence. We cannot say whether the Argumenta and Explanationes were separate works or the same work, and, if the same work, whether this contained only Argumenta and Explanationes or the intervening items found in the work attributed to Bede (“Explicit Expositio Bedae”) in ninth-century manuscripts  – that is Catalogus diapsalmatum, Interpretatio psalterii artis, Interpretatio nominum hebraeorum. The content of the Explanationes is drawn from Cassiodorus. It must be borne in mind that much of the same material is known

140 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church from contemporary Hiberno–Latin texts on Ps 1, without ascription to Bede, and sometimes with attribution to Cassiodorus. Thus in the Eclogae tractatorum in Psalmos from c. 800 (on Ps 1) with marginal ascription to “cas”, that is Cassiodorus. The text of the Eclogae reads :13 cas  Primus, hic psalmus ideo non habet titulum, quia capiti Do­mino nostro Saluatori, de quo absolute dicturus est, nihil debuit anteponi, dum ipsum rerum omnium constat esse principium. Quidam tituli, quidam prefationis locum eum tenere dixerunt. Sed licet a quibusdam omni iusto uideatur aptatus, nulli tamen preter Domino Christo potest ueracissime conuenire.

Similarly (without any ascription), in the introduction to the psalter in Das Bibelwerk, composed about 730–50, and from a tradition closely related to that in which the OIT originated. The “Reference Bible” text (in a numbered paragraph) reads :14 XXXIII Cur primus psalmus non habet titulum ? Ideo qui[a] capiti Christo de quo absolute dictus est nihil debuit preponi, dum rerum omnium constat esse principium, ut est : “Ego sum principium propter quod et loquor uobis” ; item “Ego sum alfa et o[mega]”, reliqua. Merito capud operis sancti ponitur qui princeps esse monstratur.

The conclusion from this seems to be that we do not have sufficient evidence to form a definite conclusion as to the presence or use of a work by Bede on the Argumenta or Explanationes in the early Irish Church. | 4.  In the Argumenta and Explanationes in the Irish Hebraicum fragments in BNF MS fr.  2452 (s.  X ?). We will consider these Irish fragments of the Hebraicum in greater detail below. Fischer, going on the view of David H. Wright that the texts dated from 13  Text edited by M. Sheehy, in Appendix III to McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, p. 287. The text has two verbatim citations from Cassiodorus. “hic psalmus … principium”, (CCSL 97, 27, lines 1–4) ; “Quidem tituli … conuenire” (CCSL 97, 27, lines 13–16). 14  Text edited by M. Sheehy, in Appendix IV to McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, p. 298. This passage has two distinct texts from Cassiodorus. “Ideo … loquor uobis”, (CCSL 97, p. 27, lines 1–6, citing John 8.25) ; and “Merito … monstratur” (CCSL 97, 27, lines 9–10). The citation Ego sum alpha et omega is not in Cassiodorus.

48

five irish psalter texts

141

the early ninth century, believed that they were the earliest known occurrence of the Argumenta and Explanationes.15 While the exact date of the fragments has yet to be determined, they are most probably from the tenth century.

In these fragments of the Hebraicum for Ps  90(91), in a later hand (in fol.  83r), the argumentum and explanatio of Pseudo-Bede are added, and also the Divisio of Cassiodorus (as in PL 93, 970  bc). On the top margin, over the text of Ps 90 (89). 14 (imple nos matutina misericordia tua) we have the argumentum, as follows : Arg. Pro uictoria Ezechiæ de Assyris cantatur. Aliter legendus ad Euangelium Marci, ubi Christus temptatur. Uox Ecclesiæ ad Dominum.

Next above the first line of Ps 91 (90) (Qui habitat in abscondito excelsi), and continued on the right-hand margin, we have what in fact is the Pseudo-Bedan explanatio, although not introduced as such. It reads : Laus cantici Dauid. Laus cantici divina laudatio. David ipse propeta ( !) debet intelligi. Hunc imnum demonibus pia confidentia semper opponimus, ut a nobis potius inde vincantur, unde contra creatorem suum dolore [PL dolose] aliqua dicere temptarunt. This is the text of (Ps. Bede’s Explanatio (PL 93, 970 bc), which while dependent on Cassiodorus is quite distinct from it. The opening words of Cassiodorus’s Expositio on Ps  90 are as follows : 1.  Laus cantici Dauid. Quando laus cantici dicitur, non commune aliquid sentiatur. Laus intellegi potest et humana praedicatio ; sed laus cantici animaduerti non potest nisi diuina laudatio. Dauid autem hic, ipsum prophetam debemus aduertere, qui primam partem huius psalmi suaui relatione dicturus est : Amoenus admodum et ipsarum promissionum uarietate dulcissimus. cuius undecimum et duodecimum uersum diabolus ipsi Domino Saluatori, cum eum tentasset, obiecit. Hunc hymnum daemonibus pia confidentia semper opponimus, ut a nobis potius inde uincantur, unde contra Creatorem suum dolose aliqua dicere tentauerunt.16

15  B. Fischer, “Bedae de titulis psalmorum liber”, in Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff, ed by J. Autenrieth – F. Brunhölzl, Stuttgart, 1971, pp. 90–110, at 110. 16  Cassiodorus, Expositio in Ps. XC, in Expositio in Psalmorum LXXI-CL, ed. M. Adriaen (CCSL 98), Turnhout, 1958, p. 829.

142 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Finally on the bottom margin we have the continuation of the Explanatio (PL 93, 970C), which for this psalm is also the Divisio of Cassiodorus, although not introduced explicitly as such. It reads as follows : In prima parte psalmista profetetur [PL profitetur] omnem fidelissimum [in MS possibly a final I, rather than final –m] diuina protectione uallari. Secunda laudem Christo decantat. Tertia uerba sunt Patris | ad omnem fidelem, quem in se deuotissime 49 sperare cognoscit, et (7 ) in mundo isto defensionem, et ( ) in futuro 7 illi prœmia compromittens.17 5.  In the Double Psalter of Rouen (s.  X). The Double Psalter of St-Ouen (MS Rouen, Bibl. mun.  24 [A.  41]) carries glossed texts both of the Hebraicum and the Gallicanum, the glosses on the Hebraicum with the “historical” interpretative tradition, those on the Gallicanum allegorical. It has psalm headings, in both the historical and spiritual traditions.

In the page with the Hebraicum, at the beginning of the psalms or in the outer margins we have the Explanationes of Bede.18 It also has summaries of the Theodorean headings, and some of the historical elements of the Argumenta of Pseudo-Bede.19 The work has also some of the spiritual elements of the Argumenta. Because of lack of space the Rouen Psalter has seldom headings, apart from its own summaries of the Theodorean headings.20 For Ps 118, however, the Gallicanum text does have the Bedan Explanationes for the psalm in general and or each of the subsections. It appears that the compiler of the Double Psalter had access both to the Argumenta of Pseudo-Bede and to the Explanationes. Only a thorough examination of the text will permit a judgement with regard to the form in which the compiler had access to these works, whether as separate works, a single work with Argumenta 17  See Cassiodorus, Expositio in Ps. XC (CCSL 98), p. 829, with … laudem decantat Domino Saluatori. 18  See L. De Coninck, Incerti auctoris expositio Psalmorum I.1–XVI. 11A iuxta litteram. Pars prior. praefatio editionis, Kortrijk, preprint no.  57, 1989, p. v. 19  See De Coninck, Incerti auctoris, pp. xx–xxi. 20  See L. De Coninck, “The Composite Literal Gloss of the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen and the Contents of MS Vatican Vat. Pal. lat  68”, in The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland, ed. by T. O’Loughlin (Instrumenta Patristica 31), Steenbrugge, Turnhout, 1999, pp. 81–93, at 83.

five irish psalter texts

143

and Explanationes only, or a single work in which these two elements were separated by others, as in the ninth-century manuscripts of the work ascribed to Bede (Explicit Expositio Bedae). The Psalter of Southampton (eleventh century) The Psalter of Southampton (Cambridge, St John’s College. MS 59 [C. 9]) was probably written in the eleventh century.21 In his catalogue, M. R. James remarks that at the top of fol. 2 after an indistinct note we read : Psalmus Dauid de increpatione Abisolon qui erat impius et Achitophel, going on to state that there is a similar argumentum to each psalm (in this psalter).22 The passage cited by James contains the opening words of a long text of seven lines in the upper margin, over the framed glossed text of Ps 1. The section cited is not from the Bedan Argumenta. | Rather does it 50 represent a Davidic historical interpretation of the psalm of the type we find in the “Reference Bible”, where it is attributed to a certain “Hilar”. (Hilarius), possibly an early Irish exegete.23 The relation of this entire passage to Irish psalm tradition must await the critical edition of the full text. For most of the psalms the Southampton Psalter does have the Argumenta (often under the abbreviation arg) of Pseudo-Bede on the outer margins to the opening words of the psalm, but without the Explanationes – apart from Ps 118 which has the explanatio for the psalm in general and for each of the subsections. For a fuller understanding, one must await a study of this psalter and its psalm headings. Psalm prologues : the psalm preface Dauid filius Iesse and the “subpsalmistae” Prefaces or prologues to the psalms are features of the history of the Latin Bible. Donatien De Bruyne has critically edited all the 21  See the description by M. R. James, in his Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of St John’s College Cambridge, Cambridge, 1913, pp. 76–78. See also P. De Brún – M. Herbert, Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts in Cambridge Libraries, Cambridge, pp. xxx, 110 (Irish glosses of saec.  X 2 and XI1). 22  See James, Descriptive Catalogue, p. 77. 23  “Beatus” reliqua. Secunda historia ad Chusai Arachitam pertinet, qui non exit in consilium Abisolon et Achitophel …”. Text published by M. McNamara, in “The Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp. 291– 334, at 308 (= McNamara, The Psalms, p. 438).

144 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church texts known to him from Latin manuscripts  – some 84 in all.24 Here we are interested in just one of these, that beginning Dauid filius Iesse. In the Milan commentary on the psalter in Cod. Amb MS C 301 inf., four psalm prefaces precede the commentary proper, as follows : 1.  Jerome’s preface to the Gallican Psalter : Psalterium Romae dudum possitus … de purissimo (Ebreorum) fonte potare (glossed in Old Irish) ; 2.  The preface often known as that of Pseudo-Bede, but more properly Pseudo-Jerome : Dauid filius Iessae … canticum graduum (glossed in Old Irish) ; 3.  Jerome’s preface to his translation of the psalms from the Hebrew : Scio quosdam putare psalterium … laudem uel uituperationem tecum esse commonem (glossed in Old Irish) ; 4.  St  Basil’s preface to the psalter in the translation of Rufinus : Hirunimus dicit : Omnis scriptura diuinitus inspirata … uideamus tandem quid etiam ipsa psalmi indicentur initia (without any glosses).

The three prefaces glossed in Old Irish can be presumed to have been used in early Irish psalm study. The only one of these that interests us here is that commonly known under the name of Pseudo-Bede : Dauid filius Iessae. This Irish text belongs to a psalm preface published by De Bruyne as no. 1, and in two recensions, in his edition of psalm prefaces.25 It also circulated as part (paragraphs 2–3) of Epistola 47 of Pseudo-Jerome (PL 30, 293–96, 1846 edition ; another edition, cols 301–06). | Paragraph 1 is a distinct preface published by 51 De Bruyne as no. 15 of his texts.26 The exact relationship of the Milan text to those edited by De Bruyne has not been considered. The Irish text clearly belongs to the tradition of De Bruyne’s text no. 1, but has some inversions with regard to the edited texts. These do not interest us here,

24  D. De Bruyne, Préfaces de la Bible Latine. VIII. Psalmi (Namur, 1920), pp. 42–117. 25  De Bruyne, Préfaces, Preface no. 1, pp. 43–44. The pseudo-Bedan preface is also reproduced in PL 93, 477–80. 26  De Bruyne, Préfaces, Preface no. 15, pp. 65–66 (no. 15, Da 2).

five irish psalter texts

145

since my chief interest is the ocurrence of subpsalmistae in the Irish text and its deviation from the others in this. The preface Dauid filius Iesse is concerned with David’s connection with the origins of psalmody, the taking of the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem, the roles of Asaph, Eman, Ethan and Iditun with David, in psalm superscriptions and some other introductory matters. The preface is regarded as old, of the fifth or sixth century.27 The sources, occasion and the history of composition of the piece remain to be determined. It has a loose connection with 1 Chronicles 16.4–43 on the taking of the ark to Jerusalem and 1 Chronicles 25. 1–9, on Asaph, Jeduthun and Heman. I treat here the Amb. MS C 301 inf. text, with the mention of sub(p)salmistae, in its relation to the others texts. In Amb. MS C 301 inf. the relevant passage of the preface runs as follows (the significant section is highlighted in bold type) :28 Incipit prologus psalmorum. Dauid filius lessae, cum esset in regno suo, .IIII. elegit uiros qui psalmos facerent, id est, Assab, Eman, Ethan, Idithun. VIIII fecit ipse Dauid, XXXII non sunt suprascripti ; LXXII. in Dauid, XI. in Asab, XII. in Idithun, VIIII. in filios Chore, II. in Agium et Zachariam, unus in Moysi, duo in Salamone. LXXta .II. ergo dicebant psalmos et .CC. subsalmistae, et citharam percutiebat Abiud cum Dauid rege. David son of Jesse when he was (settled) in his kingdom chose four men who would make (compose) psalms, that is, Assab, Eman, Ethan, Idithun. David himself made 9 ; 32 are without superscription ; 72 are for David ; 11 for Asab ; 12 for Idithun, 9 for the sons of Chore ; 2 for Agias and Zacharias, one for Moses, 2 for Solomon. 72 therefore said the psalms and 200 subpsalmists, and Abiud used to play the harp with King David.

The word subsalmistae is glossed in Irish as fochetlaidi, translated by the editors of the Royal Irish Academy’s Dictionary of the Irish 27  See E. Dekkers, Clavis Patrum Latinorum (CPL), Turnhout, 1995, no. 633 (222, on the spurious letters 43–47 of Jerome). On this letter (no. 47) see also I. Machielsen, Clavis patristica pseudepigraphorum Medii Aevi (CPPM), vol.  IIA. Theologica Exegetica, Turnhout, 1994, no.  2360 (p. 544. Pseudo-Jerome) ; no. 2058b (p. 460. Pseudo-Bede). 28  Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus, ed. by W. Stokes  – J. Strachan, 2  vols, Cambridge, 1901–03 ; repr., Dublin, 1975, vol. 1, pp. 8–9.

146 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Language (DIL) as ‘subsingers”, | the singular as : “one who sings 52 in accompaniment, a succentor”. This, however, is the sole occurrence of this word in Irish literature. The relevant section of the preface in De Bruyne’s edition reads (the significant section in bold type) :29 Origo prophetiae dauid regis psalmorum numero CL. Dauid, filius iesse, cum esset in regno suo, quattuor elegit, qui psalmos facerent, id est asaph, eman, ethan et idithun. LXXXVIII ergo dicebant psalmos et CC subpsalma et cytharam percutiebat abiud (=PL 30, 293C). (There is no variant reading to subpsalma of this text.) “The origin of the prophecy of King David in the number of 150 Psalms. David, son of Jesse, when he was (established) in his kingdom, chose four who would make (compose) psalms, that is Asaph, Eman, Ethan and Idithun. eighty-eight therefore said (composed) psalms and 200 (a) subpsalm and Abiud used to play the harp”.

This first recension has no variant for subpsalma. Other variants from the Amb. MS C 301 inf. text such as 88 singers (instead of 72) need not concern us here. For the relevant section, De Bruyne’s second recension reads :30 Incipit origo psalmorum Dauid filins iesse cum esset in regno suo, quattuor elegit, qui psalmos facerent, idest asaph, eman, ethan et iditthum. Ergo octoginta et octo dicebant psalmos, et CC diapsalma (variants. subpsalma. MSS Lz1 ; sympsalma : MSS z2) et cytharam percutiebat abiud cum dauid rege. David, son of Jesse, when he was (established) in his kingdom chose four, who would make psalms, that is Asaph, Eman, Ethan and Idithun. Therefore eighty-eight said (composed) psalms, and 200 diapsalma (variants : subpsalma ; sympsalma) and Abiud used to play the harp with King David.

29  De Bruyne, Prefaces, Preface no. 1, pp. 43–44. VIII. Psalmi, Praefatio No. 1 or 1 (from MSS VWAG gnXS) ; text cited 43, lines 3–7. 30  De Bruyne, Préfaces, 1 or 1r (MSS PLzR), p. 43, lines 2–5.

five irish psalter texts

147

It would appear that the original reading for the Amb. MS C 301 inf. text with subpsalmistae was that of De Bruyne’s recension 1 : subpsalma. This is a word not otherwise attested, but probably related to the rare Latin word psalma (genetive psalmatis, a loan-word from the equally rare Greek word psalma), used once by Augustine, in connection with the term diapsalma (Enarr. in Ps 4.4)31 and | by Isidore, Etym. 6, 19, 15, in the sense of “chant ; 53 the chanted part of a psalm” (as opposed to diapsalma, understood as “silence”). The second recension (and the text in PL 93.477D) replaced the difficult subpsalma by diapsalma, or sympsalma. The tradition represented by the Irish Amb. MS C 301 inf. replaces it with subpsalmistae. How to construe and translate the text in this manuscript is not easy. The first recension might be rendered : “88 therefore said (composed) psalms and 200 (a) subpsalm” (with subpsalma as an accusative). It is less easy to construe Amb. MS C 301’s text : “lxxta .II. ergo dicebant psalmos et .CC. subsalmistae”, with subpsalmistae in the nominative ; possibly as : “72 therefore said psalms and (there were) 200 subpsalmists”. In any event, whatever of the construction of this passage the “phantom” term subpsalmistae entered the tradition of Irish psalm study, especially in relation to an understanding of diapsalma and the psalm headings, where they appear as a group with Ezra. Thus in the introduction to the psalter in the Hiberno–Latin De enigmatibus (commonly known as “The Reference Bible” or Das Bibel­werk) it occurs four times, twice in relation to the time of David and the use of psalmus cantici and canticum psalmi (paragraph II) and later (paragraphs XIX–XX) in relation to Esdras and diapsalma and psalm headings : “Quis primus decantavit diapsalma … ? Id est subpsalmiste uel Hesdras primitus diapsalma posuit, ut Elarius dicit in Annalibus Istoriographis ”. And a little later on the psalm headings. “Quis primus posuit titulos ante psalmos … ? Subpsalmistae vel Hesdras primitus cantaverunt titulos”. 32

31  Augustine, Enarratio in Ps. 4.4 in Enarrationes in Psalmos 1–50, Pars 1A. Enarrationes in Psalmos 1–32, ed. by C. Weidmann (CSEL 93/1A), Vienna, 2003, 98, line 20. “… ut psalma sit quod canitur, diapsalma vero interpositum in psallendo silentium”. 32  Both texts edited by M. Sheehy in PRIA 73C (1973), pp. 294–95.

148 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The terminology is not found, I may note, in the related psalm preface in the Hiberno–Latin Eclogae tractatorum in Psalterium. 33 It may be that Irish liturgical practice had some influence on the use of subpsalmistae. In the later medieval Irish Church there apparently was an office in choir known as psalmista, not recognised by the twelfth-century reformer Gilbert of Limerick (Liber de statu ecclesiae, PL 159, 995–6) among the gradus ecclesiae, i.e. the Minor Orders. 34 Psalm prayers and biblical canticles Psalm prayers The early Church perceived, as the rabbis had, that the psalter did not have a monopoly in the prayers of the Hebrew Bible (or the Old Testament). Prayers similar to those in the psalter, whether they are of praise, supplication, thanksgiving or other, are found in other biblical books as well. In the East the custom originated of | introducing into the liturgy biblical canticles (from books 54 other than the Psalms). 35 This is also true of the West : Already in the oldest texts of the Roman Psalter there is a series of seven canticles, intended to take the place of the fourth psalm in the 33  P. Verkest, “The Praefatio of the Irish ‘Eglogae tractatorum in psalterium’”, edited with a Critical Introduction”, Sacris Erudiri 40 (2001), pp. 267–92, at 282–92. 34  See note in McNamara, “Psalter text and psalter study”, p. 268, n. 75a. 35  See H. Schneider, Die altlateinischen biblischen Cantica, Texte und Arbeiten 29–30, Beuron, 1938, section V : “Die biblischen Cantica im iroschottischen Liturgiekreis”, pp. 89–98. The themes are further developed in the three later essays of H. Schneider, “Die biblischen Oden im christlichen Altertum”, Biblica 30 (1949), pp. 28–65 (including the first codification of the odes in the fifth century ; the patristic catalogue of odes in the third and fourth centuries ; the codification of the odes in the Codex Alexandrinus) ; “Die biblischen Oden seit dem sechsten Jahrhunndert”, Biblica 30 (1949), pp. 239–72 ; “Die biblischen Oden in Jerusalem und Konstantinopel”, Biblica 30 (1949), pp. 433–52. See also H. Schneider, “Die biblischen Oden im Mittelalter”, Biblica 30 (1949), pp. 479–500, especially section “I. Die griechischen Oden im lateinischen Westen”, pp. 479–91, including the influence of Greek texts on Greek psalters by Continental Irish (Iroschotten) ; (see Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, Paris, Cod. gr, 8107 = Vetus Latina number 250+ ; written by Sedulius Scottus or presumed Continental Irish scholars (Vatican Library, Regin. gr.  13 =Vetus Latina number 354) ; also treating of “3. Griechische Oden in irischen Ordnung”, pp. 489–91.

five irish psalter texts

149

office of Lauds (Morning Prayer), from Monday to Sunday. These canticles are as follows. (1)  Isaiah 12.1–6 ; (2)  Isaiah 38.10–20 ; (3)  1 Kings (1 Samuel) 2.1–10 ; (4)  Exodus 15.1–19 ; (5)  Habakkuk 3.2–19 ; (6)  Deuteronomy 32.1–43 ; (7)  Daniel 3.57–88. A remarkable peculiarity of this series is that while the text of the first three is Vulgate that of the last four is Old Latin. The probable explanation for this peculiarity is the fact that when this series was being put together, that is about the year 500, these last four canticles had already enjoyed traditional use in the Roman liturgy, at least during the Easter ceremonies, whereas the first three are additions with the purpose of giving a variety in the weekly celebration of the office. By that time (a.d.  500), Jerome’s translation of Isaiah and Kings (Samuel) had already in many places replaced the Old Latin versions. When the Carolingian reformers set about making the Gallican Psalter normative in liturgical usage, it was also necessary to provide it with canticles. To do this they took over the canticles of the Roman series, but substituted the Vulgate (Gallicanum) text for the Old Latin. The Old Roman and the Gallican series of canticles are thus the same ; the sole difference is that the type of text for the last four of the series is the Gallicanum rather than the Old Latin. 36 In early Irish monasticism the biblical canticles did not feature as prominently as they did in the Benedictine system. They are not associated with the psalter as in Continental monasticism, but with other liturgical books such as antiphonaries and hymnals. 37 Apparently under Continental influence, the seven Old Testament canticles of the Gallican series are found in some Irish Psalter texts from the ninth | century onwards, not, however, gathered 55 together at the end of the psalter (as in Gallican Psalters) but bro-

36  See R. Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften. Manuscrits vieux latins. Répertoire descriptif. Deuxième partie. Mss 300–485, Vetus Latina. Die Reste der altlateinischen Bibel 1/2B, 2 vols, Freiburg, 2004, vol. 2, p. 16. 37  See R. Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften, 1/2B, p. 17. For the canticles in the Antiphonary of Bangor see M. Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor and the Early Irish Monastic Liturgy, Dublin, 1984, pp. 184–91 ; R. Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften. Manuscrits vieux latins. Répertoire descriptifol. Première partie. Mss 1–275 d’après un manuscrit inachevé de Hermann Josef Frede, Vetus Latina. Die Reste der altlateinischen Bibel 1/2A, 2  vols, Freiburg, 1999, vol. 1, no. 254, pp. 356–7.

150 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ken up into three groups, one for each of the three fifties of the Irish Psalter tradition. Together with this use of the canticles, in the western Church there arose also a certain number of psalm prayers, or collects, intended to be recited in private devotion at the end of each psalm. 38 Three series of such psalm collects are known. This particular usage is not attested for Ireland. What we do have from the early Irish Church, as attested by the Antiphonary of Bangor (late seventh century), are collects for various hours of the Divine Office, for recitation after certain groups of psalms, and for other occasions. In later Irish Psalters, we have three or four of these early Irish collects used in stable fashion after each of the three fifties. We find a series of three in the Psalter of Southampton (Cambridge, MS C. 9), and of four in the Coupar Angus Psalter (Vatican Library, Pal. Lat. MS 65), and the third prayer of the series in the latest Irish Psalter known to us (the Psalter of Cormac, twelfth–thirteenth century). In the Southampton Psalter, the psalm prayer is inserted immediately at the end of each of the “three fifties”, before the canticles. The usage in the Coupar Angus Psalter is irregular. The first comes after Ps 50, immediately before the canticles ; the second is inserted by a later hand after the canticles following on Ps 100. Similarly with regard to the third psalm prayer. It is inserted by a later hand after the canticle following on Ps 150, and with it a fourth psalm prayer. Psalm Prayers 1 and 2 are almost identical in both these psalters, while the third one is not. These Irish psalm prayers are as follows : I.

Deus altissime rex angelorum. deus laus omnium elimentorum. deus gloria et exultatio sanctorum custodi animas seruorum tuorum qui regnas in secula seculorum.

This prayer corresponds exactly to formula 83 of the Antiphonary of Bangor, 39 and is indicated to go after Laudate Dominum de caeOn these collects see Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften 1/2B, pp. 19–20. F. E. Warren, The Antiphonary of Bangor : an Early Irish Manuscript in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, Henry Bradshaw Society 10, London, 1895, p. 26 ; in Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor, p. 142. 38  39 

five irish psalter texts

151

lis (Ps 148.1). On this collect Curran comments : “The first lines here reflect in general Ps 148 ; the third line is an adaptation of Ps  149.5 : exaltabunt sancti in gloria ; and the fourth line is drawn from Ps 96.10 : custodit dominus animas sanctorum suorum” II.

Deus quem exercitus canit celorum (Southampton : [canit] angelorum) quemque ecclesia laudat sanctorum quem spiritus hymnizat (Southampton ymminizat ; Coupar Angus, ministrat) uniuersorum miserere obsecro omnium nostrorum (Southampton + tuorum) qui regnas in secula seculorum. Amen.

| This prayer corresponds to formula no. 90 of the Antiphonary of 56 Bangor.40 In the Coupar Angus Psalter it is added by a later hand. III. In the Coupar Angus Psalter : Te dominum de celis laudamus tibi ut canticum nouum cantare mereamur. Te dominum in sanctis tuis uenerabiliter deprecamur ut omnia uota nostra suscipias peccata dimittas Christe saluator mundi qui regnas in secula seculorum. Amen.

This collect of the Coupar Angus Psalter corresponds exactly to formula 64 of the Antiphonary of Bangor,41 where it is indicated as Collectio post tres psalmos, i.e. Pss 148–50. Line 1 is from Ps 148.1 ; line 2 from Ps 149.1, line 3 from Ps 150.1. On this collect of the Antiphonary, Curran comments :42 The use of versicles from the three psalms is characteristic of most of the post laudes collects in the Antiphonary and is a sure sign of their Irish origin. But the conclusion of this present collect was influenced by the peculiar Spanish combination, vota suscipere, peccata dimittere  … The collect as it stands is certainly an Irish product, typical of the eclecticism of the Irish in liturgical matters. The author combined three verses from the psalms in question and concluded with a phrase borrowed from a Spanish prayer. 40  Warren, The Antiphonary, p. 27 ; noting the text of the Psalter of Southampton, p. 69. 41  See Warren, The Antiphonary, pp. 24–25 ; in Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor, p. 128. In his note (67) on the Antiphonary form, Warren gives the variant Southampton Psalter text. 42  Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor, pp. 128–29.

152 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church This psalm prayer also occurs in the Psalter of Cormac, immediately after the apocryphal psalm 151 and before canticle vii : Audite caeli. It also occurs in the Double Psalter of St-Ouen, immediately before the apocryphal Ps 151. Apart from the opening words, the text in the Southampton Psalter differs from that given above. Its text reads : De dominum de caelis laudamus. Teque omnium regem regum rogamus. Tibi uni et trino in quem speramus Cum excelsis angelis imnum cantamus, Per dominum nostrum 7rl.

Psalm Prayer no.  IV, added by a later hand, in the Coupar Angus Psalter reads : Deus qui exeunti ex egipto populo tuo maria diuisisti & suspensis utrinque marginibus in specie muri eregi fluenta iussisti, animas quoque nostras a diluuio peccatorum liberare digneris ut transire viciorum gurgitem [ualeamus] hoste contempto saluator mundi, qui regnas in s[ecula] s[eculorum]. Amen.

| This Prayer IV corresponds exactly (apart from the ending … qui 57 regnas) with formula 62 of the Antiphonary of Bangor.43 In his study on the Antiphonary, Curran comments on this collect that it is not related to the Spanish and Ambrosian collects for the canticle Cantemus (Deut 32.1–43), and that apart from one expression, it has no special relationship to any known Continental prayer. If it is a genuinely Irish product, he remarks, it is an outstanding achievement among the collects of Irish origin in the Antiphonary. He would not be surprised, however, to discover it in the Spanish breviary, where it would have been quite at home in style and execution. With regard to the psalm prayers in the Coupar Angus Psalter, Bannister observes that the original scribe of this psalter omitted to copy in their proper places Prayers ii and iii. A corrector has inserted them in vacant spaces after the canticle which they should have preceded ; and to fill up the last page of the MS has inserted Prayer iv which is only found in Irish MSS.44 43  In Warren, The Antiphonary, p. 24 ; with note on the text, pp. 66–67 ; text in Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor, p. 288. 44  See H. M. Bannister, “Irish Psalters”, Journal of Theological Studies 12 (1910–11), pp. 280–84, at 284.

five irish psalter texts

153

With regard to Psalm Prayer no. 3, it would appear that the Coupar Angus, rather than the Southampton, psalter has the genuine Irish form of the prayer. We find the prayer, in exactly this form, again in the Double Psalter of St-Ouen, immediately before the apocryphal Psalm 151, and also in the Psalter of Cormac immediately after Ps 151. Biblical canticles After this consideration of the psalter collects we may now return to the biblical canticles. Some of these varied Continental traditions of which we have earlier spoken came together in Irish and Irish-related psalters, where Old Testament canticles and psalm prayers were inserted at the end of each of the “three fifties”.45 The psalters in question are the six Gallican Psalters : BL Codex Cotton Vitellius F.XI (London, Cotton Library MS F.XI) ; the Southampton Psalter ; the abbreviated psalter of the Irish Liber Hymnorum (Dublin, Trinity College MS 80) ; the Coupar Angus Psalter ; BL Codex Cotton Galba A.V (London, Cotton Library MS A.V) ; and the Psalter of Cormac. The canticles used in this Irish tradition are seven and as follows : i.  Benedicite (Dan 3.57–88) ii.  Confiteor (Isa 12.1–6) iii.  Ego dixi (Isa 38.10–20) iv.  Exultavit cor (1 Sam 2.1–10) v.  Cantemus Domino (Exod 15.1–19) vi.  Domine audivi (Hab 3.2–19) vii.  Audite caeli (Deut 32.1–43)

| We may treat of the texts separately. 1.  Canticles in BL Cotton Vitellius F. XI (c.  900). This manuscript was much damaged by the fire of 1731 in the Cotton library. Also the leaf containing Canticle ii is bound in the wrong order, and another one is missing after Ps  50.12, after which follow Canticles ii and iii. Prayer ii (Deus quem exercitus canit …) and Canticles iv–

45  On the psalter canticles and psalm prayers in general see Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften, 1/2B, pp. 15–19, canticles ; p. 17, Irish tradition ; psalm collects or psalm prayers, pp. 19–20. See also Bannister, “Irish Psalters”, pp. 280–84.

58

154 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church vi follow after Ps 100. The MS now ends with Ps 145.7.46 In Codex Vitellius the canticle Habakkuk 3.1–19 (Canticle vi) alone is Old Latin ; the others are Vulgate.47 2.  The canticles in the Southampton Psalter (c.  1000). While this psalter has the Gallican Psalter text, the biblical text of the canticles Exodus 15.1–19 (v), Daniel 3.57–88 (i) and Habakkuk 3.1–19 (vi) is Old Latin of the Irish type. The text of the other canticles in this psalter is Vulgate. After Ps  50 Prayer i ; Canticles i–iii. After Ps  100 Prayer ii ; Canticles iv–vi After Ps  150 Prayer iii ; Canticle vii. 3.  Irish Liber Hymnorum and Irish vernacular texts. See next section. 4.  The canticles in the Coupar Angus Psalter. This psalter is a later text (c.  1170). In this after Pss 50, 100 and 150 there are inserted the seven Old Testament canticles and four prayers. The arrangement, however, is not consistent, for while the canticles precede the prayers after Psalms 100 and 150, the prayer comes first after Ps  50. (Prayers 2, 3 and a Prayer 4 were also inserted by a later hand.) The sequence in the Coupar Angus Psalter is : After Ps  1 After Ps  100 After Ps  150

Prayer i Deus altissime Canticle i : Benedicite Canticle ii : Confitebor Canticle iii : Ego dixi Canticle iv : Exultavit cor Canticle v : Cantemus Canticle vi : Domine audivi Prayer ii (inserted by a later hand) Deus quem exercitus Canticle vii : Audite caeli (Prayers by a later hand) iii : Te Dominum de celis iv : Deus qui exeunti

In the Coupar Angus Psalter all the canticles have the Vulgate biblical text. 5.  The canticles in the Psalter of Cotton Galba A.V. (twelfth century). There is a lacuna between Pss 49 and 51, and the end of the MS 46  47 

See Bannister, “Irish Psalters”, p. 282. See Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften, 1/2B, p. 265.

five irish psalter texts

155

is defective. The psalter | text ends with Ps  148.14. This means that we have only one set of canticles. This is after Ps  100 where we have Canticles v, vi, ii. (Exodus 15.1–19 ; Habakkuk 5.2–19 ; Isaiah 12.1–6). The section of the manuscript with the canticles is faded, and from the microfilm it is impossible to determine whether the biblical text is Vulgate or Old Latin. 6.  The canticles in the Psalter of Cormac (1150–1200). In this psalter, which we shall later consider in detail in this essay, the canticles are inserted in the Irish fashion : after Ps  50 Canticles i–iii ; after Ps  100 Canticles iv–vi. At the end of the psalter, that is, after Ps  151, Pusillus eram, comes immediately the prayer “Te Dominum de celis laudamus” (no.  III of the Irish psalm collect series), followed by Canticle vii. In the Psalter of Cormac the biblical text of all the canticles (as is the psalter itself) is the Vulgate, with none in Old Latin.

From his study of the evidence Bannister asserts 48 that from it we are able to reconstitute the typical and, perhaps, primitive Irish Psalter as providing one prayer and a canticle or canticles at the end of each of the three books of the psalter, thus : After Ps  50 Prayer 1 ; After Ps  100, Prayer 2 ; After Ps  150 Prayer 3 ;

Canticles i–iii. Canticles iv–vi. Canticle vii.

The only exceptions to the above order are that the psalter of BL Cotton Galba A.V has the canticles in different order, and that, the original scribe of the Coupar Angus Psalter omitted to copy Prayers ii and iii in their proper places. A corrector has inserted them in vacant spaces after the canticle which they should have preceded, and in order to fill up the last page of the MS the corrector has inserted Prayer iv which is only found in Irish MSS. Irish vernacular texts with psalm division and prayers These psalters arranged according to the “three fifties”, with the canticles added after each “fifty”, were probably intended for private devotion. We have a somewhat similar tripartite arrangement in the abbreviated psalter of the Trinity manuscript (late

48 

Bannister, “Irish Psalters”, p. 284.

59

156 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church eleventh century) of the Irish Liber Hymnorum where the second and third “fifty” end with a Pater Noster. In the work Cogadh Gáedhel re Gallaibh (“The war of the Gael with the foreigner”), from about a.d.  1100, King Brian Bórama at the Battle of Clontarf (1014) is said to have recited or sung (ro gab) the “three fifties” (the entire psalter), each with 50 prayers (orthan) and 50 Paters.49 He may have been using an abbreviated psalter of the kind preserved in the more or less contemporary Irish Liber Hymnorum. With regard to the 50 prayers Brian is supposed to have recited, | one for each psalm, we must remark that we have no Irish man- 60 uscript evidence of psalters with such prayers. Another text worth mentioning in this connection is one in the satirical Aislinge Meic Con Glinne (“The Vision of Mac Conglinne”), which indicates that the teaching and concerns of early Irish eighth-century psalm introductions (with mention of synpsalms), including the canticles, were alive and well in Ireland in the years 1075–1100 or so. The text says of Mac Conglinne (probably a wandering ex-clerical student) that in Cork, [he] took down his book-satchel, and brought out his Psalter, and began singing his psalms. What the learned and the books of Cork relate is that the sound of the scholar’s voice was heard a thousand paces beyond the city, as he sang his psalms, through spiritual mysteries, in hymns of praise (for aillib), and annals (or : records, commemorations ; annálaib), and sections (or categories ; ernalaib), in diapsalms and synpsalms and sets of ten, with Paters and canticles and hymns at the conclusion of each fifty. 50

We cannot say whether Mac Conglinne used a psalter with the elements mentioned in the text just quoted, with hymns as well as Paters and canticles after each of the “three fifties”.

49  Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh. The War of the Gaedhil with the Gaill, or the Invasion of Ireland by the Danes and Norsemen. The original Irish text, edited, with translation and introduction, ed. by J. H. Todd London, 1867, par. 113, pp. 196–99. 50  Irish text edited by K. H. Jackson, Aislinge Meic Con Glinne, Dublin, 1990, 5 (par.  16, lines 137–43) ; earlier edition, with English translation, by K. Meyer, Aislinge Meic Conglinne. The Vision of MacConglinne. A Middle-Irish Wonder Tale, London, 1892), pp. 12–13.

five irish psalter texts

157

Fragments of an Irish Hebraicum Psalter in MS. Paris BNF fr. 2452, fols 75–84 Description of the manuscript MS fr. 2452 is a composite manuscript. It is classified among French manuscripts, although its contents are mainly Latin.51 I am not aware of any research on the history of the manuscript. It has five items, numbered in the 1868 catalogue as follows (no. 3, our item noted by bold type) :52 1°  Instruction sur le “mariage charnel” et le “mariage espirituel” (XVe siècle). Commençant par : “tres chieres et tres amées seurs, je, vostre aisné frere charnel d’un pere et d’une mere, quant au monde, et frere espirituel …”, et finissant par : “… ne se doit pas relascher de la rigueur par dedens do son exercitacion”. 2°  Preces latinae (fol.  49)  – Incomplet au commencement. 3°  [Our item] Psalmi quidam, fragment d’écriture lombarde du XIe siècle, contenant environ vingt psaumes (fol.  75). 4°  ”Exorcismus salis” et “aque” (XIe siècle). | 5°  ”Cantica canticorum”, fragment du XIIe siècle, avec commentaire, commençant par “osculetur me osculis oris sui …” et finissant par : “… morte partim divina celsitudo miraculis resurrectione …”. Incomplet à la fin  – Vélin. XIe XIIe, XVe siècles  – (Anc.  8188 3, Colbert 6459).

The catalogue gives no folio indication after the third item. Description of the psalter fragments The ten folios 75–84 are clearly in Irish script. They contain texts of the Latin Hebraicum rendering of the psalms as follows : fols  75–76 Pss 82.7–85.8 fols  77–78 Pss 95.8–99.6 fols  79–84 Pss 87.1–94.2

Each folio carries about 22–25 verses of the biblical text.

51  It is briefly described in Catalogue des manuscrits français (Paris, Bibliothèque Impériale, Departments des manuscrits). Tome premier. Ancien fonds. Vol.  1 (Publié par l’ordre de l’Empereur. Paris, MDCCCLXVIII [1868]), p. 429, no. 2452. 52  Catalogue des manuscrits, p. 420.

61

158 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church It is clear that the fragments have been arranged wrongly in the manuscript, and it is also clear that two folios for this section of the psalter are missing. The order should be : fols  75–6 Pss 82.7–85.8 one folio missing with Pss 85.9–86.16 (22 verses) fols  79–84 Pss 87.1–94.2 one folio missing with Pss 94.3–95.4 (25 verses) fols  77–8 Pss 95.5–96.6.

The first person to draw attention to this work seems to have been Fischer in a study on the work Bedae de Titulis Psalmorum liber in 1971.53 Fischer had received information on the fragments from David H. Wright. The fragments were dated as early ninth century. Fischer’s special interest in them was the fact that in a manu secunda they contained a text of Explanationes Psalmorum of Bede, the earliest known occurrence of a text of this work (on the presumed early date assigned to the fragments). In an essay published in 1973, the present writer drew attention to Fischer’s reference to these Irish fragments of the Hebraicum, noting that they deserve attention to determine the precise relation to the Irish Hebraicum family.54 I had an opportunity to examine a microfilm of the text at the Bibliothèque Nationale de France in June 2005, and later from excellent reproductions kindly provided by the same library. The script is clearly Irish. The precise date of the manuscript has yet to be determined by specialists. The use of the letter f with a stroke over it for the syllable for, very frequent in the text, would seem to indicate a date not earlier | than 900.55 There are 62 no biblical headings. On the left-hand margins each psalm carries a numbering apparently influenced by Cassiodorus’s divisio. There are two interlinear glosses in a hand different from that of the principal scribe. One is on Ps 82.6 : “Ego dixi dii estis” .i. feci uos pene deos sed uos praecepta mea spraeuistis, from an unidenFischer, “Bedae de titulis psalmorum liber”, pp. 90–110, at 110. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, pp. 231–32. 55  See Appendix A below, with note 4, p.  200, to the abbreviation. In this appendix, I give abbreviations and word symbols, syllable and letter symbols used in the psalter fragments in MS Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BNF), fr. 2452. 53 

54 

five irish psalter texts

159

tified source. There is another on Ps 84.4 : “altaria tua Domine” concupiui uidere, from the Epitome of Julian’s translation of the psalm commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia, or more probably from the Glossa in psalmos of the Vatican manuscript Pal. lat. 68, itself drawn from Julian’s work.56 The Hebraicum text of the Paris fragment is the Irish AKI The editors of the critical edition of the Hebraicum have identified a specifically Irish family among the manuscripts of this translation, one found in the manuscripts with the sigla AKI, that is the Amiatinus (Wearmouth-Jarrow, before a.d. 716), MS Karlsruhe Aug XXXVIII (K) and one in the Hebraicum side of the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen (Rouen, Bibl. mun.  24, tenth century). The Rouen text (I), although the most recent of the three, they regard as representing the Irish family in its purest form. But even the ancestor of the Irish family they regard as already corrupt. The exemplar of A was more corrupt than either I or K. One feature of the Irish family is the omission of certain words and phrases. The most notable omission is at Ps  90.17 where the entire half-verse et opus manuum nostrarum fac stabile super nos is omitted, and this only in the AKI witnesses of the Hebraicum. The biblical text of the Paris fragments undoubtedly belongs to the Irish family. This is clearest in the large omission at Ps 90.17, but holds true for the entire text. There is a variety in the manner in which the manuscripts AKI diverge from the critical edition (and presumably Jerome’s original). Sometimes all three differ in the same manner ; at other times only one or other of the manuscripts differs. In order to ascertain the place where the text of the Paris fragments (P) stands within the Irish Hebraicum family, I have collated the entire text against the apparatus of the critical edition. With very few exceptions, this collation shows that P almost always agrees with AKI when all these three agree against 56  “Altaria tua Domine uirtutum”. id est subauditur “concupiui uidere” ; see Glossa in psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus Latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11–151.7), ed. by M. McNamara (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1986, p. 178. The text of Julian’s Epitome reads : “Altaria tua, Domine usque Deus meus. Concupiui quoque uidere altaria tua, qui rex Dominusque meus es”, in Theodori Mopsuesteni Expositionis in Psalmos Iuliano Aeclanensi interprete in latinum versae quae supersunt, ed. by L. De Coninck – M. J. D’Hont (CCSL 88A), Turnhout, 1977, p. 296.

160 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the reading of the critical edition. 57 However, when only one or other of AKI varies from the critical edition, | P almost always 63 has the reading of the critical edition, and does not follow any of the other three Irish texts.58 The conclusion from this evidence would seem to be that, whatever of its date of transcription, the Paris fragment represents a very early stage of the Irish Hebraicum texts. Psalm division in the text In the left-hand margins, sections of each psalm are marked off by Roman numerals, from .ii. to .uii. (There is no no .i. – this being presumed as the opening verse.) These correspond to the indications given in the Divisio of Cassiodorus’s Expositio in Psalmos. That this is so seems clearest from Ps 93 (92), with seven sections indicated as in Cassiodorus. Thus Ps  82 (81) .ii. Iudicate, v.3 ; .iii. Ego dixi, v .8. 83 (82) : .iii. Fac illis, v.10. There is no no. .ii. No. .iii. is probably an error for .ii., and corresponds to Cassiodorus’s Divisio 2. 84 (83) : .ii. Beatus homo, v.6 ; .iii. Clypeus meus, v.10. 85 (84) : .ii. Continuisti omnem, v.4. 87 (86) : .ii. Conmemorabo, v.4 ; .iii. Et cantabunt, v.7 (last verse and line, exactly as in Cassiodorus’s divisio. “Tertia parte propheta uno uersu futuri saeculi beatitudinem tangit” [Corpus Christianorum Series Latina (CCSL) 98, 789, lines 19–20]). 88 (87) : .ii. Longe fecisti, v.9 ; .iii. Nunquid, v.11. 89 (88) : .ii. Confitebuntur, v.6 ; .iii. Tunc locutus, v.20 ; .iiii. Tu autem repulisti, v.39 ; .ui. (error for .u. ?) Usquequo, v.47 ; .ui. Ubi sunt, v.50. 90 (89) : .ii. Conuertens (thus MS P, with many MSS ; ed, cr. con­ uertes), v.3 ; .iii. et numerentur (et AKIO reading ; ed. cr. ut), v.12. 91 (90) : .ii. Cadent, v.7 ; .iii. Quoniam mihi adhesit, v.14. 92 (91) : .ii. Germinauerunt impii, v.6 ; .iii. Iustus ut palma, v.13. 93 (92) : .ii. Indutus, v.1 ; .iii. Insuper, v.1 ; .iiii. Firmum, v.2 ; .u. Leuauerunt, v.3 ; .ui. Testimonia, v.5 ; .uii. Domum tuam, v.5 (in 5 verses seven divisions, as in Cassiodorus. “… Sexto a ueritate dictorum, postremum a laude domus ipsius”). 95 (94) : .ii. Hodie, v.8. 57  In Appendix B, I give variants from the critical edition of the Hebraicum occurring in the BNF, MS fr. 2452. 58  In Appendix C, I give a collation of the readings of Paris fragments (P) against these AKI variants which do not all agree with one another.

five irish psalter texts 96 97 98 99

(95) : (96) : (97) : (98) :

.ii. .ii. .ii. .ii.

161

Afferte, v.7. Adorate, v.7. .Iubilate, v.4. Exaltate, v.5.

The psalter section of the Reference Bible (De enigmatibus) The chief work among those of Irish origin or with Irish affiliations identified by Bernhard Bischoff in his ground-breaking essay “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exgese im Frühmittelalter” is that bearing the title : Pauca problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis (“A few [some] questions posed concerning obscurities | of the canonical books”).59 It is a commen- 64 tary on select passages from all the books of the biblical canon from Genesis to the Apocalypse. It has been transmitted almost in its entirety in two manuscripts (Munich, MS Clm. 14276 [the Old Testament] + 14277 [New Testament] and Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. MS 11561), and for the greater part of Genesis in the Vatican MS Reginensis latinus 76. Portions of it have also been preserved in excerpts and in an abbreviated form in three known manuscripts. With regard to the date of composition we can work backwards from the date of the known manuscripts. The Vatican Library manuscript is dated to the eighth or ninth century ; the full Munich text to the beginning of the ninth century ; the Paris manuscript to the middle or the second half of the ninth century ; excerpts from the middle or latter half of the ninth century ; the earliest manuscript of the abbreviation (MS Lyons 447[376], a reworking, written as dialogue) is from the ninth century ; other texts of the abbreviation are from the ninth or tenth century, or later. If the work was already abbreviated in the ninth century, composition in the eighth century at the latest appears indicated, possibly between a.d. 730 and 750. The work seems to have been compiled on the Continent, probably in Irish circles or circles deeply influenced by Irish exegetical tradition. 59  B. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), pp. 169–281, at lines 1223–230 (=Mittelalterliche Studien I, pp.  231–36) ; trans. C. O’Grady, “Turning-Points in the istory of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, in Biblical Studies : the Medieval Irish Contribution, PIBA 1, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 1976, pp. 97–102.

162 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Bischoff designated this one-volume commentary as “Das Bibelwerk”, represented in the English translation of his essay “Wendepunkte” as the “Reference Bible”. Both designations were regarded as imprecise by Roger Gryson of the Vetus Latina Institut, and the official title for the composition in the Vetus Latina list of authors and abbreviations is De enigmatibus (abbreviated DE, followed by abbreviation of the biblical book in question, e.g. DEAp for the Apocalypse ; DEPs for the Psalms). Portions of the work have been critically edited : the general introduction and the section on the Pentateuch by Gerard MacGinty,60 and the commentary on the Apocalypse by Roger Gryson.61 The Irish nature or affiliations of the work can only be determined after the entire commentary has been critically edited, with a full source analysis. The Irish origins or affiliations will probably be seen to vary from one section to another. Bischoff has noted the close relationship of the commentary on Matthew with other commentary material regarded as of Irish origin, or at least used in Ireland. The commentary on the Apocalypse is very closely related to a commentary on the same work preserved in the Cambridge MS UL Dd.X.16 (written in Brittany). Gryson believes that they both depend on a commentary on the Apocalypse written in Ireland in the early eighth century. | This takes us to the section of De enigmatibus on the psalter – 65 in the Munich MS Clm 14276 (given the siglum M), fols 94v–108v, with Ps 86.2 ; in MS Paris, BNF lat. 11561 (given the siglum P), fols 53ra–63ra. (The section on the psalter is also in the MSS of the abbreviated text.) In the full text this section of De enigmatibus is headed : “Incipiunt pauca de Psalmis Dauid regis Israel” (“short pieces concerning the psalms of David King of Israel begin”). First there is the introduction in 33 numbered paragraphs, headed with regard to content, generally in the form of a question, answered in the body of the paragraph. The introduction Pauca problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis. Praefatio et libri de Pentateucho Moysi, ed. by G. MacGinty (CCCM 173 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars 3), Turnhout, 2000. Note the peculiar manuscript reading problesmata in the title. 61  Variorum auctorum Commentaria minora in Apocalypsin Johannis, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 107), Turnhout, 2003, pp. 231–95. 60 

five irish psalter texts

163

concludes with an unnumbered paragraph headed De laude psalterii (“On praise of the psalter”). In M, the introduction comprises five folios (M fols 94v–99v) ; in P, four folios (P 53ra–56ra). This is followed by brief treatment of individual psalm verses, headed “Incipiunt Pauca de historia Psalmorum”, which I understand as “short pieces on the historical exposition of the psalms begin”. This extends over six folios in P (fols 56ra–63ra), on Pss 1 to 150 ; in M fols 99v–108v, on Pss 1 to Ps 86.2. Due to a loss of folios in the Munich MS the section from the comment on Ps 86.2 to Canticles 6.4 is missing. M 108v (faded) ends with a comment by Eucherius on Ps 86.2 (=P 61vb21) and M 109r begins with a comment on Canticles 6.4 (=Pa 68rb10). Due to lack of comparative material from Ireland, no definitive judgment on the Irish origins or affiliations of much of the material in De enigmatibus can be made. Matters are quite different with regard to the section on the psalter. For this we have abundant Irish material, especially for the general introduction to the psalter and the exposition of Ps 1. In the Old Irish treatise on the psalter, composed about 800, we have a general introduction to the psalter, followed by a commentary on Ps 1. It is recognised that in both parts the OIT is closely related to the first part of the introduction in De enigmatibus and to the exposition of Ps 1 in that same work.62 There is also a relationship to the introduction to the psalms in the Hiberno–Latin work titled Eglogae tractatorum in Psalterium (“selected texts from commentators on the psalms”).63 These three works represent early Irish introductions to the psalter and on the exposition of Ps 1. Here I concentrate on the text of De enigmatibus. In the 33 numbered sections of the introduction the authorities used are indicated by capital letters, on occasion written in full, at other times in abbreviated form : Senator Cassiodorus (sometimes written as senatus), Isidorus, Cassianus, Hilarius, Gregorius, Hironimus and Athanasius Alexandrinus. The two manuscripts do not always agree in the manner of citation. Thus at no. XXV 62  See P. P. Ó Néill, “The Old-Irish Treatise”, pp. 148–64. See also M. Sheehy in his notes to the edition of the psalm preface in De enigmatibus in McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, Appendix IV, pp. 291–98. 63  Noted by M. Sheehy in his edition of the Preface to the Eglogae in McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, Appendix III, pp. 285–86.

164 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Cas of M is written as Cassianus in P. Occasionally, although very rarely, one of the manuscripts indicates an authority not given in the other. The authorities for the introduction to the psalter are as follows, in the order of appearance : no. II senatus et isidor (P ; senatus … is, M) ; no. III hilarius (P ; hila, M), isidorus ; no. VI ambros (P ; amb, M), hilarius (P ; hilar, M), hieronimus, gregorius (P only ; passage omitted in M through | homeoteleuton), hier, isid, 66 agustin (P ; agus M) ; no. XVIII helarius (P ; helar M), hieron, hieronimus ; no. XXIV HIERONIMUS ; no. XXV casianus (P ; cas M) ; XXVI cas (P ; M) ; no. XXVIII HIER (cited through Cassiodorus) ; no. XXX Athanasius Alexandrinus (cited through Cassiodorus). The content of nos. XXVIII–XXXIII is mainly from Cassiodorus. The introduction (under the attribution Cas.) treats of the apocryphal psalm 151, Pusillus, asking why it is placed “outside the number” (extra numerum, of 150), whether it is accepted as having the authority of psalms, and if it has a spiritual sense, why is it placed at the end. The psalm, however, is not commented on in the body of the work.64 The unnumbered section titled “De laude Psalterii” at the end of the introduction proper consists entirely of excerpts from Cassiodorus. The section with the brief treatment of individual psalms, headed “Incipiunt pauca de historia psalmorum” generally has the number of the psalm commented on indicated by a Roman numeral. Not all the psalms are commented on, and then only individual verses. The exposition is by way of excerpts, generally attributed to named commentators : Isidor(us), Cassiodor(us), Ios or Iosepus, Gregorius and Eucherius. By “Gregorius” Paterius’s compilation of excerpts from Gregory’s various works is intended. Cassiodorus is cited sparingly in excerpts for Pss 1–21 (Pss 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 21). The authors most cited, from the beginning right through to the end, are Eucherius and “Gregorius”. A work under the name of “Ios” or “Iosepus” is heavily drawn on, from Ps 4 to Ps 77 (Pss 4 ; 9 ; 15.4 ; 17.26 ; 20 ; 28 ; 38 ; 44 47 ; 48 ; 50 ; 59 ; 61 ; 63 ; 67 ; 70 ; 73.5. 12 ; 75 ; 77.70). It is clear that On Ps. 151 see now R. Stichel, Beiträge zur frühen Geschichte des Psalters und zur Wirkungsgeschichte der Psalmen (Abhandlungen der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 116), Paderborn, Munich, Vienna, Zürich, 2007, pp. 417–533 ; earlier McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, p. 271. 64 

five irish psalter texts

165

the compiler of De enigmatibus knew of a single commentary on these psalms (and presumably the entire psalter) attributed to a certain Iosepus. The work in question for the texts from Pss 17 to the end (Ps 77.70) is clearly the Epitome of Julian’s translation of the Greek commentary on the psalms by Theodore of Mopsuestia. The question is quite different for the comments on Ps 4, 9 and 15 (15.4). These excerpts are not from the Epitome but rather are identical with the glosses on Pss 1.1–16.11a of the Double Psalter of St-Ouen. It seems clear that both the Rouen Double Psalter and the compiler of De enigmatibus drew on a full “historical” interpretation of the psalter, the greater part of which (from Ps 16.11b onwards) contained the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s commentary, but for the beginning (Pss 1.1–16.11a) another historical commentary, interpreting most of the Psalms of David and his times only. The Milan commentary, on the contrary, and the Hiberno–Latin work Eglogae tractatorum in psalterium, have the Epitome for Ps 16.11 onwards, but the text of Julian’s full translation of Theodore’s work for the beginning (Pss 1.1–16.11). One may presume that at one time the full abbreviation (the Epitome) of Julian’s commentary existed, but that at an early period the opening section for Pss 1.1–16.11 got lost, and was replaced differently by another branch of a historical interpretation in the tradition represented by the Milan commentary and Eglogae, the Rouen Psalter and De enigmatibus. | The conclusion from the evidence is that in the psalm section 67 De enigmatibus is witness to early Irish psalm exegesis at least in the greater part of the preface to the psalter and in the use of a historical commentary on the psalter for Ps 1.16.11 and Ps 16.11 onwards which is a combination of the Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s psalm commentary and another hitherto unknown work, a combination also found in the Double Psalter of St-Ouen. The Psalter of Cormac (BL Add 36929) Introduction : description of the manuscript The Psalter of Cormac, now commonly assigned a date of c. 1150– 1200, is probably the latest of the Latin Psalters of the early Irish Church. That nearest to it in time is the Coupar Angus Psalter

166 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (c. 1170), which is connected in decoration with contemporary texts from Armagh and Bangor. It is, however, uncertain whether the Coupar Angus Psalter was written in Ireland or in a monastery in Scotland that was under Irish influence. The Coupar Angus Psalter is connected with the Cistercian Order. Its biblical text is Gallican and represents the recension used in the University of Paris in the thirteenth century. While some studies have been made of the Psalter of Cormac, the comprehensive examination that would situate it in Irish and monastic history still remains to be done. It has elements that seem to connect it with Cistercian tradition, and others that are specifically Irish. Any new study of the work best begins with the excellent and detailed description of most of its elements by an anonymous writer (M. R. James ?) given in the catalogue of the additional manuscripts published by the British Museum (now British Library). It is as follows :65 36929.  Psalter in Latin, of St  Jerome’s second (or Gallican) version. The preliminary matter consists of (1)  ”Expositio sancti Augustini in psalmis,” part of the treatise De psalmorum usu, generally assigned to Alcuin (Migne, Patr. Lat. ci., col. 466–467 d, cf. Berger, Prefaces, no.  84, in Mem. Acad. des Inscriptions, 1  ser., xi., pt.  2). Beg. “Si uis pro peccatis tuis,” and ends “in psalmis inuenies.” fol.  1 ;  – (2)  ”Absolutio Bernarddi,” a brief formula beg. “Absoluimus te, frater, uice beati Petri,” taken from some undiscovered source, fol.  1  b ;  – (3)  ”Ante ψsalmos oremus,” a prayer which occurs, with variations, in many early Psalters, cf. Cotton MSS. Vesp. A. i., fol.  11  b, Tib. C. vi., fol.  30, Vitell. E.  xviii., fol. 17 b, Harl. MS 2904, fol. 2 b, Add. MS 21927, fol. 12 b, Berger, Pref. no.  125. Beg. ‘suscipere digneris, domine, hos uersiculos.” fol.  1  b. Instead of the titles of the psalms allegorical interpretations are placed at the head of them, apparently abridged from the Interpretatio (Berger, Pref., no.  110) which stands at the | beginning of Vesp. A. i. (fol.  9) ; but they are not inserted after Ps  lvii. In the margin of Ps  i.–vii. the Divisiones of Cassiodorus are also noted. Ps vii., xv., xvii.–xx., xxvi., xxviii. have the words of the antiphon prefixed, apparently by the original hand ; a few are also added to later psalms, but by a more recent hand. The Psalter is divided after Ps  1. and Ps  c. ; and the Cantica, which 65  M. R. James, Catalogue of Additions to the Manuscripts in the British Museum in the Years MDCCCC–MDCCCCV, London, 1907, pp. 259–60.

68

five irish psalter texts

167

are all from the Vulgate version, are distributed as follows : (a)  At the end of Ps  1. (fol.  56  b) Dan.  iii.  57–88, Is.  xii.  1–6 and xxxviii.  10–20, followed by the colophon, with music on a stave of four red lines, “Cormacus scripsit hoc ψsalterium ora pro eo. Qui legis hec ora pro sese qualibet hora.” (fol.  59) ;  – (b)  After Ps  c. (fol.  117) Sam.  ii.  1–10, Exod.  xv. 1–19 and Hab.  iii.2–19 ;  – (c)  At the end the psalm “Pusillus eram” (fol.  175  b), followed by a prayer beg. “Te dominum de celis laudamus,” and the canticle Deut.  xxxii.  1–43 (fol.  176). The later initial B which follows is probably the beginning of the Benedictus (Luke i. 68–79). A somewhat similar distribution of the Canticles occurs in another Irish MS, Cotton MS Vitellius F.  xi, in which the leaf containing the Isaiah Canticles should probably come after Ps  1. Vellum ; fols  179 (a leaf cut out at the beginning and two at the end). Written in a fine Irish hand, most probably in the thirteenth cent. Initials of verses stand in the margin and are filled with patches of colour, chiefly red and yellow ; many of them terminate in the heads and claws of dogs, and several are outlined with red dots. The initials of psalms are larger and more elaborate, with interlaced and other designs and similar zoomorphic extremities, the colours used being red, yellow, purple, green and blue. The still larger initials of Ps. i., li., ci. are composed of the elongated bodies of dogs, mostly purple in colour ; they are surrounded by a close network of interlaced yellow cords laid on a red ground and terminating in human as well as canine heads. On the pages facing Ps.  li., ci. are rectangular frames of interlaced, key-pattern and other designs in red, yellow and purple ; they were no doubt intended for miniatures and show traces of rudely sketched outlines. The Absolution and prayer on fol.  1  b are also enclosed within a frame-border. Bound in wooden boards covered with tooled leather, apparently German and of the 16th–17th cent.  7  in.  ×  5½  in. (clipped at the top in binding).

As we can see, this is a small volume 177.8mm × 139.7mm (7″  ×  5½″). While the binding is German of the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century, the script and decoration, as well as the scribe’s name, Cormac, indicate that the manuscript is Irish. It was most probably written in Ireland, rather than by an Irish scribe in Germany. In examining its possible Irish and Cistercian affiliations we will go through the different elements noted in the catalogue, adding to the information there given where possible. First we have the opening page in the preliminary material : (“Expositio sancti Augustini in psalmis,”). Beg. “Si uis pro peccatis tuis”, and ends “in psalmis inuenies”. This, as noted in the

168 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church BL Catalogue, is part of the treatise De psalmorum usu, generally assigned to Alcuin (PL 101, 466–467D). | The colophon

On folio 59r, after the canticles which follow the first group of 50 psalms, the scribe wrote a polyphonic colophon in which he gives his own name. It is in poetic form :66 Cormacus scripsit hoc ψsalterium ora pro eo. Qui legis hec ora pro sese qualibet hora. Cormac wrote this psalter ; pray for him. You who read these things, pray for himself (=yourself ?) in every hour.

The polyphonic colophon is artistically arranged, with three lines of polyphony before the first line on the author, and three more before the second. They are evidence of Cormac’s interest in music. alsolutio bernarddi Next (fol. 1v), above a prayer (in six lines, miniature script) before the psalms, comes a formula identified in the first line of text as alsolutio bernarddi. It reads : Absoluimus te frater uice absolutio bernarddi beati petri apostolorum principis per quem/ nobis collata est potestas ligandi atque soluemdi ; 7/ in quantum tua expetit accusatio 7 ad nos pertinet/ remisio sit tibi omnipotens deus redemptor tuus uita/ et salus 7 omnium peccatorum tuorum pius indultor. amen

The source of this text or its affiliations, have not been identified. The mention of (St) Bernard would seem to indicate some connection of the completed psalter with the Cistercians. Prayer before the psalms Next, in the remainder to fol. 1v, below the absolutio bernarddi, comes a “prayer before the psalms” headed “Ante ψsalmos oremus”, beginning “Suscipere digneris Domine hos uersiculos … ; ending … 7 spatium adiuuando 7 ueram penitentiam faciendo. Per”. As the BL catalogue has noted, this is a prayer which occurs, with 66  On this colophon see D. Howlett, “The Polyphonic Colophon to Cormac’s Psalter”, Peritia 9 (1995), 81–91.

69

five irish psalter texts

169

variations, in many early psalters, among them BL Cotton Vesp. A.i. fol. 11b. Vespasianus A.i is a Roman Psalter of the eighth century, of English origin, known as the Psalter of St Augustine of Canterbury. | Biblical text of the psalter

The psalter text gives the Latin text of Pss 1 to 151, that is, including the apocryphal psalm 151, without any notice that it is extra numerum “outside the number” (of 150). Despite this, the psalter is still divided according to the “three fifties”, with a division after Ps 50 and Ps 100, with the biblical canticles as follows : (a) at the end of Ps 50 (fol. 56v) Daniel 3.57–88 ; Isaiah 12.1–6 and Isaiah 38.10–20, followed by a colophon and music on staves of four red lines, “Cormacus scripsit hoc ψsalterium ora pro eo. Qui legis hec ora pro sese qualibet hora” (fol. 59) ; (b) After Ps 100 (fol. 117) Samuel 2.1–10 ; Exodus 15.1–19 and Habakkuk 3.2–19 ; (c) at the end of the apocryphal psalm Ps 151, Pusillus eram (fol. 175v), and the psalm prayer, beg. “Te Dominum de celis laudamus” which follows it, we have the canticle Deuteronomy 32.1–43 (fol. 176). The inclusion of Ps 151 as an integral part of the psalter, before the psalm prayer, need not indicate that Cormac had copied this from his original. In this apocryphal psalm the young David is represented as speaking, saying that he was small among his brothers, the youngest in his father’s house. He tended his father’s sheep. He goes on to speak of his musical interests : manus meae fecerunt organum digiti mei aptaverunt psalterium (NRSV : “My hands made a harp ; my fingers fashioned a lyre”).

Cormac may have identified himself with the youthful David. The psalter text is Gallican. Its precise position within the Gallican family, and relationship to the Irish (CI ; MS the Cathach, Dublin, Royal Irish Academy, MS 12 R. 33 and Double Psalter of St.-Ouen) and Paris recensions remains to be determined. The “Paris Recension”, used in the University of Paris in the thirteenth century, is from our point of view represented by the Coupar Angus Psalter and Eadwine’s Canterbury Psalter (Cambridge, Trinity College Library MS R.71.1, [978]), written by the monk Eadwine in Christ Church Monastery, Canterbury, in the

70

170 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church twelfth century.67 Only a full collation will indicate Cormac’s relationship to these texts, to later Irish Gallican texts (BL Cotton Vitellius [c. 920], Southampton [eleventh century], Vatican lat. MS 12910 [eleventh cent.], BL Cotton Galba [twelfth century]), or Vulgate texts in general. Random checks indicate that it does not generally follow the Irish family, and that it has agreement with some specific “Paris Recension” readings, but not others. The Psalter of Cormac has the apocryphal Psalm 151, Pusillus, as part of the psalter text, before the psalm prayer and canticle. In this it is unique among Latin | manuscripts. Ps 151 is found in 71 the Old Latin texts and in a minority of Vulgate manuscripts. It is in the Irish Double Psalter of St-Ouen, in a later hand, after the psalm prayer. Of the “Paris Recension” it is in D (Eadwine’s Canterbury Psalter), after the canticles. What variants from the “critical edition” there are in Cormac are not sufficient or coherent to indicate any particular relationship with any of the other known texts. Non-biblical psalm headings (Tituli Psalmorum) Main headings. Series II There are no biblical headings in the Psalter of Cormac, which is understandable in a work probably intended for devotional or liturgical use. A space is left between each of the psalms, and before each psalm from Pss 2 to 57 an allegorical psalm heading is inserted in most of them (omitted in Pss 19, 27, 39). In some instances, the number of the psalm is inserted after the psalm heading (thus in Ps 4, 9, 15, 17, 19 [on which later], 26, 46, 56). The heading of Ps 19, with the psalm heading number, is inserted for Ps 18 (Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei). “Ad passionem liberationis xix”,68 above which 67  Facsimile edition, with introduction by M. R. James, The Canterbury Psalter, London, 1935 ; earlier edition, Eadwine’s Canterbury Psalter, Pt.  2. Text and notes with introduction and notes from the manuscript in Trinity College, ed. by F. Harsley, Cambridge, London, 1889. 68  In the printout of the Psalter of Cormac mauscript from my microfilm the reading of the first word is unclear. Pierre Salmon’s accepted reading for Series II, Ps.  19 is De passione liberationis, with a variant Ad passionem libertatis in MS S, Sinai Slavonic 5 ; probably ninth century ; see Les “Tituli psalmorum”, ed by P. Salmon, Rome, 1959, p. 82.

five irish psalter texts

171

an antiphon is inserted.69 Ps 19 is left without a psalm heading, but has an antiphon. It would appear that the psalm headings were inserted later, and not from the exemplar of Cormac’s Psalter but from a collection of psalm prefaces or psalm headings. The BL catalogue has noted that the allegorical interpretations of the Psalter of Cormac are apparently abridged from the Interpretatio (Berger, Préfaces, no. 110) which stands at the beginning of Vesp. A.i (fol. 9). These headings are not inserted after Ps 57, although the usual blank space has been left. The headings are from Dom Pierre Salmon’s Series II of Tituli psalmorum, of which Series the chief representative is Vespasianus A i (eighth century ; the so-called Psalter of St Augustine of Canterbury), for which reason Salmon gives the title “the Series of St Augustine of Canterbury” to this set of psalm headings. We may note that not all of the Series II set are abbreviated in Cormac’s Psalter. The Series II headings vary in length, and some are too extensive to fit into the limited space left between the psalms in the Psalter of Cormac. Series II is widely attested, with an Insular, an Italian (Italo– Insular) and Spanish tradition. In Salmon’s edition the second in order of its witnesses (with siglum t for this Series) is the manuscript Saint Gall, Stiftsbibliothek 110, a collection of psalter Prefaces attached to the Rule of St Benedict and other texts, written at Verona probably at the time of Bishop Egino, 796–99. It is also attested in the psalter from Sinai (Sinai Slavonic 5 ; ninth century ; probably of Mediterranean origin). The series is an early one, probably of Italian origin. The different witnesses show a variety of readings. | It is unfortunate that our psalter has the text of the psalm 72 headings only for 57 psalms. It is hard to say what conclusions can be drawn from this limited evidence as to precise affiliations of its text, especially given that a number of the Series II readings are abridged. In any event, the Series is not the Irish Series I of St Columba. On the assumption that these headings were written in Ireland, a question arises as to how the scribe had access to

69  The number “XVIIII” (instead of XVIII) is inserted with the psalm heading for Ps.  18 in the Madrid, MSB.N.A.  2 (The Bible of San Juan de la Peňa), eleventh century ; see Salmon, Les “Tituli Psalmorum”, p. 82.

172 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church this series otherwise unattested in Irish sources. They may, however, have been added on the Continent. Other non-Series II headings and (Cassiodorus) division numbers (added in later by hand) Together with the headings just consided there are other headings added by a later hand, or hands, which I give here. To Ps  3. Framed. In later hand, to right of Ser II : Filius loquitur ad Patrem exprobrans persecutoribus. See Cassiodorus, Diuisio. “Primo itaque modo ad Patrem loquitur, persecutoribus exprobrans”. Left-hand margin to Ps : 3.6 : ad Patrem. Below this “ii”. See Cassiodorus’s Diuisio which opens : Totus hic psalmus ad personam Christi competenter aptatur. Ps  4. Left-hand margin : Ecclesiae. See Cassiodorus’s Diuisio. Then on v. 6 : Ego dormiui … Venit ad secundam partem : “Per totum psalmum uerba sunt matris Ecclesiae”. 4.4. To Et scitote : Uox ecclesiae (=Cassiodorus’s Diuisio). Ps  5. To heading, in left-hand margin : Vox ecclesiae. See Cassiodorus’s Diuisio :  … a persona catholicae Ecclesiae. Ps  5.9, in left-hand margin to Domine deduc : Uox ecclesiae : See Cassiodrus in his diuisio psalmi : Totus hic psalmus a persona catho­ licae profertur Ecclesiae. Ps 6. Title. In left-hand margin to opening words 6.1 ; three words not legible in printout of microfilm. Ps  6.7, to Laboraui ingemui, left-hand margin : “ii”. This corresponds to Cassiodorus’s Diuisio ii (see CCSL 97, 72, lines 67–8. secunda diuisione narrat aerumnas proprias). Ps 6.9, left-hand margin to Discedit, the Roman numeral “iii”. The “heading” seems to correspond to Cassiodorus’s Diuisio, implicitly, even though after the ‘secunda diuisione” he simply has ‘sequitur … profutura correctio” ; CCSL 97, 72, 70–1. 6.10, left-hand margin, to Erubescant the Roman numeral “iiii”. This is not explicitly the diuisio IV in Cassiodorus, but it corresponds to his “conclusio” (‘superest conclusio”), Ps  7. In box, to right of Ser II : “Uox profetae”. This corresponds to the opening of Cassiodorus’s Diuisio : “Causam suam propheta trahens …”.

Cassiodorus headings and divisions As the BL catalogue has observed, in the margin of Pss 1–7 the Divisiones of Cassiodorus are also noted. There are six occurrences of the word Diuisio, written in full in the left-hand margins, as

five irish psalter texts

173

follows : opposite Pss 17 :27 (Cum sancto), 30.13b (Factus sum), 32.12 (Beata gens), 33.13 (Quis est homo), 67.20 (Benedictus Dominus die | quotidie), 144.10 (Confiteantur tibi). The word has, presumably, 73 some connection with the Commentary of Cassiodorus. In Cassiodorus’s commentary there is no indication of a division at 17.27, or in fact at which verse any of his diuisiones begins. In his Diuisio psalmi he says that this psalm cannot refer to just one person. First in order, the prophet speaks, then the Church, in the third the voice of the Saviour Lord glides down, while in the fourth the words of the Catholic Church are again given. With regard to 30.13b (30.14) Cassiodorus in his Diuisio psalmi says that throughout the entire psalm the words are those of the Lord Saviour. In the first part he beseeches the Father to be saved from the imminent sufferings, and then rejoices at having been heard. Next he returns to his passion and in the third gives thanks to the Lord on his own behalf and that of the faithful people. There is no indication at which precise verse any of the divisions begins. With regard to Ps 32.12 this could be taken as no. 2 of Cassiodorus’s Diuisio : Secunda sectione exclamat beatum esse … As for Ps 33.13 (Quis est … Twelfth letter, Mem, of Hebrew alphabet in this alphabetic psalm) : In his Diuisio Cassiodorus divides sections in accord with the number of Hebrew letters : the first with four letters (vv. 2–5) ; the second with (the next) six (vv. 6–10). In the third, he (the prophet) admonishes, as it were, from which crimes they should abstain ; this has four letters (vv. 11–14, the Hebrew letters Kaph, Lamed, Mem, Nun, ending with the letter Nun, that next to Mem). This Psalter of Cormac Diuisio with Quis est (Mem) does not correspond to Cassiodorus. With Ps 67.(19–)20 we encounter differences in punctuation and Vulgate textual reading. The critical edition, with a minority of texts which include the Irish CI, has : (19) non credentes inhabitare Dominum (20) Deus benedictus Dominus die quotidie. Cormac, with the majority of Vulgate texts, has : … inhabitare Dominum Deum (20) Benedictus Dominus die quotidie. Cassiodorus’s text reads. … non credunt inhabitare Dominus Deus. Once again, it is not obvious what exact verses correspond to Cassiodorus’s division of this psalm, but it would appear to be vv. 16–21 (Tertio per montis speciem [cf. v. 16] …. Quarto inimicorum Domini superbiam conquas-

174 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church sandum [cf. v. 22] esse pronuntiat), so that vv. 19–20 do not correspond to the beginning of a Diuisio. Ps 144 is an alphabetic psalm with 21 verses (the Hebrew letter Nun is omitted). Cassiodorus notes this structure, and makes three divisions with three, four and fourteen verses (thus vv. 1–3 ; 4–7 ; 8–21). Cormac’s note at 144.10 does not correspond to Cassiodorus. The biblical canticles and psalm prayer We have already considered the position of the biblical canticles in Western tradition and in the Irish Psalters. The canticles in the Psalter of Cormac are in the Irish tradition and are as follows : After Ps  50 Canticles i–iii. After Ps  100 Canticles iv–vi.

| The biblical text finishes with the apocryphal Psalm 151. After 74 this there immediately follows the psalm prayer Te Dominum de celis laudamus, followed immediately by Canticle no. vii, Audite caeli. We have already considered this psalm prayer, found only in Irish sources. It is no. 3 of the Irish series, found in the Antiphonary of Bangor, the Southampton Psalter, and the Coupar Angus Psalter. This psalm prayer also occurs in the Double Psalter of St-Ouen, p. 308 of MS, top of page, immediately before Ps 151 Pusillus, in same text hand. The text in the Double Psalter of St-Ouen is as follows : Te Dominum de celis laudamus tibi ut canticum n/ cantare mereamini. Te Dominum in sanctis tu/ uenerabiliter depraecamur ut omnia uota nostra/ suscipias peccata dimittas. Miserere nob/ domine qui regnas in sæecula sæculorum.

Antiphons As the BL catalogue has noted, Pss 7, 15, 17–20, 26, 28 have the words of antiphons prefixed, apparently by the original hand. A few antiphons are also added to later psalms, but by a more recent hand. Ps  7 : Al(elluia). Domine Deus meus in te speraui (=7.1) Ps  15 : Bonorum meorum non indiges in te speraui.c.m.d. (cf.  15.2 [non eges] and 15.1. conserva me Domine.)

five irish psalter texts

175

Ps  17 : Dominus firmamentum meum et refugium meum (=17.3). Ps  18 : Non sunt loquelae neque ser(mones) quorum non au(diuntur) uo(ces). e. (=v.4). Ps  19 : Exaudi te Dominus in die tribulationis (=v.2). Ps  20 : Domine in uirtute tua laetabitur rex (=v.1). Ps  26 : Dominus defensor uitae meae (cf. v.1 .. protector …).

There are seven or so antiphons by a later hand or rather hands. Ps  30 :A¬) (alleluia) In tua. ius. l.m.d. =Ps  30.2 : In tua iustitia [Gal. ius. tua] libera me Domine (in a cursive Irish hand) ; Ps  61.a¬ (=Alleluia ?) Da nobis dne auxilium de tribulatione (in a Gothic hand) (cf. Ps  59.13 ; 107.13. Da nobis auxilium de tribulatione) ; Ps  73 : Iu.u° .a°.ā.all¬a.al¬.al¬.a ;vi (v, with i above). B¬( ?) audeb¬t.l.m. (a series of abbreviated words ; Gothic script) ; Ps  76, …. uirgam hereditatis tue (Gothic script) (cf. Ps  73.1 : Redemisti uirgam hereditatis tuae) ; Ps  78  A¬.(=alleluia) Inclinate aurem vestram in verba oris m. (=mei) (Ps  77.1). An antiphon probably wrongly placed.

| Ps  80. A¬ (=Alleluia ?). Propitius esto peccatis nostris deo 75

( ? ?Domine) (Gothic hand) (cf. Ps  78.9 ; possibly a misplaced antiphon) ; Ps  99 Al(leluia). Quia mirabilia fecit Dominus (cf. Ps  97.1) (in a hand different from other late ones) ; Ps  110 : A(lleluia). Fidelia omnia mandata (Ps  110.8). In a different hand again.

Place of origin : Ireland or Germany ? There appear to be strong arguments that the work was written in Ireland. The script is Irish ; likewise the illumination. The scribe who signs himself “Cormacus”, Cormac, is clearly Irish. The presence of Series II of the psalm headings, more associated with Canterbury than Ireland, need not be a contrary argument, since Norman influences, especially in Cistercian circles, were present in Ireland in the thirteenth century. Questions still remain, however, regarding the Series II headings and other headings and antiphons as well. The manuscript did come from Germany to the British Museum, and it might be a work written in Germany by an Irish scribe. The added headings in Gothic script also require attention. These, however, would not necessarily indicate German origin,

176 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church since Gothic script and the influence of Gothic script are visible in sections written by later hands (under Anglo–Norman influence) in the Irish manuscript The Annals of Inisfallen (MS Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawlinson B 503), for instance, fol. 53 (for the years 1299–1311), fol. 57 (1320).70 The last word has not yet been said on the matter however. The biblical text needs further examination, and the presence of the apocryphal Psalm 151 as part of the biblical text, before the concluding psalm prayer. But, as we have already noted, this may not have been copied by Cormac from his original but added by him because of its mention of David’s early involvement in music for the psalms (organum and psalterium) and by Cormac’s identification of himself with David. The answer to outstanding questions, however, may in due time be settled by the identification of some late medieval psalter with the psalter biblical text as in Cormac, and more so if one has Ps 151 at its end, as in the Psalter of Cormac. The Double Psalter of St-Ouen Description, date The Double Psalter of St-Ouen contains the Gallican text on the left-hand pages (verso) and the Hebraicum facing it on the righthand pages (recto). It was written and decorated in Ireland, probably in the tenth century. The existence of glosses in a twelfth-century French hand indicates that it was in France before the end of the twelfth century. Together with the main Irish hand there are Latin glosses also in | another Irish hand, probably contemporary 76 with the main hand. The Double Psalter of St-Ouen has 160 folios, 240mm  ×  160mm (9.44″  ×  6.29″). This psalter is an important major monument to early Irish ecclesiastical learning.71 No small amount of work has been done on the psalter already, in particular by Luc De Coninck. All I intend to do here is pay attention to some elements of significance

70  See The Annals of Inisfallen, Reproduced in Facsimile from the Original Manuscript (Rawlinson B 503) in the Bodleian Library. With a descriptive introduction by R.I. Best and E. Mac Neill, Dublin, 1933, pp. 20–24. 71  It merits digitisation, with a booklet giving extensive coverage of its varied contents.

five irish psalter texts

177

for its contribution towards an understanding of Irish Psalter study from c. 700 to 1200. Both the Hebraicum and Gallicanum texts are heavily glossed, in the margins and interlinearly. The Hebraicum has a “historical” gloss, understanding the psalms as referring to events within Israel’s history. The gloss on the Gallicanum is of a spiritual nature. Psalm 1 marginal psalm-division notes On the left-hand margin of the page with the Gallicanum for Ps 1 opposite the opening words Beatus uir (v. 1) we find written diff ; opposite et erit tamquam (of v. 3) consul, and opposite non sic impii of v. 4 increp.72 These otherwise mysterious abbreviations become clear when set in the context of the study of Ps 1 in early Irish tradition, especially as found in the introduction to Ps 1 in the Old-Irish treatise on the psalms, composed about 800. The relevant text reads as follows (significant words in bold type) :73 Some of the numbers of the commentators say that the three things which are found in the psalms are found in this psalm [Ps  1] alone, to wit, vox definitionis, “the speech of definition”, vox consolationis, “the speech of consolation”, vox increpationis, “the speech of rebuke”. Primus psalmus titulus est omnium psalmorum, quod in eo continentur tres voces omnium psalmorum, i.e. vox definitionis, vox consolationis, vox increpationis. This is vox definitionis in it, from “Beatus uir” [v. 1] usque “die ac nocte”. [v. 2] This is vox consolationis in it, from “die ac nocte” usque “prosperabuntur” [v. 3]. This is vox increpationis in it, from “prosperabuntur” [v. 3] usque in finem. Twelve verses in it.

There is a similar text in the work commonly referred to as the Catechesis Celtica. This is preserved in the tenth-century manuscript Codex Reginensis 49 of the Vatican Library. It is a collection of items probably Breton in origin. Some of the pieces, however, have strong Irish connections. This is particularly true of the treatment of Ps 1. The relevant section of this section is as follows (significant words in bold type) :74 De Coninck, Incerti auctoris expositio Psalmorum, p. 4. K. Meyer, Hibernica Minora, pp. 32–35. 74  McNamara, “Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, pp. 291–334, at 306 (= McNamara, The Psalms, p. 436). 72  73 

178 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Tria in hoc psalmo continentur : diffinitio, increpatio, laudatio. Primo currit diffinitio hominis iusti a loco ubi dicit : “Beatus uir” per II uersus usque Dauid dicit : “Erit tamquam lignum” (i.e. vv. 1–2 incl.). Currit enim laudatio hominis iusti per V uersus usque Dauid dicit : “Non sic impii” (i.e. v.  3). Postquam sequitur item uersus II de hac laudatione, ubi dicit : “non sic” usque dum dicit “peribit” (vv.  4–6).

The text of the Old–Irish treatise is nearer to the abbreviations of the Rouen Psalter than is the Catechesis Celtica. We may safely expand diff, consul and increp of the margin of the double psalter with the Old–Irish treatise as diffinitio, consulatio and increpatio. The marginal indication is proof of the strong continuity of Irish tradition with regard to psalm learning. Heret signs In the earliest extant Irish commentary on the psalms, namely Glossa in Psalmos of the Codex Palatinus latinus 68 of the Vatican Library, the treatment of each psalm is introduced by the opening words, followed immediately by the term heret and a text of the preceding psalm, apparently believed to have some special connection with these opening words or the psalm in general. Thus for Ps  147 : “Lauda Hirusalem Dominum” (Ps  147.1). Heret “Magnus Dominus noster” (Ps  146.5). The origins and exact purpose of this usage have not been fully clarified. It is found uniformly in the Vatican commentary for every one of the psalms, and for the subsections of Ps  118. As De Coninck has observed, in the Gallican side of the Rouen Psalter there is a similar reference system. There the opening word of each psalm has a special sign above it (1¬ … ; a uel-type abbreviation sign followed by three dots), and corresponding to this there is a similar sign under a word, or two words, of the preceding psalm. Thus for Ps 147.1 Lauda, with this sign above it, and in Ps 146.5 magnus Dominus with the corresponding sign below. I may further note that it is not just in this psalm that the heret symbols correspond to the commentary of Pal. lat 68. This holds for practically the entire text of the Rouen Psalter. Here once again, the Rouen Psalter is in an established tradition of early Irish Psalter study.

77

five irish psalter texts

179

Biblical texts of Rouen Psalter are of the Irish, Gallican and Hebrai­ cum families Each of the Gallicanum and Hebraicum texts of the Rouen Psalter represents a specific Irish family of their respective text tradition. With the Cathach (with siglum C) the Rouen Vulgate text (with siglum I) constitutes the Irish family Vulgate texts of the psalter. It is a good text, used among the principal witnesses by the Benedictine editors of the critical edition of the Vulgate psalter. The same holds true for the Hebraicum text of the Rouen Double Psalter (given the siglum I). With the Amiatinus (A ; before 716) and MS Karlsruhe Aug. | XXXVIII (siglum K ; ninth century) it 78 forms the Irish family of Hebraicum texts (AKI). In fact, although the latest of the manuscripts, the Rouen Psalter text is nearer the original of AKI than any of the other two. This would seem to indicate either faithful transmission of early texts on the part of the Rouen text, or that it was a tenth-century copy of a good early text, without intermediaries. The Argumenta and Explanationes of Pseudo-Bede As already noted, in the work entitled In Psalmorum Librum exegesis attributed to Bede in the 1563 edition of his works, each psalm is preceded by an Argumentum and an Explanatio. The commentary only goes as far as Ps 121, while the Argumenta and Explanationes continue to the end of the psalter. The commentary has been shown to have nothing to do with Bede, and its union with the other two elements in the edition is simply fortuitous. The Argumenta were also once independent of the Explanationes, which are almost totally dependent on the introductions that Cassiodorus prefaced to his exegesis of the psalms. The Argumenta circulated independent of the Explanationes and are found in early Irish works on the psalms (for instance the Glossa of Pal. lat  68). They are scarcely the work of Bede. The Explanationes are also probably Pseudo-Bedan. The date of their composition is uncertain, but, as we have seen, they are found in many of our Irish texts.75 Fischer believed the earliest occurrence of them was in the Irish Hebraicum text of Paris, Bibl. Nat. MS 75 

See above pp. 137-43 ; the work De titulis psalmorum attributed to Bede.

180 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church fr.  2452, which Wright dated to the early ninth century. In this text (fol.  83r) for Ps  90 (91), in a later hand, the Argumentum and Explanatio of Pseudo-Bede are added, and also the Divisio of Cassiodorus (as in PL 93, 970  bc). The date, as we have seen, is probably too early and the manuscript may be contemporary with the Double Psalter of Rouen. As already noted above, in the Rouen Psalter in the page with the Hebraicum, at the beginning of the psalms or in the outer margins we have the Explanationes of Bede.76 It also has summaries of the Theodorean headings, and some of the historical elements of the Argumenta of Pseudo-Bede.77 The work has also some of the spiritual elements of the Argumenta. Because of lack of space the Rouen Psalter has seldom headings apart from its own summaries of the Theodorean headings.78 For Ps 118, however, the Gallicanum text does have the Bedan Explanationes for the psalm in general and each of the subsections. Only further examination of this psalter will provide full clarity on the matter, but it appears that the glossator(s) had access both to the Argumenta and the Explanationes associated with Bede’s name. | Glosses on the Gallicanum The glosses on the Vulgate text (Gallicanum) have not been fully examined. Those for the first hundred psalms appear to be principally from Augustine, while those from Ps 100 onwards are chiefly from Augustine’s student, Prosper of Aquitaine. For Ps 118 (the Beati), at least, Cassiodorus is drawn on heavily. Glosses on the Hebraicum : Epitome of Julian and an unknown “historical” gloss The marginal and interlinear glosses on the Hebraicum are of a “historical” nature, understanding the psalms to refer to Jewish history, whether David and his time or later Jewish history of the biblical period. From Ps 16.11b to Ps 150 the marginal gloss is from the text known as the Epitome of the commentary on the psalms of Theodore of Mopsuestia made by Julian of Eclanum.

76  77  78 

See De Coninck, Incerti auctoris. Pars prior, p. v. See De Coninck, Incerti auctoris. Pars prior, pp. xx–xxi. See De Coninck, “The Composite Literal Gloss”, p. 83.

79

five irish psalter texts

181

This gloss has been used by De Coninck in his critical edition of Julian’s translation of Theodore and the Epitome of this.79 Matters are different for the marginal gloss on Pss 1.1–16.11a. This is also a historical gloss, understanding the psalms principally of David and his contemporaries. The origin of this gloss is unknown, but does not appear to have been Irish. A preliminary edition of the gloss, with introduction, has been published by De Coninck.80 Second historical glosses on Hebraicum and Codex Pal. lat 68 The Hebraicum text in the Rouen Psalter has been glossed twice, by a manus prima from an unknown source for Pss 1.1–16.11a and from the Epitome of Julian’s translation for the remainder of the canonical psalter text. A second hand (also it would appear from the tenth century) has added further glosses of a historical nature, mainly interlinearly. These tend to be drawn from the Hiberno–Latin Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican Codex Pal. lat 68, or an Irish text very close to this. At least two such glosses from Pal. lat 68 occur on the Hebraicum of Ps 118, as follows. Ps 118.62 : On Media nocte (gloss in right-hand margin) “Quando omnia secura sunt” (=Pal : lat 68).81 | Ps 118.91 : On Hebraicum : iudicio tuo stant usque hodie (Vg : 80 ordinatione tua perseverat dies). This gloss occurs in part under the text, and partly in space at end of next line. It is probably by another hand, introduced by slanted ÷ symbol. The gloss reads : Cur dicitur sol stetit ad Gabon ? id est (.i.) non turbauit (Pal. lat. – abit) ordinem dierum quia de prima parte noctis demptum est (2-form Insular symbol for est) ut pars extrema noctis in nocte natiuitatis Christi dempta est (same symbol for est) quia in nocte illa ortus est sol (=Pal. lat 68, which lacks sol).82 De Coninck and D’Hont, Theodori Mopsuesteni. De Coninck, Incerti auctoris. A definitive edition of this gloss has been published : L. De Coninck, Expositiones psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adseruantur (CCCM 256 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VII), Turnhout, 2012, pp. xxv-xli, 5-46. 81  McNamara, Glossa in Psalmos, p. 251. 82  McNamara, Glossa in Psalmos, p. 255. 79 

80 

182 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church It is to be noted that this gloss, here on the Hebraicum, was composed for the Gallicanum (“perseuerat dies”). We have very clear evidence of extended use of the Glossa in Psalmos in the glosses on the apocryphal psalm Ps 151. In the Rouen Psalter this is added by a manus secunda after the psalm Prayer following Ps 150 and the end of the canonical psalter. There were no traditional commentaries on this apocryphal psalm, and the glossator incorporates almost all the glosses on this text from the Vatican Glossa in Psalmos or a text very closely related to it.83 These glosses from a commentary of the kind preserved in Pal. lat 68 are of special significance, as they indicate very strongly the continued use and influence of this work into the tenth century. The Psalter of Caimin (c. 1100) Description The text known as the Psalter of Caimin (MS University College Dublin, Franciscan Manuscripts A.1  ; the largest folios 360mm  ×  260mm. ; 14.1″  ×  10.2″) is a quire of six folios (numbered pages 1–12), containing portions of Ps 118 (Vulgate numbering). On these folios we have verses 1–16 and 33–116, of the 176 verses of Ps 118. In these fragments we have the Vulgate in the central writing section of the page. This is glossed heavily on the left-hand margins. There are also interlinear glosses. On the top margins of each page, except for page 1, the Hebraicum text corresponding to the Vulgate is given, the words generally in abbreviated form, sometimes indicated by an initial letter only. Each of the subsections of the psalm is introduced by the Pseudo-Bedan Explanatio. In the extant fragments, the Vulgate text begins with the opening words of the psalm in illuminated capitals. Beati immaculai in uia. This is preceded by words of the Bedan Explanatio as follows : ut meritum diuini carminis honore tituli possit agnosci (‘so that the merits of this heavenly hymn can be recognised by the glory of its heading”) : These words are but a clause, portion of a fuller sentence. The full sentence in question borrowed the Pseudo-Bedan 83  It is intended that many if not all of this second series of glosses will be edited and published together with the definitive edition of the historical glosses on Pss 1–16.

five irish psalter texts

183

Explanationes, and coming ultimately from Cassiodorus, must be what we have in two other Irish introductions to this | psalm (the 82 Double Psalter of St-Ouen and the Southampton Psalter). In these, the introduction begins : Festiuo psalmo et diuinarum rerum uirtute plenissimo, desiderabile Alleluia praemittitur, ut meritum diuini carminis honore tituli possit agnosci (…) : From this it seems obvious that the present fragments are not part of a complete comment on Ps 118 alone, but presuppose a larger work, presumably a glossed psalter. In the six extant folios there are 100 verses (1–16 ; 33–113), with the sectional headings. In the Vulgate text, the entire Latin Psalter has 2,520 verses. From the evidence of the headings of the subsections of Ps 118 we can presume that all the psalms carried the Pseudo-Bedan Explanationes. Six folios for 100 verses, including the introductory headings, would give 150 folios for 2,500 verses, indicating that the original complete psalter probably had between 150 and 200 folios at least. This may be compared with the largest Irish manuscripts known to us : the Book of Durrow, 248 folios (245mm × 145mm) ; the Book of Kells, 340 folios (330mm × 250mm) ; the Double Psalter of St-Ouen, 160 folios (240mm  ×  160  mm [9.44″  ×  6.29″]). (In the Psalter of Caimin, we may recall, the largest folios are 360mm  ×  260mm ; 14.1″  ×  10.2″.) While it seems clear that the present fragments come ultimately from an entire glossed psalter, it is quite possible that the extant text was intended as a glossed comment on Ps 118, the Beati, alone. In favour of such a possibility, we have differences in page 1 (fol. 1r) from the others, for instance the absence of the Hebraicum in the upper margin, and a number of glosses on the upper margin quite out of line with the other pages. Later history of the fragments These fragments have a special interest for at least two reasons. They are the latest psalter glosses (c. a.d.  1100) from the early Irish Church. They are also fragments from a Psalter which we can connect for its use, and probably origin, with a specified monastery, namely, Inis Cealtra and Clonmacnois. We are fortunate in that we are given the later history of the fragments. In a note entered in the lower margin of fol. 2a (p. 3), Míchél Ó Cléirigh states that he got them from Flann and Bernard

184 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of the Mac Bruaideadha family in Tearmann Caimín (Moynoe, Scariff, Co. Clare). He tells us that : it is in Tearmann Caimín they (Flann and Bernard) and their ancestors before them have been settled and in residence. I the poor Brother Míchél Ó Cléirigh am witness that I myself have seen Mac Bruaidedha dwelling in Tearmann Caimín and his children after his death. It is they and Diarmait O Duibhceartaigh who gave these leaves of Caimín’s book to me the aforesaid Brother. And let everyone who sees them pray for both our souls.

From this it appears that Brother Ó Cléirigh had visited the Mac Bruaideadha family more than once, and that on an earlier visit a Mac Bruaideadha of Tearmann Caimín (Moynoe) was chief of the Mac Bruaideadha family. Brother Ó Cléirigh visited | another 83 branch of the Mac Bruaideadha family in 1636 to get approbation for the publication of his Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland. This was “Bruaidin-Conchobhar, son of Maoilín Óg of Cill-Chaoide and Leitir-Mhaoláin, in the county of Clare”, who signed the approbation as Conner Mac Brody, called Mac Bruaideadha, on 11 November 1636. Conner’s father, Maoilín Óg, died in 1602, and was probably succeeded as Mac Bruaideadha by another Conner, most likely his own (Maoilín Óg’s) brother or half-brother. We have evidence that the Conner, son of Maoilín Óg, who signed the approbation in 1636 was head of the family (Mac Bruaideadha) in 1631. Ó Cléirigh must have got the fragments before that date. He probably took the manuscript to the Franciscan monastery of Donegal and entered the informative colophon there. In works published in 1639 both James Ussher and James Ware drew attention to the manuscript. Ware says that the manuscript was then “among the books of the Franciscans at Donnegall”,84 but it is not clear whether he had himself seen it there. Ussher had seen the manuscript before 1639, but he does not tell us where.85 It is possible that he was shown it by Ó Cléirigh himself, with whom he is known to have had good relations. The J. Ware, De scriptoribus Hiberniae (1639) ; English translation in J. Ware, The History of Writers in Ireland in Two Books, ed. by W. Harris, 2 vols, Dublin, 1764, Book I, vol. 1, p. 32. 85  In J. Ussher, The Whole Works of Most Rev. James Ussher (17 vols.) Dublin, 1847, vol.  6, 544. See M. Esposito, “On the So-called Psalter of St.  Caimin”, PRIA 32C (1913–16), pp. 78–88, at 80, n. 5. 84 

five irish psalter texts

185

Franciscans had re-established in Dublin in 1615, and Ó Cléirigh visited there in 1627, at a time when Fr Thomas Strange (a cousin of Luke Wadding) was Guardian, a man who was in very close touch with the Primate James Ussher, to whose “famous library of manuscripts” Strange was allowed access.86 Had he met Ussher then, Ó Cléirigh would have become aware of his interest in Latin Psalters. But of course Ussher may have known of the fragmentary Psalter’s existence at a much earlier date, through contact (direct or indirect) with a person such as Maoilín Óg who is known to have worked with Uilliam Ó Domhnaill, correcting the translation of the Irish New Testament between 1593 and 1596, when Ussher himself was a student there. Ó Cléirigh took the work to Louvain probably in 1637 or 1642– 43. It remained in the house of the Irish Franciscans in Louvain until the period of the French revolution (after 1793), when, with some others of the manuscripts, it was taken to the Franciscan Convent of San Isidoro, Rome. History of research The manuscript remained unnoticed in Rome until John O. Westwood examined it in 1868, and described it in a few lines, assigning it to the eleventh or twelfth century, | without any mention of 84 a tradition of an earlier origin.87 Some time later Patrick F. Moran (later to become Cardinal Moran) gave an account of the text, taking it to be a genuine relic of the time of St Caimín. 88 The first critical examination of the text was made in October 1871 by the Italian Celticist Constantine Nigra, who spent several hours in the Collegio di San Isidoro. He discovered the Irish glosses in the 86  See B. Jennings, Michael Ó Cléirigh Chief of the Four Masters and his Associates, Dublin, Cork, 1936, p. 55, with references to F. Matthews, Brevis Synopsis Provinciae Hiberniae Fratrum Minorum, Analecta Hibernica 6 (1934), p. 147, and Report on Franciscan Manuscripts Preserved at the Convent, Merchants Quay, Dublin, Dublin, 1906, p. 4 and pages following. 87  J. O. Westwood, Facsimiles of Miniatures and Ornaments of Anglo-Saxon and Irish Manuscripts, London, 1868, p. 88. 88  P. F. Moran, “Biblical Manuscripts of the Early Irish Church”, The Atlantis. or Register of Literature and Science conducted by members of the Catholic University of Ireland, no.  9 (1870), pp. 77–9 ; also separately (as pamphlet ; 57 pages) in P. F. Moran, Essay on the Biblical Manuscripts of the Early Irish Church, Dublin, 1870, pp. 13–15.

186 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church manuscript and assigned it to the middle of the eleventh century. The results of his study were published in 1885 by Henri d’Arbois de Jubainville,89 who himself contributed a note on the subject the following year.90 In 1872 all the Irish manuscripts at San Isidoro were transferred to the Franciscan Friary, Merchant’s Quay, Dublin, and in 1946 to the Franciscan House of Studies, Killiney, Co. Dublin. They were later transferred to the library of University College Dublin. Immediately on their transferral to Dublin, the Celtic scholar William Maunsell Hennessy took an interest in the manuscripts,91 paying special attention to the Psalter of Caimín. On 10  June 1872 he read a paper on the psalter before the Royal Irish Academy, the substance of which he published in an essay the following year. He noted neglect of this particular manuscript, even by scholars who worked on the Irish collection at St  Isidore’s. He was aware of the work of Nigra, Italian Minister in Paris, who devoted an hour’s attention to the manuscript containing Beati immaculati and in a letter dated 28  October 1872 acquainted Hennessy with the results of his examination and gave a description of the manuscript. Hennessy’s essay is rich in relevant historical details concerning the activity of Brother Míchél Ó Cléirigh, and his relations with the Mac Brodies and Ussher. He notes the memorandum on the first page, according to him in Colgan’s handwriting, describing the work as ex libris Conventus de Dunnagall.92 He also gives the note in Irish at the bottom of folio 2, in Ó Cléirigh’s handwriting, both in Irish and in English translation. With regard to date, he notes the tradition ascribing it to Caimin (died 653), which he says may be too early. However, Caimin’s church produced many eminent scholars, including St  Corcran who died in 1040, a date which in Hennessy’s view would certainly be too late to which to assign the writing of the manuscript.93 It was seen in 1897 by 89  H. d’Arbois de Jubainville, “Gloses irlandaises du psautier de saint Caimin”, Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes 46 (1885), pp. 344, 345. 90  H. d’Arbois de Jubainville, “Gloses irlandaises du psautier de saint Caimin”, Revue Celtique 7 (1886), p. 96. 91  W. M. Hennessy, “On a Manuscript Written by St  Caimin of Inisceltra”, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, New Series 9 (1873), pp. 241–47. 92  Hennessy, “On a Manuscript”, p. 242. 93  Hennessy, “On a Manuscript”, p. 247.

five irish psalter texts

187

Johan A. Bruun, who dated it c.  1100, to the same period as the Psalter of Ricemarch, who | died in a.d.  1096.94 The Irish glosses 85 were edited by Stokes and Strachan95 and Edward J. Gwynn,96 all without any information as to the date or characteristics of the work. The most authoritative study of the work is that of Mario Esposito published in 1913.97 He gives the history of the manuscript, the history of research, the Irish “memorandum” on fol. 2a by Míchél Ó Cléirigh, in Irish and in English translation (by Richard I. Best), a detailed description of the manuscript, including what he calls “ornamental signs employed (in the text) here and there to fill up space”, a list of the compendia scribendi in the text and additional compendia in the minuscule commentaries, a transcription of the text with interlinear scholia and the marginal glosses of one page (p. 6 of MS). Françoise Henry and Geneviève L. Marsh-Micheli examined the manuscript in 1960 for their study of Irish illumination under the heading “Manuscripts from Clonmacnois and Inis Cealtra” (Lebor na Huidre [Book of the Dun Cow], part of Rawlinson M. B. 502 ; Dublin, Royal Irish Academy MS 23 E 25).98 They note that the writing of the Psalter of Caimin, especially the pointed minuscule, is very similar to the miniscule script in the two copies of the Liber Hymnorum and also to the A hand of the Book of the Dun Cow. These comparisons and the linguistic evidence of the glosses seem to indicate a date in the late eleventh century.99 Dr Henry maintains the same position in the third volume of the history of Irish art.100

J. A. Bruun, An Enquiry into the Art of the Illuminated Manuscripts of the Middle Ages, Part 1, Edinburgh, 1897, pp. 83–84. 95  Stokes – Strachan, Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus, vol. 1, pp. xiv, 6. 96  E. J. Gwynn, “An Unrecorded Gloss”, Ériu 4 (1910), p.182 (Irish gloss, without translation ; with brief comment). 97  Esposito, “On the so-called Psalter”, pp. 78–88. 98  F. Henry – G. L. Marsh-Micheli, “A Century of Irish Illumination (1070–1170)”, PRIA 60C (1960), pp. 101–65, esp.  112–19. 99  Henry  – Marsh-Micheli, “A Century”, p. 119. 100  F. Henry, Irish Art in the Romanesque Period (1020–1170 a.d.), London, 1970, pp. 41, 48, 50. 94 

188 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The present writer examined the work in some detail in 1973,101 paying special attention to the Gallicanum and Hebraicum biblical texts, to the obeli and the apparent asterisk signs, as well as to the glosses. He expressed the view that publication of the rich body of (Latin) glosses would help us get a better understanding of the sources on which its compilers drew. Dependent on the work of Henry and Marsh-Micheli, just mentioned, he said that the MS was written long after the time of St  Caimin. The language of the Irish glosses, the script and decoration, all point to about 1100, a date assigned to it by Bruun in 1897.102 This essay was reprinted unchanged in 2000.103 In a review of this work, Pádraig P. Ó Néill noted that these (Irish) glosses provide no linguistic evidence for a date of about 1100 ; in fact, some | of the glosses, e.g. rechto (gloss 86 1), in mar (gloss 8), point to a much earlier date ; but perhaps the glosses were copied.104 Marginal and interlinear markings, critical notes and glosses. Marginal and interlinear indications of author Heret markings The first word of each of the subsections of Ps  118 has above it a small circle (circellus), with a dot in the centre. There is a similar circellus under a word of the preceding subsection, where extant. Thus over Et ueniat of the section vv.  41–8, and under Ecce (concupiui) of v.  40. This is clearly a heret sign, with the back reference to a preceding text. It is the system we have in the Glossa in psalmos of the manuscript Pal. lat.  68, where, of course, the back reference in four words or so is explicitly given. It is worth nothing that all the back references in the Psalter of Caimin correspond exactly to those of the Vatican manuscript Glossa. De Coninck has noted that the Irish Double Psalter of St-Ouen also has a system of heret and back references, indicated by

McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, pp. 245–49. As already noted by Esposito, “On the So-called Psalter”, p. 81, with reference to Bruun, Enquiry, pp. 83–84. 103  McNamara, The Psalms, pp. 19–144, at 78–82. 104  P. P. Ó Néill, in PIBA 23 (2000), 102. I may note with regard to gloss 8 (in mar) that the same word of Ps. 118.8 is glossed by the same words in the Southampton Psalter. 101 

102 

five irish psalter texts

189

signs.105 As already noted almost all the heret signs of the Rouen Psalter correspond exactly to the heret system of the Vatican Pal. lat. 68 text (including the exact back references). Obelus and asterisk signs106 In an earlier essay, the writer has already considered the occurrences of the obelus and asterisk in the Psalter of Caimin.107 This psalter has some obeli that are attested in no other text of the Gallicanum. vv. 34, 40, 50, 66, 67, 68, 69, 81, 95, 105, 116. There also appear to be two asterisks in the same category (vv. 40, 112). What I take to be clear instances of the obelus (and possibly of the asterisk) Esposito108 reckons as “ornamental signs used here and there to fill up space” ! The signs are clearly obeli – the division sign (÷) followed by the colon ( :). | In seven other occurrences (vv. 39, 49, 51, 77, 92, 99 and 105), 87 the obelus indicates words so marked also in the second hand of Codex Sangallensis 20 (ninth century) ; the word sub obelo in v. 39 is also sub obelo in the second hand of Codex Reginensis, eighth century, and that of v. 92 is written manu secunda in I (Double Psalter of St-Ouen). In no other MS of the Gallicanum listed in the critical edition is any of these words sub obelo. This seems to indicate some relationship between the biblical Gallicanum text of the Psalter of Caimin and Codex Sangallensis, written in the ninth century by the scribe Wolfcoz.109 The purpose of the obeli in CaiL. De Coninck in a report submitted on the Rouen manuscript in 1994 to the Irish Editorial Board of the Corpus Christianorum sub-series Scriptores Celtigenae after detailed observations on the various markings of the manuscript notes. “And finally every Psalm is linked to some part of the preceding one by a system of dashes and points that should be distinguished from the construe marks proper ; the word “heret” in the commentary Vat. Pal. lat. 68 has the same function … So I certainly do not have any doubt about the usefulness of a complete edition of this part of the St-Ouen codex (the Gallicanum text) with the marginal numbers and the construe marks and “heret”-marks above and beneath it, followed by the “conventional” part of the gloss”. 106  This section is a slight revision of section of essay “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, pp. 247–8. 107  See McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, p. 247, for consideration of the Gallicanum text. 108  Esposito, “On the So-called Psalter”, p. 82. 109  It is recognised that the biblical text of this manuscript (Stiftsbibliothek, St  Gall, 20 ; MS no.  427 of the Vetus Latina) is very closely related 105 

190 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church min is clear. It is to correct the text in accord with the Hebraicum. The words obelised are nearly always absent in all texts of the Hebraicum. In v. 40 it marks a word (tua) omitted only in AI of the Irish family. (The word is in the Hebraicum text reproduced in the Psalter of Caimin !) On the other hand in v. 68 it marks a word (es) absent from all Hebraicum texts except AK and that of the Psalter of Caimin. In v. 95 it marks a word (me, 2°) absent only in Codex Legionensis2 of the Hebraicum. In vv. 67, 69, 81, and 105 it indicates words not found in any Gallicanum MS except the Psalter of Caimin. In v. 105 it actually marks two words (tuum Domine), the last one absent from the Hebraicum and the Gallican in general – probably being the only word on which it should be. What appears to be an asterisk (a cross with four dots in the angles accompanied by the colon) in vv. 40 and 112 is found in no other Gallican MS. Nor do there appear to be any grounds for it, the words under the asterisk being in the Septuagint. If this mark is really an asterisk it presents the same problems as some of those in the Cathach.110 Other construe signs and other markings There are a number of markings and construe signs in the text the significance of which has not yet been fully explored. Some, as for instance two dots under certain words, may just be reference signs to marginal glosses. A full study of these markings remains as a desideratum, as do the markings of the Double Psalter of St-Ouen. Vernacular Irish glosses There are nine Irish vernacular glosses in all – on folios 1a (p. 1), 3a (p. 5), 4a (p. 7), 5a (p. 9), 5b (p. 10), 6b (p. 12).111 | 1.  fol.  1a Ioseph(us) .… stairscribnid libuir historiarum isintibata fuidell scélinarechto (“a writer of a book of histories. In them are the remains of the stories of the Law”). to that of the Gallicanum text of MS Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek Aug.  XXXVIII (MS with the siglum K of the Gallicanum and Hebraicum biblical texts). See Gryson, Altlateinische Handschriften, 1/2B, p. 241 (for MS 427). 110  See McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study”, p. 268. 111  These glosses have been edited by Stokes and Strachan, Thesaurus Paleohibernicus 1, pp. xiv, 6 ; the hitherto unidentified gloss (no.  5) by Gwynn, “An Unrecorded Gloss”, p. 182.

88

five irish psalter texts

191

2.  fol.  3a (Ps  118.57)  … uel portio .i. ainm errannais nech dephurt choitchent (“the name of a portion of anyone from the common part”). 3–4.  fol.  4a (Ps  118.70) coagulatum (obduratum) est cor eorum sicud lac eorum agulum .i. binntén. coagulum compositum a con et agulum uel agelo cogilatum (leg. a gelu congelatum) foeside (“under this”). With DIL (bintén ; binntén) we can understand binntén as “rennet ; cheese-curds”. 5.  fol.  5a (Ps 118.123) sine palpetratione .i.e. amail chath sula (“like an eye battle”).112 6.  fol.  5a (Ps  118.87) Paulo (pene) minus  – .i. bagaire (ba gaire ; “almost”). 7.  fol.  5b (Ps  118.96) omni consummatione  – i. forbe (“finishing, completing ; end, termination ; culmination ; perfection”). 8.  fol.  5a (Ps  118.97) quomodo  – i. ciacruth (cia cruth ; “what form”). These words are used to gloss Latin quomodo also in early Irish texts, e.g. Wb  25d5, Ml  38a9. See DIL s.v. cruth col.  564, 8–10. 9.  fol.  6b (Ps  118.107) usquequaque  – i. inmár (in már, “very large”). There is a similar gloss (inmar uel magnopere) above this same word in Ps  118.8 in the Southampton Psalter (fol.  84a).

Glosses, marginal and interlinear Left-hand margins The manuscript is heavily glossed on the left-hand margins. Most of these, on source analysis, derive almost always verbatim, from the psalter gloss, Glossa in Psalmos, preserved in the MS Pal. lat. 68. They appear to be from the full commentary, not from a selection of glosses from it. Some of the glosses in the left-hand margin are from the Epitome of Julian of Eclanum’s translation of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on the psalms. These glosses appear to be from the full text of the Epitome of Julian’s translation, not from earlier glosses. Right-hand margins All the glosses in the right-hand margins are from Cassiodorus’s Expositio in Psalmos. These glosses seem to be from a full text of Cassiodorus’s work, not from earlier glosses. 112  On this gloss see further below pp. 193-95 ; the Glossa in Psalmos of Codex Pal. lat. 68, p. 258.

192 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Interlinear glosses A number of the interlinear glosses are difficult to identify. Of those whose sources can be traced some merely repeat or abbreviate glosses already in the left-hand margins, especially glosses from the Vatican Library MS Pal. lat. 68, Glossa in Psalmos. Others present a spiritual interpretation of the text. What is quite interesting is that a number of the interlinear glosses whose sources can be identified are from, or are related to, the commentary of Prosper of Aquitaine. | Source analysis

Marginal source indication A few of the texts from Cassiodorus are introduced by the letters SC, presumably “Senator Cassiodorus”. Thus for the verses 13b, 49a, 68 ; possibly for verse 70. There are a few instances (five in all) of the abbreviation his, possibly indicating historia(liter) : thus verse 14a (source not identified) ; verses 12a, 40a, 58a before texts from the Vatican Glossa in psalmos ; v. 97, before a series of letters indicating words, presumably the Hebraicum biblical text (of Jerome). The Explanationes of Pseudo-Bede As already noted at the beginning of this essay, each subsection of Ps 118 in the Psalter of Caimin is introduced by the relevant section of the Explanationes of Pseudo-Bede. Source analysis of the glosses In all, there are in the extant fragments about 315 marginal and interlinear glosses. The sources of most of these can be identified, as follows : The Glossa in Psalmos of Codex Pal. lat.  68 The greatest single source for the marginal glosses (all on the lefthand margins) is the Glossa in Psalmos of Pal. lat  68,113 or one of the sources of this, since it is possible that the Davidic type exegesis used in this Glossa was drawn from an independent commentary, which may still have existed in the tenth century and have been used as a source for glosses in the Double Psalter of St-Ouen. 113 

McNamara, Glossa in psalmos ; see note 56 above.

89

five irish psalter texts

193

About one half (153 of the total of about 315) of the marginal and interlinear glosses of the Psalter of Caimin are from this source. A notable feature of this particular group of glosses is the fidelity with which they agree with this Glossa in Psalmos as preserved in the Vatican codex (Pal. lat.  68). This close relationship merits further study. I note in particular the gloss on Ps  118.82. The full biblical text reads : Defecerunt oculi mei in eloquium tuum (dicentes quando consolaberis me) : The gloss on the verse in Pal. lat. 68 reads as follows : “Deferunt (MS : defer¬) oculi (mei) : Id est similitudine speculatoris sine palpitratione aspicientis”, which may be rendered : (“ eyes have faded away”). That is : “in the likeness of an onlooker (speculatoris) looking on without blinking”, or more probably as : (“ eyes have faded away”). That is : “in the likeness of an executioner (spiculatoris) looking on without blinking”. We have a similar gloss in a similar text in Pal lat. 68 for Ps 118.123 (not in the Caimin fragments), “Oculi mei defecerunt (in salutare tuum)”, glossed as : “id est in similitudine aspicientis sine palpitratione”. (The second part of the verse Et in eloquium iustitiae tuae is glossed as : id est in promissionem tuam iustam liberandi me.) It is not easy to understand the reason behind this gloss. The words defecerunt oculi mei should have presented no great difficulty. They occur in Ps 68.4b, where the Vatican Glossa in Psalmos explains through a text from the Epitome of Julian | (prob- 90 ably dependent on Theodore) : “Defecerunt oculi mei. Id est labore continuae expectationis”. Apart from the argumentum for Ps 118 there appears to be little, if anything, in the so-styled Epitome of Julian from the commentary of Theodore for this psalm. We are fortunate that we now have the Syriac translation of Theodore’s commentary on Ps 118, and also of Pss 138–48.114 In the Syriac translation of Theodore’s commentary on Ps 118, due to the loss of two lines, the lemma for verse 82 is absent. From the context, however, it appears that, as at Ps 68.4b, Theodore under-

The recently discovered Syriac texts have been published by L. van Rompay, Théodore de Mopsueste. Fragments syriaques du Commentaire des Psaumes (Psaume 118 et Psaumes 138–48). (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium vol. 436 ; Scriptores Syri tomus 190), Louvain, 1982. Syriac text in same series, vol. 435, Scriptores Syri tomus 189. 114 

194 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church stood verses 81–2 as referring to the hope of salvation.115 It is not clear how the Latin glossator of Pal. lat. 68 understood Def(ec) erunt oculi of the lemma of Ps 118.82, possibly as “(My eyes) have turned away (from pity)”, followed by the explanatory gloss on the executioner. The gloss of Pal. lat. 68, reproduced in the Psalter of Caimin, seems to be on the words of a lemma taken clear out of their biblical context and alien to the general trend of the comment on Ps 118. Further research may throw some light on the world of ideas of its origin. The word palpitratio is unknown in Latin. The meaning (“blinking”), however, seems clear from the context, and an original might have been the related palpebratione,116 or possibly palpitatione. The Caimin gloss reproduces the Pal. lat Glossa in Psalmos verbatim : “De o“. Similitudine speculatoris sine palpetratione aspicientis”, probably understanding it to refer to the executioner. This left-hand margin gloss, in its turn, has a reference-dot over pal of palpetratione, with an Irish gloss to the left : amail chath sula, “like an eye battle”. How precisely the vernacular glossator understood the meaning of the Latin and what precisely he wished to express in his three-word gloss is not altogether evident. Gwynn first published the gloss,117 but without translation. He 115  The Syriac translation of Theodore’s comment on Ps.  118.81–2 reads : (Ps.  118.81b) “And I have hoped in your word. When I recall, he says, the promises that you have made to us with exactness I am strengthened in my expectation concerning their effective realization, and [two lines blank. The lacuna must have contained the citation of v. 82, where the LXX has ‘My eyes have failed (LXX. exelipon) in waiting for your word saying (in the LXX legontes) ‘When will you console me ?’ …] [v.82] I have been, he says, at every moment [… one third of a line blank] these (promises) have in actual fact been realized (seeing that) by them the end of my ills shall be granted and (there shall be granted) to me deliverance from these ills”. In effect with regard to the words while they say (LXX. legontes ; Ps.  118.82)  – he attributes them rightly to the eyes to say. “while they await and fix their gaze on the realisation of these (promises)”. Theodore continues the same idea in his exposition of the next verse (v. 83). (English translation based on van Rompay’s French rendering.) For van Rompay’s French translation see van Rompay, Théodore de Mopsueste, tomus 139, p. 43, lines 18–19 ; Syriac text in same series, vol. 435, Scriptores Syri tomus 189, p. 34. 116  See Isidore, Etym., 11.1.39 : “Palpebrae sunt sinus oculorum, a palpitatione dictae, quia semper mouentur”. 117  Gwynn, “An Unrecorded Gloss”, p. 182.

five irish psalter texts

195

remarked that palpetratione should be read as palpebratione, and on | the gloss itself comments : “The glossator is thinking, I suppose, 91 of two persons trying to stare each other out of countenance”.118 Cassiodorus, Expositio Psalmorum There are about 48 glosses in the right-hand margins from the Expositio Psalmorum of Cassiodorus. In the source adscriptions he is referred to as SC. The glosses are quite extensive, and appear to provide evidence that the glossator had at hand a full commentary of Cassiodorus. Prosper of Aquitaine For Psalms 100–50 the glosses on the Gallicanum of the Double Psalter of St-Ouen draw heavily on the commentary of Prosper of Aquitaine. This commentary, or glosses drawn from it, also provide a source for the glosses of the Psalter of Caimin, especially in interlinear glosses. Sometimes the citation is verbatim. In many instances, however, while the source seems to be Prosper, the citation is not direct. Between direct citations and probable references or echoes, there are about 59 instances. The Epitome of Julian of Eclanum’s translation of Theodore There are about fourteen instances of citation from the so-called Epitome of Julian’s translation of Theodore’s commentary. They provide evidence that the Epitome continued to be in use in Ireland when the gloss on the Psalter of Caimin was being compiled. Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos There are about thirteen instances in which the glosses seem to cite or draw on Augustine’s Enarrationes in Psalmos rather that on

118  The Royal Irish Academy Dictionary of the Irish Language (DIL) registers the Caimin gloss amail chath sula twice, in both cases, with reference to Ériu iv, 182, as a gloss on palpetratione, with the comment “leg. palpebratione” ; first under cath, DIL 86, cols. 32–3 (without translation), under “cath (a) battle, fight”. DIL registers the gloss again under “súil”, (b) (col.  420, 63–65) in phrases, with as examples. la brafad súla, “in the twinkling of an eye”, LU 2103 (FA 17) ; palpetratione (leg. palpebratione) .i. amail chath sula, with comment within brackets [borrowed from Gwynn] : “(of two persons trying to stare each other out of countenance)”, with reference to Ériu iv, p. 182.

196 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Prosper of Aquitaine’s representation of this in his commentary on Pss 100–50. Conclusions The fragments known as the so-called Psalter of Caimin, although only part of Ps  118 and possibly a very small part of a full original glossed psalter, are very significant for the understanding of psalter text and psalter study in the early Irish Church in the pre-Norman period (a.d.  600–1200). To begin with, it represents the latest glossed psalter of the period, showing the continuity of Irish ecclesiastical learning over these centuries. The texts and concerns of the earliest period are found there. As the main biblical text we | have the Gallicanum, 92 but also the use of the Hebraicum, presented for each page in the upper margins. We still have the use of, and interest in, the obeli and the asterisks. It shows an interest in combining the historical and spiritual approach to an understanding of the psalter text, drawing on sources representing both traditions. The “historical” approach is amply represented by the texts from the Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican manuscript (Pal. lat. 68) or a text closely related to it. The spiritual dimension and the bearing of the particular section and verse of the psalm on Christian and monastic life is attended to by the Explanationes of Pseudo-Bede (drawn from Cassiodorus) and from the lengthy excerpts from Cassiodorus’s commentary on the psalm. The continuity with the earliest recorded Irish study of the psalter is particularly noticable in the sources used. Chief among those, as already noted, is the Glossa in Psalmos. This was composed in Ireland or Northumbria probably c.  700, and combines both the “historical” and “spiritual” interpretation of the psalter. It is possible that there existed along with this double interpretation of the psalms another exposition of the psalms with an entirely or predominantly historical interpretation alone, one on which the Glossa in Psalmos drew. The reason for the presumption of such a text is that the glosses from the earlier text (be it that known to us in the Glossa in Psalmos or its source) found in the later Irish psalters tend to carry only historical material, not the “spiritual” interpretation. The Glossa, or the related text, continued to influence later Irish psalm interpretation. Glosses

five irish psalter texts

197

from it are found in the Vitellius Psalter (MS BL Vitellius F.  XI) from about a.d.  920. It has been drawn on by the second glosses of the Double Psalter of St-Ouen (tenth century), considered above (pp.  79–80), as well as by the compiler of the Psalter of Caimin (c.  1100). Another of the sources of Caimin, namely, the Epitome of Julian, has been a chief source of glosses in Ireland from about a.d.  700. Cassiodorus’s commentary was early known in Ireland. The same can be presumed for psalm exposition of Augustine. There is no evidence in the glosses of the Psalter of Caimin of the influence of any later Continental European commentaries on the psalms in Ireland. This evidence gives little support to the supposed mission of Brian Bórama abroad to bring in books to make good those destroyed by the ravages of the Danes. Inis Cealtra, the home of the Psalter of Caimin, was within Brian’s territory. In 990 Marcán, brother of Brian Bórama, took the abbacy of Emily, and died in 1010 as the Abbot of Terryglas, Inis Cealtra and Killaloe.119 Details of any activity of Marcán in these monasteries is not given in the sources. After his defeat of the Danes, according to an oft-cited text of the Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh, Brian is said to have sent messengers over seas to bring back books. To cite the text in full :120 | By him were erected also noble churches in Erinn and their 93

sanctuaries. He sent professors and masters to teach wisdom and knowledge ; and to buy books beyond the sea, and the great ocean ; because their writings and their books in every church and in every sanctuary where they were, were burned and thrown into water by the plunderers, from the beginning to the end (Ro cui­ ritt saoithe ocus maighistreacha do theaccascc eccna, ocus eolais, ocus de chendach leabhar tar muir, ocus tar mórfhairrge ; uair de loisccedh ocus do baidedh a screptra, ocus a liubhair in gach cill, ocus in gach neimedh ina robhattar la diberccachaibh ó tosach go deiredh) ; and Brian, himself, gave the price of learning and the price of books to every one separately who went on this service. Many works, also, and repairs were made by him. By him were erected the church of Cell Dálua, and the church of Inis Cealtra, and the bell tower of Tuaim Greine and many other works in like manner.

119  See A. Gwynn, A History of the Diocese of Killaloe. Part I. The Early Period, Dublin, 1962, pp. 26–27. 120  Todd, Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh, par. 80, pp. 138–39.

198 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The Psalter of Caimin (with the Double Psalter of St-Ouen) serves as an informative text for knowledge of the end of pre-Norman history of the psalter in the school and monastic life in Ireland. Is may be compared to the position of the roughly contemporary Gospels of Máel Brigte with regard to the Gospels, at least with regard to the Gospel of Matthew. Composed in 1138 the glosses on these Gospels do not represent the “new learning”. Rather are they drawn verbatim from commentaries presumed to be current in Ireland in the eighth century,121 and occasionally from Hiberno-Latin apocryphal Infancy Narratives.122 Postscript 2014 Since the publication of this essay in 2009 significant developments have been made in 2012 by the critical editions of the glosses of the Southampton Psalter by P. P. Ó Néill123 and of the literal glosses of the Double Psalter of St the.-Ouen (MS Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale 24) by Luc De Coninck,124 the latter referred to above in some notes.

121  On this see J. Rittmueller, “The Gospel Commentary of Máel Brigte Ua Máeluanaig and its Hiberno–Latin Background”, Peritia 2 (1983), pp. 185–214. 122  See Apocrypha Hiberniae I. Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara – C. Breatnach – J. Carey et al. (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13), Turnhout, 2001, pp. 120–26. 123  Psalterium Suthantoniense, ed. by P. P. Ó Neill (CCCM 240 ; Scriptores Celtigenae part 6), Turnhout, 2012. 124  L. De Coninck, Expositiones psalmorum duae.

five irish psalter texts

199

| Appendix A : Psalter fragments BnF MS fr. 2452 Abbreviations and word symbols, syllable and letter symbols of the fragments The abbreviation system may help in locating the fragments palaeographically and in time. I list them here. Attention may be drawn to the absence of the specifically Irish autem-symbol h. The frequency of the for-symbol f¬ (f with a stroke over it) may be significant. The absence of this in manuscripts before the late-ninth or tenth century has been noted. If the for   ante   antequam   apud   aut   autem   ber   -bus   con-   cuius   cum   deus, dei   dicens   dominus, domine, domini   eius   -em   enim   esse   est

an¬ (Ps 89.24). an¬q (with stroke though bar). ap¬ a¬ (Ps 88.11). at¬ (at with bar over t) ; Ps 88.14 ; 89.28. 31. 34. 39 and other times. No instance of h-symbol is found.1 b¬ bs¬ reversed c. cs¬ c¬ ds, di¬ dcs (Ps 91.2). dns, dne. э (reversed uncial e) ; mainly with upper “bowl” closed, lower open (as in Bk Armagh ; Mac Durnan) ;2 Ps 89.10,12,24,25,26 (bis), 30 (bis), 31,37,38,40,41,43,44,45,46. -- (omn-- = omnem ; indignation-- = -ionem). # ee, with stroke over (Ps 84.11). The 2-form of the Insular symbol is

1  See D. Bains, A Supplement to Notae Latinae (Abbreviations in Latin MSS. of 850 to 1050 ad.), with a foreword by W.M. Lindsay, Cambridge, 1936, p. 3 : on “autem”. The Insular h-symbol is found “[w]ith at¬ (a rarer Insular symbol) in : the Southampton Psalter of St  John’s Coll., Cambridge (Irish, of “saec .x–xi”) ; the Welsh Cambridge Ff IV 32 (saec. ix–x). With at¬ and a in : the Macdurnan Gospels of Lambeth (Irish, of c. 900) … The ancient Nota at¬ persists likewise in Insular MSS only”. 2  See C. P. Finlayson, Celtic Psalter. Edinburgh University Library MS. 56, Amsterdam, 1962, p. xiv.

94

200 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church   esto   | et   factæ   for-   gra-   gre-   homo   id est   in   men-   meus, meum   mihi   misericordia   nomen, nomine, nomini   nobis   nomen, nominis   non   noster, nostro   nostrarum   omnis, omni, omnes, omnia   per   populo   prae

used, with a dot below the horizontal stroke.3 The 2 at times almost as small as a dot or comma ; Ps 87.5 ; 88.4 ; 88.13. est sign +o. The 7-form of symbol is rarely used ; Ps 89.11,13,15 ; 96.7,8,11,12 ; 97.2,4,12 ; 98.1 ; also in marg Ps 83.12 supplying omitted text. The word et is generally written in full. fcæ¬ f¬ (f¬titud-) ; many times.4 g with ~ above it (g~ndis). g¬ (eg¬su¬, egresum). ho¬ (Ps 84.13) .i. i¬ m¬ (fundam¬ta) ; m¬tiar, mentiar 89.34 ms¬, mm¬ m with vertical stroke (i) above it mis¬ no¬, noe¬ (Ps 89.17), noi¬ ns (with stroke over two letters) (Ps 85.6,8) nois, stroke over oi n¬ nr, nro nr¬ar¬ oes¬, oia¬ p¬ plo (Ps 89.20) p¬(p with stroke over)

3  As in the Ricemarch Psalter (Trinity College Dublin, MS, A  IV  20 ; A.D. 1085–91) and Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 199  – Augustine, De Trinitate, written by John, brother of Ricemarch. See Bains, A Supplement, pp. 13–14. 4  For the for-sign see Bains, A Supplement, pp. 16, 58, who speaks of f¬te (forte), f¬titudo (fortitudo) being designated by the late syllable-symbol for or, from about the year 900, with instances from the Mac Durnan Gospel, the Ricemarch Psalter, and in general Insular MSS, mainly Welsh and Irish. Similarly, L. Bieler  – J. Carney, in “The Lambeth commentary”, Ériu 23 (1972), pp. 1–55, at 5, with reference to Bains, A Supplement, noting that the symbol f, with a stroke over = for almost certainly originated in Irish ; in Latin Mac Durnan, c.  900 being the earliest occurrence on record, indicating a tenth-century date for the Lambeth manuscript.

95

five irish psalter texts   pri   pro   quae   quasi   qui   quam   quas   quibus   quia   | quo   quod   quomodo   quoniam   sancto   saeculo   saeculum   sed   sem¬   sicut   siquidem   suis   ter   tra   uer-   -us   usque

5  6 

201

p with short vertical line above -p (p with bar to left upper shaft) q¬ (q with stroke over) qs¬i q with short vertical line above q with line through bar ; at times scarcely distinguishable from quia-symbol (Ps 84.11) qs¬ q with vertical stroke over (=qui) b3 q with wavy line through bar ; at times scarcely distinguishable from quam-symbol (Ps 84.12) q with o above it q with shaft traversed by a cross stroke ; normal Irish signs qmo qm¬ sco sclo (90.2)5 slm¬ (90.2).6 Written in full in the only other occurrence of the word (83.18) s¬ (s with stroke over) (Ps 89.24 ; also in a gloss on 82.6) semen s with short vertical stroke above it (Ps 83.12 ; 83.15) siq(vertical line over q)d- (84.4) ; siq(vertical line over q)dem (96.10) ss¬ t¬ (t¬rae) t with small r above it u¬ semi colon, or two commas one over the other ; rarely a figure 3 us¬

See Bains, A Supplement, pp. 42–43. See Bains, A Supplement, pp. 42–43.

96

202 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Appendix B : Psalter fragments BnF MS fr. 2452

Variants from the editio critica of the Hebraicum in MS. BNF fr. 24527 In order to ascertain whether the Paris Hebraicum text had any special affiliations with any other of the version’s families all variants from the critical edition were later checked. These variants showed no special pattern. Some were merely orthographic, especially with Hiberno– Latin forms. I give this full collation in this appendix. P : Text of MS BNF fr.  2452 P reading first MSS sigla as in the critical edition (ed. cr.) ; orthog. = orthographic variant Significant AKI readings in bold type 82.7 82.7 82.7 82.8

morimi] ; unique ; ed. cr. –iemini caditis] = AI ; ed. cr. –etis (ego) dixii] error for dixi quoniam tu] = AKIQ etc. (ed. cr. quoniam)

83.5 ersrah¬ (ed. cr. israhel) 83.9 brahium] (ed. cr. brachium) 83.9 filium (loth)] ed. cr. filiorum Loth 83.10 sisarrae] ed. cr. Sisarae 83.11 Endor] ed. cr. Aendor 83.12 et Zeb omitted in text ; error indicated by punctum. Added in marg. dex. as 7 zeb 83.12 psalmana] ed. cr. Salmana 84.8 (ibunt) in (fortitudine)] = AKI ; ed. cr. de (fort.) 85.6 nolii] error for noli 87.1 fundamenta] ed, cr. fundamentum cum RFGLO cum heb. Aq. etc. ; -enta cett. cum LXX Ro moz Ga 87.2 dilegit] unique, for diligit ; orthogr. 87.4 (Babilonis) scientis ; ed. cr. –tes cum RFGLI cum Aq. ; -tis CM*BIQL LO 87.5 dicitur (dr¬)=RLO ; ed. cr. dicetur 87.6 numerauit]=FST+BKIQ G*LGLO edd. ; ed. cr. –abit 88.7 possuisti] posuisti, orthog. 88.7 nouisimo] nouissimo, orthog. 88.7 et in3 (profundis)] = AKI ; ed. cr. in prof. 7  This critical edition used is Sancti Hieronymi Psalterium Iuxta Hebraeos, ed. by Dom H. De Sainte-Marie (Collectanea Biblica Latina vol. XI, Rome, Vatican City, 1954.

97

five irish psalter texts

203

88.9 abhominationem] abomin- ; orthog. | 88.11 gygantes] gig- ; orthog. 88.11 surgunt] = I only ; ed. cr. surgent 88.13 cognoscentur] = AKI ; ed. cr. noscentur 88.15 abiicis] unique ; for abicis 88.16 erumnosus, with “uel o” interl. over first “u” (erom-) ; ed. cr. aerumnosus 88.17 terrores (ed. cr.)] = AKI ; et terrores cett. ; P terrores 88.18 ualuerunt] = AKI (ualluerunt) ; ed. cr. uallauerunt 89.3 sempiternum (misericordia)] ; error for. ed. cr. sempiterna m. ~ mis. sem… I*O 89.4 percusi] for percussi ; orthog. 89.11 et superbum (⁊ sr¬bu¬)] + et unique ; ed. cr. superbum 89.11 et in brachio] + et = AKI ; ed. cr. in br. 89.11 fortitudo] = M* (ut. Uid.) ; ed. cr. forti tuo 89.14 roburetur] for roboretur ; orthog. 89.14 et (exaltetur)] = AKI cum multis codd. ; Rom et Gal. ; ed. cr. exaltetur 89.16 scit iubilium] ed. cr. nouit iubilum ; scit = AKI (scit iubilum) ; iubilium unique 89.17 iustitia // exultabt¬ (-abunt ? or -abuntur ?)// tua] ed. cr. ius. tua exultabuntur. In P tua considered omitted and added at end of line (with omission signs ?) 89.18 missericodia] for miser- ; orthog. 89.19 rege nostro se¬m (=semper) ; + semper unique. MS D of Vulg. + diapsalma 89.20 possui] for posui ; orthog. 89.20 et exaltaui] + et = AKI 89.20 populo meo] + meo = AKI 89.22 probauit] = AKI ; ed. cr. roborabit 89.27 inuocauit] = FKIQG*O ; ed. cr. uocabit 89.29 erit ei] ~ = AKI et al. ; ed. cr. ei erit 89.35 uolabo] unique, for uiolabo 89.35 labis] ; for labiis ; orthog. 89.35 motabo] = AKI ; for mutabo 89.36 si (Dauid)] = RAKI, for ne (Dauid) 89.38 stabiliter], for stabilietur 89.39 repulisti] ; for reppulisti ; orthog. 89.40 deadema] for diadema ; orthog. 89.41 disipasti] for dissip- ; orthog. 89.41 possuisti, for posu- ; orthog. 89.42 uicinis nri (nri deleted punctis delentibus) suis] ed. cr. uicinis suis 89.43 eliuasti]. For eleuasti ; orthog. 89.44 in praelium] = AKI (in proelium) ; ed. cr. in proelio

98

204 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 89.45 in terra] = AKI et al., cum Rom mozx ; ed. cr. in terram 89.45 distruxisti] unique ; ed. cr. detraxisti 89.46b (ignominia) sempiterna semper] For + semper here see Λ L : ignominio sempiterno SEMPER ; ignominia sempiterna diapsalma B ; ignominia SEMPER (SELA f) QKfm cum hebr. AK + semper after adulescentia eius of v.  46a 89.47 succenditur = AKI ; ed. cr. succendetur 89.51 obprobri] for obprobrii ; orthog. 89.53 amen amen] = AKI and most MSS. ; ed. cr. amen et amen, with FQKm, cum hebr. | 90.2 tu es Deus] ed. cr. tu es with RST HM 2QRGL ; + Deus =M* alii cum Ro Ga 90.3 conuertens] ed. cr. conuertes with RFG cum hebr ; conuertens cett. 90.3 dices] ed. cr. dicis with CMPLO QK ; dices cett. 90.4 pertransiit] = ed. cr. ; AKI perransit 90.6 conuertetur] unique ; ed. cr. conteretur 90.8 possuisti] for posuisti ; orthog. 90.12 et] = AKI (ed. cr. ut) 90.17 super nos opus manuum confirma] P as all AKI texts omits et opus manuum nostrarum fac stabile super nos after super nos8 91.2 in eo] = AKI ; ed. cr. in eum 91.3 liberabit] om. te unique ; ed. cr. lib. te 91.4 obumbrabit te] unique for Heb, but = Ga ; ed. cr. (ob.) tibi 91.7 decim] for decem, orthog. 91.7 adproprinquauit (with u corr. To b)] –auit RFBAI ; -abit ed. cr. 91.9 possuisti] for posu- ; orthog. 91.10 adpropinquauit (u corr. to b)] unique in Hebr and and in Ga only in C ; ed. cr. –abit 91.11 mandauit] =FHCAK etc., cum o and RFC of Ga ; ed. cr. –abit 91.13 bassiliscum] for basil- ; orthog. 91.15 inuocauit (with u corr. to b)] = Heb RST HCQGW M cum Ro mozc 91.16 longuitudine] for longit- ; orthog. 92.4 decachordo] = AKI (et al.) ; ed. cr. decacordo 92.7 intelliget] for intelleget ; orthog. 92.10 ecce] ; ecce enim ed. cr. with RFC etc ; ecce R*M 2 cett. 92.10 disipabuntur] for diss- ; orthog. 92.11 exaltabitur] unique ; ed. cr. et ex. 92.11 senecta] = ed. cr., with FAKI and a few other MSS ; most MSS, with the Romanum, Mozarabic and Gallicanum have senectus 92.13 cedros] unique, for caedrus ed. cr.

8 

See pp. 159-61 above.

99

five irish psalter texts

205

92.14 atris domus] for atriis ; orthog. ; + domus PAKI ; ed. cr. atriis 92.15 pingui]=of Heb FH cum a et Aug, Ennarrato 3 in Ps 36, §4 ; ed. cr. pingues 93.3 domini] unique for Domine 93.4 grandis] = AKI ; ed. cr. grandes 93.5 longuitudine] for longi- ; orthog. See Ps  91.16 above 95.9 diserto] for deserto ; orthog. 95.9 probauerunt] ed. cr. pr. me ; om. me unique 96.13 orbem terrae] = AKI ; ed. cr. terram 96.13 inuto (with is interl. above to)] error for in iusto ed. cr. 97.3 hostes] ed. cr. hostes eius ; om. eius unique 97.7 sculptilia] = AKI ; ed. cr. sculptili 97.8 iudicia] for ed. cr. iudicia tua ; om. tua unique | 97.9 Quoniam Dominus excelsus super omnem terram] unique ; ed. cr. : tu enim Dominus Excelsus super omnem terram. But see Ga Vulg. Ps 96.9 : Quoniam tu Dominus altissimus super omnem terram 97.9 omnes] = Ga. Ro, moz ; ed. cr. uniuersos 97.12 iusto (with o corr. to i)] error for iusti 98.5 in cithara (2°) omits] = AKI ; ed. cr. in cithara in cithara et uoce 99.1 hiruphin] ed. cr. cherubin 99.4 dilegit] for diligit ; orthog. 99.5 scamellum] = A L* : ed. cr. scabillum Fol.  78 ends with Ps  99.6a

100

206 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Appendix C

Collation of Paris MS. with AKI “variants” not always agreeing with one another (see pp. 159-61 above) This collation of the Paris fragments is made against the critical edition of the Hebraicum (Sancti Hieronymi Psalterium Iuxta Hebraeos) by H. De Sainte-Marie. In the following collation the text of the critical edition (ed. cr.) of the Hebraicum is generally given first and et al. = et alii codices. fol. 75, Pss 82–3 82.1 deos (ed. cr.)] = AI and many others ; deus M 2 cett. cum Ro Ga---P deos 82.2 SEMPER] om. AIO … ; P semper 82.7 caditis (ed. cr. cadetis)] AI only ; P caditis 83.2 deus (1°) domine K ; P deus 83.3 tumultuati (ed. cr.)] tumultati R*AI ; P tumultuati 83.7 moab (ed. cr.)] mouab I ; P moab 83.9 et] om. I ; P et 83.10 Madian] madiam IO ; P madian 83.10 Sisarae (ed. cr.)] sissar(a)e AI ; P sisarrae 83.11 sterquilinium (ed. cr.) stercolium I ; P sterquilinium 83.12 Salmana] psalmana I ; P psalmana, with dot over p (punctum delems ?) 83.15 deuorat] deuorans AK ; P deuorat 83.16 turbine] turbidine A ; P turbine 83.17 quaerent (ed. cr.)] quaerunt AK ; P querent 83.18 et 2° (et erubescant)] om. AK ; P et (erubescant) 83.19 tu] om. AKI ; P om. tu 84.3 Domini (ed. cr.)] dei I ; P domini 84.6 fortitudo est in te] in te est fortitudo AK ; P fortitudo est in te 84.7 ponent eam] ponentem I ; P ponentem 84.8 benedictione] a benedictione I ; P a benedictione 84.9 meam] om. AKI ; P meam 84.9 SEMPER] om. I (et alii codd) ; P semper 84.11 habitare] habitarem AI ; P habitarem 85.3 85.3 85.4 85.5

dimisisti] demisti M*I ; P demisisti SEMPER] om. IQ (et al. codd.) ; P semper conuersus es] conuersus est IQ ; P conuersus es Iesus] hiesus AKI ; P IHC ; in marg. hiesus

86.17 et 1°] ut I (et al.) ; P et

101

five irish psalter texts

207

87.3 SEMPER] om IO (etc.) ; P semper 87.4 scientes] scientis I (etc.) ; scientibus AK ; P scientes | 87.4 Tyrus] thyrus I ; P tyrus 87.6 numerabit] numerauit KI ; P numerauit 87.6 SEMPER] om. I (etc.) ; P semper 87.7 fontes] fortes K ; P fontes 88.3 ingrediatur] ingrediar K* ; P ingrediatur 88.3 te] om. AK* ; P te 88.5 (descendentibus) lacum (ed. cr.)] = I (et al.) ; in lacum R*M* cett. ; P discendentibus lac¬ 88.6 et 1°] A 2 (t in ras.) ; om. CM*BQK ; P ; P et (dormientes) 88.7 tenebris (ed. cr.)] A* ; tenebrosis A 2KI ; P tenebrosis 88.8 SEMPER] om. I (et. al.) ; P semper 88.10 (at end) + SEMPER A ; in P no semper 88.11 mirabilia] + mea K ; P mirabilia (no + mea) 88.11 surgent] surgunt I ; resurgent AK ; P surgunt 88.11 SEMPER] om. AKI ; P semper 88.13 obliuioni (ed. cr.)] = K* ; -ne K 2 ; P obliuioni 88.18 uallauerunt] valluerunt AKI ; P ualuerunt (one “1”) 89.3 sempiterna misericordia} ~ miseric. sempit. I*O ; P sempiterna misericordia 89.3 caelos] caelo AK ; P caelos 89.5 stabiliam] stabilio K ; P stabiliam 89.5 SEMPER] di(apsalma) I ; P semper 89.7 adaequabitur] (a)equabitur AKI (etc.) ; P equabitur 89.8 in arcano] in arcana K ; P in arcano 89.8 in cunctis] cunctis A ; P in cunctis 89.9 CA (i.e. line beginning) ; P line begins : fortissime 89.10 gurgitum] gurgium K ; P gurgitum 89.12 orbem] + terrae I (et al.) ; P orbem (et) (no + terrae) 89.13 Hermon] haermon I ; P hermon 89.16 nouit] scit AKI ; P scit 89.17 in (1°)] et in I (et al.) ; P in (nomine tuo ; no + et) 89.17 in (2°)] om. A ; P in (2°+ ; in iustitia) 89.18 eleuabis] eleuabitur AK ; P eleuabis 89.18 cornu] cor A ; P cornu 89.19 a (1°)] om. AK ; P a (a dno¬) 89.19 Israhel] isrl AI ; P isrl¬ 89.19 rege] regi A ; P rege 89.20 sanctis] filiis AK ; P sanctis 89.23 non (1°) et non AK ; P non (1°) 89.27 uocabit] inuocabit A ; inuocauit KI ; P inuocauit 89.31 in] om. I ; P in (iudicis) 89.35 mutabo] motabo A*KI ; P motabo

102

208 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 89.36 ne] si AKI ; P si 89.39 es] est I ; P es 89.41 macerias] macherias AK ; P macerias | 89.44 in proelio] in proelium AKI ; P in praelium 89.46a eius] + SEMPER AK ; P semper (after sempiterna, 46b) 89.47 absconderis] + me I ; P absconderis (no + me) 89.47 succendetur] succenditur AKI ; P succenditur 89.49 SEMPER] om. I (et al.) ; P semper 89.50 quas] quasi AI ; P quas 90.4 pertransiit] pertransit AI ; P pertransiit 90.5 percutiente te] om. te K ; P percutiente te 90.5 somnium erunt] somniauerunt K ; P somnium erunt 90.6 ad uesperam] ad uesperum AKI ; P ad uesperum 90.7 consumpti] adsumpti A ; P consumpti 90.9 ed. cr. has lines beginning te ?) primum esse. Aliter : septem candellabra aurea. Id est aeclesia septiformis quae aurea est pro munditia sensus ipsius et candelabrum dicitur quia mos est ad candellabrum non illud lucet sed de eo lucerna lucet. Corpus autem aeclesie candelabrum dicitur quia ex ipso corpore anima cum suis donis atque sensibus lucet. et in medio septem candelabrorum aureorum similem filio hominis. Id est aeclesia in ea semetipsa quia septem candellabra et similis filio hominis et septem stelle aeclesia sunt licet in multas species diuiduntur. similem filio hominis. Id est eclesiam similem Christo quae discit exem/63r/plum eius ut ipse dixit : Discite a me quia mitis sum et humilis corde [Mt 11.29]. uestitum pudere. Puderis autem uestis est sacerdotalis ut diximus. Aptum fuit ut in ueste sacerdotali uideretur eclesia quae offert corpus et sanguinem Christi et que offert rectas et mundas orationes et que offert se totam Deo hostiam sanctam uiuam Deo placentem [Rm 12.1]. zona aurea. Id est ordo doctorum uel chorus sanctorum,15 uel castitas munda. 15 

Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 211.

facies sicut sol. Id est, principes catholice et doctores qui theoricam docent.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 411

ad mamellas. Id est ad duo testamenta.16 caput eius. id est praepossiti. capilli. Id est subiecti qui licet in magnitudine capiti, id est prepossitis, dissimiles sunt ; similem tamen claritatem habent meritorum. Per caput autem et capillos omnes sancti intelleguntur. Aliter : capilli. id est multitudo alborum in fide. tamquam lana alba. Id est propter similitudinem ouium,17 id est propter infirmitatem et innocentiam et humilitatem et eo quod sustinet tondentem se quae hec omnia eclesiae conueniunt. et tamquam nix. Id est propter innumerabilem turbam candidorum a celo datorum ; ipsi enim sunt Hirusalem que de celo discendit et propter frigus castitatis.18 et oculi eius uelut flamma ignis. id est spiritus septiformis uel precepta diuina ;19 preceptum enim (#) Domini lumen est ut dicitur : Lucerna pedibus meis uerbum tuum Domine, [Ps 108.105]20 et ut dicitur : Eloquium Domini inflammauit eum [Ps 104.19] et ut dicitur : | et pedes eius et reliqua. Pedes autem igniti aeclesiam 232 nouissimi temporis nimietate praesurarum ignitam indicat ; pedes enim (#) nouissima pars corporis est ( !).21 uox illius tamquam uox aquarum multarum. In uoce quoque aeclesiam ostendit ; aque enim (#) multe populi sunt. Id est predicatores22 scripturarum et confessores in martyrio et uox poenitentium in confessione dicentium : Ego dixi, Domine miserere mei [Ps 40 (41).5]. in dextera sua stellas septem. Id est aeclesiam septiformem 23 in semetipsa. facies eius sicut sol. Mirus est ordo membrorum. Post pedes ignitos discribitur facies. Id est post nouissimam certaminis Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 211. Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 211, 20. 18  The expression frigor castitatis occurs in Jerome, Commentarius in Ecclesiasten, 10.4, ed. by M. Adriaen (CCSL 72), Turnhout, 1959, p. 335, lnes 72–73. 19  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 212, 2–3. 20  Cited in Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 212, 3–4. 21  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 212, 5–10. 22  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 212, 21–22. 23  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 213, 1–5. 16  17 

412 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church flammam ostendit eclesie claritatem manifestam de qua dicitur : Tunc fulgebunt iusti sicut sol [Mt 13.43] et reliqua. et cum uidisset eum cicidi. Iohannis autem qui ista uidit totius aeclesiae figuram portat quae (q :) uelut mortua a peccatis humiliatur. et uiuus. Id est in resurrectione. et fui mortuus. Id est in cruce. et ecce sum uiuens. Id est post resurrectionem. et habeo claues uite. Id est in uitam praesentem [sentem interl.] redu182co, uel in uitam conpletiones ( !-iones) mandatorum Dei i eclesia siue in uitam futuram. et mortis. Id est in presenti tempore ut est illut : Et indurare Dominus cor Pharaonis. Aliter : clauis mortis ut est illud :Nolite timere eos qui possunt occidere animam autem non possunt occidere. Sed (s&d) magis timete eum qui potest corpus occidere et animam mittere in gehennam [Mt 10.27–28].24 scribe ergo quae uidisti. Id est quae uidisti a principio uissionis usque nunc. Vulg. “Nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus animam autem non possunt occidere. Sed potius eum timete qui potest animam et corpus mittere in gehennam”. 24 

caecidi ad pedes. Id est, ad apostolorum ut paenitentiam egisset. mortuus. Id est, in littera quia littera occidit. uiuus. Id est, in Spiritu Dei. posuit dexteram. Id est, auxilium suum. noli timere. Id est, noli timere paenitentiam agere quia adpropinquauit regnum caelorum. uiuus in resurrectione. mortuus in cruce. habeo claues. Id est, uitae ut in uitam praesentem reduco, uel de saeculo in saeculum uel in uitam futuram. et mortuus. id est, praesentis, ut : Nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus, animam autem non possunt occidere.7 (End of Reference Bible glosses on Apoc. I ; next gloss is on Apoc 2.5) 7 

“autem non possunt occidere” interl. in Paris ms.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 413

et que sunt /64r/. Id est que (q ;) sunt in presentia coram Deo. quae oportet fieri post hec. Id est que usque ad consummationem uissionis manifestabuntur. Aliter : que uidisti. Id est quae uidisti (q. uid interl.) in rebus facta. que sunt. Id est in propinquitate mox aduenientia. | que oportet fieri. Id est in futuro tempore, ut est persecutio 233 Antichristi et iudicium et retributio sanctis. scribe autem. id est ne obliuiscaris ea. septem stellae angeli sunt septem eclesiarum. et candelabra septem eclesiae sunt. Stellas autem dicit esse angelos ecclesiarum, et candelabra eclesias esse dicit : Non septem autem eclesiae sunt set (s&) una eclesie septiformis sicut scriptum est : Una est columba mea, una est perfecta mea [Song 6.8]. Est autem consuetudinis scripture unam rem diuidere ut dicimus. Homines eclesie cum homines ipsi sunt aeclesia. Angeli non septem dicuntur set pro omnibus principibus (-pi- interl.) eclesiarum siue pro animabus hominum, ut est : Angeli eorum semper uident faciem Patris mei [Mt 18.10] ;25 siue angeli qui ministrant (r interl.) nobis uident faciem Patris, siue nostre animae per fidem. caput 2 angeli ( !) eclesie effessi scribe. Id est principi uel angelo primo custodienti ecclesiam uel unicuique anime ; unusquisque enim (#) in eclesia angelus est qui dicit “Credo” et “Pater noster”. Aliter : angelo aeclesie. id est eclesie in qua ostendit duas partes dum laudat eam et increpat, sicut in consequentibus (u interl.) manifestatur non eandem partem increpare quam laudat. Effesum autem latine dicitur uoluntas, siue consilium meum /64v/ ut dicit Hironimus,26 siue ut Augustinus27 dicit, lapsus magnus interpretator ( !) per quem significator ( !) lapsus Adae in transgressione ; qui lapsus figurat lapsum plebis Israel in cruce Christi et lapsus uniuscuiusque cadentis in peccatum. Et ecclesie que cicidit in his scribitur. qui tenet septem stellas. His autem demonstrat potentiam suam dum in potestate eius omnis eclesia est (ē). Ideo autem hoc 25  “angeli eorum in caelis semper…” ; om. “in caelis” R [Irish Mac Regol Gospels]. 26  Jerome, Liber interpretationis hebraicorum nominum, p. 160.17. 27  ubi ?

414 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church dicit ut uenerationem darent uerbo eius. Uel in dextera sua. Id est in prosperitate fidei. in medio septem candelabrorum cum unum candellabrum est : In medio autem candelabrorum dicitur esse, id est in sensibus unuiuscuisuque in eclesia. Ideo autem hoc dicit ut scirent quod non potuerunt latere eum. scio. Id est prope sum. opera tua. Id est cotidiana. Id est opera fdei, ut ieiunium et elimosyna et uigilias (first i interl.). et laborem. Id est sustentiones ( !) persequtionis. et patientiam. Id est in omni sustentione ( !). quia non potes sustinere malos. Id est sine correptione (re interl. alia manu), pro zelo spiritate ( != ? spiritali), ut scriptum est : Quoniam zelus domus tue comedit me [Ps 68 (69).10 (Jn 2.17)] et teptauistsi ( !=temp ?) eos. Id est probauisti eos. Non teptantur ( !tept) autem nisi qui intus (i interl) sunt ; qui enim (#) formis (=foris ?) sunt sine ullo temtamento foris esse manifesta sunt, nec eos temptari opus est, qui non fructibus set (s&) loco noscuntur mendaces esse qui non (non deleted by puncta above and below) docent litteram legis obseruari in nouo. | et sustinuisti illos propter /65r/ nomen meum. Id est prop- 234 ter iustitiam quae nomen Christo est (ē). sed habeo aduersus te pauca.28 Unde manifestum est in uno corpore duas esse partes : unam perseuerantem et alteram transgredientem, cui dicit : Dereliquisti caritatem tuam (cf. Apoc 2.4), id est Christum. Quare autem hoc dicitur dum dictum est caritas numquam excidit ? [1  Cor  13.8]. Ostendit autem quod non per totos gradus ascendit qui excidit. 28 

Vulg. aduersus te ;+pauca with DO gig Uic BaedaD.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 415

memor esto itaque unde cecidisti. Id est quid 29 excelsitudinis bonitatis et relegionis dimissisti. et age paenitentiam (ni interl.). Id est age (ms ago) potentiam tanto quanto excelsitudinem habuisti. et priora opera tua fac. Id est contra hereticos dicitur, qui dicunt quempiam non posse opera priora aedificare. 29 

gradus uel quid, interl. alia manu.

memor esto unde excideris et age paenitentiam et priora opera tua fac. id est, memor esto unde caecidisti, id est, qualem gradum siue excelsitudinem siue religionem dimisisti. et age paenitentiam, id est, sic age (ms ago) paenitentiam tantum quantum gradum uel excelsitudinem uel religionem habuisti. et priora opera tua fac. Id est, contra hereticos qui dicunt nullum posse opera priora aedificare.

416 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Cambridge Commentary and Reference Bible : Apoc 5.1–6.6 234

One very notable feature about our two texts in the present pericope is the matter in which they agree in the gloss on the opening verses and in the tradition on the Seven Seals. It is worth noting that this entire section, as found in the Reference Bible¸ is found almost verbatim in the Catechesis Celtica (Vatican Library, ms Reginensis lat. 49, fol.  40vab). The Catechesis Celtica text is without heading ; it treats of the same words of the Apocalypse, and contains a tradition on the Seven Seals.1 This is a second identified item in the Cambridge manuscript almost verbally identical with one in the Catechesis Celtica.2 | It is also worth noting that the Cambridge text on the Seven 235 Seals is significantly shorter than that in the Reference Bible (which, I may add, also differs from a rather lengthy text on the seals in the Catechesis Celtica). For the remainder of the exposition of chapter 5, the Cambridge manuscript has a rather full gloss, in contrast with the Reference Bible which glosses only a few verses. The Cambridge gloss for chapters 5–6 seems to draw from the Homilies of Caesarius of Arles on the Apocalypse. On Apoc 6.6 (“Bilibris tritici denario …”) the Reference Bible has a text ascribed to Primasius, part of which (“In tritico … et in populis”) corresponds rather faithfully to Primasius’s text. 3 Almost the same text occurs, without ascription, in the Cambridge text. Both expand on Primasius in a similar fashion.

1  The texts of the Catechesis Celtica and of the Reference Bible on the Seven Seals have been ed. by M. McNamara, “Affiliations and Origins of the Cate­ chesis Celtica : an Ongoing Quest”, in The Scriptures in Early Medieval Ireland (Instrumenta Patristica 31), ed. by T. O’Loughlin, Steenbrugge and Turnhout, 1999”, pp. 179–203, at 199–200 ; for texts on the Seven Seals ; for the biblical text of the Apocalypse piece, p. 193. 2  The other text is the grammatical treatise on Vesper in Dd. X.  16, fol.  46v–47r (referred to by D. Ganz, Appendix  II, below p. 447), agreeing verbatim with Reg. lat.  20va18–20rb2. On this text see M. McNamara, “Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp. 291–334, at 315–16 (edited below, pp. 443-45). 3  Primasius, Comm. in Apoc., (p. 384, note 22 above), p. 95, lines 90–91.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 417

Cambridge, fol. 73v et uidi in dextera sedentis. Id est in Christo quia ipse est (e interl.) dextera Dei per quem cuncta constituit et totum genus humanum redemit. librum scriptum intus et foris. Id est utrumque testamentum.1 Propterea autem (h ∩) unus liber est (÷) quia nec nouum sine ueteri et uetus sine nouo esse potest : Nam uetus nuntius est (÷) et uelam̄ noui et nouum adimpletio est (÷) et interpraetatio ueteris. Scriptio autem deforis /74r/ uissa uetus testamentum indicat, et scriptio intus uissa nouum testamentum indicat. Siue intus et foris scribitur liber ut per conscriptionem intimam diuinitatem intellegamus, ut est (÷) illud : In principio erat uerbum [Jn 1.1], et per conscriptionem foris ostensam incarnationem Christi intellegamus, ut est illud : Christi autem generatio sic erat [Mt 1.18]. Siue dicitur liber iste scriptus intus et foris : Liber enim (#) sacri eloquii intus et foris scribitur : foris per historiam, intus per sensum spiritalem ; foris autem per sensum literae simplicem adhuc infirmantibus congruentem, intus quia inuissibilia promittit, foris autem quia mores aeclesiae in terra per rectitudinem praeceptorum suorum disponit, intus quia caelestia pollicetur. 1 

Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 221. 23.

Reference Bible (Paris ms B.N. lat 11561 : fol. 207rb–va) uidi in dextera. Id est dextera Christi est qua mundum fecit et redemit. librum intus et foris signatum : librum uetus testamentum significat. intus et foris. Id est in historia et sensu. Item de humanitate et diuinitate Christi. sigillis .vii. Id est vii. quae (ms qui) de Christo principaliter leguntur. Id est natiuitas et reliqua. Ideo sigillati in ueteri quia nemo potuit scire Ecce uirgo in utero concipiet1 reliqua usque Christus natus fuit de uirgine. Haec sunt .uii. sigilli in ueteri testamento de natiuitate Christi, ut est : Ecce 1 

Is 7.14 (Vulg.).

418 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church signatum. Id est conclussum. | sigillis septem.2 Id est conceptione Christi et passione et sepul- 236 chro et ingressu in infernum et resurrectione et sede ad dexteram Dei et perueniendo ad iudicium. Haec enim (#) septem in ueteri testamento scripta fuerunt. De conceptione scriptum est, utest : Ecce uirgo concepiet et pariet filium [Is 7.14]. Et de passione scriptum est, utest : Potestas eius super humeros eius [Is 9.6]. Et sepulchro scriptum est illud : Erit sepulchrum eius honorabile [Is 11.10]. Et de ingressu in infernum scriptum est ud ( !) est illud : Factus sum sicut homo sine adiutorio inter mortuos liber [Ps 87 (88).6]. Et de surrectione scriptum est ud ( !) est illud : Non dabis sanctum tuum uidere corruptionem [Ps 15 (16).10]. 2  On the interpretation of the seven seals in Hiberno-Latin and vernacular Irish literature, see M. McNamara, “Some Affiliations of the St Columba Series of Psalm Headings : a Preliminary Study, II”, PIBA 22 (1998), pp. 91–123, at 107–14 ; with texts of the Reference Bible and Catechesis Celtica) (=McNamara, The Psalms in the Early Irish church, Sheffield, 2000, pp. 337– 46) ; also McNamara, “Affiliations and Origins”, pp. 199–200 (with texts of the Catechesis Celtica and Reference Bible).

uirgo in utero, 2 reliqua, Christus soluit quando natus est, ut dicitur : Natus est nobis hodie conseruatur salutis nostrae, 3 reliqua. Secundum sigillum de baptisma, ut est : Transiuimus per ignem et aquam [Ps 65 (66).12], reliqua. Christus soluit, ut Iohannes dicitur. Ecce eo debeo baptizari a te [Mt 3.14], et reliqua. Tertius sigillus de passione eius, ut : Sicut ouis ad occissionem ductus [Is 53.7], reliqua, Christus soluit, ut : Inclinato capite tradidit spiritum [Jn 19.30]. Quarto sigillo de sepulchro eius, ut : Sepulchrum eius erit honorabile [Is 11.10]. Item : Sicut liber inter mortuos [Ps 87 (88).6] soluit ChrisIs 7.14 (Old Latin). Lk 2.11 (Old Latin, Usserianus primus and ß (St Paul in Kärnten, Stiftsbibl. 225.3.19)). 2  3 

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 419

Et de sede ad dexteram Dei scriptum est ut est illud : Sede ad ( !) dextris meis [Ps 109 (110).1]. | Et de adueniendo ad iudicium scriptum est ut est illud : Deus 237 manifeste ueniet [Ps 49 (50).3]. Aliter : signatum sigillis septem. Id est misteriis septiformis obscuratis totius canonis quae septem esse dicuntur (n interl.), pro spiritu septiformi /74v/ qui ( ?) alluquutus ( ?) est quae librum totius canonis concluserunt. uidi angelum fortem. Id est praeconium legis quia postolat (second o originally written u) Dei uoluntatis inpleatorem nec inueniebat. dicens : quis dignus est aperire librum et reliqua. quis dignus. Id est pro inpossibilitate dicit : aperire librum et solue­re signacula eius. Hoc autem (aut interl.) ordo proposterus est : aperire ante solutionem, sed non ita est in qualitate istius uerbi. Nam aperire est historiam totius libri legere, et soluere est conplere uii signacula quae ( ?ms q ;) prophetauerunt de Christo.

tus, ut : Cum Ioseph accepisset corpus Iesus inuoluit illud in sindone mundo [Mt 27.6]. Quintus sigillus de resurrectione, ut : Tu exsurgens Domine misereberis Sion [Ps 101 (102).14]. Christus soluit, ut angelus dicit : Non est hic, surrexit enim [Mt 28.6], reliqua. Sexto sigillo de ascensione, ut : Sede ad ( ! ; Paris ms) dextris meis [Ps 109 (110).1], reliqua. Christus soluit, ut angelus dixit. Quemadmodum uidistis eum euntem in caelum [Acts 1.11], reliqua. Septimus sigillus de aduentu eius, ut dicit : Deus noster manifeste ueniet [Ps 49 (50).3]. Soluit , ut Petrus dicit : Elementa igne ardescent in aduentu Domini [2  Pt  3.11].

420 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church et nemo poterat in caelo. Id est angelus. 3 neque in terra. Id est iustus uiuens.4 neque (neq ;) subtus terram. Id est mortuis.5 et ego flebam multum. Id est aeclesia flebat honerata et grauata, uolens redemptorem suum peruenire. (5.5) unus de senioribus. Id est totum corpus prophetarum dicit : prophetae enim (#) consulabantur aeclesiam nuntiantes Christum6 uenturum esse. radix dauid. Moris est (÷) autem radici quod ex arbore crescit et arbor ex radice crescit. Ita Christus est (÷) ex Dauid et Dauid ex Christo est (÷). (5.6) agnum stantem. Id est (÷) Christum de quo dictum est (÷) : Ecce agnus Dei et reliqua. tamquam occisum. Id est quia cito resurrexit ; ideo tamquam occisus dicitur. Aliter : agnum stantem. Id est (÷) aeclesiam7 similem agno, id est Christo. tamquam occisum. Id est quia uere resurget. misi in omnem terram. Id est ut est (÷) illud : Sicut missit me Pater ita ego mitto uos [Jn 20.21].8 3  4  5  6  7  8 

Caesarius, Caesarius, Caesarius, Caesarius, Caesarius, Caesarius,

In In In In In In

Apocalypsim, Apocalypsim, Apocalypsim, Apocalypsim, Apocalypsim, Apocalypsim,

p. p. p. p. p. p.

222.9. 222. 222. 222.13–15. 222.20–21. 222.29.

nemo in caelo neque in terra neque subtus terra potest aperire librum. Id est nemo in caelo, quia nemo de illis suscipit carnem nisi Christus. nemo in terra, quia nemo sine peccato. neque subtus terram, quia nemo liberatus de inferno usque Christus resurrexit a mortuis. unus de senioribus. Id est unus ordo prophetarum consulat ecclesiam.p. (End of Reference Bible glosses on lemmata of Apoc 5. Next gloss on Apoc 6.1)

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 421 | (5.7) et accipit librum de dextera sedentis. Id est Christus 238 totum canonem accipit de potestate Patris. Uel aeclesia a Christo qui est dextera Dei canonem accipit. quatuor animalia et uienti quatuor seniores et reliqua. Id est tota aeclesia cicidet ad Christum adorandum cum Christus sumpsit canonem totum de potestate Patris. Uel aeclesia /75r/ subiecta procedit ut Christus adoraueret cum aeclesia superior accipit scripturam a Christo et illam aperit ut mysteria ipsius sciat. habentes singuli citharas. Id est corda laudantium9 Dominum. fiolas. Id est mentes quibus effunditur uerbum Dei uel bonas conscientias. nouum canticum. Id est testamentum nouum10 ostendit Aliter : nouum canticum. Id est Magnificat anima mea Dominum. accipere librum. Id est accipere gratias pro demonstratione huius libri. aperire signacula eius. Id est oportet nos non alio dare honorem pro apertione signaculorum nisi illi qui aperuit. et redemisti nos deo in sanguine tuo. Hoc autem ostendit animalia et seniores hic aeclesiam esse, dum dicunt Redemisti nos Deo in sanguine tuo. ex omni tribu. Id est tota plebs. et populo. Id est pars mgna de plebe. et natione. Id est progenies. regnum. Id est eo quod regnat nos Deus. super terram. Id est hic in aeclesia quae in terra est (÷), siue in terra uiuentium de qua propheta dicit : Credo uidere bona Domini in terra uiuentium [Ps 26 (27).13]. et uidi. Hoc est credidi. et audiui. Id est intimis auribus. uocem angelorum. Id est nuntiatorum Christi. erat numerus eorum milia milium. Id est angelorum et animalium et seniorum. Et ideo iste numerus dicitur ut sciamus innumerabilem eclesiam Christi.

9  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, pp. 222–23 : “citharas id est chordas laudum”. 10  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 223, 3–4.

422 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church dignus est (÷) agnus et reliqua. Id est tota aeclesia11 hanc sententiam de Christo dicit qui occisus est (÷) in cruce ; uel aeclesia subiecta de aeclesia superiore dicit, quae agnus est propter innocentiam et eo quod offertur in martyrio. accipere uirtutem. Id est uirtuum ( !). et diuinitatem./ 75v/ Id est unitam esse. Id est in diuinitatem ( !). et sapientiam. Id est scripturarum. honorem et gloriam. Id est uite eterne. et benedictionem. Id est ut est illud : Uenite benedicti Patris mei [Mt 25.34]. audiui dicentes. Id est totum ( !) eclesiam. sedenti. Id est Patri.12 in throno. Id est in eclesiae ( !) et agno.13 Id est Christo. 239 | Siue sedenti. Id est Christo. agno. Id est aeclesiae.14 quatuor animalia dicebant amen. Id est quando aeclesia tota Patrem et Christum benedicit, altera pars ex ipsa respondet Amen. Uel cum eclesia subiecta Christum et eclesiam superiorem laudat, altera pars de subiecta eclesia respondet : Amen. cum aperuisset agnus. Id est Christus. unum de quatuor animalibus. Id est ordo doctorum. tamquam uocem tonitrui. Id est magnam predicationem. Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 223, 15. Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 223, 20–21 : sedenti. id est, Patri et Filio”. 13  “Et agno … id est aeclesiae” omitted in text ; added in margin, with omission and suppletion signs. 14  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 223. 11 

12 

et unus de quattuor animalibus. Id est, ordo doctorum in nouo testamento. ii. Hic apparuit primum sigillum. equus albus (Apoc 6.2). Populus Christianus albus per baptismum.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 423

ueni et uide. Id est inuitat aeclesiam succidentem sibi. Uel inuitat eclesiam subiectam sibi, uel infidelem eclesiam inuitat nunc. ueni. Id est crede. et uide. Id est scito et intellege mysterium. et ecce aequus albus. Id est populus Christianus qui aequus est pro fortitudine fidei et operis eius ; albus autem (h ∩) dicitur quia lauauit eum babtismum deforis et lauauit eum intus credulitas in Christum. et qui sedebat super illum. Id est Christus15 qui sedebat super populum Christianum. Iste enim (#) equus16 Domini sicut per Zachariam promisum est : Uissitabit Dominus gregem suum et disponet eum sicut equum spetiossum in bello [Zec 10.3].17 habebat arcum. Id est uirtutem potestatis uel aequitatem iudicii. Aliter : habebit arcum. Id est minas sententiarum uel uirtutem uindictae contra (ↄ+tra) demones et uitia et gentes et Iudeos /76r/ hereticosque (ti interl. heretosq ;). Aliter : abebat arcum. Id est scripturam diuinam de qua mittuntur testimonia in corda aliorum. et data est ei corona. Id est inmortalitas uel intigritas uite aeterne uel intigritas bonorum operum. et exiuit uincens. Id est diabulum in cruce ut uinceret per sanctos qui membra Christi sunt. 15  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, pp. 223–24 : “Equus ecclesia est, sessor Christus” ; see also Primasius, Comm. in Apoc., eed. Adams ; on this text p. 94, 62–64 : “Iste equus potest … ecclesia intellegii … cuis sessor Christus”. 16  Caesarius, In Apoc., p. 224, 1. 17  Cited not according to the Vulgate, but from an Old-Latin text ; also cited in Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, 224 : “Iste equus domini cum arcu bellico per Zachariam hoc modo ante promissus est : visitabit dominus deus gregem suum, domum israhel, et disponet eum sicut equum speciosum in bello ; et ex eo inspiciet, et ex eo disponet, et ex eo arcus in ira, et ex eo exiet omnis insequens”.

qui sedebat super illum. Id est Christus. arcum habens. Id est uirtutem iudicii et potestatem.

424 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | alius equus rufus. Id est populus persequutor qui ideo 240 aequus est : Id est pro superbia et pro stultitia et pro inmunditia et ideo rufus est eo quod sanguine18 eclesie efundit. qui sedebat super illum. Id est diabulus19 qui populum persequutorem regnat. datum est ei. Id est permisum est ei ut sumeret pacem de terra. Id est de terra sua. Id est de sua familia quia habet eclesia pacem eternam quam Christus illi reliquit. ut inuicem se interficiant. Id est dum alter alterum prouocat ad mortem corporalem uel ad mortalia cremina quae occidunt animam. gladius magnus. Id est persecutio magna ad eclesiam se ( !) uel uindicta super semetipsum uel gladius occisionis peccatorum a se inuicem. tertium animal. Id est doctorum ordo. ueni. Id est aeclesie subiecte dicitur. ecce aequus niger. Id est populus hereticorum qui facit opera tenebrarum. qui sedebat super illum. Id est diabulus. habebat stateram. Id est simulationem aequitatis iudicii.20 in manu sua. Id est in opere suo. 18  19  20 

See Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, pp. 224–25. Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 224, 27. Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 225, 5–6.

equus uero rufus et qui sedebat super eum datus est ei ut sumeret pacem de terra, reliqua. equus rufus. Id est populus persecutores. (6.5) et qui sedebat super eum : diabulus. III equus niger et qui sedebat super eum habebat sta­ teram in manu sua. equus niger. Populus hereticorum qui facit opera tenebrarum. habens stateram. Id est similitudinem aequitatis iudicii.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 425

tamquam in medio quatuor animalium. Id est uocem doctorum eclesiae. bilibris tritici et tris bilibres ordei. In tritico /76v/ autem et in ordeo totam eclesiam dixit, siue in magnis21 siue in minimis, in praepossitis scilicet et populis et praetium unum docet esse, 22 si quidem pusilli et magni. denario uno. Id est perfectio praetio sanguinis Christi redempti sunt apostoli. Namque in ordeo praefigurati sunt. Cum reliquiae operum Christi .xii. cofini fuissent qui sunt corpus praepossitos .uii. sportae dicuntur que sunt corpus septiformis eclesiae. | Aliter : bilibris tritici. Id est theorica aeclesia. denario 241 uno.23 Id est unitate diuinitatis uel unitate personae in Christo ex diuinitate et homine. In ms siue in magnis repeated. Primasius, Comm. in Apoc., ed. Adams, pp. 95–96, lines 91–92. Bilibris tritici … In tritico et hordeo ecclesiam dixit, siue in magnis et minimis, siue in praepositis et populis. 23  i interl. over e (=dinario). 21 

22 

bilibris tritici denario .i. et .iii. bilibris ordei denario .i. et uinum et oleum ne leseris. bilibris nomen mensurae. Isidorus dicitur : Sextarius duarum librarum est qui bis (ms quibus) adsumptus nominatur bilibris ; quater fit (ms sit) Graece nomine cenix.4 Item Primasius dicit : In tritico et in ordeo totam ecclesiam significat siue in magnis siue in minimis uel prepositis et in populis praetium unum habent,5 id est sanguine Christi redempti sunt. Item in ordeo apostoli praefigurati sunt. Cum reliquie operum Christi .xii. cofini fuissent qui sunt corpus praepositorum. Et post praepositos .uii. sporte dicuntur quae sunt corpus .uii. formis ecclesiae. Aliter : bilibris tritici. Id est theorica ecclesia.

Isidore, Etym. xvi  xxvi  6. Primasius, Comm. in Apoc., ed. Adams, pp. 95–96. See page 384 above note 22 to corresponding text of the Cambridge commentary. 4  5 

426 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church et tres bilibris24 ordei. Id est eclesiae actualis. denario uno. id (est ?) ut supra diximus25 ideo autem (h ∩) aeclesia theorica unus bilibris dicitur eo quod unitatem diuinitatis credit et ideo eclesia actualis tris26 bilibres dicitur eo quod credit fidem Trinitatis. Set (s&) tamen eclesia theorica fidem Trinitatis habet et eclesia actualis unitatem diuinitatis credit. uinum et oleum ne lesseris. Id est quod districtum est in nostra doctrina ne molle feceris illud, et quod suaue est in nostra doctrina ne districtum feceris illud : Aliter : uinum. Id est omnis qui bibit sanguinem Christi27 et uinum euangelii. et oleum. Id est eclesiam babtizatam, quia oleum accipitur iuxta babtismum et sacerdotes meos unctos oleo et oleum Spiritus Sancti quod fit erga cor uniuscuiusque ne lesseris. e interl. over last i (corrected to bilibres). supra diximus ; same phrase below in gloss to 13.14. Back references not identifiable. Reference Bible Apoc 6.6 has : Ut praedixinus, ecclesia theorica unus biblibri dicitur. 26  e interl. over i (corrected to tres). 27  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, 225, 7. 24  25 

dinario .i. Id est unitate diuinitatis uel unitate personae in Christo ex diuinitate et humanitate. Et .iii. bilibris ordei. Id est ecclesia actualis. denario .i. ut praediximus,6 ecclesia theorica. Unus bilibris dicit eo quod unitatis diuinitatem credidit. Et ideo actualis ecclesia .iii. bilibris dicitur eo quod fidem Trinitatis credidit sed tamen ecclesia theorica fidem Trinitatis habet et ecclesia actualis unitatem diuinitatis credit. uinum et oleum ne lesereis. Id est uinum est omnis qui bibit sanguinem et uinum euangelium. Oleum uero omnis ecclesia quae (ms qui) oleum in baptismum suscipit et quo omnes reges et sacerdotes et prophetae uncti sunt. 6  praediximus. ubi ? See corresponding supra diximus in the Cambridge text.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 427 | Cambridge Commentary and Reference Bible : Apoc 242 13.13–14.1 The third section chosen for publication has to do principally with the interpretation of Apoc 13.18 on the number of the beast. To situate this pericope in context, the passages immediately preceding and following in both the Cambridge text and in the Reference Bible are given. The exegesis of the verse in both texts of Apoc 13.18 says that the number of the beast is the number of a person. The gloss in the Cambridge manuscript (which principally interests us) takes a number to identify a person and one to identify the beast (Antichrist). The first number it seeks to compute is 616, which seems to be that found in the biblical text of the Apocalypse it is glossing. The accepted biblical reading in Greek and Latin texts of Apoc 13.18 (as well as in the Syriac, Coptic and Armenian versions) is the number 666. However, 616 was read in some manuscripts known to Irenaeus (c.  130–200), who comments that 666 was found “in all good and ancient copies” and is “attested by those who had themselves seen John face to face”.1 According to Tischendorf’s eighth edition of the Greek New Testament, the numeral 616 was also read in two minuscule manuscripts, which however no longer exist.2 It is well known that 616 was also the reading of Tyconius. The Cambridge text (and the corresponding Reference Bible gloss) first interprets the number 616, which computes as what it regards the monogram for Christ, namely χιςʹ (in numerical value 600  +  10  +  6 ; the final letter being final Greek ς, or special Greek note episemon, in value the numeral six). After this exposition the Cambridge text goes on to say that “in other books” the number is not 616, but rather 666. It then goes on to interpret this according the value of the Greek letters as numerically the equivalent of the name Tietan, which it regards as an apt name for Antichrist. A similar gloss, but less extensive, is found in the corresponding section of the Reference Bible.

1  B. M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Stuttgart, 1971, p. 749. 2  Metzger, A Textual, p. 750.

428 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church For the first part of this gloss, the Cambridge text is dependent on, or at least agrees with, the Expositio of Caesarius of Arles. 3 The second part (from “other books”) depends on the tradition attested also in Ps-Jerome, De monogramma Christi, and in the commentary of Primasius. After this exposition found in both the Cambridge text and in the Reference Bible, the Reference Bible goes to on, with an introductory term Item to give another exposition, beginning “Faciamus ergo numerum” and ending “quem superius de monogramma diximus”. Almost all this is taken verbatim from Ps-Jerome’s De monogramma Christi.4 A similar treatment is found in the commentary of Primasius ; the Reference Bible text, however, seems to depend on Ps-Jerome’s De monogramma rather than on the almost identical text of Primasius. After this the Reference Bible | goes on 243 to give material under the heading Recapitulatio, ending with the note Hucusque de monogramma, confirmation of the use of a work of this name (by Ps-Jerome ?).

Morin, Sancti Caesarii, p. 247. Morin, De monogramma Christi, pp.195–97, at 197 ; repr. PLS 2 (1960), cols. 287–91, at 289–90. 3  4 

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 429

Cambridge, Dd X 16, fol. 92v facit signa magna. Id est quia adsistente populo propositi faciunt quod uoluntati diabuli proficiat. ut etiam ignem faceret de caelo discendere in /93r/ terram. Id est 1 negandum est si coram oculis hominum hoc signum fuerit. Aliter : ignem. id est uindictam. de caelo. Id est de eclesia, id est propter persecutionem eius. in terram. Id est in homines consentientes illis. quae data sunt illi. Id est quae permissa sunt illi. ut facerent imaginem bestiae. Id est ut essent semetipsi imago bestiae id ut fuissent bestia, id est corpus diabuli. quae habet plagam gladii et vixit. Id est ut supra diximus.2 ut daret spiritum imagini bestiae. Id est ut daret doctrinam his de ( ?) quibus faciunt bestiam uel ut daret baptismum per quod 3 sanctus super eclesiam discendit. non supplied ; see Reference Bible text. supra diximus : Where above not identifiable. See also gloss in Cambridge text at Apoc 6.6. 3  For insertion of Spiritus see Reference Bible text. 1  2 

| Reference Bible (Paris ms, fol. 213ra4) faciat ignem de caelo in terram descendere. Id est non negandum est si coram oculis hominum hoc signum fuerit ; uel ignem de caelo. Id est uindictam de ecclesia propter persecutionem eius in terram in homines terrenos consentientes illis. ut facerent imaginem bestiae. Id est ut essent illi imago bestiae et ut fuissent corpus diabuli. et ut daret spiritum imaginem bestiae. Id est ut daret doctrinam his de (de interl.) quibus (bus interl.) faciunt bestiam, uel ut daret babismum in similit (ms P : similit) ecclesiae quia per babtismum Spiritus super ecclesiam descendit.

430 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ut adloquatur imago bestiae. Id est ut doceant, uel ut babtismum dederint hi de quibus imago bestiae, id bestia semetipsa, facta est : ut quicumque non adorauerint imagine bestiae occidantur. Imaginem bestiae pro locis intellegimus aliquando ipse populus uel seodoprophetae, aliquando ipsa similitudo nominis Christi. | nisi qui habet characterem. Caracter autem est nota, 244 id est monogramma aut nomen aut numerus literarum nominis. hic sapientia est : Id est licet diximus bestiam esse, tamen homo est sed Spiritus bestiam appellat. numerus enim hominis est : Id est numerus est nominis hominis, numerus est nominis bestiae. et numerus nominis eius est sexcenti sexdecim. Nomen autem quod habet istum numerum Christus est, quod scribitur per grecas literas. Id est per chi4 et epψsi et simcma. 4 

χ interl. above chi.

quicumque non adhorauerit imaginem bestiae uel non habuerit caracterem eius in fronte uel in manu dextera occidetur. Id | est qui non crediderit uel non simulauerit populum credentem seudoprophetis habentem similitudinem nominis Christi. in manu. Id est in opere. uel in fronte (n interl.) caracterem. Hoc est monogramma ut Christiani habent. T̶ signum crucis. hic est sapientia. Id est, licet enim diximus bestiam esse, carac­ terem enim nota est uel monogramma aut nomen aut numerus litterarum nominis, tamen homo est, sed Spiritus bestiam dicit : numerus enim nominis est : Id est numerus nominis hominis est, non numerus nominis bestiae. et numerus nominis eius est .dclxvi. uel .dcxvi. in aliis libris. Nomen autem quod habet istum numerum Christus est, quod scribitur per grecas litteras. Id est

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 431

Super chi autem uadit numerus sexcenti et super epsin potest numerus denus exire ; deinde autem a litera greca in locum eius datur. Id est iota quae numerum denum potest habere et ideo (idō) in loco eius ponitur dum unius linguae sunt.5 Et simma senum numerum non potest habere super se quia ut alii dicunt greci non habent literam que senum numerum habere potuisset et ideo /93v/ in loco istius literae quae uocatur simma ponitur epissimon quod signum est conpoti apud grecos et senum numerum habet. | Non facilis est autem hec sententia (-ten- interl.) quia quod 245 nomen est non est numerus et quod numerus est non est nomen. Deinde autem faciemus unam literam que potuerit et nomen esse et numerus esse, id pro litera chi a qua nomen incipitur nomen esse potest et ista litera monogramma uocatur.6 Mono autem grecae una in latina interpraetatur, et gramma grece litera interpraetatur. 5  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 247, 20–24. “Faciamus ergo numerum quem dixit, ut accepto numero inveniamus nomen vel notam. numrus, inquid, eius est sexcenti sedecim. Quem faciamus secundum Graecos, maxime quia ad Asiam scribit. Et ego, inquid, sum Α et Ω. Sexcenti ergo et sedecim graecis litteris sic fiunt .Χις. quae notae solutae, numerus est ; redactae autem in monogrammum et notam faciunt et nomen et numerum. Hoc signum Christi intellegitur”. 6  Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 247.

χ chi

ψ et

epsi.

o ψ autem.

p.

.cc. et

simma

Super χ chi autem inuenitur numerus .dc. et super epsi .c. et simma .cc. Super epsi non potest numerus denus esse. Deinde alia littera greca in locum eius datur. Id est iota quae .x. significat, et ideo in locum eius poni potest dum unius linguae sunt. Et symma senum numerum non significat quia Greci non habent litteram quae significat .vi. Ideo in loco istius litterae quae dicitur symma ponitur episimon, nota numeri apud Grecos ; ita : .ς. significat .vi. Non facilis est haec sententia quia quod nomen est non numerus et quod numerum non nomen est : Deinde faciamus litteram unam quae poterit et nomen esse et numerus. Id est, pro littera chi a qua nomen incipitur nomen esse potest : Et ista littera monogramma uocatur. Mono enim grece una in latina, gramma lettera.

432 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Pro qua (interl.) causa monogramma in Apocalypsis inuenitur cum in corpore libri non inuenitur ? Ideo dicitur eo quod dixit angelus : qui abet ( !) intellectum conputet numerum bestiae. Haec est autem monogramma : Χς Χις In aliis autem libris non ita inuenitur, sed sic inuenitur ; sexcenti sexaginta sex. Nomen autem quod hunc numerum habet Tietan est, et ideo (idō) ad Antichristum hoc nomen dicitur in quo totus diabulus erit, quia Tietan grecae latine Sol interpraetatur et aptum est ut Antichristum hoc nomen uocatum fuerit quia de (interl.) diabulo dicitur : Transfert se in angelum lucis.

Pro qua causa monogramma in Apocalipsin ponitur dum in istorialibus non inuenitur ? Ideo quia dixit angelus : qui habet intellectum conputat numerum bestiae. Haec est monogramma. In hunc modum est : ☧

χ

In ipsa enim inuenitur

chi

ρ et

ro

ψ uel

epsi

c et symma. Id est xps. Ut Hieronimus dicit : Per chi et ro et symma nomen Christi scribitur. Item in aliis libris sic inuenitur .dclxvi. Nomen autem quod hunc numerum habet Tietan est (÷) et ideo ad Antichristum hoc nomen dicit in quo totus diabolus erit. Tietan enim grece sol interpretatur quod conuenit ad Antichristum in quo diabolus erit. Et de diabolo dicit qui transfert se in angelum lucis.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 433 | hic est autem numerus istius nominis quia super .Tau.7 246 exeunt 8 .ccc. et super iota9 exeunt .x. et super eta10 exeunt quinque et super11 Tau exeunt .ccc. et super alpha12 uadit unum et super Noi13 quinquaginta uadit. Numerus autem sexcentorum apte Antichristum dicitur quia (qia) simulat se inplere quatuor euangelia et simulat se inplere duo testamenta et simulat se uoluntatem Dei facere ex corpore et anima et simulat se delegere Deum et proximum et simulat se pacem abere ( !) inter se et proximum. Et numerus denus14 apte ad Antichristum dicitur quia simulat se implere decim uerba /94r/ legis et decim sensus portare ad uoluntatem Dei. Et numerus senus15 congrue ad Antichristum dicitur quia ipse praedicauit sex dies T interl. above Tau. ccc interl. above exeunt. 9  i interl, above iota. 10  H interl. above eta. 11  tau T interl. above tau ; ccc interl. between Tau and exeunt. 12  Inverted v interl. above p of alpha, and i above last a of same word. 13  n and i interl. above Noi. 14  ms decenus, with ce circled by dots. 15  ms sensus. 7 

8 

hic est numerus istius nominis, quia super .tau. T. ccc. et iota x et aetha .v. et item tau .ccc. et alfa unum et nominis [ ! ; lege nu, or noi] .L. significat. Simul faciunt numerum .dclxvi. apte ad Antichristum dicitur qui simulat se implere .iiii. euangelia et .ii. testamenta et .x. praecepta legis. Ipse enim numerus .dclxvi. per .x. et .vi. significat. Congrue ad Antichristum dicitur, qui dicitur se implere .x. praecepta legis et fecisse mundum per .vi. dies /213va/ et .x. sensus animae et corporis homini dedisse et mundum per .vi. aetates fecisse. Item : hic est sapientia. qui habet intellectum conputet numerum bestiae, reliqua usque .DCLXVI. Unum autem est qui habuerit notam aut bestiae aut numerum nominis eius.1 What follows immediately here, “Faciamus … superius monograma diximus”, is from Ps-Jerome, De monogramma Christi, Patrologiae latinae supple1 

434 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in quibus factus est mundus et sex mundi spatia praedicabit et numerus diuiditur in trias et in trias. Et apte ad Antichristum dicitur nus16 numerus quia simulabit se praedicare fidem Trinitatis et tris leges, id est legem naturae et legem prophetarum et legem noui testamenti. Et recte quinquagenus numerus ad poenitentiam pertinet pro psalma ( !-ma) quinquagessimo qui de poenitentiam cantatus est : 16 

Space for about three letters blank or erased before nus.

Faciamus ergo numerum ut in numero nomen cognoscimus et notam. numerus eius est .dclxvi. Quem facimus secundum Grecos. Est enim nomen ANTEMOC 2i.l.ccc.v.xl.l.cc.145 Quod nomen, ut dixi, Grece suputatum .dclxvi. impletur. Antemos autem honori contrarius interpretatur ac si diceret honori homini qui soli conpetit Deo contrarius est, Antichristus cui anathema (ms P : antema) conuenit. Item aliud nomen est quod eiusdem numeri complectitur summam. Id est i.

c.

l.

lxx.

cccc.

xl.

v

A.

R.

N.

O.

Y.

M.

E

qui simul faciunt eundem numerum. Hoc autem nomen interpretatur Nego quod Antichristo conuenit, id est, nomen negationis, cum Christo nomen credulitatis. Siue autem honori contrarium siue nego iure Antichristum potest utrumque referri. Quod autem dicit hominis est enim numerus, Christi utique quem per falsam emitationem se Antichristus accipi desiderat. Item dc.

c.

x.

cc.

ccc.

v.

x

X

P

I

C

T

E

I

autem genetiui cassus .vii. litterae secundum suum numerum conputate prope illum numerum dierum perficiunt qui in persecutimentum 2, 289–90 ; see also Primasius. The sections underlined above are in both Primasius and in De monogramma ; see also Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 247 (cited above), which text has apparently influenced the Cambridge gloss on Apoc 13.18. 2  suprascript on ANTEMOC.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 435

one Antichristi iam futurus est, id est, dierum .ī.cc.xx.v. In cuius se specie fraudulanter opponit aduersitas, hoc in nota. Id est, in monogramma quae in hunc modum explicatur, ☧ .ī.cc.xx, ubi conpendio totum nomen Christi concluditur, dc.

c.

x.

cc.

ccc.

v.

x

X

P

I

C

T

E

I

in quo ut dixit ī. cc. xx. v. sunt. Item nomen Adam per grecas litteras .xl. vi. numerum conplet hoc modo .i.

.iiii.

i

xl.

A.

Δ.

item A.

M.

qui faciunt .xlvi. Cum autem ipse numerus .xlvi. soluitur hoc modo xx.

lxx.

cccc.

i.

iiii.

c.

i. .

iiii ( !).

x

K

O

Y

A

Δ

P

CC(=A)

Γ

I

l.

ccc.

i.

cc.

v.

lx.

N

T

A

C

E

Ξ

qui simul faciunt numerum .ī.cc.xxv quem superius in monograma diximus. Item recapitulatio. Ut nemo possit uendere (uendere interl.) aut emere nisi qui habet nomen bestiae aut numerum nominis eius sicut ecclesia symbolum tradidit profuturum nostrae saluti ut non liceret unicuique Christiano conmercium facere nisi contra eum qui habet symbolum fidei. Ita faciet Antichristus similitudinem hanc, ut dicitur : Nemo potest intrare in domum reliqua [Mt 12.29]. hic est sapientia, reliqua : Id est ut ex numero nominis agnoscatur. Et intellectus. Id est qua causa factus est hoc nomen scripsit. Uel idem est sapientia et intellectus sicut nota et nomen et numerus per synomiam facitur. Haec est causa nominis scripti apud Antichristum : Sicut est simbolum fidei et crux Christi in frontibus Christianorum ut agnoscantur serui Christi sicut fuit in fronte uel in manu (ms. mane) Cain, ut Hieronimus dicit, ut agnosceretur, ita faciat Antichristus ut putatur esse Christus hac similitudine. Faciamus numerum ut (ms P : et) nomen ex numero cognoscamus et notam. Numerus eius est dc.lx.vi. quem facimus secundum Grecos, ideo quia Grecis Assie scripta est haec hars. Item

436 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | et ecce agnus stabat super montem sion. Id est Chris- 248 tus ad iudicium montem Sion ueniet ; siue ut alii dicunt post persecutionem Antichristi Christus ad adiutorium acelesiae ueniet in qua Christus speculatur. Sion enim specula interpraetatur. habentes nomen eius et nomen patris scriptum in frontibus suis. Id est

sciendum est quod non una difinitione 3 scriptura hunc numerum nunciat. Alibi in isto libro data est potestas draconi mensis .xlii. Alibi : dabo duobus martyribus meis ut prophetant diebus ī. CC.LX.4 (Apoc 11.3). Item in Danielo (Dan 7.25) : Tempus et tempora et dimidium. Id est, .iii. anni et semis. Item .ī-ccxc. dies inuenitur ibi. Item ī.cc.xc.v dies in hoc ostendit quod clare humane notitie diem iudicii uel aduentus sui Christus /214ra/ noluit , ut dixit apostolus : Non est uestrum nosse tempora uel momenta (Acts 1.7), reliqua. Item, quomodo haec nota nominatur ? Isidorus dicit : crisenon haec sola ex uoluntate uniuscuiusque ad aliquid notandum ponitur.5 hucusque de monogramma. et uidi et ecce angelus stabat super montem sion et cum illo .cxliiii. milia habentes nomen eius et nomen patris scriptum in frontibus suis. et cantabant canticum nouum ante .iiii. animalia et .xxiiii. seniores, qui empti sunt de terra. et non sunt quoinquinati cum mulieribus uirgines enim sunt. angelus (ms angeli) stabat super montem sion. Id est Christus super montem Sion ad iudicium ueniet. habentes nomen eius et nomen patris eius, reliqua. Id est : … 3  See Primasius, Comm. in Apoc.  13.17–18 ; pp. 207, 351–52 ; PL 68, 885C ; also Morin, De monogramma Christi, Anecdota Matedsolana III, 3 (1990), p. 197 ; Patrologiae latinae supplementum 2, 290. 4  =i with stroke over =M=1000 ; the total is 1260. The texts of Apoc 11.3, Dn 7.25 and Acts 1.7 are cited by Primasius, Comm. in Apoc., pp. 207–08. 5  Isidore, Etym. i  xxi 22. ☧ Crisimon. Haec sola … ponitur.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 437 | Cambridge Commentary and Reference Bible : Apoc 248 19.17–22.18 In chapter 19 (19.17) to the end (22.18) the gloss in both texts (Cambridge and the Reference Bible) agree fairly closely throughout. The Reference Bible has no additions from other sources, other than the bible. There are more or less lengthy citations of the biblical text, without exegetical gloss, in the Reference Bible at 20.7–9 ; 20.11–20 ; 21.10–22.4. These lengthy texts concern the end events : Gog and Magog (20.7–9) ; the last judgement (20.11–20) ; the New Jerusalem, the holy city (21.11–22.4). The Reference Bible compiler seems to have had a special interest in this holy City, as at | the end of the gloss 249 on 22.3 he writes : “Finitum de ciuitate”. Despite the inserted extended biblical texts, however, the gloss of the Reference Bible corresponds in general to that of the Cambridge commentary. With regard to the source of the gloss in the Cambridge text (and also the Reference Bible), occasional citation from, dependence on, or similarity with, the Expositio of Caesarius of Arles can be seen, e.g. at 20.9 ; 20.12 ; 21.6 ; 21.9 ; 21.10 ; 21.12 ; 21.13 ; 21.23 ; 21.24 ; 22.2 ; 22.17 ; 22.18 ; 22.20. Two of these citations merit special attention. The first is the Cambridge text at 21.12. angelos uero duodecim tribus Israhel intellegimus quae sunt in potestate praepositorum, quod (expressed by the quod-symbol) sunt portae hoc fundamenta et quod (quod-symbol) ciuitas hoc muros quae sunt eclesia que super praesitas ( !) fundata est aeclesia ut : Tu est Petrum ( !) et super hanc petram edificabo eclesiam meam.

The exact sense intended by this text, how to construe it and translate it, is at first sight not easy to determine. It could appear as the combination of possibly upset glosses. This first impression can be borne out by the corresponding gloss in the Reference Bible (Paris ms, 217ra), which reads : nomina .xii. tribuum filiorum israhel intellegimus quae sunt in potestate apostolorum uel praepositos qui in eclesia sunt, ut Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram reliqua.

Reference Bible (Munich ms) : nomina .xii. tribuum filiorum israhel intellegimus quae sunt in potestate apostolorum uel praepositorum ut dicitur : Sedebitis

438 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church super .xii. sedes et reliqua. Uel praepositi sunt qui in ecclesia sunt, ut Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram reliqua.

The Expositio of Caesarius of Arles1 reads on Apoc 21.14 : et murus civitatis habens fundamenta duodecim. et super ea duodecim nomina apostolorum agni. Quod sunt portae, hoc fundamenta : quod civitas, hoc murus, hoc supellex. (et qui loquebatur mecum  … Apoc 21.15)

It is clear that Dd  X  16 has introduced from Caesarius a text not found in the Reference Bible. The second text is quite interesting. It is Apoc 21.23, and in the Cambridge text reads : non indiget sole et raliqua ( ! ral—). Id est quia neque lumine aut elimentis huius seculi regnantur aeclesiae sed Christo eterno sole. Aliter : non indi sole. Id est in futuro.

| The text of the Reference Bible (Paris ms 217rb, lines 5–2 from 250 end) is almost identical : non indiget ciuitas sole et luna. Id est, non regat ( ! ; Munich ms, manu secunda, regnat) aeclesia elementis uius saeculi sed Christo aeterno sole ; uel ecclesia in futuro non indiget sole praesenti.

The use in the Cambridge text of regnantur, the passive of the transitive use of regno, may be noted. The reading in this text is clear. Both mss of the Reference Bible have regat (M 2 , regnat), which may be an error for regnatur. The gloss in both texts is close to that of the Expositio of Caesarius :2 civitas non indiget sole neque luna, ut luceant in ea : quia non lumine aut elementis mundi regitur ecclesia, sed Christo aeterno sole deducitur per mundi tenebras.

This is one of the texts in which Caesarius borrows from Tyconius. An identical text, from Tyconius, occurs in Bede’s commentary on the verse :3 Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 273, 27–29. Caesarius, In Apocalypsim, p. 274, 23–26. 3  Gryson, Expositio Apocalypseos, p. 561 ; PL 93, 203c ; Bonner, “Saint Bede”, pp. 1–29. 1  2 

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 439 civitas non eget sole neque luna, ut luceant in ea : quia non lumine aut elementis mundi regitur ecclesia, sed Christo aeterno sole deducitur per mundi tenebras.

It does not appear that in this instance the gloss in the Cambridge text or in the Reference Bible borrows directly from Caesarius, but rather on some modified form of Tyconius’s commentary. Concluding Observations and Reflections At the end of this comparison of three sections from the Cambridge Commentary and of the Reference Bible, and some remarks on the fourth, we may now end by some observations and reflections on the relationship and differences between the two works.

1.  It is clear that throughout the two works share the same gloss on the Apocalypse. This can be seen from the texts placed in parallel above, and is put beyond doubt by a cursory comparison of the two works from beginning to end. 2.  It is also clear that we are dealing with two distinct works. One is not a copy or expansion of the other. This is already clear from the relative size of the two works : the Cambridge commentary, with 23,500 words, being almost double that of the Reference Bible (with 13,500 words). 3.  It is clear that the Reference Bible has added extra material (often with explicit ascription) from Primasius, Isidore and other sources (probably from De monogramma Christi at Apoc 13.17–18). | 4. Without full analysis we cannot say that the Cambridge text has faithfully preserved the original gloss on the Apocalypse, or whether it also has added – for instance in those sections where the Reference Bible has no corresponding gloss. We have seen what appears to be an interpolation from Caesarius of Arles in the gloss on Apoc 21.12. There may be others. 5. After examination and with the critical edition of both texts it will be for future research to attempt to restore the original gloss on the Apocalypse which stands behind both the Cambridge text and the Reference Bible, to identify its sources as far as this is possible, to see what earlier or contemporary sources it uses (whether directly or indirectly, for instance, Tyconius and Primasius) or does not use (for instance Bede and Isidore), to analyse the biblical text both of the lemmata and that used in the glosses. 6. It is clear that an earlier, if not the original, form of this gloss served as one of the sources for the commentary on the Apocalypse used by the compiler of the Reference Bible (about 780 ?). We can say, in the spirit of what Bernhard Bischoff has said about sections of certain other presumed Hiberno-Latin commentaries or intro-

251

440 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church duction to biblical books : “Much of it has passed into the Reference Bible”. 7.  With regard to a date for the composition of the original gloss on the Apocalypse standing behind (or within) the Cambridge text and the Reference Bible I believe we must go back beyond 750 (the probable date of composition of the Reference Bible). How much further back remains to be determined. 8.  With regard to the transmission of the text of this gloss, we may again note that the Cambridge manuscript carrying it (Dd X 16) is a tenth- or possibly ninth-century work, written most probably in a Breton scriptorium. This manuscript has throughout, in all its five or six items, very pronounced Insular/Irish abbreviations. We may further note that three of the items were already considered to belong to Hiberno-Latin literature (Ps-Jerome on the gospels ; Grammatical treatise on Vesper ; the commentary on the Apocalypse). As David Ganz states (below), “it seems clear that the separate texts in this [Cambridge] volume were copied from different manuscripts”. It follows that at least one line of the transmission of this commentary on the Apocalypse was through circles strongly influenced by Insular or Irish scribal traditions. 9. It remains to be decided where the original gloss was compiled. Insular circles, in England or Ireland, are not to be ruled out. 10.  This Cambridge commentary will probably shed light not just on the Apocalypse gloss in the Reference Bible, but on the composition of this work itself. We now have come upon one of the sources the compiler used, and this passed through a heavily Insular/Irish-influenced stage of transmission. The presence of similar sources for the exposition of the biblical books in the Reference Bible need not surprise us. | 11.  The chief importance of this newly-identified Cambridge com- 252 mentary, and of the closely related Reference Bible text, is the evidence they give of an early medieval interpretation of the last book of the New Testament canon, of the sources that stand behind it and the manner in which these sources have been transmitted faithfully or altered in the process of transmission – whether the original composition of the gloss took place in Britain, Ireland or on the Continent. A first requirement for the proper understanding of their evidence is a critical edition of both the Cambridge text and that of the Reference Bible. It is to be hoped that an edition of both will proceed with due haste.

Addendum After completion of this essay for publication and printing, extra information on texts considered came to my attention, which I here communicate as an addendum.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 441

The first concerns the text De monogramma Christi (above, pp. 386-87, of which only two manuscripts were known. A third has been identified by Michael Gorman in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, ms lat.  2384 (s.  ix), fol.  68r–68v.4 This text is headed “De monogramma Christi”, below which heading comes : Pauca incipiunt de monogramma de qua memoratur Iohannes in Apocalypsi ex commentario Primasii et Victorini, et Ticonii et aliorum auctorum uoluminibus excerpta. This same manuscript, we may note, together with the Argumenta and Explanationes on the Psalms attributed to Bede, Bede’s Retractatio in Actus apostolorum and a work of Alcuin, also has an incomplete text of the (Hiberno-Latin ?) commentary on Matthew known as Liber questionum in euangeliis. A critical edition of this commentary is about to be published in Corpus Christianorum. A major contribution is Roger Gryson’s critical edition of Bede’s commentary on the Apocalypse (above, p. 387 n. 39). Together with the critical introduction and a rich presentation of its sources, this work has a long introduction (of some 200 pages) on the manuscripts, the history of the text, Bede’s sources (Tyconius, Irish teachers ( ?), Primasius), on Bede’s biblical text (including consideration of the Book of Armagh’s text and of that of Durham Bede), and much else besides. Bede had before him a full text of Tyconius and Primasius. This critical edition will be invaluable in the study of the Apocalypse commentaries examined in this essay. Finally, I may note that a critical edition of the Reference Bible text is being prepared by Roger Gryson and that in the Cambridge manuscript by Guy Lobrichon.

4  M. Gorman, “The Argumenta and Explanationes on the Psalms Attributed to Bede”, Revue Bénédictine 108 (1998), pp. 214–33, at 222-23.

442 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Appendix I The texts edited in this appendix have no direct bearing on the Apocalypse commentary, but are included for the light they may shed on the Cambridge manuscript and its affiliations. In the Cambridge text the item is an independent one. In the Vatican manuscript (Reg. lat.  49) it serves as the opening of a homily on the resurrection pericope Mt 28.1– 15, with the incipit (Vespere autem sabbati) and the explicit (hodiernum diem) in the Vatican text, the incipit alone in the Cambridge manuscript. In both, and after the manner of Hiberno-Latin homilies and commentaries, the pericope is linked (by the word heret) with one or other passage immediately preceding (altera dies, cf Mt 27.62 ; or illi [abeuntes], cf. Mt 27.66). These opening remarks make sense in the context of the Vatican manuscript homily, not as part of an independent item. The scribe of the Cambridge codex can be presumed to have copied it from a manuscript such as the Vatican text, scarcely, however, from the Reg. lat.  49 itself, which is probably more recent that Cambridge Dd X  16. That the two texts are very closely related, in fact almost identical, is clear. In both, in fact, ΕΠΙΦΟC is used for the correct Greek ἐπιφωσκόυσῃ. In the Vatican text the homily is according to the passage’s threefold sense (historical, spiritual and moral), an approach found in vernacular Irish and Hiberno-Latin sermons. The entire historical section of the homily, including the introduction, have been edited by Martin ;McNamara, “Catechesis Celtica homily on the resurrection narrative (Mt 28.1–15)”, in PIBA 23 (2000) 67–89.

253

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 443

MS Reg. lat 49 (Catechesis celtica) 20va18–20rb20 CCCLIII. In nomine Dei summi. Amen. Vespere autem (h ’) sabbati usque hodiernum diem. Vespere autem sabbati heret altera dies uel illi abeuntes. Est etiam uesper, uespere, uesperum, uespera. Hic casus nominatiuus quadruplex est cuius differentia hoc erit, quod uesper quidem dicitur quoties sol nubibus aut luna ferruginibus quacumque diei uel noctis hora contegitur. Et hoc meritum ( ! lege neutrum ?) est ut uesper, -is, -ri, -em, -er, -re declinetur. Nominatiuo uespere uocatur ab hora nona, sole discessum inchoante. Sed hoc nomen non declinatur. Vesperum cum, sole occidente, dies dificit, et sic declinatur : uesperum, -i, -o, -um, -um, -o. Vespera est cum lucis oriente aurora nox finitur, et sic declinatur : uespera, -ae, -ae, | -am, 254 reliqua. Cauendum est ne aut uesper aut uesperum aut uespera pluralem numerum habeant. Vespere. Id est, fine noctis. Uenerunt, non uesperescente (hir.)1 die sed uesperescente nocte. Defectum omnis rei uesperum dicimus. Consummatio omnis rei uespera dicitur eo quod nox sequebatur diem apud illos, donec resurrexerit Christus. Nox uero precedit diem a resurrectione Christi. hir. (with stroke over) in left-hand margin to line beginning die sed, ending omnis rei. 1 

Cambridge, Dd X 16, fol. 46v8 Uespere autem (h’) sabbati. Heret altera dies uel illi. Est etiam (& iā) uesper uespere uesperum uespera. Hic cassus nominatiuus quadruplex est (÷) cuius deferentia hec erit, quod uesp. quidem dicitur quoties sol nubibus aut (ā) luna ferruginibus quascunque diei uel (ł) noctis hora contegitur. Et (&) hoc neutrum est (÷) ut uesper .is.ri.er.re. At nominatiuo uespere uocatur ab hora nona sole discen( ?)ssum inchoante. Sed hoc nomen non declinatur uesper uc ( ? ; lege cum) sole occidente dies deficit. Et (&) sic declinatur : uesper i.o.u,.um o. Uespere est (÷) cum lucis oriente aurora nox finitur et sic declinatur uespera ae ae am reliqua. Cauendum est (÷) ne aut (ā) uespera uesperum aut (ā) uespera pluralem (plu–) numerum (num ̄ ) habeant. Uespere. Id est fine noctis uenerunt, non uespescente ( !sic : uespes–) die sed (s̄) uesperscente nocte. Defectum omnis rei uesperum dicimus omnis rei.1 Uespera dicitur eo quod nox (space for about 12 letters blank in ms) diem apud illos donec resurrexit Christus. Nox uero praecedit diem a resurrexione Christi. 1  … dicimus omnis rei. Thus my transcript of the Cambridge ms ; possibly erroneous.

444 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Vespere sabbati. Id est, graeca nomina sunt uesper et uespere et uespera, et interpretantur finis uel difectio. Et feminini generis est in greca uespere, nam sic est in euangelio greco :

i. uespere. ΟΨΕ i. q ΤΗ i. sabata/u/rum CΑΒΒΑΤΟΝ.

i. hac (i.m.s.) ΤΗ .i. lucescit ΕΠΙΦΟC

i. sabati (i.m.s.) CΑΒΒΑΤΟΝ .i. in ΕΙC

.i. primum ΜΟΥΑΝ

In quo ap/20vb/paret quod opse femininum nomen est te uero femininum pronomen est : Quidam autem uolunt uespera, non uespere, hic dici debere. Quidam dicunt quod uespere commune est uel masculinum et femininum. Quidam subtilius legunt, quasi ordo sit : Venit Maria Magdalena et altera Maria uidere sepulchrum in prima sabbati, quae lucescit. In prima sabbati. Alii ita intellegunt : “sabbatum requies interpretatur”. | Uespere quietis qui lucescit in prima sab(bati). Interrogatur utrum mane quando uenerunt ad momumentum surrex(it) Christus. Non mane sed in medio noctis, ut natus est : Et in medio noctis ueniet iudi(care) uiuos ac mor(tuos) in die iudicii. Simili modo in media nocte resurrextio

Uespera sabbati (sab̄) .i. graeca nomina sunt ( ?s̄) uespere et uespera. Et est (÷) pro (p̄ ?) finis uel defectio et fimi generis est (÷) in greca uespere. Sic est (÷) in euangelio greco :

.i. uespere ΟΨΕ .i. ( ?) ΤΗ s( ?)abaturum CΑΒΒΑΤΟΝ.

.i. hac ΤΗ .i. lucescit ΕΠΙΦΟC

.i. sabati CΑΒΒΑΤΟΥ .i. in ΕΙC

primum ΜΟC[ ! ?]ΑΝ

In quo apparet quod obse fimininom (femīnō) est (÷) ; te uero se pro ( ? v° sé pro to =pronomen est ?). Quidam autem uolunt uespera non uespero hic dici debere. Quidam autem quod uespere commune est (÷) .i. mas(culinum) et fem(ininum). Quidam subtilius ( ?) legunt quasi ( ? ̄ss ;) ordo est ( ?sit s ;t). Uenit Iamria (Maria, >Maria Magdalene) et ( ?) altera Maria uidere sepulchrum in prima sab(bati) quae lu(cescit) in prima sab(bati). Alii ita intellegunt. ‘sabbatum requies estprae ( !÷p̄ ; > interpraetatur)”. Uespere quietis qui lucescit in prima sab(bati). Interrogatur utrum mane quando uenerunt ad momumentum surrex(it) Christus. Non mane sed in medio noctis, ut natus est : Et in medio noctis ueniet iudi(care) uiuos ac mor(tuos) in die iudicii. Simili modo in media nocte resurrex-

255

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 445 Christi facta est (÷) ut dicitur ex persona Christi : Media nocte surgebam ad confitendum reliqua. Ag(ustinus) : Christus in nocte conceptus est (÷) et in nocte Vespere, quietis. Quae lucescit in prima sabbati. Interrogatur utrum mane, quando uenerunt mulieres ad monumentum surrexit Christus. Non mane sed in medio noctis, ut resur(rexit) etiam (&am ̄) neque mane dominicae diei quae est (÷) prima post sab(batum) neque uesperescente diae sed (s̄ ) noctis uespere. Id est (÷) profunda nocte dominicae diei resurectio facta credatur. Dominica dies dicitur dum meruit uidere Dominum resurgentem et mundum reparari per Christum.

tio Christi facta est (÷) ut dicitur ex persona Christi. Media nocte surgebam ad confitendum reliqua. Ag(ustinus). Christus in nocte conceptus est (÷) et in nocte resur(rexit) etiam (&am ̄ ) neque mane dominicae diei quae est (÷) prima post sab(batum) neque uesperescente diae sed (s̄ ) noctis uespere. Id est (÷) profunda nocte dominicae diei resurectio facta credatur. Dominica dies dicitur dum meruit uidere Dominum resurgentem et mundum reparari per Christum.

446 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Appendix II : Cambridge University Library, Dd X 16 : 256 A Description of the Manuscript (by David Ganz) In the 1856 Catalogue of manuscripts in Cambridge University Library this manuscript was catalogued as “A small folio on parchment Thirteenth century” and its contents remained unidentified. The volume contains a collection of commentaries, on the four gospels, the mass and the Apocalypse, with at the end a sermon of Caesarius of Arles. It bears the bookplate used in 1736 on manuscripts presented to Cambridge from the library of John Moore, bishop of Ely, by king George  I. It is not listed in Edward Bernard’s 1697 catalogue of Moore’s manuscripts, or in the handwritten supplement to that list kept as ms Oo  7  50  2 ; and there is no clear evidence of where it may have come from. (Ultra-violet examination of the opening page reveals nothing above the opening of the text, though the large red initial P seems to be a later addition.) It was CUL manuscript 572 according to Nasmith’s 1796 Catalogue ms Nn 6 42–44 and was described as “Glossa orationum et in 4 Evangelia et Apocalypsim”. According to David J. McKitterick1 Moore owned books from Ely, Norwich, Glastonbury, Le Mans and Bourges, so it does not seem possible to establish when the book reached England. Several scribes, working at the same time and using similar unskilled versions of Caroline minuscule copied ms Dd.  X.  16. They can be distinguished on the basis of the quality of their scribal stints, the forms of individual letters, and the abbreviations they use. There are clear changes of hand at folios 22r, 33r, 39r, 85r, and 109r and probably in other places. Quires were ruled on the outside, normally with 27 lines to the page. Of the minuscule letter forms used by the scribes d is always straight. G mostly uses the caroline form but is sometimes flat topped or shaped like a figure 3. There is a distinctive ct ligature. Incipits and explicits are copied in clumsy rustic capitals with various forms of A. Coloured initials were omitted at fol.  26v the start of the commentary on Luke and fol.  35v start of the commentary on John. The distinctive letter forms and abbreviations may derive from the exemplar being copied : it seems clear that the separate texts in this volume were copied from different manuscripts. Abbreviations include a for autem, ↄ con, Insular est, sed, vel, ost for ostendit and the Insular forms of per post prae qui quia and vero.

1  D. J. McKitterick, Cambridge University Library. a History ii, The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Cambridge, 1986, pp. 87–152.

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 447 The script may be compared with the plate of CCCC 192, fol.  37r, illustrated by David Dumville2 and the less talented hands in the destroyed ms Chartres 91 illustrated by Feerdinand Lot, 3 I suggest that the volume was copied in the region west of Tours in the tenth century, though a ninth-century date is not impossible. | On fol.  46v in the Catechesis Celtica text Greek is copied, using a good alphabet, suggesting a rudimentary knowledge of Greek letterforms.

Contents fols 1–49r : Ps-Jerome on the Gospels, PL 30, 531–90 (and PL 114, 861– 916) The large number of late eighth- and ninth-century manuscripts of this commentary were listed by Dom Lambert, Bibliotheca Hieronymiana manuscripta, iii no.  470 and that list has been amplified by Michael Gorman in Revue Bénédictine 2000. The passion narrative in John is set out separate from the main text on fol.  42r–43r and ends with the capitalis title explicit passio. fol.  46v–47r : Grammatical treatise on Vesper with Greek discussed by M. McNamara.4 The text is also found in the Epistola of Vergilius Maro Grammaticus, but the version here is that of the Vatican manuscript Reg. lat  49 including a Greek version of Matthew. This passage is copied more carefully and with far greater Insular punctuation and abbreviations than any other portion of the manuscript. fol.  48 : Mass commentary 48v : “ad ultimam ponuntur seraphim” is the anonymous De divinis officiis (PL 101, 1252), 5 followed by a brief text close to Ps.Jerome in Matthew, p.  63 line 122. fol.  49r : “Introitum compositum nomen est”, the exposition on the Mass Primum in ordine, edited in PL 138, 1173–86 : and more recently by Daniele Mazzuconi,6 lacking the opening sentences. fol.  52 : e igitur fols  58r–104v : Commentary on the Apocalypse fols 105r–107 : blank.

2  D. Dumville, “The English Element in Tenth-century Breton Book Production”, in Dumville, Britons and Anglo-Saxons in the Early Middle Ages, Aldershot, 1993. 3  F. Lot, Nennius et l’Historia Brittonum, Paris, 1934. 4  “The Irish affiliations of the Catechesis celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp. 291–334. 5  Edited in Revue des études augustiniennes 26 (1980), pp. 122–31. 6  Mazzuconi, D., “La diffusione del expositio Missae ‘Primum in ordine’ e l’expositio orationis Dominicae cosiddetta Milanese”, Archivio Ambrosiano, 45 (1982), pp. 208–66.

257

448 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church fols  107v–113 : Sermo 179 of Caesarius followed by a gloss on the meaning of the name of Peter similar to the Glossa Ordinaria on the second Epistle of Peter, PL 114, 691. There are drawings of foliage on the stubs between fol.  10 and fol.  11 which may date to the tenth century, and a good quality marginal drawing of a figure holding something above its head in the left hand margin of fol.  12r.

Codicology of the manuscript : collation quire 1 of 8 fol.  9 quire 2 of 10 with 2 and 8 cancelled Quires 3 and 4 of 8 fol.  33 quire 5 of 10 with 2 and 8 cancelled fol.  41 quire 6 of 10 with 2 and 8 cancelled fol.  49 quire 7 of 8 fol.  57 quire 8 of 10 with 2 and 8 cancelled fols  65–80 quires 9 and 10 of 8. fol.  81 quire of four Gap between fols  84v and 85r but no break in text of Apoc 9.9. | fol.  85–100 two quires of eight fols 101–108 quire of 8 wants 6 (fol. 105r–108 blank save for “ministerium circumcisionis Abraham” in s.  XII hand on fol.  107v. This text is not biblical) fol.  109 quire of 8, wants 6–8.

Postscript 2014 There have been very significant developments in the various areas covered by this essay since its publication in 2001, mainly, if not exclusively, due to the researches and publications of Roger Gryson. The essay treated of the biblical Latin texts of the Vetus Latina and Vulgate of the Apocalypse, of the patristic and medieval commentaries on the work, and of related texts of the Apocalypse in the “Reference Bible”, De enigmatibus, and in the Cambridge manuscript. Gryson has edited the critical edition of the Vetus Latina Apocalypse,7 and has worked on the completion of the critical edition of the Vulgate Apocalypse. The notes to the original essay drew attention to his surveys of patristic commentaries on the Apocapypse. With a special interest in Tyconius’s commentary on the Apocalypse, and with a view to reconstructing this from relevant 7 

Vetus Latina 26/2, Apocalypsis, ed. by R. Gryson, Freiburg, 2000-2003.

258

the newly-identified cambridge apocalypse commentary 449

commentaries, he critically edited a number of shorter and lengthier commentaries on the Apocalypse. In a work on the minor commentaries on the Apocalypse of John8 he gives critical editions, with detailed introductions, of six of these : Aspringi Pacensis Tractatus fragmenta, Cassiodori Senatoris Complexiones, Pauca de Monogramma Excerpta, Incerti Auctoris Commemoratorium, De enigma­ tibus ex Apocalypsi, Commemoratorium a Theodulpho Auctum, this last-mentioned preserved in a manscript written apparently at Micy about 810. Some of these texts are of direct interest for our subject. The obvious example is the critical edition of the Apocalypse text of the “Reference Bible”, De enigmatibus. Bernhard Bischoff listed the Commemoratorium in his essay “Wendepunkte” as a HibernoLatin work or of Irish inspiration. This claim has been either denied or doubted. Gryson favours Bischoff’s view. The work was composed in the second half of the seventh century. The other Commemoratorium¸ that of Theodulph of Orleans, has Irish connections in that it depends of the same lost Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Apocalypse, written in the first half of the eighth century, on which glosses of De enigmatibus and the Cambridge commentary also draw. Gryson has also edited the commenary of Bede,9 and that of Beatus of Liebana.10 The most significant development has been Gryson’s critical edition of the Cambridge commentary in 2013.11 The text had already been identified by Guy Lobrichon and attention drawn to its importance five years before the Peritia essay was published. In his introduction to the edition Gryson pays detailed attention to the manuscript, its orthography, language (vocabulary, morphology, syntax), favourite expressions, biblical text and sources, followed by an extensive treatment of the ecclesiology of the author. After his analysis, Gryson concludes that the work clearly comes from the same intelCommentaria Minora in Apocalypsin Johannis, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 107), Turnhout, 2003. 9  Bedae Presbyteri Expositio Apocalypseos, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 121A), Turnhout, 2001. 10  Beati Liebanensis Tractatus de Apocalypsi, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 107B, 107C), 2 parts, Turnhout, 2012. 11  Incerti Auctoris Glossa in Apocalypsin e codice Bibliothecae Cantabrigiensis Dd. X. 16, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 108G), Turnhout, 2013. 8 

450 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church lectual milieu which produced the constellation of writings analyzed by Bischoff in his Wendepunkte, whatever that milieu may have been, if one wishes to leave this question open (whether Ireland, or Irish circles on the Continent). He would situate its composition between the theoretical time limits of about 750 and 900. The date is very probaly nearer the beginning than the end of this period. Like the Apocalypse commentary of the Commemoratorium of Theodulph of Orleans and De enigmatibus, it depends on a lost Hiberno-Latin comentary of the first half of the eighth century. This in turn is in the same exegetical tradition as the Commemoratorium de Apocalypsi (possibly Irish). The lost commentary would have filled out the brief texts of the Commemoratorium, drawing heavily on the commentary of Tyconius. Gryson has also edited a reconstructed text of the commentary of Tyconius, together with a French translation of this.12

12  Tyconii Afri Expositio Apocalypseos, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 107A), Turnhout. 2011 ; R. Gryson, Tyconius. Commentaire de l’Apocalypse. Introduction, traduction et notes, Turnhout, 2011.

PART II

Apocrypha

Robert T.  Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012 Part III (unpublished).

THE APOCRYPHA IN IRELAND AND ABROAD1 Definition of Apocrypha The term Apocrypha can mean different things for different people and at different times, but it always tends to have the connotation of works not accepted as part of a biblical canon. With regard to the Greek, and in part Latin, translations it designates books in the Greek but not in the Hebrew text, many of the books designated as deuterocanonical in traditional Catholic terminology. For texts of the early Christian period the term designates a variety of texts rejected as not canonical, some of them heretical or Gnostic. The Gospel according to the Hebrews (Evangelium secundum Hebraeos) is generally classed among the apocrypha. Writings related in nature to the early apocrypha continued to be composed after patristic times. A precise definition or criterion was called for by publishing houses in their choice of works to edit or translate.2 Some translation collections of New Testament apocrypha took A.D. 400 as a cut-off point, but all generally included the Letter of Lentulus, a thirteenth-century text on the physical appearance of Jesus. Commenting on Lk 1.1 (on the “many who had attempted to narrate the great deeds of Christ”) Bede (PL 92, 307CD) lists false gospels under the names of apostles, e.g. Thomas, Bartholomew, Matthew, twelve apostles, with false doctrine to be rejected. “However”, Bede continues, “it should be noted that the Gospel according to the Hebrews (Evangelium iuxta Hebraeos) is not to be listed among the apocrypha but among the 1  Abbreviations : AIC = M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975. 2  For the 7th edition of Antike christliche Apocryphen in deutscher Übersetzung of Hennecke-Schneemelcher, edited by Christoph Markschies et al., Tübingen, 2012, Apocrypha are understood as “texts that either have the form of biblical texts which became canonical, tell stories about characters in the so called canonical biblical texts or convey the words spoken by these characters or claim to be written by biblical figures”. This working definition leaves the question of cut-off point, and others to be answered.

The Bible and the Apocrypha in the early Irish Church, edited by Martin McNamara, IPM, 66 (Turnhout, 2015), pp. 453-482. ©

DOI 10.1484/M.IPM-EB.1.XXXXXX

454 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church histories of the Church. For (nam) Jerome, the scripture commentator, uses many citations from it and translated it into Latin and Greek”. Some of the earlier works listed as apocrypha, and many of the later ones, were composed not so much to compete with the canon as to attend to religious needs and serve as vehicles for developing theologies or devotions. The European based Association pour l’Étude de la littérature apocryphe chrétienne (AELAC) takes a broader definition of the term and includes much later developments. Critical edition project of Irish Apocrypha In 1975 I published a list of Irish apocrypha, with some descriptions and bibliographies. I concluded by noting that these Irish texts could very profitably be critically edited in a Corpus Apo­ cryphorum Hiberniae.3 An opportunity for just this soon arrived. In 1988 the Irish Biblical Association entered an agreement with AELAC (founded 1981) for publication of the New Testament Irish apocrypha in their series Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum. On examination of the material it was estimated that this could be done in four volumes (some as required in more than one part), or under four headings : (1) Infancy Narratives ; (2) Apocalyptica et Eschatologica ; (3) Public Ministry of Jesus and Passion Narratives ; (4) Apocryphal Lives (or as called in Irish tradition “Passions”) of the Apostles. Work began immediately on the preparation of the first volume on the Infancy Narratives. Irish Infancy Narratives and their Importance (AIC ## 35-50)4 The main Irish Infancy Narratives have been preserved in the manuscripts known as the Leabhar Breac (1408-1411) and the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (c. 1437-1440), and partially in some other texts as well. The Liber Flavus text gives the account (following the Protevangelium of James), from the conception of Mary, through the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem, to the midwife and her witness to the marvellous events in the cave at the birth of the child. The text ands abruptly with her witness, due apparently to M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975, p. 144. Apocrypha Hiberniae. I. Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al., 2 volumes (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13-14), Turnhout, 2001. 3  4 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

455

a loss of text. The Leabhar Breac text has the Infancy Narratives as part of a larger Gospel History. It begins the Infancy narrative proper with the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem, and carries it on through the birth of Jesus, the flight into Egypt and sojourn there, the return to Nazareth, miracles there and a full text of the apocryphon The Childhood Deeds of Jesus (The Infancy Narrative of Thomas). Part of the Leabhar Breac text had been edited by Edmund Hogan, SJ.5 In 1927 Montague Rhodes James published from two manuscripts (BL Arundel 404 and Hereford, Library of Dean and Chapter, 0.3.9) new Latin Infancy Gospels, together with the parallel section of the Leabhar Breac.6 Later Jan Gijsel found more manuscripts of both Arundel and Hereford texts. These Latin texts have been found in part to contain the narrative of the Protevangelium Jacobi into which texts of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew had been interpolated. The Hereford text goes further by adding material from the homily of Pseudo-Augustine on the Annunciation. A feature of both texts is that from the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem onwards to the Magi narrative, a new, hitherto unknown, source is used, a text which, following James, is referred to as the “New Source”, also referred to as the “Special Source”. Because the birth of Jesus is described in this source as light, James considered it Docetic and possibly from the Gospel of Peter. The newly published Irish texts were analysed against this background, with deep involvement by Professor Jean-Daniel Kaestli of the University of Lausanne, who had a very special interest in, and knowledge of, the Protevangelium and its Latin transmission. To facilitate comparison, the Irish texts were given the same paragraph numbering as James’s edition. In the comparison Montague Rhodes James’s text was named “the J Compilation”, its Irish form, “the I Compilation”. The comparison makes it clear that both belonged to the same tradition. However, it emerged that the I Compilation did not have the additions from Pseudo-Matthew of the J Compilation, and therefore represents an earlier form of the text.

5  E. Hogan, The Irish Nennius from L. na Huidre and Homilies and Legends from L. Breac (Todd Lecture Series 6), Dublin, 1895. 6  M. R. James, Latin Infancy Gospels. A New Text with a Parallel Version from the Irish, Cambridge, 1927.

456 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church A number of questions merit attention with regard to the J and I Compilations, especially the section titled “the Special Source”. One is the identification of the work. James, as we have seen, believed it was the Gospel of Peter. In the critical edition of the Irish and Latin texts (2001) the editors (mainly through the researches of Jean-Daniel Kaestli) saw in it the Liber de infantia saluatoris et de Maria uel obstetrice, “Book on the birth of the Saviour, and on Mary or the midwife”, rejected as apocryphal in the Decretum Gelasianum, and probably originating in the second century. Another question is the birth of the child Jesus presented as the birth of light, expressed in a variety of ways in the texts : “When, therefore, the light had come forth, she (Mary) adored him whom she saw she had brought forth. And this child was (indeed) radiating light round about in a unique manner” (73.2). In a later study (2011) Kaestli returned to the questions. He remarks that the critical edition of the Irish Infancy narratives (2001) has led to several advances in the knowledge of the so-called New Source.7 In this essay he makes a deep study of the birth (light, child) scene and the midwife scene. This latter is preserved in the “J Compilation”. (It is omitted from the Leabhar Breac, for theological reasons.) Kaestli begin his study with what for him is a very important observation : the Irish infancy narrative of LFF (Liber Flavus Fergusiorum) represents an earlier stage of the compilation, made up only of a combination of the LNS (Liber de natiuitate saluatoris) and the Protevangelium, whereas the Latin texts attest to a later stage, characterized by the addition of elements borrowed from a third source, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew.8 A further point worthy of note about the Latin and Irish J and I Compilations is the very developed narrative on the Magi’s visit, how they were led by the star, in keeping with their own traditions on the birth. The text says that the Magi got their name from the language of their own country, because they are used J.-D. Kaestli, “Mapping an Unexplored Second Century Apocryphal Gospel. The Liber de Nativitate Salvatoris (CANT 53)”, in Infancy Gospels. Stories and Identities, ed. by C. Clivaz  – A. Dettwiler  – L. Devillers  – E. Norelli with B. Bertho (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament I, 281), Tübingen, 2011, pp. 506-59. 8  Kaestli. “Mapping”, pp. 511-12. 7 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

457

to praying to God in silence. They are descended from Seth, who received some mysterious revelations from his father Adam and recorded them in books. These books predict the appearance of a star, which will be God appearing in the bodily form of a human being. The star is seen to descend from heaven and enter the cave ; it becomes concentrated, takes the bodily form of a small and humble human, and then tells the Magi to come and see the birth of the Saviour. In an essay on the subject A. Kehl had noted that nothing similar to this Latin text of James’s Latin Gospels was known in other Latin texts, but that it was similar to a section of the Syriac Chronicle of Zuqnin.9 On discussion of this matter at an AELAC meeting at Dole, France, François Bovon († 2013) communicated that the Zuqnin Chronicle text was being critically edited by a student of his, Brent Landau. This has now been completed and Landau has published the results.10 His view is that this apocryphal work, which he has named The Revelation of the Magi, originated in the second century. It is uncertain whether the original language of this work, known only in Latin and Irish, was Greek or Syriac. Kaestli has noted the similarities between this apocryphon and the work he identifies with Liber de natiuitate Saluatoris, and believes the same origin is probably to be postulated for both works. A final point worthy of note with regard to the Irish Infancy Narratives is the detailed account of the miracle of the palm tree in the narrative of the journey from Bethlehem to Egypt (§§ 126129), a miracle also found in a much shorter form in PseudoMatthew (18-21). After the palm had bowed down to give food to Mary, Christ said to the palm : “Rise, palm, so that you may be 9  A. Kehl, “Der Stern der Magier. Zu §  94 der lateinischen Kindheits­ evangelium der Arundel-Handschrift”, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 18 (1975), pp. 69-80. 10  B. Landau, Revelation of the Magi. The Lost Tale of the Wise Men’s Journey to Bethlehem, New York, 2010 ; Landau, “The Revelation of the Magi in the Chronicle of Zuqnin. The Magi from the East in the Ancient Christian Imagination”, Apocrypha 19 (2008), pp. 182-201 ; Landau, The Sages and the Child. An Introduction to the Revelation of the Magi. An Ancient Christian Apocryphon (doctoral dissertation Harvard Divinity School, 2008). Accessible online at http://ou.academia.edu/BrentLandau/Papers (accessed 29 Aug. 2013). Landau’s doctoral dissertation is under revision for publication in the Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum.

458 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church among the trees of my Father’s paradise, and give forth water from your roots”. Angels forthwith took the tree up with them to paradise and streams of clear sweet water then came forth from the roots of the tree. It is interesting that in the Transitus Mariae apocryphon, in the Irish texts both vernacular and Latin, and in the Ethiopian and Georgian versions, and in them alone, this miracle of the palm tree on the flight into Egypt, but now located on the Mount of Olives, is narrated at length by Christ (or the angel) to Mary, ending with the account of the palm tree (or date-palm) going to paradise. Thus in the Irish versions : “The palm bowed immediately and Jesus said : “O greatest tree in Egypt, rise and lift yourself nobly on me through the grace of the nobility and humility you have shown to us in the desert where you are.” It is then that the palm rose in your presence and ascended into the air and into the firmament and was placed in paradise”. Or in the Latin : Tunc inclinavit se palma et tu et Joseph saciati eratis. Et iterum dixi ad palmam : “Surge”, et surrexit statim in conspectu tuo et portata est per aerem ab angelo in paradissum. The tradition of both texts may centre around a sanctuary on the Mount of Olives honouring this miracle. A solution to the problems may possibly be found in a consideration of the origin of the Transitus traditions in the Church of Jerusalem.11 Together with a church on the Jerusalem-Bethlehem road commemorating the spot where Mary is believed to have descended from the donkey to rest on the way from Nazareth, there is also another site on the Jerusalem-Bethlehem road mentioned by a pilgrimage guide attributed to Anthony of Piacenza (Antoninus ; Anonymus Placentinus), writing probably between 560 and 570. The text describes the holy sites along the route from Jerusalem to Bethlehem, noting the place called Ramah where Rachel’s body lay, at the third mile from Jerusalem. Just beyond this Ramat Rahel, the guidebook continues, is the presence of a large rock in the middle of the road from which poured forth an inexhaustible supply of sweet water. The explanation for this sweetness, the guidebook says, is that reports had it (dicentes) that it was due to the presence of holy Mary, but not

11  On this see S. J. Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption, Oxford, 2002, chapter 2, pp. 78-141 : “The Ancient Palestinian Cult of the Virgin and the Early Dormition Traditions”.

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

459

before childbirth but rather that while on the flight to Egypt she sat and thirsted at that place, and thus that water would have come forth.12 The Childhood Deeds of Jesus (Infancy Narrative of Thomas) – Verse Presentation (AIC # 46) The title under which this work is generally known, “The Infancy Gospel (or Narrative) of Thomas (or of Pseudo-Thomas)”, is modern, and is found in none of the manuscripts. A number of the manuscripts have no title ; others varying ones. One scholar (Sever Voicu) believes that the original (Greek) title was Paidika tou (kyriou) Iêsou, which he renders as “Episodi dell’infanzia di Gesù”, or “Histoire de l’enfance de Jésus”. It is a very early text, preserved in whole or in part in a number of languages, Greek, Syriac, Ethiopic, Georgian and Latin in two forms. Critical editions of the various texts are currently being undertaken ; the Greek very recently edited (CSSA 17, 2011), the Latin texts being prepared for publication by Sever Voicu. From the many varying forms scholars attempt to reconstruct the original, in Greek or Syriac. The Irish text, in verse form, is preserved in a single manuscript (Dublin, National Library of Ireland, G 50, seventeenth century). While preserved in a later manuscript, the original has been assigned a date c. A.D. 700 A.D. The text has been critically edited by James Carney13 and again by Máire Herbert.14 It is agreed that the Irish poet was working on a Latin text, or texts. In Voicu’s opinion the Irish poem is of less importance for the 12  See Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions, pp.  90-91 ; text of the pilgrim in (Ps.-) Antoninus Placentius, Itinerarium, in Itinera Hierosolymitana saec. IIIVIII, ed. by P.  Geyer (CSEL  39), Vienna, 1898, p.  178 ; in Itineraria et alia geographica, (CCSL 175), ed. by P.  Geyer et. al., Turnhout, 1965, p.  143 ; in Enchiridion Locorum Sanctorum, ed. by D. Baldi, Jerusalem, 1957. no. 108 : “In ipso loco vidi in media via de petra exire aquam inmobilem ad arbitratum usque ad sextarios septem, unde conplent omnes et neque minuitur neque ampliatur. Suavitudo ad bibendum innarrabilis, dicentes, eo quod sancta Maria fugiens in Aegyptum in ipso loco sedit et sitivit, et sic egressa esset ipsa aqua. Ibi et ecclesia modo facta est”. 13  J. Carney, The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan together with the Irish Gospel of Thomas and a Poem on the Virgin Mary, Dublin, 1964. 14  M. Herbert, “A Versified Narrative of the Childhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus”, in Apocrypha Hiberniae I, ed. by McNamara et al., pp. 443-83.

460 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church reconstruction of the original. The poet’s original is transformed in a poem where each episode is given a few lines. Such a layout is not very rich in items of critical information, even if it permits us to detect the structure of the model on which it depends. Using or even reshaping the source, or sources, at his disposal the Irish poet has given us a devotional poem, one in which the image of Jesus as the Son of God, as the gentle one, has influenced his translation, and ensured that the language used was in keeping with the dignity of Jesus. To achieve this he has rephrased or omitted certain expressions.15 Irish Apocrypha : Apocalyptica et eschatologica The second volume of Apocrypha Hiberniae under the title Apocalyptica et eschatologica is designed to carry apocryphal apocalyptic and eschatological texts. This volume is planned to be in three parts. The first part In Tenga Bithnua. The Ever-new Tongue by John Carey has already been published.16 We shall return to this further below. The second part will carry the following texts : Fís Adomnáin-The Vision of Adomnán and Dá Brón Flatha Nime-The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven by John Carey, the Transitus Mariae, and the Irish Visio Sancti Pauli, recension IV. The third part will contain editions, translations, introduction and textual notes on various texts on the Irish Antichrist legend, Signs before Doomsday, the Scéla Laí Brátha, and a Poem on the Day of Judgment, by various editors with introductions by the present writer. The Eschaton in St Patrick’s Confessio ? In treating of Irish eschatology one may ask whether one should begin at the very beginning of Irish Christianity, with St Patrick himself. In fact some scholars say that in Patrick’s Confessio there is evidence that he was living in the end time, that with him the Gospel had reached the ends of the earth and, even, that with his work the end of the world was nigh.17 In evaluating the evidence of the Confessio it may be well to recall something of the person of See M. McNamara, in Apocrypha Hiberniae I, pp. 450-51. J. Carey, In Tenga Bithnua. The Ever-New Tongue (Apocrypha Hiberniae II. Apocalyptica 1, CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2009. 17  See T. O’Loughlin, Saint Patrick. The Man and his Works, London, 1999, pp. 44-45. 15  16 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

461

Patrick and the nature of his writing. He comes across as a person steeped in the spirituality of the Bible, especially in relation to his sense of mission and the nature of the Gospel he preached. In the matter of eschatology and the eschaton he had behind him the texts on the expectation and the fulfilment of divine promises, and stock phrases used in relation to this. The Servant of the Lord was told by God. “I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach the end of the earth” (Isa 49.6 ; see also Isa 52.10. 2, “all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God”). The prophecy relating to the Servant of the Lord was naturally seen as fulfilled in Jesus. As Paul and Barnabas reminded the Jews in Pisidian Antioch : “For so the Lord has commanded us saying, I have set you as light for the Gentiles so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth” (Acts 13.47). Before his ascension according to Luke (Lk 24.47) Jesus said to his apostles that repentance and remission of sins was to be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. This is phrased somewhat differently by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 1.8) : the apostles would be witnesses to him in Jerusalem, in Judea, in Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. In the Acts of the Apostles (written probably about three decades after Paul’s martyrdom) Luke devotes the first part of his work to the early Church in Jerusalem and the activity of Peter, the second almost entirely to the activity of Paul. His narrative ends rather abruptly with Paul’s declaration to the Jews in Rome that salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles (Acts 28.28 ; see also Acts 26.23). The abrupt ending is probably intentional, Luke for his purpose regarding Rome as “the ends of the earth”. As part answer to his disciples’ question as to the sign of his (second) coming and the end of the age (Matthew 24.3), Jesus gives some signs, but then says ; “And this good news of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the world, as a testimony to all the nations ; and then the end will come” (Mt 24.14 ; Mk 13.10 : “And the gospel must first be preached to all nations”). Later in this discourse Jesus says : “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mt 24.36 ; Mk 13.32). There is a certain tension in the Gospels between Christ’s statement on the uncertainty with regard to the knowledge of the final end and statements that it (or some end)

462 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church will come “in this generation”, presumably that of Christ’s first followers (see Mt 16.28 ; Mk 9.1 ; Lk 9.27 ; Mt 24.34 ; Mk 13.30 ; Lk 21.32). The non-fulfilment of this promise caused a crisis to the faith for some in the early Church, one addressed in 2 Pet 3.310 (probably about A.D. 150). Paul’s activity was directed by his sense of divine obligation to preach the gospel (I Cor 9.16), at the same time (in his earlier preaching at any rate) accompanied with a belief of the end being imminent, in his own generation : “We will not all die, but we will all be changed” (I Cor 15.51 ; I Thess). In the Gospel of John we have what some refer to as realized eschatology ; the last times have already come. 1 Jn 2.18 speaks of the “last hour” having already arrived, made manifest, apparently, by the presence of disturbers of the faith called “antichrists”. The last days can also have been said to be present in general since the death and resurrection of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2.18 ; Heb 1.2 : “... in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son”). In contrasting his Corinthian community with Israel of the desert wanderings Paul writes that in himself and the former “the ends of the ages have come”, in quos fines saeculorum devenerunt (I Cor 10.11). Patrick uses the expression “the ends of the earth” four times in relation to his mission to the Irish, twice in citations from the prophets. He thanks God that many peoples have been reborn through him to God and that clerics everywhere have been ordained for the people recently come to belief, which God took from the ends of the earth (ab extremis terrae), as he had of old promised through his prophets (citing Jer 16.19). Then, citing Isa 49.6 (also used by Paul and Barnabas, Acts 13.47) Patrick continues : “I have given you as a light among the Gentiles that you may be for salvation to the very end of the earth (usque ad extremum terrae) (Confessio 38).18 This is followed (Confessio 39) by a citation from Mt 8.11 on a related theme : “They will come from the east and from the west, and they will sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob”. Earlier in the Confessio, using again Acts 13.47 in conjunction with II Cor 3.2-3, Patrick considers himself “a letter of Christ, for salvation, to the boundaries of the world” (usque 18  In Libri Epistolarum Sancti Patricii Episcopi (Clavis Patricii II), ed. by L. Bieler, Dublin, 1993, p. 78.

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

463

ad ultimum terrae) (Confessio 11).19 Towards the end of the Confessio he prays : “God forbid that I ever lose his people which he has acquired at the boundaries of the world (... ut nunquam amittam plebem suam quam adquisivit in ultimis terrae) (Confessio 58).20 In a consideration of his limitations, Patrick thanks God for his calling and success (Confessio 34) :21 Whatever happens to me, either good or bad, I ought equally accept, and always give thanks to God who has shown me that I could believe without end, a God who cannot be doubted. He has heard me, no matter how ignorant I am and in these last days (in nouissimis diebus ; Acts 2.17) I can undertake such a holy and wonderful work and in this way I can imitate somewhat those whom the Lord had foretold long ago would announce his gospel as a witness to all nations before the end of the world (in testimonium omnibus gentibus ante finem mundi ; see Mt 24.14). That is what we see ; that has been fulfilled. Behold, we are witnesses that the gospel has been preached to where there is nobody beyond it, euangelium praedicatum est usque ubi nemo ultra est” (that is, the ends of the earth). The citation from Mt 24.14 is given in a slightly different form, and closer to the biblical text, in Confessio 40, ending : in testimonium omnibus gentibus et tunc ueniet finis (“as a witness to all nations and then the end will come”).22

It does not appear from these texts that Patrick had a belief or expectation of an immediate end to the world as a result of his preaching in Ireland, at the ends of earth. The many biblical texts he cites with regard to his mission have to do with the fulfilment of prophecy both of the Old and New Testaments on his bringing the Gospel message to the very ends of the earth. The key text cited in regard to his belief in an imminent end is Mt 24.14 cited in Confessio paragraph 34, ending ante finem mundi. Patrick cites the same text, in a form near the biblical one in paragraph 40, ending et tunc ueniet finis. As against an expectation of an immediate end we have Patrick’s desire expressed earlier in the work (paragraph 14) to leave after his death (through the Confessio ?) a bequest ( ? exagllias, ‘something of value”) to his brothers and 19  20  21  22 

In In In In

Bieler, Bieler, Bieler, Bieler,

Libri Libri Libri Libri

Epistolarum, p. 63, with commentary, p. 123, Epistolarum, p. 89, with commentary, p. 187. Epistolarum, p. 76. Epistolarum, p. 80.

464 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church sisters and children whom he baptized in the Lord  – many thousands of them (Confessio 14).23 He also prayed that God may not let it come about that he should suffer the loss of his people who have become his (that is God’s) in the furthermost parts of the earth. Certainly belief in an immediate end of the world on Patrick’s part would seem to be ruled out by Christ’s own words that this is something no one knows, neither angels nor the Son but only the Father (Mt 24.36 ; Mk 13.32), texts Patrick would surely have known. Irish texts of the “Transitus Mariae” (AIC # 97). The Literary Background Texts of the apocryphon variously titled the “Dormition” (koimesis), Transitus Mariae, the Obsequies of Mary and Liber Requiei are now known in a number of languages : Syriac, Ethiopic,24 Coptic, Georgian, Arabic, Armenian. Greek, Latin, Irish, and others, with variants within those. There have been various attempts at a classification of this evidence, and the identification of the earliest form of the tradition, and even of its origins.25 The available evidence seems to indicate that towards the end of the fifth and the beginning of the sixth century there were two major traditions concerning the end of Mary’s earthly life, known as the “Palm of the Tree of Life” tradition and the “Bethlehem” tradition and others besides. The first of these traditions gets its designation from the prominence of the palm of the Tree of Life in the narrative ; the “Bethlehem” tradition is so named by reason of many of the important events being located there rather than in Jerusalem. Our interest here is the “Palm of the Tree of Life” tradition, to which the Irish and the Latin traditions belong.

In Bieler, Libri Epistolarum, pp. 64-65 ; Commentary, pp. 128-30. First brought to scholarly attention in 1973 in the critical edition of V. Arras, De Transitu Mariae. Apocrypha Aethiopice I (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Vol. 343, Scriptores Aetiopici, tomus 67), Louvain, 1973. 25  On the classification see M. Clayton, “The Transitus Mariae. Tradition and its Origins”, Apocrypha 10 (1999), pp. 74-98 ; see also S. J. Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption, Oxford, 2002, pp. 7-77. 23 

24 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

465

The earliest witness to the “Palm tradition” is a set of Syriac fragments dated by palaeography to the later fifth or early sixth century, known as the Obsequies of the Holy Virgin and published by William Wright in 1865, with English translation.26 A complete Ethiopic version of this early narrative was published by Victor Arras in 1973, now known as Liber Requiei. In the sections of this work for which there are ancient Syriac parallels the Liber Requiei is seen as a remarkably faithful witness to the ancient traditions, and it may be presumed that the sections of the Ethiopic version not preserved in the Syriac fragments also represent an early tradition. Other fragments of the same ancient text have been preserved in a Georgian version, and fragments of a closely related version are known in Coptic. From the point of view of the Irish tradition it will be a question of studying the Irish evidence and seeing how it compares with the eastern and western tradition. We have the fuller text of the Irish vernacular Transitus in the two manuscripts Oxford, Bodleian Library Laud Misc. 610, fols 34-38 (1410-1454), and Dublin, Royal Irish Academy, 23 O 48 a-b (476), known as the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum, ii, fols 48(49) a-50(51)b (1437-1440). There is a fragment in the manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Fonds Celtique, MS 1, fol. 14vb (1473-1490). There is a Latin text in the fifteenth-century Irish Franciscan manuscript, Trinity College Dublin, F.5.3 (667). The language of these vernacular texts cannot be much older than the fifteenth-century manuscripts in which they are found. However, in his analysis of the language Caoimhín Breatnach points out that linguistic evidence indicates that Udhacht Mhuire is a substantially modernised version of an earlier text and it would appear that the extant vernacular version of Transitus (Udhacht Mhuire) was written between c. 1200 and 1450. There is, however, clear evidence that the Transitus was known in Ireland earlier than this. It is drawn on in an Irish Life of the Virgin Mary.27 The earliest extant version of this text is found in a fifteenth-century manuscript but, linguistically, the text can be dated to the

26  Contributions to the Apocryphal Literature of the New Testament, ed. by W. Wright, London, 1865 ; English translation pp. 42-51. 27  See C. Breatnach, “An Irish Life of the Virgin Mary”, Ériu 51 (2000), pp. 23-58.

466 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church early Middle-Irish period (c. 900-1050).28 We seem to have a second proof of the earlier knowledge on the Transitus in Ireland in the Fís Adomnáin, The Vision of Adomnán (about 1000), which speaks of the apostles being brought together to see the terrible pains of hell “on the day of Mary’s death”. This seems to draw from the specifically Irish text of the Transitus.29 We can pass beyond the linguistic and other arguments to the contents of the Irish texts themselves and their known relation to earlier forms of the tradition. These aspects of Irish tradition have long been recognized, even by scholars without access to the original Irish texts. Among the more significant contributions was an essay in 1923 by St. John D. Seymour on “The Irish Versions of the Transitus Mariae”30, in which he gives what he himself describes as “a fairly full resume” of the form of this apocryphal writing as found in Liber Flavus Fergusiorum of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin (MS 23 O 48). Two decades later all the known Irish texts on the Assumption of the Virgin were published by Charles Donahue, together with an examination of the Irish tradition of the Dormitio. 31 The importance of the Irish evidence for the full understanding of the Transitus Mariae was again stressed by Victor Arras in his edition and study of the Ethiopic text of this apocryphon (1973). 32 Of the Irish version (known to him through Breatnach, “An Irish Life”, pp. 25-26. See translation of M. Herbert, “The Vision of Adomnán”, in Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, ed. by M. Herbert and M. McNamara, Edinburgh, 1989, p. 137. 30  Seymour, “The Irish Versions of the Transitus Mariae”, Journal of Theological Studies 23 (1921-22), pp. 36-43. 31  C. Donahue, The Testament of Mary. The Gaelic Version of the Dormitio Mariae together with an Irish Latin Version, New York, 1942. 32  V. Arras in De Transitu Mariae. Apocrypha Aethiopice I, ed. by V. Arras (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Vol. 343, Scriptores Aetiopici, tomus 67), Louvain, 1973 ; see pp. vii-viii “Magno in numero habendus est auctor qui in Irlanda Testamentum Mariae gaelice confecit. Quod ille solus narrationem retinuit de itinere in Aegyptum, quod solus probationem Pauli retulit et quod de itinere per transmundana testimonium servavit, satis est argumenti eius adhuc tempore codices graecos vel latinos exstitisse multo integriores codicibus nobis hodie notis. Hoc autem dolendum est quod qui acutiores de variis Transitibus scripserunt, hunc librum gaelicum, mole exiguum, momento vero magnum, utpote perrarum in europaeis vel maximis bibliothecis, inspicere non potuerunt. Qui expendere velit quomodo varii 28 

29 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

467

the works of Seymour, Willard and Donahue) he says : “The fact that it alone [ipse solus] retains the narration of the journey into Egypt, 33 that it alone reports the account of the testing of Paul, 34 and has retained the account of the otherworld journey, 35 is sufficient to indicate that at the time the Irish vernacular author was composing his work Greek or Latin manuscripts existed which were much more complete than those known to us today”. Arras regretted that the edition of the Irish text was extremely rare even in the largest European libraries. Most recently we have the assessment of Stephen J. Shoemaker. 36 After treating of the early Latin tradition, as evidenced by the Transitus attributed to Ps.Melito of Sardis, the texts published by Wilmart and Wenger, and the important précis of these early traditions given by Gregory of Tours, Shoemaker writes : “Finally, there is an early Irish version, preserved in two different recensions, that was probably translated sometime before 712. This text, in spite of its considerable geographic distance, is a key witness to the earliest traditions from the eastern Mediterranean, which probably reached Ireland early on via traffic through Spain”. 37 As Arras has noted, all the Irish texts contain the three episodes that link the Irish tradition with the very early Ethiopian one : narration of the journey into Egypt, that it alone reports the account of the testing of Paul, textus de Dormitione agentes, omnibus vestigiis indagatis, connexi sint, exoptabit fore ut gaelicum scriptum rursus prelis subiciatur. Non enim sufficit legere quae optima de eo seymour et willard exposuerunt ; horum doctorum observatories ad unum tantum codicem, scil. Ms. 23048 b Dublinensis Irisch [sic] Academy referuntur ; cui nomen Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (XV saec.), quem seymour legit, donahue vero suum textum sumpsit e codice Laud. Misc. 610 Bibliothecae Oxoniensis (etiam XV saec.) ; codices alius ab alio discrepant, ut verbis donahue suum apocryphum explanantis patet”. 33  Udhacht Mhuire 3-5, trans. by Herbert, in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara, pp. 119-20. 34  Udhacht Mhuire 21-22 ; trans. by Herbert, in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara, p. 126. 35  Udhacht Mhuire 29-34 ; trans. by Herbert, in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara, pp. 129-30. 36  Shoemaker, Ancient Tradition. 37  Shoemaker, Ancient Traditions, p. 37 with reference to Donahue’s edition and the study of J. N. Hillgarth, “The East, Visigothic Spain, and the Irish”, Studia Patristica 4 (1961), pp. 442-56, and C. Thomas, The Early Christian Archaeology of North Britain, London, 1971, pp. 22-25.

468 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church and has retained the account of the otherworld journey. The Irish, as other Transitus texts, states that the body of Mary was placed under the tree of life. This is repeated again at the end of the text. After the journey to the underworld, the Irish text notes : “And the Virgin Mary was brought afterwards under the tree of life in Paradise, and the Saviour and Michael ascended to heaven after raising the Virgin Mary nobly and honourably under the tree of life with the host of God around her praising the Saviour, that is, Jesus Christ, the son of the living God”. It is to be hoped that on publication of this new critical edition of the Irish Transitus texts scholarly reaction will help us further define the place of these Irish texts, vernacular and Latin, within the larger framework of the rich Transitus tradition.

Visio Sancti Pauli Recension IV (AIC # 91) The original Apocalypse of Paul, known in Latin as the Visio Sancti Pauli, was written in Greek, but translated into Latin by the sixth century. It circulated widely in Europe, and in the words of Theodore Silverstein, the principle specialist in the transmission of the text, the Visio was “one of the chief formative elements in the developments in the later legends of heaven and hell which culminated in the Divina Commedia of Dante”. 38 The full Visio Sancti Pauli appears to have also been known in early Ireland, and to have influenced the Fís Adamnáin among other works. In the West, in general, the Visio Sancti Pauli was known not so much through the full texts as through excerpted sections, known as Redactions, of which eleven are known. Most of these shorter texts are from the tenth century or later, with the exception of two, Redactions VI and XI, both believed by a number of scholars to be of Irish origin or with strong Irish affiliations. Both of these are extant in manuscripts of the ninth century and both have Irish or Anglo-Saxon connections”. 39 Charles D. Wright has argued for an insular, probably Irish, origin of Redaction XI.40 The most Th. Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli. The History of the Apocalypse in Latin together with Nine Texts (Studies and Documents, no. 4), London, 1935. 39  M. E. Dwyer, “An Unstudied Redaction of the Visio Pauli”, Manuscripta 32 (1988), pp. 121-38, at 136. 40  C. D. Wright, “Some Evidence for the Irish Origin of Redaction XI of the Visio Pauli”, Manuscripta 34 (1990), pp. 33-44 ; also Wright, The Irish Tradition, pp. 111-13. 38 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

469

popular of all the recensions is Recension IV, with Paul’s vision of the damned in Hell. Silverstein gives no Latin text for his Redaction IV, but notes that it is found in the text published by Herman Brandes 41 and also in the spurious homily 100 of Bede (PL 94, 501-502). Redaction IV, Silverstein noted, is extant at least in twenty-seven of the codices. He lists these manuscripts and others which he marks as “unclassified”, and which he believes may also belong to this tradition.42 Silverstein’s position on Redaction IV has been generally accepted. Attention will now have to be given to the latest work in this field, that of Lenka Jiroušková, Die Visio Pauli.43 In this work she gives a synoptic presentation of the material classed under Silverstein’s influence as “Recension IV”, that is, the 27 texts recognised by him as belonging to this recension and the other unclassified ones. In all she lists, studies and publishes, 82 manuscripts with a full text, 15 with an incomplete text, and 5 with excerpts. Among these MSS there are four in Trinity College Dublin Library, one from Ireland (TCD 667), and three from England. Jiroušková does not accept the designation “Recension IV” for the manuscripts she has studied, holding that they cannot be said to be descended from a common ancestor. Her designation is “(Lateinische) Höllen-Fassungen” (“Hell-Versions”). The present location or original provenance (when known) of the manuscripts listed by Jiroušková give no indication as to the place of origin of the “Höllen-Fassungen” or, if we prefer, Recension IV, tradition of the Visio Sancti Pauli (known provenance : England 2, England unsure 1 ; Bavaria 2 ; North France 1 ; Ireland 1) : Recension IV is extant in two Irish versions, the complete text in Dublin, Royal Irish Academy, 24 P 25 (475) (known as Leabhar Chloinne Suibhne), 41  H. Brandes, Visio S. Pauli. Ein Beitrag zur Visionsliteratur mit einem deutschen und zwei lateinischen Texten, Halle, 1885, pp. 75-80 (from cod. Vienna, lat. 876, together with variant readings from MSS BL Additional 26770 and Harley 2851). 42  Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli, p. 112, and note 29 (pp. 220-21). 43  L. Jiroušková, Die Visio Pauli. Wege und Wandlungen einer orientalischen Apokryphe im Lateinischen Mittelalter. Unter Einschluss der alttschechischen und deutschsprachigen Textzeugen (Mittellateinische Studien und Texte 34), Leiden and Boston, 2006. I wish to express my gratitude to Anthony Hilhorst for bringing this work to my attention.

470 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 80 fols, A.D. 1532-1544, without title ; the other incomplete, due to lack of two folios, in the Dublin, Royal Irish Academy, 23 O 48 a-b (476), known as the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (A.D. 14371440), fol. 38vb, under the heading Aisling Póil do phíanaib ifrinn sís, (“Paul’s vision of the torments of hell below”). Both texts have been critically edited, with translation, for Apocrypha Hiberniae volume 2. The full text follows the text of Pseudo-Bede’s homily 100. Linguistically the two texts cannot be regarded much older than the manuscripts. We know, of course, that the original Latin text is centuries older. The possession of a Latin text with which to compare the Irish, makes the precision of the Irish version clear. One may ask whether Irish translators had training for their profession. Irish Tradition of Antichrist (AIC 104J) The term Antichrist and Antichrists occurs already in the New Testament (I Jn 2.18, 22 ; 4.3 ; II Jn 1.7) as realities present to the New Testament communities, and the man of lawlessness is expected to come in an end time (2 Thessalonians 2.3). It is but natural that the figure of the Antichrist should feature in New Testament apocryphal apocalypses, for instance in The First Apocryphal Apocalypse of John.44 The theme is also developed in exegetical and theological literature in the patristic period. The classical text on Antichrist in the West comes from around AD 950, in De ortu et tempore Antichristi of Adso, later abbot of Montier-en-Der.45 The Irish tradition does not belong to this. It is independent of it. We now turn to this Irish tradition. In his edition of a poem on “The Conception and Characteristics of Antichrist” (a composition hard to date but which in general has the appearance of a very late Middle Irish composition 44  See J.-D. Kaestli, “La figure de l’Antichrist dans l’Apocalypse de saint Jean le Théologien” (Première Apocalypse apocryphe de Jean)”, in Les forces du Bien et du Mal dans les premiers siècles de l’Église (Théologie historique, 118), ed. by J.-M. Blanchard  – B. Pouderon  – M. Scopello, Paris, 2010, pp. 277-90. 45  Critical edition by D. Verhelst, Adso Dervensis, De ortu et tempore Antichristi, necnon et tractatus qui ab eo dependunt (CCCM 45), Turnhout, 1976 ; English translation by B. McGinn, in McGinn, Apocalyptic Spirituality. Treatises and Letters of Lactantius, Adso of Montier-en-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan Spirituals, Savanarola, Mahwah, NJ, 1979, pp. 81-96.

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

471

[c. 1200 ?]) Brian Ó Cuív has listed practically all the vernacular Irish texts with descriptions of, or reference to, Antichrist.46 We have six such in verse compositions and seven in prose compositions. Ó Cuív also notes that there is a certain unity of presentation in these texts. In so far as the Irish text he edits is intelligible, he remarks, the Antichrist story given there has the following elements : (1) Antichrist is the son of his own sister who conceives him when her father, a bishop in Jerusalem, lies with her on the Friday before Easter at the Instigation of the devil (§§ 16-19) ; (2) in appearance Antichrist has a face with one eye (§ 20) ; (3) he has miraculous powers : he can make gold out of grass and anise ( ?) and wine out of water ; he can cause disease and cure the sick, he can create a moon, sun and elements ( ?), he can do anything that Christ did on earth except restore people to life (§§ 21-26) ; he has a thousand fair women in his company. Ó Cuiv also notes that comparison with other texts of the list he has given shows several correspondences. Between the poems of Blathmac (about A.D. 750) and nineteenth-century manuscripts there are about fifteen texts with references to Antichrist in this Irish tradition. These are all being attended to in the general introduction to the Antichrist texts to be published in part 3 of Apocrypha Hiberniae vol. 2 in which the Antichrist texts are critically edited with translations and notes by Caoimhín Breatnach. The first of these texts is that of the Book of Lismore, late fifteenth century, and eleven other texts which are facsimiles (2) or copies of it. The earliest version of this text is found in the manuscript Dublin, Royal Irish Academy, 23 N 15 (490), p. 53-58, written by Mícheál Ó Longáin and Mícheál Óg Ó Longáin, 17401810. There are four other copies of this work in the library of the Royal Irish Academy. Text 3 of Caoimhín Breatnach’s edition is found in three manuscripts of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Details of these texts are examined in the critical edition. This examination shows that, together with the central Irish Antichrist tradition, these texts seem dependent to a certain extent on Adso’s classical work, and give garbled forms of some proper names. Thus : they say that Antichrist will be born of a harlot 46  B. Ó Cuív, “Two Items from Apocryphal Tradition”, Celtica 10 (1973), pp. 87-113, at 88.

472 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of the tribe of Daniel (Text 1), in Bethlehem (Texts 1,2 ; Babylon Texts 2,3), that he would be reared in the Caruban (Text 1) and that he would live in the city called Besata (Text 1 ; Bisargita Text 3). All of this derives from an original, as in Adso, “the tribe of Dan, born in Babylon, reared in Corozaim and Bethsaida”. Mention of Bethlehem as birthplace may have arisen from the contrast of Bethlehem as birthplace of Christ with Babylon as the birthplace of Antichrist in the Adso form of the legend, or in some version related to it.47 One feature of the Irish tradition is its interest in the physical features of the Antichrist, in physiognomy. This clearly distinguished it from the western Adso and related traditions. It is independent of it. As McGinn writes :48 Antichrist physiognomies accompanied by unusual legendary accretions belonged to the Eastern imagination at this time [950-1000]. Yet they became prevalent in one place in Western Europe  – Ireland, at least from the tenth century on. The native imagination, coupled with Irish predilection for apocryphal literature suspect in other parts of Latin Christendom, seems to have had much to do with this unexpected turn of events.

McGinn then draws attention to a tenth-century Latin text edited by Bernhard Bischoff, containing what Bischoff believes to be the oldest text on Antichrist in the West.49 The text, now in Avranches, Bibliothèque municipale as MS 108, from the twelfth century at the latest, in the famous monastery of Mont St. Michel (Brittany) and Bischoff believes the legend originated there. Bischoff notes that this description of the Antichrist should be compared with a Latin-Irish text given in translation by Georges Dottin in the introduction of his edition of “The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven”, of which there is an almost identical description in

Verhelst, Adso, pp. 23-24 ; Pseudo-Alcuin, Vita Antichristi, in Verhelst, Adso, p. 120. 48  McGinn, The Antichrist, pp. 97-98. 49  See B. Bischoff, “Vom Ende der Welt und vom Antichrist (I) ; Fragment einer Jenseitsvision (II) (Zehntes Jahrhundert)”, Anecdota Novissima. Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, ed. by B. Bischoff, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 80-84 ; 82 for Latin text cited. 47 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

473

the Book of Lismore.50 There are some Latin phrases retained in the Irish text, an indication that the work is translated from Latin. The Latin text published by Bischoff has many irregular Latin forms which makes understanding and translation difficult. The general sense, however, is clear. The text begins by reference to the phoenix, destroyed by fire from heaven. The fire is extinguished by rain from Africa. The text continues :51 From the ash and the rain will be born the girl from whom Antichrist will come. Two young virgin girls will stand there, called Abilia and Lapidia, from whose breasts will pour the milk by which they will nourish him for five years. When the five years are over, he will begin to reign.

The text concludes as follows : His disciples said to Jesus : “Lord, tell us what he will be like”. And Jesus said to them : “His stature will be nine cubits. He will have black hair pulled up [ ?] like an iron chain. In his forehead he will have one eye shining like the dawn. His lower lips will be large, he will have no upper lips. On his hand the little finger will be the longer ; his left foot will be wider. His stance will be similar [ ?]. He will come to the sea, say ‘Dry up’, and it will be dried. He says to the sun, ‘stand’, and it will stop ; and he says to the moon, ‘Become dark’, and it will be darkened. And the stars will fall from heaven.” … ex ipsa pulvera et pluia erit gerata puella, unde ortus erit antechristus. In illo loco stabunt duas puella virginis, quis apellatur Abilia et Lapidia, unde mamellas eorum lactus fundebatur et nutrierunt eum V annos. Quod fuerat annorum quinque, sic inciperat regnare. Et dixerunt ad Iesum discipuli eius : “Domine, dic nobis, quod similia tenebatur”. Et dixit eis Iesus : “Similia tenebatur status eius cubitorum novem. Habet capillum nigrum in tortorio sicut catena ferrea. In medio frontem habet oculum unum et lucebit sicut aurora. Labia subteriores grande habet, superiores non habet. In manus eius digitus minor longior erit. Pedes sinistro latior erit. Status eius in similitudinem. Venit ad mare, dicit :

50  G. Dottin, “Les deux Chagrins du royaume du Ciel”, pp. 349-387, at 353-536, from MS Royal Irish Academy 23 N 15 (490). The text of the Book of Lismore has now been edited by J. Carey, and is forthcoming in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. II,2. 51  In the translation of McGinn, The Antichrist, p. 98.

474 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‘Sica’, et sicabitur, et dicit ad sol : ‘Sta’, et stetit, et dixit ad luna : ‘Tenebriscare’, et tenebricabitur, et stella cadent de celo”.

As a general conclusion to this treatment of the Irish Antichrist tradition I may note that the rich Irish legend on Antichrist has drawn from a number of sources : biblical, exegetical, apocryphal and legendary, some of them identifiable, others not so in the present state of research. It remains for future study to fill out and refine the evidence and draw conclusion consistent with it. Fifteen Signs before Doomsday (AIC # 104-104 I) After Jesus had predicted the ruin of Jerusalem, on the Mount of Olives his disciples asked him privately : “Tell us when this will be, and what will be the sign of your coming and the end of the age ?” (Mt 24.3 ; Mk 13.4 ; Lk 21.7). It was natural that later generations should have an interest in the end time and the signs preceding it. In the west the best known composition on this matter is the Apocalypse of Thomas, with signs for the eight days before Doomsday..52 During the first millennium the eight-day sign tradition seems to have been the prevalent one. There are signs in the Irish Poems of Blathmac (c. 750) which conform to no known pattern. From the end of the millennium (A.D. 988) we have signs in the Saltair na Rann section on Doomsday, again in the Ps.-Thomas tradition. The signs in the first and second recension of the Tenga Bithnua The Ever-new Tongue do not conform to any one type. From about A.D. 1000 there is evidence of a Fifteen-Day Signs before Doomsday, found in three forms : that of the Collectanea of Pseudo-Bede ; of (Peter) Damian, c. 1050, and of (Peter) Comestor (c. 1150). A date for the Collectanea (AIC # 104D) cannot be fixed with certainty. The work first appears in the Heerwagen 1563 edition of Bede’s works. The Collectanea has been critically edited by Martha Bayless and Michael Lapidge.53 In Michael Lapidge’s opinion with regard to the section of the work containing the Fifteen Signs, a date after c. 820 (not necessarily long after) needs to be posited  – always assuming, of course, that their inclusion was the 52  See F. M. Biggs and C. D. Wright, “Apocalypse of Thomas”, in The Apocrypha (Sources of Anglo-Saxon Culture), ed. by F.M. Biggs, Kalamazoo, MI, 2007, pp. 71-72. 53  Collectanea Pseudo-Bedae (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae 14), ed. by M. Bayless  – M. Lapidge, Dublin, 1998.

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

475

work of the original compiler of this part, and not a later interpolator (who may, once again, have been Heerwagen himself).54 From the Damian text we can say that the Fifteen Signs tradition existed before the year 1000. How long before is difficult to say. In any event, from the twelfth century onwards (to the fifteenth) the Fifteen Signs before Doomsday tradition became widespread all over Western Europe. The question arises as to the passage from the Apocalypse of Thomas eight-day signs to the Fifteen-Day series and the role of Irish tradition in this. View of William W.  Heist on the Irish Origin of the Fifteen Signs Tradition William W. Heist investigated the question in depth and believes that it originated in Ireland and Irish tradition.55 According to William W. Heist, in his monograph The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday (1952), the legend of the Fifteen Signs as found in England and on the Continent seems to depend on, and to originate in, the material found in the additional strophes of Saltair na Rann. In the conclusion to his book (p. 193) he writes : I have tried here to show that the additional strophes, CLIIICLXII, of the Saltair na Rann constitute a crucial text in the study of the origin and development of the legend of the Fifteen Signs before Doomsday. They are certainly the key to the study of the legend, and they are probably its actual original. For if the origin of the legend remains somewhat uncertain, it is only in the sense that we cannot prove beyond cavil that the immediate source from which it is developed was the matter in these additional strophes. The earliest clear trace of it appears here, and nothing in the legend points beyond these strophes to any earlier source, except to the recognized main source of Saltair na Rann, the Apocalypse of Thomas. But no other form of the Apocalypse of Thomas can dispute with Saltair na Rann the position of probable source of our legend. So it is stating the case very moderately to say that it seems most likely that these strophes are the primary source of the Fifteen Signs, with The Evernew Tongue serving as the most important secondary source, even though we cannot quite exclude the possibility that the legend had been already formed when the Saltair na Rann was composed and that

54  55 

M. Lapidge in M. Bayless and Lapidge, Collectanea, p. 10. W.W. Heist, The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, East Lansing, 1952.

476 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the latter borrowed from the legend as well as from the Apocalypse of Thomas, upon which it is primarily based.

On the assumption that Saltair na Rann is the main source of the fifteen-day legend, Heist (p. 99) gives the following diagram as one possible explanation of the formation of the tradition and of the interrelationships of the various texts carrying the legend. In the diagram the “Irish Antichrist” is the medieval Irish legend of a number of Irish texts. Not all the forms of the legend of the Fifteen Signs indicated in this diagram have extant texts to represent them. Some are forms whose existence is postulated to explain points of agreement and difference in the affiliated texts of the legend ; thus for instance the “Irish XV Signs”. “Ava” in the diagram is the type of the legend found in the poem attributed to the twelfth-century German poetess Ava. This type is given together with those found in Peter Damian, Pseudo-Bede and Peter Comestor – three Latin texts which carry three different types of the legend, types, however, which are closely related to each another. Apoc of Thom.

Unknown Source

IRISH XV Signs Airdena

Armes Dydd Brawd

Evernew Tongue

SnR

OE homilies (Vercelli, Hatton, and Blickling)

Yrymes Detbrawt

Irish Antichrist

. .

Latin A. Lat. B. OF

Gwynn gwarandaw Debate

Dam., Ps.-B., Ava, Com.

There are some difficulties with Heist’s theory and stemma. One is the evidence drawn from texts not critically edited and subjected to literary and source analysis. Another is the postulating of non-existent sources. The Fifteen Signs stand alone only in two of the known texts, that is, in the Collectanea and in a Liber Flavus Fergusiorum text. In all the others they appear as the first in a series of the Last Things : Signs, Doomsday, eternal rewards and punishments. The date of the Irish texts, and portions of them,

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

477

must also be borne in mind. Apart from the Collectanea (possibly early) the oldest of the texts is the poem attributed, but only in later manuscripts, to Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh (c. 1200). In the text prepared for volume 2 of Apocrypha Hiberniae the following texts on the matter are being analysed and critically edited : (1) The Signs in Cantos 153-162 of Saltair na Rann ; AIC # 104B ; (2) Airdena inna Cóic Lá ndéc ria mBráth (Prose Text on the Signs of the Fifteen Days before Doomsday ; AIC # 104C), with Damian type ; (3) Poem of Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh on the Fifteen Signs (AIC #104E) ; with the Latin Collectanea text ; (4) Three Prose Texts XV with Signs of Comestor Type : (a) Liber Flavus Fergusiorum Text 1 on the Fifteen Signs (AIC104G) ; (b). Royal Irish Academy Text 2 on the Fifteen Signs (AIC 104G) ; (c) Fifteen Signs in Ms Oxford, Bodleian Ir.e.7. The signs in the Saltair na Rann appear to be still in the Apocalypse of Thomas tradition, with signs over eight days. The Airdena (or Airdena inna cóic lá ndéc ria mbráth, a title actually not found in the manuscript tradition) is one of the best-known Irish texts enumerating the fifteen signs before Doomsday. Its text has the Damian type, each much expanded. It has yet to be determined whether the expansion is a later development of an earlier set of signs or not. The latter part, on the rewards and punishments, has been shown to be linguistically later that the earlier part. In the opinion of a specialist study for the forthcoming Apocrypha Hiberniae edition the section of Airdena referring to the pains of hell and the rewards of heaven (§§ 24-53) appears to reflect modernisation in the Early Modern period. In any event source analysis shows that in this section the author of Airdena is drawing from, and at times citing verbally in Latin, texts from the Lucidarium of Honorius Augustodunensis (early twelfth century). In the poem attributed to Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh, Garbh éirghidh iodhna an bhrátha, in the judgment scene the rewards and punishments follow Matthew’s Gospel account very closely. Mary is in heaven with her body. The Liber Flavus text 1 (a), which is without any introduction, gives each of the fifteen signs (of the Comestor type) very briefly, and ends after signs 15 with “Finid” ; Text 2 is in the manuscript Oxford, Bodleian Ir.e.7. This gives the text of the Fifteen Signs (Comestor type), followed by eschatological material. Among authorities cited in the Doomsday section of this are

478 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Franciscus de Marione and Pelbartus. Text 3 is Dublin, Royal Irish Academy 23 M 7 (287), written by the scribe Micheál Óg Ó Longáin in Cork in 1818-1819. Its text with the fifteen signs is very close to that of the Bodleian manuscript. While it has some extra eschatological material, attributed to Bernard, this has nothing in common with that of the Oxford text. With regard to the Oxford text Bodleian Ir.e.7 with the references to Franciscus de Marione and Pelbartus, Caoimhín Breatnach has prepared an edition of it in three paragraphs. Pelbartus is Pelbartus Ladislaus of Temesvár (born in Temesvár, Hungary (now Timisoara, Romania) in 1458 ; died in Buda (of Buda Pest) in 1504). He studied at the University of Krakow ; licensed in theology there in 1463. After 1483 his writings were published in print. He has a number a works to his name, one being Sermones Pomerii de tempore (1498 and later editions) ; another is Stellarium coronae Beatae Mariae Virginis (with his text of the Transitus, Assumption of Mary). While Pelbartus cites texts of the Franciscan Franciscus de Mayronis more than once, none of the citations matches that given in the Irish text. Paragraph no. 2 of our Irish text has ideas similar to those found in Pelbartus, but not to be considered as citations. Matters are different with paragraph 3 of the Irish text. This is so close to Palbertus, Sermo IV, paragraph no. “Z”, that the Irish text may practically be considered a translation of the Latin.56 Conclusion to the Fifteen Signs Some preliminary observations on Heist’s theory may be made. An initial point is that the Fifteen Signs legend most probably pre-dates Saltair na Rann, the composition of which is generally put at A.D. 988, a possibility granted by Heist himself. As will be indicated below, the analysis of the Airdena text is by no means altogether clear. The latter part of it, on the sequel to the Signs before Doomsday, is of composite origin, some of it dependent on a tenth-century Irish tradition and other sections drawing on the I wish to thank Bart Janssens, Brepols Publishers, who has put me in contact with Mrs Cecilia Radó, Hungary, who is involved in a team putting all the works of Pelbartus on the Internet (digitizing). She has kindly searched her database and put two of Pelbartus’s Advent sermons (Sermo III and IV) at our disposal. 56 

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

479

Elucidarium of Honorius Augustodunensis (c. 1115). The date to be assigned to the Signs section of the Airdena text is not easy to determine. While the language appears not to be much older than the manuscript (fifteenth century), the tradition it enshrines may be earlier. The Irish texts of the Fifteen Signs already mentioned represent all three forms of the legend, but the language of none of them can be shown to be sufficiently old to support Heist’s position. A convincing argument for a relationship of the Saltair na Rann text with the Fifteen Signs legend does not appear to have been made. Any view on the influence of the Irish Fifteen Signs legend on the Continental tradition will need to take account of the complexity of this tradition, not yet fully explored. A beginning has been made by Christoph Gerhardt and Nigel F. Palmer who have drawn up a detailed catalogue of the witnesses to the Fifteen Signs before Judgment in German and Dutch translations from the twelfth to the fifteenth century  – in a variety of sources : poems, sermons, direct translations and others. They first circulated this as a preprint (Privatdruck) to interested colleagues,57 and later made it available on the internet, as xv. signa Katalog. In a later work they published a critical edition of the Munich poem (Münchner Gedicht ; Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Munich Cgm 717), together with an introduction and appendices.58 The introduction includes the Latin texts of the various forms of the Fifteen Signs : Pseudo-Bede, Damian. Comestor, Jacobus de Voragine, “Antequam judicii dies metuenda”, and “Die redende Zeichen”  – a sermon-like expansion of the Comestor type in which natural elements and living creatures give voice to belief on the Signs. The Comestor text is edited direct from manuscripts, not reproduced from printed texts.59 One appendix gives a list of texts with 57  C. Gerhardt – N. F. Palmer, xv. signa ante iudicium. Studien und Texte zur Überlieferungsgeschichte eines eschatologischen Themas, Oxford and Trier (privately published), 1986. 58  C. Gerhardt – N. F. Palmer, Das Münchner Gedicht von den 15 Zeichen vor dem Jüngsten Gericht. Nach der Handschrift der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek Cgm 717. Edition und Kommentar (Texte des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit 41), Berlin, 2002. This treats of “Die ‘15 Zeichen vor dem Jüngsten Gericht’ in deutscher und niederländischer Überlieferung”. 59  Gerhardt and Palmer, Das Münchner Gedicht, pp. 63-65.

480 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the number of fifteen, e.g. fifteen steps of the ways of the soul to God. Another appendix gives the catalogue of the Fifteen Signs in German and Dutch translation. The authors regard their approach as a new examination of the evidence, moving away from thinking in terms of types. Their researches should prove a significant step forwards in the study of a complex question.

Scéla Laí Brátha : Tidings of Doomsday (AIC # 106) & Poem on the Day of Judgment (AIC # 105 ; eleventh century) The Scéla Laí Brátha (probably 11th century) is fundamentally a homily on the judgment scene as found in Matthew’s gospel (Mt 26.31-46), and can be included among the apocrypha in the broader definition of this term. By reason of its contents it has in fact been seen as related to earlier apocryphal apocalypses by some scholars. It is probably a reliable reflection of homilies used in the Irish church in the 11th century. The homily has four sections, beginning with an opening section on Christ’s word in Matthew on how Christ is served or neglected by one’s attitude to those in need. For the just “those then are the six kinds of mercy by which the heavenly kingdom is purchased. They are the six crystalline doors through which the light of eternal life comes into the church. They are the six steps by which the saints and the righteous ascend to heaven” – six of the seven later traditional seven corporal works of mercy. Next comes a description of the four groups at the judgment scene, named in Irish and Latin (in Latin apart from the last, due to loss of text) as mali non valde, mali valde, boni non valde, (boni valde), four groups traditional in medieval Irish eschatology. Next comes a description of hell, then of the joys of heaven. In the two last sections the text has close affiliations with other Irish vernacular texts : the Saltair na Rann, Airdena, the Poem on the Day of Judgment. All these texts probably depend on an earlier Irish vernacular text on the last things, a text possibly dependent on earlier apocryphal apocalyptic and eschatological compositions. Specifically Irish “Apocrypha” The Scéla Laí Brátha may be regarded as an Irish apocryphal composition, but closely related to Matthew’s gospel text and earlier Irish compositions. We have other major creative Irish texts with no such links, for instance An Tenga Bithnua (“The Evernew

the apocrypha in ireland and abroad

481

Tongue”), Fís Adamnáin (“The Vision of Adamnán”), and Dá Brón Flatha Nime (“The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven”). Since those belong to Irish literature, rather than to Apocrypha proper, they need not be considered here. Irish Apocrypha at Home and Abroad ? Traditions and Texts on the Magi Winding up his introduction to the “Catalogue of Latin Exegetical literature both Hiberno-Latin and that showing Irish Influence, up to the beginning of the ninth century” Bischoff chooses the pericope on the Magi and the star at Bethlehem (Mt 2.1-12) to demonstrate that after their transportation to the Continent by Irish monks these texts were considered worthy of transcription in continental scriptoria like Tours, Verona, and Salzburg. They were known therefore to Carolingian scholars and were used by them. He chooses the pericope on the Magi and the star of Bethlehem (Mt 2.1-12) to demonstrate this, and to show, at the same time, how, from the discussions of the Irish exegetes, from their combinations and from apocryphal embellishments, a specific pattern of ideas had grown up around the text of the Bible, which essentially determined the way and the manner of considering the text.60 He believes that it is easy to show that Paschasius Radbertus (790-865) and Christian of Stablo (died after 880), the most learned of Carolingian interpreters, owe much of what was considered their peculiar contribution on the Magi pericope to Irish sources. 61 We may have a similar instance on the Magi in the curious names given to them in such texts as the Gospels of Máel Brigte (Harley 1802) and by much later Continental writers. We have the following text in the Gospel of Máel Brigte (fol. 10v, left-hand margin) : Haec sunt nomina eorum in ebrio, Arelius, Arenus, Damascus .i. humilis, fidelis, misericors. In greco autem Lalgalath, Galgalad, Sanicis uel Sincerna, nuntius, deuotus, gratia interpreta(ntur), secundum Ug (=Hugo ?) nomina eorum apud Caldeos Melcho Caspar, Patifarsat. The fanciful etymology of the names in Hebrew, Greek and Latin, is found in later biblical exegetes (for example Zacharias of

60  61 

B. Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, p. 90. B. Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, pp. 90-94, at 92-93.

482 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Besançon and Peter Comestor) without awareness of its occurrence in earlier Irish texts.62 Postscript 2014 Critical editions of all the texts mentioned in this essay (Transitus Mariae, Visio Pauli Recension IV, the texts on the Antichrist, the (XV) Signs before Doomsday, Fís Adamnáin (“The Vision of Adamnán”) ; Dá Brón Flatha Nime (“The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven”) have already been made and will appear in a forthcming volume of Apocrypha Hiberniae. A critical edition of In Tenga Bithnua, “The Evernew Tongue” has already been published.63

62  On the many Irish texts on the Magi see R. E. McNally, “The Three Holy Kings in Early Irish Latin Writing”, in Kyriakon. Festschrift Johannes Quasten¸ ed. by P. Granfield  – J. A. Jungmann, Münster, 1970, vol. 2, pp. 667-690. On descent from Balaam, see Bischoff, “Turning-Points”, pp. 90-91. The “Greek” names “Lalgalath, Galgalad, Sanicis uel Sincerna”, and the interpretation as nuntius, deuotus, gratia are so widespread in Irish and presumed-Irish texts that identification of any author (e.g. Ug) is idle ; see McNally, “The Three Holy Kings”, pp. 671-76, etc. ; pp. 687-88 for the Harley 1802 text ; p. 671 for futility in attempting to find a Hebrew or Greek etymology for the name, and for the names in Zacharias of Besançon and Peter Comestor. 63  J. Carey, “Tenga Bithnua The Evernew Tongue”, in Apocrypha Hiberniae II. Apocalyptica I, ed. by J. Carey (CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2009.

| NOTES ON THE IRISH GOSPEL OF THOMAS*

42

In 1964 Professor James Carney of the Dublin Institute of Advanced Studies published from MS G  50 of the National Library of Ireland (formerly MS  10276 of the Sir  Thomas Phillips collection) an Old Irish translation of the apocryphal Infancy Gospel of Thomas.1 While MS G  50 was transcribed in the seventeenth century, the nature of the language in which it is written indicates that the Irish translation in question was made about a.d.  700. How we are to explain the rather faithful transmission of the text between a.d.  700 and the seventeenth century is a problem not easily solved. Professor Carney’s view2 is that G  50 is a copy of a twelfth century manuscript and that the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, never being a popular work, suffered comparatively little from scribes and editors before being transcribed into the twelfth century manuscript. Professor Carney’s publication is of immense importance for the history of the apocrypha in Ireland, putting before us as it does a complete text of one apocryphon from a very early period. The Irish text is likewise of importance for a study of the complicated history of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas itself. The Irish text is in verse. In this it differs from all other known forms of this apocryphal work. Since it is in verse one might suppose that the Irish author permitted himself certain liberties in the use of his sources. Before we pass any judgement on this matter, however, we must first study the Irish composition in the light of the other known forms of this apocryphal Infancy Gospel. In fact a knowledge of these is occasionally required | for an under- 43 First published in : Irish Theological Quarterly 38 (1971), pp. 42-66. The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan together with the Irish Gospel of Thomas and a Poem on the Virgin Mary, ed. by j. Carney (Irish Texts Society, vol.  47), Dublin, 1964. Introduction pp.  xv–xviii ; diplomatic text and textus restitutus with English translation pp.  89–105 ; textual notes pp.  153–164. English translation reproduced here with kind permission of Editor and Publisher. The text, translation and notes earlier appeared in Eriu 18 (1958), pp. 1–43. 2  Carney, The Poems, p. ix, note 4, x–xiii. *  1 

The Bible and the Apocrypha in the early Irish Church, edited by Martin McNamara, IPM, 66 (Turnhout, 2015), pp. 483-512 ©

DOI 10.1484/M.IPM-EB.1.XXXXXX

484 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church standing of the Irish composition itself. The other known sources of this work are the following :3 1.  Greek A. This, considered the older of the two Greek recensions, with 19 chapters contains a longer form of the apocryphon. It is found in the complete MSS. of the fifteenth-sixteenth centuries (two of them in almost complete agreement with each other) and in a Paris MS carrying only the first seven chapters. Greek text in Constantin Tischendorf, pp.  140–150 ; de Santos (with Spanish translation), pp.  285–303. English translations in Alexander Walker, pp.  78–85 ; James, pp.  49–55 ; Hennecke-Wilson, pp.  392–399. 2.  Greek B, with 11 chapters, is represented by a single MS of the 15th century. While briefer than Greek A, with seven (or eight) incidents to Greek A’s thirteen, it follows the text of the former rather closely, but has occasional similarities with the text of Pseudo-Matthew. Greek text in Tischendorf, pp.  158–163. English translations in Walker, pp.  86–89 ; James, pp.  55–57. 3.  A Syriac recension, lacking three of the incidents of Greek A, is extant in a sixth century MS (MS Addit.  14, 484) of the British Museum, edited with an English translation by William Wright, Contributions to the Apocryphal Literature of the New Testament, London, 1865. Wright’s Syriac text (without translation) was republished by Ernest Alfred Wallis Budge in The History of the Blessed Virgin etc. (Luzac’s Semitic Text and Translation Ser. 4–5), London 1899, vol.  1, pp.  217–22. This Syriac text is also extant in another MS of the fifth century. This Syriac recension at times diverges considerably from the known Greek texts (including A) and shows striking points of contact with the known Latin texts of the Gospel of Thomas. The Syriac recension is also extant

3  Abbreviations used in this article : de Santos = A. de santos otero, Los evangelios apocrifos (Biblioteca de autores cristianos), 2nd ed., Madrid, 1963 ; Greek A = The Gospel of Thomas in recension known as Greek A ; Greek B = Gospel of Thomas in recension known as Greek B ; Hennecke  – Wilson = Edgar hennecke, The New Testament Apocrypha, edited by W. Schneemelcher ; English translation edited by R. Mc L. Wilson, Vol.  I “Gospels and Related Writings”, London, 1963 ; Ir = The Irish text of the Gospel of Thomas ; James = M. Rhodes James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1953 ; Lat = The Latin Version of the Gospel of Thomas ; Ps.-Matt. = The Gospel of Thomas as found in the Infancy Gospel of PseudoMatthew ; Syr=The Syriac text of the Gospel of Thomas ; Tischendorf = C. tischendorf, Evangelia apocrypha, 2nd  ed., Leipizig, 1876 ; Walker = A. Walker, Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, and Revelations (Ante-Nicene Christian Library, vol. 16), Edinburgh, 1870.

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

485

in Cod. Vat. Syr.  159, a MS to which Paul Peeters attributes special importance, considering its text very near to the original MS which he believes to be the base of all known recensions of the Gospel of Thomas. In the work cited above, edited from a thirteenth-fourteenth MS, Budge believes there is incorporated with little change the Gospel of Thomas edited by Wright. This is quite | inexact. Budge’s text does contain the Gospel of Thomas but in quite a different form from that published by Wright. 4.  Latin. A number of texts carrying a Latin version are known to exist, many of them no earlier than the twelfth century. The Vatican MS edited by Tischendorf (pp.  164–80) is late. The Latin version goes beyond the Greek and Syriac versions in having at the beginning stories of the flight into Egypt. English translations of the Latin can be found in Walker, pp.  90–99 ; James, pp.  58–65. A Latin version is also extant in a Vienna palimpsest of the fifthsixth centuries. This Vienna text is considered to be of great importance as, in agreement with a fifteenth-century MS (Paris, Bibl. nat.  1652) of Pseudo-Matthew, it apparently establishes that the London Syriac MS noted above preserves a very good ancient tradition. The first three chapters (carrying only the Flight into Egypt and the Return from Egypt) of the Vienna palimpsest have been published by de Santos, pp.  303–06. 5.  The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew has incorporated into it the Gospel of Thomas. Pseudo-Matthew is actually a work composed of the Protevangelium of James (= Ps.-Matt.  1–17) and the Gospel of Thomas (in chapter 18  ff.). The composition of Pseudo-Matthew from these two works is dated to the 8th or 9th century. The text of Thomas which it incorporates had of course, an earlier independent existence and is important for the history of this apocryphon in the Latin Church. Pseudo-Matthew was immensely popular in the Middle Ages and is extant in a large number of MSS. Vatican 5257, Paris 5559A (14th cent.), Paris 1652 (fifteenth century) were used by Tischendorf for his edition (pp.  51–112). Tischendorf’s text is reproduced by de Santos (pp. 179–242). English translation in Walker, pp.  16–52 ; summary in James, pp.  73–79. 6.  The Gospel of Thomas is also incorporated into the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy, itself probably a work translated from the Syriac ; cf. Hennecke-Wilson, pp.  404-05. Latin translation in Tischendorf, pp.  181–209 ; Spanish in de Santos, pp.  309–38 ; English in Walker, pp.  100–24 ; summary in James, pp.  80–82. 7.  It is also incorporated into the Armenian Gospel of the Infancy, but in a much modified form ; cf. de Santos, p.  359 ; summary in James, pp.  83–84.

44

486 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 8.  The Old Georgian Version of the Gospel of Thomas, related to the Syriac, has been published in a Latin translation by Gerard Garitte : “Le fragment géorgien de l’Évangile de Thomas” in Revue d”histoire ecclésiastique 51 (1956) 513–520. 9.  An Ethiopic Version, preserved as part of a Gnostic work, has been published with French translation by Sylvain Grébaut, Les miracles de Jésus. Text éthiopien, (Patrologia Orientalis 12). Paris, 1919, pp.  625–642. | 10. Finally we must mention the Old Slavonic Versions which, while in general following Greek A, correspond occasionally with the Latin version ; cf. Hennecke-Wilson, p. 389 ; de Santos, p. 283.4

We can see from all this that the Infancy Gospel of Thomas had a long and complicated history, in keeping with the Infancy Gospels in general. Paul Peeters’s view5 is that as basis of them all there stands a single work in which were narrated certain episodes of the life of the Infancy of Jesus after the return from Egypt. This original work is the source of the Syriac, Greek, Latin, Georgian and Slavonic recensions. This original work, he further maintains, was later reworked to give us the later texts of the Infancy Gospels. Peeters’ view, while considered indispensable in any new study of the problem, is not taken as a definitive solution by scholars. As Oscar Cullmann writes in his introduction to the Gospel of Thomas in Hennecke-Wilson (pp. 389–90) : “Despite the preliminary work of Paul Peeters (Évang[iles] apocr[yphes] II, 1914, Introduction) which is quite indispensable for the study of 4  See now a. de santos otero, Das kirchenslavische Evangelium des Thomas (Patristische Texte und Studien 6), Berlin, 1967. The principal aim of this work is to establish the original contents of the Old Slavonic text. This version he takes to be a translation from the Greek made at the end of the tenth or beginning of the eleventh century. His reconstructed Slavonic version he gives in German translation. He takes the Greek text to be the original one, but not the Greek as published byC.Tischendorf. Tischendorf’s text he takes to be a later reworking of the more original Greek version to which the Old Slavonic version gives us indirect access. In the third part he argues against the view of P. Peeters that the Greek was a translation from a Syriac original. See review of the work by G. MacRae, in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 30 (1968), pp. 635–36 from which I have drawn this information. 5  p. peeters, Evangiles apocryphes II  : L’évangile de l’enfance : rédactions syriaques, arabes et arméniennes, traduites et annotées (Textes et documents pour l’étude historique du christianisme 18), Paris, 1914, pp. LIII ff. See now work referred to in preceding note.

45

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

487

the literary connection between the Gospel of Thomas and other infancy writings, there is still no comprehensive treatment and accurate analysis of the intricacies of this tradition”. When the Infancy Gospel of Thomas was composed we cannot say. An apocryphal work entitled “The Gospel of Thomas” is mentioned by Hippolytus (c. a.d. 230), who says it was used by the Naassene Gnostics. Origen (died 253), too, says a Gospel according to Thomas was current in his day. Cyril of Jerusalem (a.d. 348) speaks of the Gospel of Thomas as a Manichaean production, and both Pseudo-Leontios of Byzantium and Timothy of Constantinople class it as a Manichaean work, as does the Gelasian Decree (early sixth century). A “Gospel according to Thomas” is listed in the Stichometry of Nicephorus which assigns it 1,300 lines (stichoi), 200 lines more than the Stichometry gives for the Book of Wisdom. Among the texts of Nag Hammadi (ancient Chenoboskion) recently discovered, there is a Coptic version of a Gnostic Gospel of Thomas (English translation in Hennecke-Wilson, pp. 511–522). This Gospel of | Thomas is a collection of sayings of Christ and 46 has no resemblance whatever with the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. It was very probably this Gnostic Gospel which Hippolytus (and perhaps Origen also) had in mind. This, too, is probably the Manichaean Gospel of Thomas referred to by Cyril of Alexandria and Timothy of Constantinople. Timothy, however, also speaks of a work called “The Infancy of the Lord” (Paidika tou Kyriou) used by the Manichees. This may be the Infancy narrative of Thomas. So, too, possibly is the Gospel of Thomas referred to in the Gelasian Decree and in the Stichometry of Nicephorus. Whether there was originally any relation between the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas (now known in a Coptic version) and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is hard to say. Authors are divided on the point. It is conceivable that both the extant Gnostic text and the Infancy narrative once formed part of a single work, the tradition later dividing into two branches. This complicated history of the tradition enshrined in the Gospel of Thomas must be borne in mind when we come to study the Irish text published by James Carney. Its significance as a witness of the tradition can be perceived when we realize that, the Vienna Latin palimpsest and the Syriac version apart, it is the oldest

488 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church known text of this Infancy Gospel, coming as it does from about a.d. 700. Where it stands in the tradition can only be ascertained by a comparison of the various incidents with the other texts. In the notes which follow we intend to compare the Irish version (Ir) with Greek A, Greek B, the Syriac (Syr) and Latin (Lat) versions, and with the form of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas incorporated in the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew (Ps.-Matt.). Title The Irish text bears no title. In the Syriac version the apocryphon is entitled “Infancy of the Lord Jesus” ; in Greek A. “Account of the Infancy of the Lord Jesus by Thomas, the Philosopher of Israel” ; in Greek B. “Book of the holy Apostle Thomas concerning the Life of the Lord in his Infancy” ; in the Latin text. “Here begins a Treatise of the Boyhood of Jesus according to Thomas”. Contents All versions of the Gospel of Thomas contain a series of incidents from the Infancy of Jesus. In the number of incidents narrated the texts we are to study fall into two recensions : the shorter recension of Greek B and Ir with eight incidents, and the others with more than these eight. The following table will give an idea of the relationship of one text to the others from this point of view. An x means that a given incident is found in a given recension ; a – that it is missing there. | Gr A Introduction x I+II Incident of Pools and sparx rows III Incident of boy who met x death for annoying Jesus IV Jesus at School x x V Incident of boy (Zeno) whom Jesus is falsely accused of slaying VI Cures man cut while cleaving x wood VII Jesus takes water in his cloak x VIII Incident of miraculous sowing x

Gr B x x

Syr – x

Lat Ps.-Matt Ir x – – x x x

x

x

x

x

x

x x

x x

x x

x x

x x

x

–

x

x

–

x –

x x

x x

x x …

x x

47

489

notes on the irish gospel of thomas IX

Incident of lengthening of beam

x

x

x

x

x

x

X XI

Jesus at School a second time Jesus at school a third time

x x

– –

x x

x x

– –

x

–

x

x

x x … x

x

–

–

x

–

–

x

–

–

–

–

–

x

–

x

x

–

–

XII

Jesus cures James bitten by a serpent XIII Jesus restores dead child to life XIV Jesus raises builder from death XV Jesus among doctors in the Temple

–

The shorter recension, with nine incidents, is represented only by Greek B and Ir. Actually, each of those has only eight incidents. It appears, however, from the evidence that the original number was nine. The tradition represented by Greek B omits incident VIII, while the tradition represented by Syr and Ir omits incident VI. We shall see how Ir follows the tradition found in Syr in other matters as well. The final section (X–XV) seems to be a secondary development, incidents X and XI being variants of the popular and widespread incident found in IV. In the first nine incidents we should note the uniformity of the entire tradition, even in Ps.-Matt., which however inserts two incidents, not attested for other texts of the Gospel of Thomas, between incidents VIII and IX. The same sequence of incidents is found in all texts. Together with the longer recension, attested for the fifth-sixth century in Syr, there also circulated a shorter one represented now only by Greek B and Ir. It would be an error, however, to believe that Ir goes with Greek B against the other texts. This is true only as regards the form of the recension. From the point of view of content, and the material contained in the various episodes, there is a rather big variety between the various texts. Here Greek B follows Greek A, whereas the other four texts Syr, Lat, Ps.-Matt. and Ir form a class apart. This we shall see from a study of the various incidents. Incident of the pools and the sparrows (Ir 1–10) When Jesus, son of the living God, was a small boy, five years of age, he blessed twelve small pools ; he had fenced them in with clay (1). He | fashioned twelve small birds  – passeres they are called

48

490 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (passir a n-anmann) ; on the Sabbath day he made them smoothly out of clay (2). A certain Jew upbraided Jesus, son of the great God ; he escorted him by the hand to his foster-father, Joseph (3). “Reprove your son, Joseph, not good is what he does ; on the Sabbath day he has made clay-images of birds” (4). Jesus clapped his two hands, his little voice was heard ; before their eyes  – kingly the grace !  – he scared the birds away (5). A dear little voice was heard on the lips of the pure Jesus : “so that you may know who has made you, go ye to your home” (6). A certain man announced it to the people ; wonderful was the news : the cries of the birds in flight were heard (7).     The son of Annas, the scribe, came towards his play-thing ; he let each stream run out at its side ; he destroyed the masonry (8). “What you have done”, said Jesus, “has not been of advantage to us ; may you be as a little branch that falls before its fruit” (9). The boy collapsed like a withered twig : it would have been better for him if he had not destroyed the play-thing of the King’s son (10).

Here we have two incidents interlocked ; the first on twelve sparrows, the second on the fate of the son of Anna the scribe (mac Annae scribae) who destroyed the pools. The two incidents are similarly interlocked in all the other five texts. Like Ir, all the other texts, save Ps.-Matt., state explicitly that Jesus was five years at the time of this incident. In Ps.-Matt. he was at the beginning of his fourth year. All texts note as Ir does that he made twelve sparrows. Greek A is the only other text with Ir which gives the number of pools as twelve. Greek B and Syr simply say he made pools of water. According to Lat he made a pool of water ; according to Ps.-Matt., seven pools. In saying a certain Jew upbraided Jesus and reported the matter to Joseph Ir is in the tradition of Greek A, Syr and Ps.-Matt. (quidam de Iudaeis). According to Greek B a child runs to Joseph ; according to Lat, the children of the Hebrews. As in Ir, so too in Greek A and Syr it was the son of Annas (Syr : Hanan) the scribe who destroyed the pools. Greek B is almost identical : “a certain son of Annas the scribe”. In Lat it is a Pharisee who does it. In this, however, Lat is certainly secondary, the context of Lat requiring that it be a child. In Ps.-Matt. 26 the culprit is “one of the children, a son of the devil, who was playing with Jesus”. In Ps.-Matt. 28, however, where this episode is repeated, it is a son of Annas, a priest of the Temple. Here then

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

491

in this second episode Ir agrees with the Greek and Syr tradition against the Latin texts. In this latter part of the episode (especially in §9) Ir is clearly summarising a longer tradition found in all texts except Ps.Matt. 26. In this longer | tradition the pools are destroyed with 49 a branch of a tree. Hence the form Jesus’ reply takes, even in Ir 9. It is worthy of note that Ps.-Matt. 26 (unlike the incident repeated in Ps.-Matt. 28), like Ir, makes no mention of any branch in describing the destruction of the pools. In making no explicit mention of the child’s death Ir agrees with Greek A and Syr (“and immediately the lad withered up completely”) against Greek B, Lat and Ps.-Matt. The immediate source of Ir for this incident is, however, a Latin version of the Gospel of Thomas. This is clear from the Latin word passeres (passir) and mac Annae scribae. In both Lat and Ps.Matt. the birds are called passeres. The Latin text of the Gospel of Thomas known to the author of Ir was, as far as this episode goes, nearer to the form found in Greek A, B and Syr than to the Latin texts of Lat and Ps.-Matt. It is worthy of note that Joseph’s rebuff to Jesus found in all other texts is omitted in Ir. Incident of the boy who met his death through annoying Jesus (Ir 11–21) Another time when Jesus was at home with Joseph another boy who came to him annoyed him (11). “May it not be a going and a coming”, said Jesus, “the journey you have made”. The boy collapsed ; he died on the instant (12). He annoyed the ignoble kin of the boy upon whom he had pronounced the doom. They said : “With your son, Joseph, go from us, avoid the land and the village” (13). “Unless you restrain your son go you any place ; whatever path ye might take out of here it would not be too soon” (14). “Why, son”, said Joseph, “have you annoyed the people ? Anyone upon whom you pronounce your doom is taken away dead from you” (15). “Anyone who is innocent”, said Jesus, “does not die from judgements. It is only the wicked that the curse pursues” (16). “It is enough that I gave my ear to them” [=“listened to them”] “and that they have foregathered with me without that, in addition, they should shear the two ears from my head” (17). “A great terror”, said the people, “is your son who does this thing ; until now we have never heard of any such little boy” (18). “As quick as a glance around, everything he says is done immediately ; we never heard of the equal of that boy in the world” (19). Said

492 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Joseph : “He is not like the sons of others : unless it were a cross or death, whichever it be, he would not get his deserts” (20). “Everyone who solemnly reviled him, he punished them : deafness seized their ears, blindness their eyes” (21).

A number of passages in this incident of Ir are obscure. The same holds for the other texts also where a certain variety is noticeable among the various recensions, and even in the different MSS. of Greek A. | The difficulties and the differences can 50 possibly be explained through the Gnostic origins of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (see de Santos, notes to pp. 288 -89), as can the portrait of Jesus here presented. Ir may be a composition from different texts of the apocryphon. Some of its obscurer passages can be explained by comparing with others of the extant texts. Greek A practically contains two different episodes. As Jesus was going again through the village, a lad ran and knocked against his shoulder and was struck dead by a word from Jesus. The parents of the dead child came to Joseph, saying he must leave the village unless he teaches Jesus to bless and not to curse. Joseph calls Jesus and admonishes him. Jesus says he will remain silent but that they (who ?) will bear their punishment. Immediately his accusers were smitten with blindness. Those who saw this remark that everything Jesus does becomes fact. “And when Joseph saw that Jesus had so done, he arose and took him by the ear and pulled it hard”. Jesus gets angry and objects in rather obscure language. Syr is similar to Greek A. It is the family of the dead boy which comes to Joseph, to whom Jesus replies : “If these were children of the bedchamber, they would not receive curses. These [=the children of the bedchamber, legitimate children] shall not see torment”. Syr is probably the original form here and is presupposed by the other texts ; e.g., Ir 13 : “the ignoble kin of the boy” ; Ir 16 : “Anyone who is innocent does not die from judgements…”. Syr, as Greek A, notes how Joseph became angry with Jesus “and seized hold of his ear and pulled it”. Lat, too, follows Greek A, with certain differences. It also notes that Joseph took hold of Jesus by the ear in anger. In Ps.-Matt. this incident is linked with the preceding one. After the death of Annas’ son, Joseph was afraid and took Jesus home. On the way a boy ran against him, intending to hurt him.

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

493

Jesus curses him and the boy falls down dead. The parents complain to Joseph as in the Gospel of Thomas. Joseph speaks to Jesus. Jesus replies that only the guilty are punished. They gather together against Joseph, who is afraid of an uprising. “Then Jesus took the dead boy by the ear and held him up by it in the sight of all (apprehendit Iesus infantem mortuum ab aure et suspendit eum a terra in conspectu omnium), and they saw Jesus speaking to him as a father to a son. And his spirit returned to him and he lived again, and all marvelled”. Evidently the compiler of Ps.-Matt., or the tradition on which he depends, found the statement of the Gospel of Thomas, which says Joseph pulls Jesus’ ear, offensive and changed it. The desire to change this offensive passage is most probably the explanation of the obscure text of Ir 17 where Jesus says : “It is enough that I gave my ear to them – Ba lour mo ó frithiu.” The continuation of the passage (“and that they have foregathered against me – ocus comrac frium – without | that, in addition, they 51 should shear the two ears from my head”) may also have behind it a tradition not attested in the other texts. In these it is Joseph who pulls Jesus’ ear. One would gather from this text of Ir that it was some other group, perhaps the parents of the dead boy, who did this. Here again Ir may have behind it a tradition attested in no other known text of the Gospel of Thomas. But the tradition as found in Ir seems so much changed that it is difficult to ascertain what text in particular lies behind it. When Ir 21 has Joseph say that blindness seized the eyes of those who reviled Jesus it shows itself dependent on the tradition found in Greek A, Syr and Lat, although Ir itself makes no mention of Jesus having done this. This would seem to indicate that in this incident Ir is combining or adapting different traditions. In the same passage Joseph says deafness seized the ears of those who mocked Jesus. No mention is made of this in any other text ; but it may well have stood in texts of Thomas known to the author of Ir. In Ir 20 Joseph says of Jesus : “He is not like the sons of others : unless it were a cross or death, whichever it be, he would not get his deserts”. In this Ir is unique. No mention of a cross, and nothing similar to these words of Joseph, is found in any of the other versions of this incident. Reference to the cross is found again in

494 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Ir 33, 39 in the incident which follows on this, and there it has parallels in some other texts. It may well be that in the incident of Ir we are now considering we have a contamination from the following one, and that mention of the cross has been introduced from the following incident. It would appear that in certain passages the other recensions of this present incident have suffered contamination from the incident which follows on it. In conclusion, then, we can say that in the present incident Ir follows no known tradition closely, although a knowledge of the different traditions is required for an understanding of some obscure passages of the text of Ir. It may be, as already said, that in this incident Ir is combining and adapting different traditions. Jesus at school (Ir 22–39) This incident on Jesus at the school of Zacharias, with eighteen of the entire poem’s forty-eight strophes, is by far the most detailed one of all eight. It is also a section of the Gospel of Thomas with a most complicated history of its own, and one which connects the Infancy narrative of Thomas in some way with the Gnostic Gospel we have spoken of earlier. It is even conceivable that this particular episode had once an independent existence of its own outside of the Infancy narrative of Thomas. The story is already referred to in the Epistle of the Apostles 4 (in Hennecke-Wilson, p. 193 ; | James, p. 486) : 52 This is what the Lord Jesus did, who was delivered by Joseph and Mary his mother to where he might learn letters. And he who taught him said to him as he taught him, ‘say Alpha”. He answered and said to him, “First you tell me what Beta is ...”

This text is from the second century St  Irenaeus (about a.d.  200 ; Adv. Haer.  1, 20, 1) is witness of the same tradition current among the Gnostic Marcosian sect. He tells us that these supported their doctrines by a vast number of apocryphal writings : They adduce, too, this false invention, that when the Lord as a child was learning the alphabet, and his teacher said, as the custom is : Say Alpha ; he answered : Alpha. But when the teacher bade him say Beta, the Lord answered. First tell thou me what Alpha is, and then I will tell thee what Beta is. And this they interpret as meaning that he alone knew the unknown mystery, which he manifested in the form of Alpha (text in James, p.  15).

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

495

Our interest here is not in the relation of the Infancy narrative of Thomas to the Gnostic Gospel, but is rather the relationships of the extant texts of this Infancy narrative among themselves, and in particular the place of the Irish text within the tradition of the Infancy narrative. We have the usual six texts : Greek A, Greek B, Syr (also in Hennecke-Wilson, pp.  399–400 for this incident), Lat, Ps.-Matt. and Ir ; and together with this the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy (48–49) and the Slavonic versions. The former, agreeing in the main with Greek A, can be omitted from consideration. We shall consider the Slavonic version only incidentally. The popularity enjoyed by this incident is evidenced by the fact that it is given in different forms as three distinct episodes in Greek A, Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. The history of the tradition in this episode must have been a very complicated one, and we are not surprised to find a certain amount of diversity between the various texts. Yet, despite this, the texts fall sharply into two groups, with Greek A (6–8) and Greek B (6–8) on the one side and Syr (6–8), Lat (6), Ps.-Matt. (30–31) and Ir on the other. In Greek A Zacchaeus, the teacher, advises Joseph to send Jesus to his school. This Joseph does. Zacchaeus teaches Jesus the alphabet from Alpha to Omega “with much questioning”. Jesus questions Zacchaeus on the meaning of the first letter, and explains the meaning of Alpha (text corrupt here). Zacchaeus is perplexed and so are the others present. Zacchaeus asks Joseph to take Jesus away, saying that Jesus is no mere man. While the Jews console Zacchaeus Jesus speaks and heals those who had fallen under his curse (how they had so fallen we are not told). After that no one dared to provoke Jesus. Greek B follows Greek A rather faithfully, with Jesus answering Zacchaeus from the beginning. It ends, however, with Zacchaeus remarking that Jesus is not earthly born and asking Joseph to take him away. Jesus’ words which come at the end of | Greek A are found in quite different form towards the 53 beginning of the episode in Greek B. In the texts of Lat, Syr and Ps.-Matt. we really have two incidents conjoined. First Zacchaeus (Ps.-Matt. Zachyas) invites Joseph to send Jesus to school. There follows a reply by Joseph as to who would be able to teach Jesus. Then there follows a reply by Jesus on his own superiority. The people are astonished. Then comes a further reply from Jesus (=Ir 34–39). Next comes a dif-

496 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ferent incident. Zacchaeus (Zachyas) again asks Joseph to send Jesus to school to learn letters (thus Lat, Ps.-Matt.), or to learn what is proper (Syr). (This=Ir 22.) Joseph has Jesus go to school (=Ir 23). The teacher begins to teach Jesus the letters from Aleph (Syr ; “from the first letter” Ps.-Matt. ; “from A to T” Lat), asking Jesus to answer. Jesus remains silent (=Ir 24). The teacher strikes Jesus on the head (=Ir 25). Jesus replies with a proverb (Syr, Ir, Ps.-Matt.), or with words to the effect that it is he who should teach his master and not vice versa (=Ir 26). Jesus (in Lat and Ps.-Matt.) goes on to say he knows the meaning of the letters and actually expounds their meaning (=Ir 27–28). The teacher is confounded and remarks that Jesus is no ordinary mortal (Syr, Lat, Ps.-Matt.) and asks Joseph to take Jesus away (=Ir 29–33). All three texts (Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt.) end with words of Jesus on the unfruitful bearing fruit. Ir, on the contrary, ends with words of Jesus found in the first part of the episode in the other texts. The history of the tradition as found in each of these texts deserves separate study. Each has its own problems. Here we concentrate on the Irish text which the above analysis will have shown to fall into the tradition of Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt., apart from the fact that it omits the preliminary episode, part of whose material it includes at the end. We shall now go through this incident of Jesus at school as found in the Irish text, section by section, indicating its relation to the other representatives of the Gospel of Thomas. Invitation to send Jesus to school Said the sage Zacharias : “This is a wonderful boy ; were he to be taught he would be more wonderful still” (22).

Ir alone gives Zacharias as the name of Jesus’ teacher, a form which is a corruption of Zacchaeus of Greek A, B and Lat (Syr has Zqy), or of Zachyas, Zachamaeus, Zacheus of the various MSS. of Ps.-Matt. The change of the form of the name may have arisen within the Irish tradition and is possibly due to the influence of the Protevangelium of James where Zacharias figures prominently. In Ir Zacharias is called a sage (suí). In the other texts the person who teaches Jesus is called a master (Greek A, Ps.-Matt.), a teacher (Syr, | Greek A, Ps.-Matt.), a doctor of the Law (Ps.- 54 Matt.) or a scribe (Syr), never a sage.

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

497

Ir does not say explicitly to whom Zacharias directed his invitation to have Jesus sent to school. Presumably it was to Joseph who is represented speaking at the end of the preceding incident. All the texts intimately connect this incident with the preceding one. In Greek A, B and Syr Zacchaeus asks Joseph to send Jesus to school to learn letters and also how to behave properly towards his elders and towards other children. This indelicate language has been toned down somewhat in Lat (6, 1). It has vanished completely in Ir. Zacharias takes Jesus to school Zacharias takes him with him to his school in order that he might study with him like everybody else (23).

In Greek A and B, as in Ir, it is clear that Jesus goes to the school of Zacchaeus (Zacharias). In Syr and Lat there seems to be some confusion. As we have already remarked, in these accounts we really have two incidents, in the first of which Zacchaeus, Joseph and Jesus are involved before Jesus goes to school. The second incident concerns a teacher and Jesus at school. Originally these may have been two distinct and partly parallel episodes, later brought together with a consequent unevenness of narrative. Thus for instance in Syr, Zacchaeus when he first approaches Joseph is called Zacchaeus the teacher ; then, in the later part of the episode when Jesus is at school, he is first of all called Zacchaeus the scribe, thereafter simply “the scribe”, without proper name. The same unevenness is noticeable in Lat, where first we read of “a certain man called Zacchaeus” (6, 1–4), whereas in the episode of the school proper (6, 5–6) we simply hear of an anonymous teacher. In Ps.-Matt. the double tradition is clearest. Zachyas approaches Joseph to send Jesus to school to be taught by Levi the scribe. Yet, even in Ps.-Matt., a certain contamination has occurred, as in the second part of the narrative we once read of “Zachyas the teacher” (31, 2). Ir is in the tradition of Greek A and B in having Jesus attend the school of Zacchaeus (Zacharias), as it also is in having no preliminary episode. In Ir it is Zacharias who takes Jesus to school. In this Ir is in the tradition of Syr and Greek A (15, 1 ; 6, 2). In Ps.-Matt. (31, 1), as in the Epistle of the Apostles, it is Joseph and Mary who take Jesus to school ; in Lat and Greek B (6, 1) Joseph alone.

498 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Jesus remains silent When he had written the alphabet for him he said : “Say A”. Though the son of the King did not answer he knew more (24).

| Here, as already noted, Ir is in the tradition of Syr, Lat and 55 Ps.-Matt. against Greek A and B, and indeed against the form of this tradition as found in the Letter of the Apostles and in the text of the work of the Gnostic Marcosians cited above. In this latter form of the tradition Jesus replies to the master when asked by him to say “Alpha” ; in the former he remains silent. Within the tradition of Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt., Ir is nearest Ps.-Matt. In Lat the teacher writes for Jesus the first line of the alphabet which goes from A to T (i.e. Tau of the Hebrew alphabet). Syr says the teacher Zacchaeus repeated to Jesus the whole alphabet from Aleph many times and asked him to answer. Ps.Matt., on the contrary, has : et incipiens a prima littera Aleph dicebat ei : “Responde” (31, 1).

Jesus is struck The master became angry ; he hit him on the head, whichever of the two he used, whether fist or stick (crann : lit. “tree”) (25).

Although ordinarily in Ir (22, 29, 34) Zacharias is called a “sage”, here he is referred to as “master” (maigistir). The variant may conceivably be due to the sources used. In this section of the incident Ir appears to be a conscious combination of varying traditions, in one of which the master strikes Jesus with his fist, in another with a stick. And in point of fact both traditions are attested. Lat (6, 6) simply says that the teacher hit him on the head. In Syr “the scribe became angry and struck him with his hand upon his head”. According to Ps.-Matt. (31, 1) the teacher Levi hit Jesus on the head with a storax-tree rod : Unde praeceptor Levi iratus apprehendens virgam storatinam percussit eum in capite. This seems to indicate that more than one form of the Infancy narrative of Thomas circulated in Ireland in the seventh century, one of them in this part of the episode similar to that now attested in the Syriac text.

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

499

Jesus replies with a proverb “This is how it is wont to be with it”, said Jesus. “Any anvil that is struck teaches him who strikes it ; it is not it that is taught” (26).

Were it not for Syr one would feel inclined to see in this text of Ir an old Irish proverb not attested in any other Old Irish source.6 The evidence of Syr clearly demonstrates that this is far from being the case. Ir, in fact, is here reproducing its source. This we know from Syr, the text and context | of which reads : “Then 56 the scribe became angry and struck him with his hand upon his head. And Jesus said : “A smith’s anvil (sdn’ dqyny’) being beaten, can learn and it has no feeling ; but I am able to say those things, which are spoken by you, with knowledge and understanding’“ (Hennecke-Wilson, p. 159). Christ’s reply, whether in Irish or in Syriac, is obscure. It would appear certain, however, that the obscurity is due to the eastern origins of the tradition, and perhaps to its Gnostic associations, rather than to any Irish adaptation. The reference to the anvil in both Ir and Syr makes it evident that Ir is here reproducing its source. But the immediate source of Ir was not Syr nor a literal translation of it. This is clear from the different endings of Jesus’ reply in Ir and Syr. Of the two, Ir seems to be the more original ; the ending in Syr looks like a resolution of the proverb in the interests of intelligibility. A further step in rendering the presumed meaning of the proverb into plain speech is found in Ps.-Matt. (31, 2) : Ut quid me percutis ? In veritate scias quia ipse qui percutitur magis docet percutientem se quam ab eo doceatur. Ego enim te possum dicere (corr. to ? docere) quae a te ipso dicuntur (“Why do you strike me ? Know of a truth that he who is struck can teach him who strikes him rather than be taught by him. For I can teach (lit. “say”) you these things which are said by you”). Apart from the reference to the anvil, this text of Ps.-Matt. is very close to Ir. The author of Ir must have had a text very similar to that of Ps.-Matt. before him, but one in which the original reference to the anvil was still retained. Instead of the proverb Lat. gives its presumed meaning : “I ought to teach thee and not thou me” (6, 6).

6 

Cf. carney, The Poems of Blathmac, p. 159.

500 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Jesus expounds the secrets of the alphabet “For what you have taught to all, what you have written for me, the letters you reckon, I know their names” (lit. “I know their sound”  – ro-fetor a son) (27). Jesus recounted his letters for them before their eyes, each of them with its element and with its secret (28).

In writing ro-fetor a son the author of Ir is being faithful to his sources rather than indulging in poetic licence. We should consequently render literally as “I know their sound”. The text of Ir is excellently explained by Ps.-Matt. (31, 2), in the immediate continuation of the passage which we have already cited : (Ego enim te possum dicere quae a te ipso dicuntur.) Sed hi omnes caeci sunt qui dicunt et audiunt, quasi aes sonans aut cimbalum tinniens, in quibus non est sensus eorum quae intelliguntur per sonum eorum (“But all these are blind who speak and hear, like sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal, in whom there is no perception of those things which are meant by their sound”). Lat in this passage appears to be secondary. “I | know the letters which thou wouldst teach me, 57 and I know that ye are unto me as vessels out of which cometh nought but sound, and neither wisdom nor salvation of the soul” (6, 6). We are in the presence of the Gnostic-type tradition in which Jesus explains the secret meaning of the letters of the alphabet. This reply of Jesus is found in one form or another in all extant texts of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, except Syr, and outside of it in the Epistle of the Apostles and in the text of Irenaeus already cited. In the original form of the tradition, Jesus’ mystical explanation of the letters of the alphabet was probably couched in unusual or in quite unintelligible terms. In this particular section of the Infancy narrative of Thomas the texts of Greek A, Lat and Ps.-Matt., are hopelessly corrupt. A rendering of the text of Greek A would run something like this : Hear, teacher, the arrangement of the first letter, and pay heed to this, how it has lines and a middle mark which goes through the pair of lines which you see, (how these lines) converge, rise, turn in the dance, three signs of the same kind, subject to and supporting one another, of equal proportions ; here you have the lines of the Alpha (6, 4 ; Hennecke-Wilson, p.  394 ; cf. James, p.  51 ; de Santos, p.  291).

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

501

Lat is equally corrupt : Listen to me, master ; understand the first letter. See how it has two lines ; advancing in the middle, standing still, giving, scattering, varying, threatening ; triple intermingled with double ; at the same time homogeneous, having all common (6, 7).

In the corresponding text of Ps.-Matt. Jesus asks master Levi : Dicat magister legis, prima littera quid sit, vel quare triangulos habeat multos, gradatos, subacutos, mediates, obductos, productos, erectos, stratos, curvistratos (31, 2). The author of Ir very wisely satisfied himself by saying that Jesus expounded the element and secret of each letter of the alphabet !

Zacharias confounded says Jesus is no mere mortal Said the sage Zacharias : “Take the boy away from me. I am not capable of answering you. Boy, do not vex (lit. ‘shake”) me” (29). “I thought it was a pupil I brought with me to my school ; I saw it was a master I had taken in charge” (30). “I do not know how it is, whether he is an angel or God ; it seems to me that until today I was not befogged (lit. I did not walk about into a mist)” (31). “Who is the mother who conceived this being in womb ? Who is the foster-mother who was able to nurse the suckling ?” (32). “The earth is not the proper place for him : rather is this the being destined for the cross who has been before the Flood” (33).

There is nothing in these quatrains of Ir which is not paralleled in other texts of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. Here again the closest parallels | are found in Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. Many of 58 the elements are found in a different wording in Greek A ; only one of them in Greek B. With Ir 29 we can compare Lat 6, 8. 11 ; Ps.-Matt. 31, 3 ; Greek A 7, 1–2 ; with Ir 30, Lat 6, 8. 10 ; Ps.-Matt. 33, 3 ; with Ir 31, Syr ; Lat 6, 10–11 ; Ps.-Matt. 31, 3 ; with Ir 32, Lat 6, 9 ; Ps.-Matt. 31, 3 ; with Ir 33, Syr ; Lat 6, 1 ; Ps.-Matt. 31, 3. The sequence of Zacharias’ words as found in Ir is not, however, that found in the other texts. Here it is well to recall the different arrangement of the material of this incident of Jesus at school in Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. : i) incident involving Jesus, Zacchaeus and Joseph before Jesus goes to school ; ii) words of Jesus to teacher at school ; iii) words of Jesus to others at school.

502 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The reference to the cross in Ir 33 deserves special attention. No mention of this is found in Greek A or Greek B. We do have reference to the cross in Syr, Lat and in the Slavonic version, but in words of Joseph addressed to Zacchaeus before Jesus goes to school. In Lat Joseph says : No man is able to teach him but God only. Think you that this young child will be the occasion unto us of little torment my brother ?

As Montague Rhodes James (p. 61) notes, there should be mention of a cross in this sentence. This is evident from Jesus’ words to Zacchaeus which follow immediately in Lat  6, 2 : And when thou shalt raise the standard (i.e. the cross) whereof my father spoke, then shalt thou understand that all things that proceed out of my mouth are true.

The Syriac text, in a passage exactly parallel to Lat, gives Joseph’s words as follows : “And who is able to teach a boy like this ? Does he think he is equal to a small cross ?” Jesus, answering Zacchaeus, says in the Syriac text : “And as for the cross of which thou hast spoken, he shall bear it whose it is.” The Slavonic version says : Joseph was all the more filled with anger and said to the teacher : “Who shall be able to teach the cross to this boy ? Do you think it is so brother ? For he is humbler and meeker than all.” And the child Jesus, having heard his father speak these things, laughed much and said to Zacchaeus : “Master, all that my father has just said to you is very true” (de Santos, p.  290, note 23).

The reader will notice that something has gone wrong in the Syriac text cited above : it was Joseph, and not Zacchaeus, who had spoken of the cross. On this point Lat and the Slavonic version are logical. Perhaps in Syr we have a combination of two traditions : one in which Joseph, another in which Zacchaeus, spoke of the cross. The latter tradition is that found in Ir and also in Ps.-Matt., which latter text is here nearest to Ir in this particular point and also in giving the teacher’s words after Jesus has explained and expounded the secrets of the alphabet. We here give the text of Ps.-Matt. (31, 3) :

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

503

“Then he (i.e. the master) began in the hearing of all to cry out and say : Ought such a one to live on the earth ? Yea, he ought to be hung on the great cross. For he can put out fire, and make | sport of our modes of punishment. I think that he lived before the flood, and was born before the deluge. For what womb bore him ? or what mother brought him forth ? or what breasts gave him suck ? I flee before him ; I am not able to withstand the words from his mouth, but my heart is astounded to hear such words. I do not think that any man can understand what he says, except God were with him. Now I, unfortunate wretch, have given myself up to be a laughing-stock to him. For when I thought I had a scholar, I, not knowing him, have found my master. What shall I say ? I cannot withstand the words of this child : I shall now flee from this town, because I cannot understand them. An old man like me has been beaten by a boy, because I can find neither beginning nor end of what he says. For it is no easy matter to find a beginning of himself. I tell you of a certainty, I am not lying, that to my eyes the proceedings of this boy, the commencement of his conversation, and the upshot of his intention, seem to have nothing in common with mortal man. Here then I know not whether he be a wizard or a god ; or at least an angel of God speaks in him. Whence he is, or where he comes from, or who he will turn out to be, I know not”7 (Walker, p.  45).

Jesus replies to Zacharias The little boy Jesus answered : ‘Sage of the law of God, you think Joseph is my father. It is not he” (34). “I was before your beget7  Cf. De Santos Otero, pp. 231-32 : Tunc coepit cunctis audientibus clamare et dicere. “Num debet iste super terra vivere ? Immo in magna cruce dignus est appendi. Nam potest ignem extinguere et alia deludere tormenta. Ego puto quod hic ante cataclismum fuerit, ante diluvium natus. Quis enim venter illum portavit ? aut quae mater genuit illum ? aut quae ubera illum lactaverunt ? Fugio ante eum ; non enim valeo sustinere verbum ex ore eius, sed cor meum stupescit talia verba audire. Nullum enim hominem puto eius consequi verbum, nisi fuerit Deus cum eo. Nunc ego ipse infelix tradidi me huic in derisum. Cum enim me putarem habere discipulum, inveni magistrum meum, ignorans eum. Quid dicam ? Non valeo sustinere verba pueri huius : de hoc iam municipio fugiam, quia non valeo haec intelligere. Ab infante senex victus sum, quia neque initium de quibus ipse affirmat invenire (non) possum nec finem. Difficile enim est initium e se ipso reperire. Certo dico vobis, non mentior, quod ante meos oculos operatio huius pueri et initia sermonis eius et intentionis exitus nihil cum hominibus commune videtur habere. Hic ergo nescio an magus aut deus sit ; aut certe angelus Dei loquitur in eo. Unde sit aut unde venerit aut quis futurus sit nescio.”

59

504 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ting ; it is I who am the sage ; I know every thought that has been in your heart” (35). “You are certain in every science, you have read all ; I have a lesson for you that no man knows” (36). “I have a wonderful matter to tell you without the trace of a lie ; I have seen Abraham in the time when he existed” (37). “Thus did I see even you long ago through the mystery of the Holy Spirit ; sage of the law, from all time before your begetting I was” (38). “That cross you spoke of, he will suffer it who has come to it for the sake of all to redeem every living creature” (39).

| All this material is again paralleled in the texts of Syr, Lat 60 and Ps.-Matt. For Ir 34 see Syr and Ps.-Matt. 30, 2 ; for Ir 35 Syr, Lat 6, 2 and Ps.-Matt. 30, 2 ; for Ir 36 Syr and Ps.-Matt. 30, 2 ; for Ir 37 Syr and Ps.-Matt. 30, 4 ; for Ir 38 Lat 6, 2, Syr and Ps.Matt. 30, 4 ; and for Ir 39 Lat 6, 2, but especially Syr. All the parallels given here are from the first part of this incident in the texts of Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. None of these texts, we may recall, has any reply of Jesus to the teacher after this latter has been confounded by him at school. The content of Jesus’ reply to Zacharias on this occasion is found in the other texts in words addressed by Jesus to Joseph, Zacchaeus, or the astounded people before he went to school. This must be borne in mind in our study of Ir. The sequence in this earlier episode in Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. is as follows : i) Zacchaeus asks Joseph to send Jesus to school ; ii) Joseph replies ; iii) Jesus speaks to Zacchaeus on hearing the words of Joseph ; iv) The people are astounded ; v) Jesus speaks to the people. In what form the entire incident was known to the author of Ir we cannot say. As we have seen, Ir belongs to the tradition of Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. It may well then be that the author of Ir had the tradition in this same form, and that he has rearranged the material to give us the present form of Ir. There are, in fact, indications that this was so. Note the repetition in Ir 35 and 38 where Jesus says twice to Zacharias : “I was before your begetting”. This repetition can be explained through Lat and Ps.-Matt. in which words equivalent to these are first addressed by Jesus to Zacchaeus (Lat 6, 2 ; Ps.-Matt. 30, 2), then to the crowd (Lat 6, 3 ; Ps.-Matt. 30, 4). Syr is particularly close to Ir 39 where Jesus says : “That cross you spoke of, he shall suffer it who has come to it”. The words of Jesus in Syr are : “And (as for) the cross of which thou hast spo-

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

505

ken, he shall bear it, whose it is”. The continuation of this text in Syr, however, is rather Docetic in character : “For when I am greatly exalted, I shall lay aside whatever mixture I have of your race”. In Ir, on the contrary, the continuation is an expression of orthodox doctrine. Conclusion to incident IV The evidence shows that in this incident Ir is definitely in the tradition represented by Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt., as against Greek A and Greek B. The evidence also seems to indicate that more than one form of the tradition was known in Ireland (cf. no.  4), and that Ir is to a certain extent a rearrangement of earlier forms of the tradition (no.  8). Within the tradition of Syr, Lat and Ps.Matt., Ir shows a close relation with Ps.-Matt. on a number of points (cf. nos.  3, 6 and 7). What is more interesting, however, is the particularly close connection with Syr on two points (nos.  5 and 8 ; see also nos.  2 and 7). Equally evident is the fact that in this episode all | vestiges of indelicate language and unorthodox 61 doctrine have been expunged in Ir. Whether this happened in Ireland, or had taken place in the tradition before it reached Ireland, we cannot say. Jesus raises Zeno from the dead He played a game with boys, the pure son of Mary ; this is his age which I know : when he was seven years (40). One of the boys fell over a cliff ; he thereupon died ; they all fled except Jesus ; he waited for the crowd (41). He was charged with an attempt : that it was he who had thrown him down. “Wait for me a while”, said Jesus, “until I reach him” (42). “I am charged, Zeno, with throwing you down. Is it true ?” “It is not true, Lord, it is not true. Release him, it is not he who is guilty” (43). He was dead before, he was dead as soon as he had said this ; when the crowd saw it they released him (44).

Ir lays stress on the age of Jesus at the time of this incident : “This is his age which I know : he was seven years” (40). It is possible that the author of Ir found this in his sources. Hippolytus, in fact, tells us that the following words of Jesus were found in the Gospel entitled “according to Thomas” used by the Gnostic Naassenes : “He that seeketh me will find me in children from seven years and upwards : for there I am manifested, who am hidden in the fourteenth age” (Hippolytus, Against Heresies, 5, 7 ; cited in

506 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church James, p. 15). It may be that the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas originally contained episodes from the seventh to the fourteenth year of Jesus. And the first episode of the Gospel of Thomas as found in the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy is there connected with his seventh year. In the Arabic Infancy Gospel, however, as in all the longer recensions, the final episode narrated (that of Jesus among the doctors) is dated to his twelfth, not his fourteenth, year. And when a date is given for the first episode in the other texts, it is his fifth year (thus Ir, Syr, Greek A, Lat) or the beginning of his fourth year (Ps.-Matt. 26, 1). The words used in Ir 40, however, seem to indicate that the author is making a deduction, rather than translating an earlier source. He can hardly be following the tradition of Greek A or B, Lat or Ps.-Matt., in all of which the episode which follows on this one in Ir is dated to Jesus’ sixth year. Ir is most probably dependent on the form of tradition as found in Syr (11), in the incident of Jesus taking home water in his cloak which immediately follows the present incident in Syr and in Ir. (The intervening incident, found in Greek A, B, Lat and Ps.-Matt., is omitted in Syr as it is in Ir.) The incident of Jesus taking water in his cloak is introduced in Syr with the words : “And again, once on a time, after Jesus was seven years of age …”. If the author of Ir had some such tradition before him we can see how he deduced that the incident preceding | this occurred when 62 Jesus was seven years. The connection of Ir with Syr in this part of the text would then be twofold : the age of Jesus and the omission of the incident which intervenes in the other texts. We may note how the Irish form of the boy’s name is Zenon (Ir 43 : a Zénón ; diplomatic text : afhiamhain). This is the Greek form, retained also in Syr (Znôn). Ps.-Matt. has the Latin form Zeno (Ps.-Matt. 32) ; Lat has Zenoo. In all the other texts Jesus and the children were playing on a housetop. Perhaps the author of Ir has changed this to “cliff” to give the story an Irish colouring. Otherwise Ir agrees with the other texts, apart from noting that the boy was revived only for a moment. The other texts (with the exception of the variant of this episode as found in the Armenian Gospel of the Infancy 16, James, p. 83) make no mention of the boy’s return to death. A curious feature of all the accounts, including Ir (43), is that the resuscitated boy addresses Jesus as “Lord”.

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

507

Jesus brings water in his cloak His mother sent him for water – wonderful renowned son ! He filled his lap with the water and it did not go through his cloak (45).

Ir here gives in brief the somewhat longer account found in Greek A 11, Greek B 10, Syr 11, Lat 9 and Ps.-Matt. 33. In all these texts Jesus is sent by his mother with a pitcher to fetch water. When the pitcher gets broken (in the press of a great crowd, Syr ; through Jesus stumbling, Greek A ; by the crowd, Lat ; by one of the other children, Ps.-Matt.), Jesus spread out his garment and brought home water in it to his mother, who was amazed. Ir omits here the reference to Jesus’ age found in Greek A, Greek B, Lat, Ps.-Matt. (all six years) and Syr (after he was seven years). The miraculous sowing He sowed a little field with leeks (di chaninn)  – its size was not great : when it was cut afterwards there were a hundred basketfuls of produce (46).

In all texts, as in Ir, this episode is recounted in few words. Despite the brevity a certain variety is noticeable. In Greek A Jesus goes out with his father to sow wheat. Jesus sows one grain of wheat. When he had reaped and threshed it, he brought in a hundred measures and distributed to the poor, Joseph taking the residue. Lat follows Greek A very closely : Jesus goes out to sow with Joseph ; he sows a handful of wheat which yields a hundred measures ; Jesus distributes to the poor, “save that Joseph took a little thereof to his house for a blessing”. | Syr and Ps.-Matt. have a slightly different text. According to 63 Syr once when Jesus was playing “he sowed one measure of wheat, and reaped a hundred cors and gave them to the people of the village”. In Ps.-Matt. Jesus goes out into the field and sows a little wheat which he has taken from his mother’s barn. It yields as produce three cors which he gave to his numerous acquaintances. Ir has elements found in all the different traditions. It agrees fully with none of them, but seems nearest the text of Ps.-Matt. It differs from all the other texts in speaking of leeks instead of wheat. The miraculous lengthening of a beam A piece of craftsmanship was brought to Joseph’s house to be made even ; for its corner was long in the side  – one side exceeds

508 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the other (47). Said Jesus : “Take your part, I shall take mine”. He stretched the shorter half until it was as long as the other (48).

Certain differences between Ir and the other texts must be noted. In all other versions it is remarked that at this time (Greek B, Lat and Syr note that Jesus was then eight years) Joseph made nothing else but ploughs and yokes (for oxen) and a certain person asked him to make a bed for him. The implication is that Joseph cut one beam too short through his inexperience. And this is explicitly asserted in Greek B and in the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy 38 (chapter 39 gives another form of the episode). Greek A apparently wishes to avoid the reference to Joseph’s inexperience, and simply says that one beam for the bed was shorter than the other. So, too, does Lat and Syr. In Ps.-Matt. (37) it is one of Joseph’s servants who cuts one beam too short. In Ir it is not Joseph or his workman who cuts the beam too short, but some other inexperienced person who then sends his unspecified piece of craftsmanship to Joseph to have the error rectified. It seems clear that the tradition found in the other texts stands behind Ir, and that in Ir the tradition has been altered out of respect for Joseph. Once more, we cannot say whether this is due to the author of the Irish text or to the tradition on which he depends. It is quite possible that the tradition was already modified when it reached Ireland, as it is in Greek A, Lat, Syr and Ps.-Matt. General conclusion The Irish text of the Gospel of Thomas does not correspond exactly to any of the known forms of this apocryphon. Its exact Vorlage is then unknown to us. Nearly all the material found in Ir, however, is found also in the Gospel of Thomas as known to us from the other sources. It is probable that the earlier form of the Gospel comprised only nine | incidents, and that the longer recension found in Greek A, 64 Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. is a later development. The shorter form, found now only in Greek B and Ir, does not permit us to postulate a special relationship between Ir and this Greek text, seeing that a different incident is omitted in each of these texts. In the omission of the incident of the cure of the injured wood-cutter Ir is in the

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

509

tradition of Syr, which also omits this incident. It appears, then, that the original shorter form of the Gospel of Thomas divided into two branches by the omission of an incident. One branch is represented by Greek A, another by Ir and the text lying at the basis of Syr. That the immediate source or sources of Ir were in Latin, and not in Greek or Syriac, seems certain, and even implied in incidents I and II of Ir. It seems probable, too, that the author of Ir had more than one text of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas before him when compiling his work (see Incident IV, no. 6). He also seems to have occasionally rearranged the material before him in compiling his metrical work (Incident IV, 6 end). Either the Irish author or his tradition has omitted the unorthodox doctrine and indelicate expressions found apparently in the original work. The Irish text shows but little connection with Greek A or Greek B against Syr, Lat and Ps.-Matt. The opposite, in fact, seems to be the case. Correspondences with Lat against Syr and Ps.-Matt. are few. The Irish text is more closely related to Syr and Ps.-Matt. than to any of the other texts studied. In this we have evidence that the text of Pseudo-Matthew (compiled probably in the 8th–9th century) faithfully reproduces an earlier form of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The close relationship of the Irish to the Syriac text on more than one point deserves special attention. There is first of all the relationship in form, both texts omitting the same incident. Then there is the particularly close connection on two points in incident IV, i.e. the reference to the cross and the proverb on the anvil. There is also the reference to the age of Jesus found in Ir, incident V. This connection of the Irish Gospel of Thomas with Syriac tradition cannot be studied in isolation from other evidence of 7th–8th century Ireland. The apocryphal Acts of Thomas is probably a production of the Syriac Church (cf. James, pp. 364 ff.). Both the Syriac original and a Greek translation of this work exist. The apocryphal work was composed in the first half of the third century, by Bardaisan of Edessa or by one of his Gnostic followers, according to many scholars. In any event, we know from Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries that the work was then in the possession of various heretical sects, such as the Encratists, Manichaeans and Priscillianists. A curious feature of this apocryphal

510 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church book is the number of liturgical hymns it contains. It is in these especially that the Gnostic and Docetic teaching shows through. | Despite its Docetic teaching and the censures of the early Fathers, 65 these Acts of Thomas continued to be used in the Church. Now, in an Irish Sacramentary, written in the third quarter of the seventh century, published by Alban Dold and Leo Eizenhöfer8 we find one of these hymns inserted in the Mass for the Feast of the Circumcision, a hymn which retains the Docetic teaching of the Acts of Thomas.9 The Latin text of the hymn in the Irish Sacramentary is the oldest extant Latin rendering of these hymns known to us.10 Its text generally follows the Greek, but occasionally agrees with the Syriac against the Greek.11 We cannot say whether these hymns of the Acts of Thomas then existed independently of the rest of the work, whether the Acts themselves were known in Ireland, or whether the author of the Sacramentary is dependent directly on earlier liturgical literature rather than on apocryphal literature.12 This hymn from the Acts of Thomas is, in any case, evidence for the presence of Syriac tradition in early Ireland. Another Syriac work, in Latin translation, which may have come to Ireland about this time is The Testament of Mary (Transitus Mariae). In the opinion of Charles Donahue13 the ancestor of all known Irish (Latin and Gaelic) texts of this work was brought to Ireland before the middle of the eighth century. Here we have a field of Irish-Oriental relationships yet to be explored.

8  Das irische Palimpsestkommentar im Clm 14429 der Staatsbibliothek München, ed. by A. Dold  – L. Eizenhofer, with a contribution by D. H. Wright (Texte und Arbeiten, 53–54), Beuron, 1964 ; with summary in English on pp. 125*–128*. The Hymn is on fol. 26 v of the MS ; on p. 44 of edition. 9  Cf. Das irische Palimpsestkommentar, p.  45. In this the hymn differs noticeably from the Irish Gospel of Thomas, where all unorthodox doctrine is excised. 10  The hymns were omitted in the Old Latin version of the Acts. 11  Cf. Das irische Palimpsestkommentar, p. 46. 12  See J. Jungmann, The Place of Christ in Liturgical Prayer, LondonDublin, 1965, pp. 165–169, esp. 169 ; cf. pp. 94-95 for our Sacramentary. 13  The Testament of Mary. The Gaelic Version of the Dormitio Mariae (Fordham University Studies Language Series, No. 1), New York, 1962, p. 25.

notes on the irish gospel of thomas

511

The Irish Infancy narrative of Thomas must also be considered in the light of the presence of apocryphal literature in general in the early Irish Church. On this Prof. Bernard Bischoff writes :14 In the early period of Irish Christianity, in many respects still dark, a refuge was offered for some of the heretical and apocryphal literature which on the continent seemed destined to disappear. The authentic form of Pelagius’ commentary on the Pauline epistles, and parts of the commentary of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the Psalms, were here preserved. Traces of the transmission of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, and other apocrypha, point to Ireland. |

The Gospel according to the Hebrews must have been used in Ireland during the 7th–8th centuries. Citations from it are found in Sedulius Scottus’ commentary on Matthew and in Irish works of which ninth-century MSS. survive.15 The Letter of Christ to Abgar was apparently known in Ireland in the eighth century and the apocryphal Acts of John, the Passion of Peter and Paul and the Passion of Andrew in the ninth. The Epistle to the Laodicaeans is found among the Epistles of St  Paul in the Book of Armagh (ninth century), with the remark that Jerome denies it is Paul’s. The Saltair na Rann, composed at the end of the tenth century, makes use of two apocryphal works : The Book of Adam and Eve and the Assumptio Mosis.16 From later centuries we have a very rich crop of apocryphal literature, mainly in Irish translation, and found particularly in the Leabhar Breac and in the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum. But this rich field of Irish Apocrypha and Irish Oriental Tradition still awaits due scholarly attention.

14  B. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri vol.  6, no.  2 (1954), pp. 189-281, at 195. 15  These texts, noted and published by Prof. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”, pp.  203-04, 252, 262, can now be seen in English translation in HenneckeWilson, pp.  150–152. P. Vielhauer, who there studies them, believes they come from “The Gospel of the Nazaraeans” rather than from the “Gospel according to the Hebrews”. 16  See St. j. d. seymour, “The Book of Adam and Eve in Ireland”, PRIA, 36C (1922), pp.  121–33.

66

512 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Postscript 2014 A new critical edition of the Irish text, under the new title “The Childhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus”, has been published by Máire Herbert, accompanied by an introduction by Máire Herbert and Martin McNamara, and notes to the translation by Martin McNamara.17

17  In Apocrypha Hiberniae I, Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al. (CCSA 13), Turnhout, 2001, pp. 441-83.

| THE BIRD HIRUATH OF THE “EVER-NEW

TONGUE” AND HERODIUS OF GLOSS ON PS. 103.17 IN VATICAN CODEX PAL. LAT. 681 In his interesting essay on “The jewels and bird hiruath of the “Ever-New Tongue”“, in Ériu 35 (1984), pp. 113–36, Peter Kitson has, among other things, brought to our attention the Latin text in MS British Library, Royal 6. A. xi, fol. 146v (a twelfth-century manuscript), which he believes to be directly derived from some form of the “Ever-New Tongue” (Kitson, p. 130). He also notes that on herodius, as elsewhere, the first recension of the “Ever-New Tongue” (Tenga Bithnua = TBith), which has the fullest version, will in general be closest to the original. It alone, for example, preserves the idea that it is the “mountains” which heat the egg. The second recension and the text in Royal 6. A. xi have both rationalized the story to make the sun the heating agent (Kitson, p. 131). He also notes that the text in Royal 6. A. xi doubtless preserves a detail of the original TBith which both extant recensions have now lost. Its figure of seventy warriors in the egg-ship may well likewise be the original underlying the first recension’s seven thousand and the second recension’s two hundred and seventy (Kitson, p. 131). He also draws attention to the Latin name herodius in Ps. 103.17 and Jerome’s comment on this in his Tractatus in Psalmos to the effect that the herodius is a bird of great size, which is said to prey even on eagles, and that it does not have a regular nest but sleeps wherever night happens to overtake it (Kitson, p. 132). Kitson suspects that the Irish author of the TBith knew only the first of Jerome’s statements, and not from the Tractatus in Psalmos directly but from a snippet in a Psalter gloss or glossary. The simplest hypothesis for the data available to us, he says, is that Irish glossators developed a standard comment on Ps. 103.17 involving Jerome’s statement on the large size of herodius, that it was striking enough to be taken up by sto1 

First published in : Ériu 39 (1988), pp. 87-94.

The Bible and the Apocrypha in the early Irish Church, edited by Martin McNamara, IPM, 66 (Turnhout, 2015), pp. 513-524. ©

DOI 10.1484/M.IPM-EB.1.XXXXXX

87

514 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ry-tellers as well as commentators, and that TBith’s tenth( ?)-century author was one of the first to use it (Kitson, p. 133). Other interesting points made by Kitson are that there may be ultimate affinities between the Irish tradition, and even Jerome’s herodius, and the bird ziz of Jewish tradition, and that a special study of the rabbinic traditions of these monstrous birds is desirable (Kitson, p. 132, n. 115). I believe we are in a position to move somewhat beyond this, especially with regard to the egg of hiruath/herodius, and along the lines suggested by Dr Kitson, i.e. glosses on Ps 103.17. I begin by giving the relevant sections of the Irish and Latin texts, with translation. First the texts of the TBith on hiruath (herodius) : | First recension :2 88     §58.  En inna mete dermhaire dianad ainm Hiruath i tirib India. Rosaig di meit a delba conid uide tri ngaimlaithe di muirib no tirib rosoich fosccud a eitedh intan sgailes uadha iat. Forluathar ar ite oc accaill arna bledmila isin muir. Slebe gainme 7 grian it e guirte in ogh docuirither iar ndothad. Libern co seoluib 7 ramaib dognither do leth ind ugha sin iarna madhamaim .lxx.c. mile cona n-armaibh 7 a lointib issead bereas dar muir. Ocus ata sochuidi mor don tsluagsa fil isin ceiti-se sunn is i lleth ind uga sin dodeochatar dar Muir Ruadh …     A bird of enormous size named Hiruath is in the lands of India. Such is the size of its form, that the shadow of its wings, when it expands them, extends to a journey of three winter-days by seas or lands. It speeds on the wing a-hunting for the monsters in the sea. Mountains of sand and gravel are what warm the egg that it deposits (therein) after laying. A galley with sails and oars is built out of the half of that egg after breaking it. Seven thousand soldiers with their weapons and provisions is what it carries over sea. And there is a great multitude of this host in this assembly here, which came in the half of that egg over the Red Sea.

Second recension :3     §35.  En dianad ainm in tIruath fil a tirib India, ata da med conidh uidhi tri ngemla uadh ar cach leith ro roich fosgad a eited 2  Edition and translation by W. Stokes, “The Evernew Tongue”, Ériu, 2 (1905), pp. 96–162, cited by Kitson, p. 129. 3  Edition and translation by Ú. Nic Énri and G. Mac Niocaill, in Celtica 9 (1971), pp. 1–59 (at 30–1), cited by Kitson, p. 129.

the bird hiruath of the ever-new tongue

515

an tan scailes iad. Ise biad nos·imfuilngedar .i. bleidhmila muiridhi, conus·ber les iad ana chrobaib etaruas. Aen ogh ased beres cacha bliadna i ngaineamh tirim, 7 in grian goires a ogh, 7 ticseam iarum da fis in tan ceadaiges Dia do.     §36.  Da-nithear long fhuilnges seol 7 imram do lethblaisc a uighi sin. Sechtmogha laech ar da cetaib cona n-armaib 7 cona lointib ased beres tar muir. Atait sochaidi mor don lucht fil asa comdail seo, 7 is a leithblaisc na huigi sin tangadar tar Muir Ruaid …     A bird that is named Iruath in the lands of India is so large that the shade of its wings stretches the distance of three winter days’ journey on every side of it when it opens them. The food that supports it is the monsters of the sea, and it picks them up in its claws. It lays one egg every year in dry sand, and the sun hatches the egg, and it comes to see it when God allows it.     A ship that can carry sail and oars is made of half the shell of that egg. Two hundred and seventy warriors with their weapons and their provisions it carries over sea. There are many of those who are in this gathering who came in a half shell of that egg over the Red Sea.

The relevant text of Royal 6. A. xi, with translation, is as follows :4 De herodio auis est magna magnitudine, herodius nomine, in regione Indie, Umbre. Illius magnitudo quando alas suas extendit continet spacium trium dierum deambulatione equi. Quando uolat in litus maris montes facit de arena. In illis montibus oua sua eicit, et sol calefacit quousque ex eis aues fiunt. Et | dimidio oui ipsius (MS : iplius) fit nauis in quo nauigare possunt .lxx. uiri cum armis suis. Of the herodius There is a bird of vast size, herodius by name, in a region of the Indies, Umbre. The size of it when it stretches out its wings encompasses the space of three days’ journey by horse at walking pace. When it flies on the sea shore it makes mountains of the sand. In those mountains it deposits its eggs, and the sun heats them until the young birds hatch out of them. And from a half of the egg of it is made a ship in which can sail seventy men with their weapons.

4 

Edition of Latin text by Kitson, p. 128 ; translation, p. 129.

89

516 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Herodius in a gloss in Cod. Vaticanus Pal. lat. 68 Part of this later Irish tradition concerning hiruath/herodius is attested already in a gloss on Ps. 103.17 in the Vatican Codex Palatinus lat. 68. This is an acephalous commentary on the Psalter, consisting of texts drawn mainly from earlier authorities, particularly from the Epitome of Julian of Eclanum’s translation of the commentary on the Psalms made by Theodore of Mopsuestia. It has some Old Irish and Old English (Northumbrian) glosses. While the present codex was transcribed in the eighth or ninth century (opinion differs), the original composition appears to date from the early eighth century, and to have been compiled either in Ireland or in Northumbria, presumably in a Columban monastery. In any case, its tradition of exegesis belongs to that of the early Irish schools. Its comment on Ps. 103.17 is as follows :5 (v. 17) Illic passeres. id est in cedris praedictis. hirodi domus dux est eorum. id est passer et herodius aues sunt quae in lignis agrestibus ponunt nidos ; hirodius autem principatur praedictis auibus, id est passeribus. Aliter : hirodius quidam auis magnus est dux omnium auium, qui in monte arena ad hostium fluminis intrantis mare super inminenti confouet ouum et calor solis cum eo XL diebus et conpleto tempore ad hostium ouum de monte rostro trudit et illo distructo eius dimedium C uiros trans hostium portat et hunc pro admiratione hic ostendit. Aliter : domus hirodi quae in altis lignis fit dux est passerum ; passeres enim si longius exierint quam quod umbra domus hirodis adierit, iterum non possunt inuenire nidos ; ideo dicitur dux est eorum.

This we may translate as follows : “There the sparrows”. That is, in the aforementioned cedars. “The house of hirodius (the heron) is their leader”. That is, the sparrow and hirodius (the heron) are birds which make their nests in wild trees ; hirodius (the heron), however, rules the aforementioned birds, that is the sparrows. An alternative interpretation : “Hirodius (the heron) is a large bird and leader of all the birds ; it warms its egg in a sand mountain on top of a projection (eminence) at the mouth of a river entering the sea, and the heat of the sun is with it for 40 days. And | when the time at the mouth (of the river) has been completed, with its 5  Glossa in Psalmos. Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Vaticanus Palatino-latinus 68, ed. by M. McNamara (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1986, p. 213.

90

the bird hiruath of the ever-new tongue

517

beak it casts the egg from the mountain, and after it has been destroyed, the half of it carries 100 men across the mouth (of the river) and out of admiration he shows this here”. An alternative interpretation : “The house of hirodius (the heron)”, which is on tall trees is the leader of the sparrows, because should the sparrows go further afield than the shadow of the house of hirodius (the heron) ( ? reading hirodi for hirodis) reaches, they are unable to find their nests again. Hence is it said that “it (i.e. the house of hirodius  – the heron) is their leader”.

The first part of this gloss on hirodius (from quae in lignis to praedictis auibus) is taken from the Epitome of Julian,6 extant in the Milan Commentary of Cod. Amb. C 301 inf., a manuscript written by the Irish scribe Diarmait about A.D.  800. I have been unable to determine the source of the next gloss, noted in italics  – the text that interests us here. It really contains only one part of the legend, that concerning the egg of the fabulous bird hirodius, although it does have a general reference to the bird’s size (auis magnus). The Pal. lat.  68 text is evidence that at least part of the hiruath legend of TBith was known in Ireland in the later seventh or very early eighth century. It is possible that the other section, containing details of the bird’s huge size, was also known there. We have no means of knowing, however, whether this fuller form of the legend was known to the compiler of the Glossa in Psalmos of Pal. lat.  68. While there are indications that the commentary now extant in this Vatican manuscript, or one very similar to it, continued to be used in Ireland and provided almost the sole source of the left-hand marginal glosses of the so-called Psalter of Caimin about A.D.  1100,7 it is clear that it was not the source for the author of TBith, which has a fuller form of the legend of the bird’s huge size. The origins of this legend and the manner in which it made its way to Ireland, or was developed there, still remain to be determined.

Theodori Mopsuesteni expositionis in Psalmos Iuliano Aeclanensi interprete in Latinum versae quae supersunt, ed. by L. De Coninck, adjuvante M. J. D’Hont, (CCSL 88A), Turnhout, 1977, p. 336. 7  See, for instance, M. McNamara, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (A.D. 600-1200)”, in PRIA 73C (1973), pp. 245–49, and Glossa in Psalmos, in note 5 above, pp. 70, 77, 245-57. 6 

518 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church One apparently fruitful avenue of approach is to study similar legends outside Ireland, and in particular those mentioned in rabbinic literature  – a point suggested by Kitson in his essay. To this we now turn. Some fabulous birds in rabbinic tradition (ziz, bar, yokni, sekwi) 8 Rabbinic sources have legends on some fabulous birds, to which names are occasionally given. The impression one gets from the texts in question is | that the legends are independent of the 91 names, and that – at least in some cases – only at a secondary stage have particular names been attached to them. It seems best to study these legends separately and to avoid the temptation to bring unity into the various traditions. Jewish tradition knew of two monsters, Behemoth and Leviathan, kings of the dry land and of the waters, of the animals and the fishes, respectively. From this, apparently, there developed the further tradition making the huge bird ziz king of the birds. Ziz’s flesh is considered a delicacy to be served to the pious at the end of time, to compensate them for the privations endured by abstaining from the unclean fowls. In rabbinic sources there is no hard and fast tradition on the monster bird ziz. Instead we find a number of different legends which tended to become attached to this particular name. We begin our account of these with one associated with the name of the Jewish rabbi Rabbah bar bar Ḥana. It occurs in the Babylonian Talmud (Baba Bathra 73b) as an item in a series of wayfarers’ tales being told by various rabbis. The text that interests us runs as follows.9 8  The various texts have been brought together by L. Ginsberg, The Legends of the Jews, vol.  1, Philadelphia, 1909, pp.  28-29 ; notes, vol.  5 (1925), pp.  46-47. A number of them had earlier been considered, with some later texts, by J. H. Wolff in his dissertation (32 pages), Fabula Judaica de portentosa magnitudinis ave zyz sdy dicta, Leipzig, 1683, where the rabbinic texts concerning ziz are interpreted mystically. Wolff’s work also considers the treatment of the rabbinic texts by medieval rabbis and by Christian writers. I have been able to consult this very rare work at the Biblical Institute, Rome. 9  English translation by Israel W. Slotki in Baba Bathra (The Babylonian Talmud ; Seder Neẓiḳin  II), London, 1935, p. 291.

the bird hiruath of the ever-new tongue

519

Rabba b. bar Ḥana further related : Once we travelled on board a ship and we saw a bird standing up to its ankles in the water while its head reached the sky. We thought the water was not deep and wished to go down to cool ourselves, but a Bath Kol [i.e. a heavenly voice] called out : “Do not go down here for a carpenter’s axe was dropped (into this water) seven years ago and it has not (yet) reached the bottom”. And this, not (only) because the water is deep but (also) because it is rapid. R. Ashi said : “That (bird) was Ziz-sadai for it is written : ‘And Ziz-Sadai is with me’”.

Rabbi Ashi’s reference here is to Ps.  50.11 in the Hebrew text, in which God, speaking in heaven, and from heaven, says : “I know all the birds of the mountains and ziz sadai is with me”. The end of the verse is translated in modern versions (e.g. the RSV) as : “all that moves in the earth is mine”. The understanding of the passage assumed by R. Ashi is that there is mention of a bird (ziz saday) which is both on earth and in heaven  – hence one of huge proportions. This understanding is found in the Aramaic translation (Targum), in which, however, the Hebrew ziz saday is translated as “wild cock”. The Targum reads : “Every species of bird that flies in the air of the heavens is manifest before me, and the wild cock, whose feet dwell on the earth but whose head reaches to the heavens, sings before me”. Rabbah bar bar Ḥana was a Babylonian scholar of the late third (and early fourth) century who came to Palestine and studied under R. Johanan.10 | He is actually well known in Jewish 92 tradition for his narratives of fantastic adventures in the desert and on sea. In his desert journeys he had an Arab act for him as guide. Rabbah’s stories of his adventures on the sea, it has been remarked, resemble tales of other navigators concerning the immense size of various marine animals. The following typical one has been compared with the later voyage of Sindbad :

10  On Rabba bar bar Ḥana see W. B(acher) and J. Z. L(auterbach) in The Jewish Encyclopaedia, vol.  10, New York, 1907, pp.  290-91 ; also W. Bacher in Die Agada der babylonischer Amoräer, second enlarged edition, Frankfurt am Main, 1913 (photographic reprint, Hildesheim 1967), pp.  87–93 (same pagination as in first edition, Strasbourg 1878). We need not here enter the currently debated question as to the exactness of the ascriptions of sayings or legends to individual rabbis. For our purpose it suffices that the traditions are found in early rabbinic sources.

520 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Once, while on a ship, we came to a gigantic fish at rest, which we supposed to be an island, since there was sand on its back, in which grass was growing. We therefore landed, made a fire and cooked our meal. But when the fish felt the heat he rolled over, and we would have been drowned had not the ship been near” (Baba Bathra 73b).11

The story about the monster-sized bird is in keeping with Rabbah’s style. It is worth noting that Rabbah bar bar Ḥana himself does not name the bird ; the identification with ziz saday comes from the later Palestinian Rabbi Ashi (A.D.  352–427). We cannot say whether the midrashic interpretation of Ps.  50.11, making ziz saday a monster bird linking earth and heaven, existed at an early period, or whether it arose from a seafarer’s story introduced from outside into Jewish tradition. Other rabbinic texts make mention of the gigantic wingspan of the fabulous bird, by whichever of the various names it is called. In these texts a connection is made with Job 39.26. “Is it by your wisdom that neṣ [generally rendered as : “the hawk”] soars and spreads his wings towards the south ?” Thus in Midrash Rabbah, Leviticus 22.10, we read : “… and ziz of the fields are mine “(Ps.  50.11). Rabbi Judah son of R. Simon says : When ziz spreads out his wings he darkens the disk of the sun. Hence it is written : Doth the neẓ soar by thy wisdom and stretch her wings toward the south (Job  39.6). Why was it called by the name “ziz” ? Because it possesses many kinds of tastes, the taste of this (zeh) and of that (zeh).12

The same tradition, again under the name of R. Judah b. Simon, occurs in Midrash Rabbah, Genesis 19. 4 : “the ziz is a clean bird and when it flies it obscures the orb of the sun”.13 The tradition is found again in Baba Bathra 25a,14 where, however, the bird is called “the son of the hawk” (ben neẓ, in dependence on Job 39.26) The Jewish Encyclopaedia, vol. 10, p. 291 ; the text also in English translation by I. W. Slotki, in Baba Bathra ; note 9 above, p. 291. 12  Translation by J. J. Slotki in Leviticus Rabba 22, 10 (Midrash Rabbah, vol. 4), London, 1939, pp. 289-90. 13  Translation by H. Freedman in Midrash Rabbah, vol.  1 (Genesis I), London, 1939 (3rd impression 1961), p. 151. 14  English translation by M. Simon in Baba Bathra, vol. I (The Babylonian Talmud, Seder Neẓiḳin  III), London, 1935, p.  124. 11 

the bird hiruath of the ever-new tongue

521

rather than ziz ; there it is said that of the four winds the south is the most violent, and were it not that the “son of the hawk” (ben neẓ) stays it with its wings, it would destroy the world. Mention is also made in Talmudic sources of a huge egg laid by a fabulous | bird, which in these texts is called Bar Yokani (or Bar 93 Yokni). Thus the Babylonian Talmud, Bekorot 57b : Once a certain cedar tree fell in our place and sixteen wagons alongside each other passed its width. Once the egg of a Bar Yokani fell and its contents swamped sixteen cities and destroyed three hundred cedar trees. But does it actually throw the egg ? Is it not written : The wing of the ostrich beateth joyously (Job  39.14) : The egg (which was thrown) was a rotten one.15

The stress is on the huge size of Bar Yokani’s egg. The same is true of the other occurrences of the egg of Bar Yokani in the Babylonian Talmud, Yoka 80a.16 In Sukka 5a–b17 mention is made of the face of Bar Yokani, a very large bird being clearly intended. The bird was evidently believed to belong to the ostrich family (cf. Job  39.13, cited above) and some scholars believe it is a loan word from the Persian Varaghna  – the (Bactrian) ostrich.18 These latter texts on Bar Yokani and its egg have at most but a very remote connection with the Irish texts we are considering. With regard to other elements of the tradition the similarities are greater. How to explain any connection there might be is a more difficult matter. It could be that these particular Jewish traditions, like so many others, became known in the West through

15  English translation by L. Miller and M. Simon in Bekorot (The Babylonian Talmud, Seder Kodashim (Bekoroth, Arakin), London, 1948, p. 391. 16  English translation by L. Jung in the Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo‘ed (Yoma), London, 1938, p. 389. 17  English translation by M. Simon in the Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo‘ed (Sukkah. Bezah), London, 1938, p. 17. 18  Thus, for instance, A. Kohut, in his edition of the Aruk of Rabbi Nathan. Aruk completum, vol.  II, Vienna, 1926, pp.  176-77 ; M. Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic literature, vol.  1, New York, 1950 ; original edition 1903, p.  568 (under yokani) ; M. Simon in the notes to his translation, in note 17 above. See also L. Ginsberg, “Bar Yukani”, in Legends of the Jews, vol.  1, p.  29, where he translates “son of the nest”, with reference to Arabic wukanatum, “nest”, with corresponding note 138 in vol. 5, p. 47.

522 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Latin translations, even though those translations are now lost or at least as yet unidentified. We are invited by the Jewish legends themselves to pass beyond Judaism for their origins. For good part, we may recall, they are given as travellers’ tales, in particular tales of seafarers. Earlier scholars have noted an obvious relation between some of them and the later narratives of Sindbad. There is a particularly striking similarity between the Jewish legends on the large bird and the bird mentioned in the second voyage of Sindbad the Sailor of the Thousand and One Nights (the 73rd Night).19 Sindbad had noted a huge bowl floating on the sea, of enormous height and thickness, which had no entrance and could have been about fifty feet in circumference. Then he describes the advent of a huge bird that blacked out the light of the sun as if it were covered by a dense cloud. This bird made Sindbad think of the bird roc of which he had heard tell. The huge bird came down and covered | the egg and 94 Sindbad could see that one of the bird’s legs was as large as the trunk of a tree. It gulped down serpents of unheard-of length.20 19  I wish to thank Professor Proinséas Ní Chatháin for first indicating the similarity between the Jewish and Sindbad traditions. 20  “After that, I arose and stood up, and walked about the island to the right and left, unable to sit in one place. Then I climbed up a lofty tree ; and began to look from it to the right and left ; but saw nought save sky and water, and trees and birds, and islands and sands. Looking however with a scrutinizing eye, there appeared to me on the island a white object, indistinctly seen in the distance, of enormous size. So I descended from the tree, and went towards it, and proceeded in that direction without stopping until I arrived at it ; and lo, it was a large white dome, of great height and large circumference. I drew near to it, and walked around it ; but found no door to it ; and I found that I had not strength nor activity to climb it, on account of its exceeding smoothness. I made a mark at the place where I stood, and went round the dome measuring its circumference ; and lo, it was fifty full paces ; and I meditated upon some means of gaining an entrance into it. The close of the day, and the setting of the sun, had now drawn near ; and behold, the sun was hidden, and the sky became dark, and sun was veiled from me. I therefore imagined that a cloud had come over it ; but this was in the season of summer. So I wondered ; and I raised my head, and, contemplating that object attentively, I saw that it was a bird of enormous size, bulky body, and wide wings, flying in the air ; and this it was that concealed the body of the sun, and veiled it from view upon the island. At this my wonder increased, and I remembered a story which travellers and voyagers had told me long before, that there is, in certain of the islands, a bird of enormous size,

the bird hiruath of the ever-new tongue

523

Even the legend as given in the Arabian Nights suggests that the story concerning a bird of enormous size was old, and presumably widespread. Sindbad knew such a bird under the name of roc. The legends of Sindbad are connected with the quays of the Arabian port of Basarrah (Basra) in the Persian Gulf, open to the sea routes to India and the East. It might be useful to bear these facts in mind in any attempt to identify the sources behind the legends concerning exotic birds, stones and such like.21 called the roc, that feedeth its young ones with elephants. I was convinced, therefore, that the dome which I had seen was one of the eggs of the roc. I wondered at the works of God, and while I was in this state, lo, that bird alighted upon the dome, and brooded over it with its wings, stretching out its legs behind upon the ground ; and it slept over it.” The Arabian Nights entertainment or the Thousand and One Nights, trans. with explanatory notes by E. W. Lane, London, no date, pp.  186-87 ; in translation of N. J. Dawood, The Thousand and One Nights, Harmondsworth, 1954 ; Penguin Classics 1955, pp.  121-22. 21  Direct dependence of the eastern on western tradition seems improbable, although this has been maintained by some scholars with regard to some elements at least of the Sindbad stories. Other scholars argue strongly for influence in the opposite direction. Following on the pioneering study of M. J. Goeje, “La légende de Saint Brandan”, pp. in Actes du VIIIe Congrès International des Orientalistes, Section 1, pp. 43–76, Leiden, 1891, M. Asin Palacios argued for dependence of the St Brendan legend on the Islamic story of Sindbad the Sailor, and of other Irish and Hiberno-Latin compositions of voyage literature and otherworldly journeys besides (e.g. the Vision of Tundal, St  Patrick’s Purgatory) ; see M. Asin Palacios, La escatologia musulmana en la Divina Comedia sequida de la historia y critica de una polemica (Instituto Hispano-Arabe de Cultura, 3rd edition, Madrid, 1961, pp. 312–28 for legends of sea voyages (including the Navigatio Brendani) ; pp. 286–93 for visions of hell including Tundal’s Vision and St  Patrick’s Purgatory ; an abridged English translation in M. Asin Palacios, Islam and the Divine Comedy, translated and abridged by H. Sutherland, London, 1926, pp.  204–16 for sea voyages ; pp. 206–14 for the “Brendan Voyage”. (I wish to thank Dr  D. James for having brought this work of Palacios to my attention.) A different view of the influences on the Navigatio Brendani was presented by Dr  D. Faraci of the Università dell’Aquila (Italy) in a paper read at the First Irish Conference of Medievalists at Maynooth in 1987, “The green Apsidochelone and the woody Jasconius. relationships between Physiologus and the Navigatio sancti Brendani”. (See now Faraci, D., “Navigatio Sancti Brendani and its Relationship with Physiologus”, Romanobarbarica 11, 1991, pp. 261-71.) Any future discussion of the question must take into account the presence in the West at the relatively early date of 750 or so (as instanced by Pal. lat.  68) of at least certain elements of the tradition on exotic birds and jewels.

524 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Postscript 2014 The tradition of hirodius/hiruath has been examined in great detail by John Carey in his extensive notes to paragraph 57 of Tenga Bithnua.22

22  J. Carey, In Tenga Bithnua The Ever-new Tongue (Apocrypha Hiberniae II, Apocalyptica I ; CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2009, pp. 329-36.

| BIBLE TEXT AND ILLUMINATION IN ST GALL, STIFTSBIBLIOTHEK CODEX  51 WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO LONGINUS IN THE CRUCIFIXION SCENE1 Introduction to the St Gall Codex 51 Codex 51 of the Stiftsbibliothek of St  Gall contains the four Gospels in the usual order in Latin but in subdivisions marked off by larger initials, probably intended for liturgical reading (Kenney 1929, p. 649 ; Duft and Meyer 1954, pp. 69–71). The Gospel text ends on page 265 (like most St  Gall manuscripts, this one is numbered by pages, rather than by folios). The existence of these Gospels has been noted for a long time. More attention has been devoted to the illumination of the work than to an examination of the biblical text it carries, although this has not been forgotten. The manuscript and its contents have been and need to be studied from at least three points of view : palaeographical, art-historical and from that of the biblical text. Wallace Martin Lindsay examined the script in 1913 (Lindsay 1913, p. 304) : the script was Irish (half-uncial or large minuscule). The scribe, he wrote, relapses at the conclusion of the text (Lindsay, p. 265) into what we may suppose to have been his everyday hand. This is of the Continental type of minuscule, for Lindsay proof positive that the manuscript was not written in Ireland, for Continental minuscule did not appear in Britain or Ireland until the tenth century. He regretted that neither Chroust nor Steffens, who had published photographs of this manuscript, had selected this most interesting page. Perhaps, he surmised, this was because they thought (which seems unlikely) that the scribe left the text unfinished, and that

1  First published in : Pattern and Purpose in Insular Art (Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Insular Art held at the National Museum Gallery Cardiff, 3-6 September 1998), ed. by M. Redknap  – N. Edwards et al., Oxford, 2001, pp. 191-202.

191

526 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the concluding lines were added later. Lindsay returned to a brief consideration of the manuscript two years later (Lindsay 1915, 483), maintaining basically the same positions : the last three lines of the text, which look like, but can hardly be, a later addition, are in Continental minuscule. He added that a clue to the (Continental) provenance of this manuscript is its use of the contraction usi etc. for “vestri”, etc. – these originally Visigothic/Spanish contractions being found in Continental, but not in Irish manuscripts. In his study of the illumination and the origin of the manuscript in 1916, Ernest Heinrich Zimmermann (1916, 99–102 ; 240–42) took quite a different position. In his opinion, the manuscript contained no indication of a Continental origin. The script was free of Continental influence and the postscript which Lindsay held to be contemporary was much later (end of the tenth century). The abbreviations which Lindsay took as indications of Continental origin were too few to carry conviction and the field had not been sufficiently researched. Zimmermann argued for Irish origin and for a date c.  750–60 (E. Heinrich Zimmermann 1916, pp. 101–02 ; 240). Klemens Löffler (1929, pp. 13–15) reviewed earlier studies of the origin and date of the manuscript, including Zimmermann’s, and noted the predominant opinion favouring an Irish origin and a mid-eighth century date. He returned to the end lines being in Carolingian minuscule, and noted that the minuscule is of the stamp to be found in St  Gall at the time of Grimalt and Hartmut (pp. 841–72 ; 872–83). For him, the likelihood of the end lines of John having been forgotten and later added was as good as excluded. The possibility of St  Gall as place of origin could not be excluded, and at a date of about 850. James Kenney also summarised some of the earlier views on the work (Kenney 1929, p. 649). Jonathan James Graham Alexander included it in his study of Insular manuscripts of the sixth to the ninth centuries (Alexander 1978, no. 44, pp. 66–67). He noted the presence of corrections and pen-trials in Carolingian minuscule (Alexander 1978., 1, p. 128). He assigned it a date of the second half of the eighth century. In his view the manuscript was probably made in Ireland and brought to St  Gall at a later date, no doubt in the ninth century. It was less likely to have been made by Irishmen on the Continent.

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

527

| The most authoritative examination of the manuscript was 192 made by Johannes Duft, librarian of the Stiftsbibliothek (Duft and Meyer 1954). He noted the studies of Zimmermann and Löffler and their differences with regard to the date and place of origin. Duft himself described the last two lines of the text (testimonium eius … libros) as in Carolingian minuscule ; below this in another charter-like, grotesque hand was written : “Amen Amen Dignus est operarius mercede SVA” (in Duft and Meyer 1954, p. 69). The time of origin, Duft remarked, can only be decided on palaeographic and art-historical grounds and it was about, or more probably, later than 750. In his view, MS 51’s place of writing was probably Ireland ; at all events it was the work of an Irish scribe and of at least two book illuminators (in Duft and Meyer, pp. 69–70). On palaeographic and art-historical grounds Zimmermann and Duft opted for a date about 750, or somewhat later. The arguments of Lindsay, Löffler and others for a later date and Continental origin derived mainly from the last two lines of text in Carolingian minuscule (the line below this in a charter-like, grotesque hand, with no bearing on the biblical text, is clearly a later addition). Given the importance of the last two lines it was unfortunate that attention had not been given to details of the biblical text they carried. We may here recall how the manuscript ends. Page 264 has 25 lines of text. On page 265 there are thirteen full lines in the normal hand of the manuscript, ending with an incorrect reading at the second-last verse of John’s Gospel (Jn 21.24) as follows : “et scimus quia testimonium uerum est” (instead of “quia uerum est testimonium eius”). The St  Gall reading is attested in no known manuscript and must be regarded as an error. Why this error, and why the original scribe did not write the final verse (21.25) we cannot say. The last verse is missing from the Greek original of the fourth-century Codex Sinaiticus, but from no other text. We can presume it was in the original of St  Gall 51. In our manuscript the text, with the final verse of the Gospel, is completed in two further lines. This text in minuscule begins (after the erroneous “testimonium uerum est”) with the correct ending of verse 24 : testimonium eius (abbreviated as ei), and continues with verse 25 as follows : “sunt autem (aut, with a stroke over the t) et alia multa quae (que. e caudata) fecit Iesus quae (que, e caudata) si

528 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church scribuntur (Vulgate : scribantur) per (p, with a stroke through the lower part) singula nec ipsum arbitror (second r interlineated) mundum capere eos qui scribundi (sic, – un- ; lege : scribendi) sunt libros”. In these two lines I draw attention to the different abbreviation and contraction system from that of the main text. Thus for autem we have aut, with a stroke over the t, for the horned h as in page 265, line 9 (21.21) (Fig.  1), and in general in St  Gall 51. For per we have p with a bar through the downward shaft, instead of the horned p as in page 265, lines 7 and 12 (second last line of normal text) (21.20, 24) (Fig.  1) and passim in the manuscript. For eius we have ei, with a stroke over the i, while in St  Gall 51 it is generally written in full, as in page 265, line 7 (21.20) (Fig.  1). Quae is written as que, with e caudata, for the usual q with three dots (“therefore”-sign, at Jn 20.33 and passim), although it occasionally has quae (conjoined ae, at Jn 2.24), even e-caudata (1.9), but with much longer “cauda” than here in end lines. We have no explanation as to why the principal scribe lapsed into textual error in the second-last verse of John’s Gospel, or why the final verse (21.25) was omitted. The ending in minuscule, which presumes an awareness of the uncorrected error in verse 24, has all the hallmarks of a text coming from quite a different person than the main scribe. It appears to be an addition, not a continuation, and would seem to have no bearing on the date or place of origin of the main text. The Biblical text What has just been said on the final verses indicates | the impor- 193 tance of paying attention to the biblical text for a satisfactory understanding of the manuscript. To my knowledge, until recently the biblical text has been generally neglected. The Gospels feature in Gregory’s Textkritik (Caspar René Gregory 1900, no.  1923, p. 708). Samuel Berger examined them for his study of the Vulgate in the early Middle Ages (Berger 1893, pp. 56, 416). He observed that they have the mixed Irish type of text, particularly mixed in the first chapters of Matthew, and noted some rare or unique readings : Mt 1.25, filium suum unigenitum ; 2.4, et congregatis omnibus pontificis et scribis populi ; 2.6, domus Iuda … rex ; 2.7, exquessiuit ; 3.3, Hoc enim quod dictum est ; 3.7, ab ira uentura ; 4.18, Transens autem secus mare Galileae ; 10.31, timere eos, multo magis passeribus ; 16.6, Adtendtite uobis et ; Mk 1.42, Inspiciens autem uultu iecit eum ;

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

529

Jn 13.10. non indiget ut lauet nisi pedes lauare (doublet) ; 21.25 is omitted ; end of verse 24 : quod testimonium uerum est. The first serious analysis is that of the sixteen passages (four from each Gospel) examined by Bonifatius Fischer in his four volumes on the Latin Gospels before 900 (Fischer 1988 ; 1989 ; 1990 ; 1991). For this work Fischer collated some 464 manuscripts (mainly from before the year 900), whereas J. Wordsworth and H. J. White in general used only 29 for their critical edition of the Vulgate Gospels, including Matthew (Wordsworth and White 1895). Fischer has given the siglum Hs (Hibernia, St  Gall) to the biblical text of Codex 51. For his examination of the text of Matthew he collates four sections (Probeabschnitte) from it. Mt 2.19– 4.17 ; 8.2–9.8 ; 16.9–17.17 and 26.39–58  +  27.29–46 (taken as a single Abschnitt). In the first of these four sections, he says, the MS St  Gallen 51 is as far removed from the Vulgate text as is the Vetus Latina side of Codex Bezae and scarcely less than the Bobiensis, which has the African text of the Vetus Latina (Fischer 1988, 6*). In a work published in 1990 the present writer carried out a partial collation of chapters from all four Gospels of Codex 51. For all four Gospels, except for St  Matthew (for which Fischer’s partial collation was also used), this was made against the critical edition of the Vulgate alone. This partial collation indicates that in this codex we are in the presence of some curious phenomena, ranging from readings otherwise unattested in the early chapters of Matthew to an extraordinary correspondence throughout John with the Irish manuscripts the Book of Armagh and the Mac Regol Gospels. In preparation for the present study a complete collation of John’s Gospel has been made, except for chapters 8.17–59, chapters 9, 10, 11 and 16, that is, except for four and a half of the Gospel’s twenty-one chapters. This collation was first made against the critical edition of the Vulgate alone, and later also against Fischer’s complete collation for the four pericopes chosen by him for John’s Gospel (Jn 2.18–3.31 ; 7.28–8.16 ; 12.17–13.6 ; 20.1–21.4). This first fuller collation shows that the agreement between St  Gall 51 and Armagh runs right through the Gospel of John, from beginning to end. The same holds for the relation-

530 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ship of Codex 51 to Mac Regol.2 The second stage of the collation against Fischer’s much richer evidence showed that many of the variants of St  Gall Codex 51 were shared by other manuscripts (Irish and sometimes from other text groups) beyond Armagh and Mac Regol. While this indicates the need for caution and for further research before we prove an overall special textual relationship between Codex 51 and Armagh and Mac Regol, the evidence does clearly show that for the Gospel of John Codex Sangallensis 51 has an Irish biblical text. A further, but partial, examination of the text of Matthew’s Gospel also indicates special affiliations with the so-called “Celtic” or “Irish” texts of the Book of Armagh, British Library Egerton 609, the marginal glosses of the Echternach Gospels, the Lichfield Gospels, the Book of Kells and Mac Regol. For the Gospels of Matthew and John we may note interpolations in the crucifixion scene. Especially significant for our purpose is the addition in the Irish textual tradition at Mt 27.49 (McNamara 1990, p. 25). In the Gospel scene the dying Jesus cries out (27.46). “Heli heli lema sabacthani… Some of the bystanders said : heliam uocat iste. And immediately one of them ran, took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, put it on a reed and gave him to drink. (49) Ceteri uero dicebant sine uideamus an ueniat Elias liberans eum (there are variant readings to the verse)”. Here the Irish tradition has an interpolation from Jn 19.34, found in St  Gall 51 as follows : Alius autem (written in full, not with the Irish symbol as is usual in St Gall 51) accepta lancea pupungit latus eius et exit aqua et sanguis. (“Another, however, having taken a lance pierced his side and water and blood came out”).

This interpolation in Matthew is also found in the following Latin Gospel texts, almost all of which are Irish : the texts listed in the paragraph above ; in addition to these (among the texts thus far examined) we have Usserianus Secundus (Irish ; CLA 271) ; the Book of Mulling (Irish, dated to the eighth century ; CLA 276) ; BL Additional 40618 (Ireland, dated to the ninth century ; CLA 179) ; British Library Harley 1023 (Irish, dated to the tenth century), British Library Royal 1  E  VI plus Canterbury, Cathedral Library 2 

I intend to publish this new collation of Codex John.

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

531

Additional 16 (dated to the end of the eighth century ; Kent ; CLA 214). Thus, in Latin Gospel texts, this interpolation is transmitted almost exclusively in Irish manuscripts. The interpolated passage is a variant of the Vetus Latina text of Jn | 19.34, with the inver- 194 sion aqua et sanguis for sanguis et aqua as in the African text of the Vetus Latina. The interpolation itself, however, is a very old one in Gospel texts. It is found in some earlier Greek Gospel books, such as Codex Sinaiticus (London, British Library, Add.  43725), Codex Vaticanus (Vat. graec.  1209), Codex Ephraim rescriptus (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, grec 9) ; Greek minuscule 1010 (dated to the twelfth century), in manuscripts of the Syro-Palestinian translation, in some of the Ethiopic translations, and in John Chrysostom (according to Severus, AD  538). The Greek interpolated text reads : [αὐτόν]. ἄλλος δὲ λαβὼν λογχὴν ἔνυξεν αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὕδωρ καὶ αἷμα (see Jn 19.34). (“another taking a lance pricked/stabbed his side and water and blood came out”) (as against Jn 19.34 : “One of the soldiers pricked/stabbed [Jesus’] side with his lance and immediately there came out blood and water”).

We have an extremely significant interpolation in St  Gall 51 (chiefly from Mt 27.51 or Mk 15.38) at Jn 19.30, again at the account of the death of Christ, added after the words “He handed over the spirit” : 19.30 (tradidit spiritum). “Cum ergo expirasset uelum templi scisum est a summo usque deorsum. (Iudei ergo…)” (“When, then, he had breathed his last, the veil of the Temple was rent from the top right down to the bottom”).

This addition is known otherwise in Latin only in Irish Gospel texts : in the Vulgate texts Armagh, Mac Regol, BL Egerton 609, BL Harley 1023, Harley 1802 (Gospels of Mael Brigte, 1138), Cadmug Gospels (Fulda) ; in the Vetus Latina only in Usserianus Primus, Irish. It is also found in some late (twelfth- and fourteenth-century) Greek minuscule texts, although it occurs as well in earlier Syriac and Syro-Palestinian translations (see the apparatus to Jn 19.30 in Merk 1948 and Tischendorf 1872).

532 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church With regard to these interpolated passages in the crucifixion scenes in the Gospels of Matthew and John, we may legitimately ask whether they have been preserved by textual transmission alone, or whether their presence is due to the prominence of the crucifixion scene in Irish devotion. The textual evidence for John’s Gospel in particular indicates that the St Gall codex 51 was written in Ireland or copied from an Irish exemplar, most probably the former. The significance of the St  Gall manuscript for a knowledge of the Bible text in Ireland, and among Irish on the Continent, can only be assessed after a fuller examination of the whole evidence. In this paper we will concentrate on the Crucifixion scene on page 266 of the St  Gall Codex (Fig ;  6), with reference to the other miniature facing it on page 267 (Fig ;  7). The biblical text, with the ending in Carolingian minuscule, we may recall ends on page 265. Crucifixion scene : Longinus and Stephaton in Christian art and in Irish art All we need examine here on the Crucifixion scene in Christian art are those exemplars which have a bearing on the understanding of the miniature in Codex Sangallensis 51. Of these the principal earlier depictions are those in the Rabbula Gospels, in a fresco of Santa Maria Antiqua, and in a miniature in a ninth-century Gospel manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. In the Rabbula Gospels (now in the Biblioteca Laurentiana, Florence), created in 586 in the monastery of Zaqpa in Mesopotamia by the Greek monk Rabbula, we have the well-known depiction of the Crucifixion (Fig.  2), with Christ clad in the colobium (a sleeveless garment signifying dignity, reaching to the knees or ankles, in this case to the ankles). At his right is depicted the lance-bearer (identified by the name Loginos) piercing his side, and on his left the (unnamed) sponge-bearer. There is a similar depiction of the Crucifixion in a fresco in the Chapel of Theodotus, in the church Santa Maria Antiqua in Rome (Fig.  3). It is from the time of Pope Zacharias (741–52), and is under Greek and eastern influence (de Grüneisen 1911 ; Romanelli and Nordhagen 1964, p. VII). Again, the lance-bearer (identified by the name Longinus) is on Jesus’ right and the unnamed sponge-bearer on the left. The

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

533

wound in Christ’s right side is visible, with two streams pouring from it, the stronger one towards Longinus’s face, but not reaching it (depicted in the reproduction in de Grüneisen 1911). Another early related example occurs in the Gospel book in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat.  257 (Fig.  8) (already noted by Gougaud 1920, 135 ; it is Qd of Fischer’s sigla, where Q designates Franco-Saxon manuscripts, with their chief centre as Saint Amand). This Gospel book, written in part in golden letters, is a ninth-century manuscript illuminated in the style of the Franco-Saxon school (Lauer 1939, pp. 94–5). It has a full-page miniature of the Crucifixion (Louandre 1858b, pl.  14), with Longinus at Christ’s right and Stephaton on his left. Longinus is depicted piercing Christ’s right side. Four streams (of blood ?) pour from the wound, the lowermost striking Longinus’s knee, the uppermost his face at eye-level. There is a description of the miniature in Louandre (1858a, pp. 36–8), with special interest in the clothing. The dress worn by Longinus (called the “executioner” by Louandre) and the sponge-bearer recalls Gaulish dress ; their long-sleeved tunic is an imitation of the | ancient sagum, and the clothes cov- 195 ering their thighs and legs resemble the Gaulish breeches. It can be noticed that Longinus wears a kind of trousers buttoned at the legs. In Louandre’s opinion, there are good grounds for believing that these items of clothing are the exact reproduction of some civil dress of the ninth century. From our point of view what is noteworthy is the blood issuing from Christ’s wound on to Longinus, one of the streams reaching his eyes, although there seems to be no indication of any healing. Both Longinus’s eyes are open, and seem healthy. Unlike the St  Gall miniature, and other Irish Crucifixion scenes, Longinus is on Jesus’s right. The Crucifixion scene in Irish iconography has been extensively studied and written on by Gougaud and others (Gougaud 1920 (extensive, almost exhaustive, | treatment) ; Henry 1965, 1970 ; Henderson 1987, 196 80–8 (“The Iconography of the Last Judgment-Crucifixion”) ; Ó Floinn 1987 ; O’Reilly 1987–8 ; Harbison 1992, vol.  1, 273–86). The Crucifixion scene in Codex St Gall 51 and its context The illumination of the manuscript consists of Evangelist portraits with initial pages opposite, St  Matthew (page 2), “Lib” (page 3) ; St  Mark (page 78), “Ini” (page 79) ; St  Luke (page 128),

534 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church “Q” (page 129) ; St  John (page 208), “In” (page 209) (Alexander 1978, no.  44, 66–7). In addition, a carpet page (page 6) precedes the genealogy of Christ with the initials “Xpi” (page 7). At the end, after St John’s Gospel (which ends on page 265) there are two miniatures  – one of the Crucifixion (page 266), faced by another (page 267) which Alexander calls the Lord’s Advent (1978, pp. 66–7). Alexander (1978, p. 67) describes the Crucifixion miniature as follows (with references to other manuscripts studied by him in the same volume) : In the Crucifixion miniature (p.  266) the Christ is shown swathed in the colubium as in Eastern iconography (cf. the Durham Gospel Book, no.  10). Stephaton is on the left holding up the sponge and Longinus with the spear is on the right with the blood from Christ’s side spurting into his eye. A pair of frontal half-length angels holding books are on either side above the arms of the cross. The composition is very close to that of the Durham Gospel Book. A Crucifixion miniature was planned for the Book of Kells (no.  52). The scene is also shown on the Southampton Psalter (no.  74).

In Alexander’s opinion the manuscript St  Gall 51, which he dates to the second half of the eighth century, was probably made in Ireland and brought to St  Gall at a later date, no doubt in the ninth century (1978, p. 67) ; it was less likely to have been made by an Irishman on the Continent and was the most important of the later Gospel books generally accepted as Irish. The Southampton Psalter (Cambridge, St John’s College MS C. 9 (59)) was written in Ireland, probably in the early eleventh century. It has the Crucifixion miniature on fol.  38v, before Psalm 51, at the beginning of the “second fifty”. In | the Southampton Psalter (Fig. 17.4), Long- 197 inus is on the right (on Christ’s left), as in St  Gall 51. No blood is issuing from Christ’s side. The Durham Gospel Book (Durham, Cathedral Library, MS A.II.17, fols  2–102 and Cambridge, Magdalene College Pepysian MS 2981), of Northumbrian provenance (possibly Lindisfarne), is from the late seventh or early eighth century. Alexander thus describes the Crucifixion miniature as follows (1978, pp. 40–41) : The end of St.  Matthew is framed (f.  38 3) by a broad panel with projecting squares at the centre of each side in a cross shape…

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

535

The frame is filled with dotted interlace. On the verso, preceding the chapters to St.  Mark, is a full-page miniature of the Crucifixion (f.  38 3v). The Christ is bearded and swathed in a long robe (colobium). To left and right below the cross are Longinus and Stephaton, the former piercing Christ’s side with the lance, the latter holding the sponge to His lips. Above the Cross on either side are six-winged Seraphim.

This miniature differs from St  Gall 51, the Southampton Psalter and other Irish representations of the Crucifixion in the positioning of Longinus and Stephaton. The Durham miniature has inscriptions linking the Crucifixion scene with New Testament texts and with Christian life (Henderson 1987, pp. 81–88). Stephaton and Longinus stand on either side of Christ on the cross on almost all the Irish representations of the Crucifixion. This is also the case in the vast majority of non-Irish Crucifixion scenes of the first millennium. As Harbison notes (Harbison 1992, vol. 1, p. 277), in most of the examples outside of Ireland, Stephaton with the vinegar is on the right (facing the viewer) ; on Christ’s left, where he is found in the Irish examples on the crosses at Moone, Castledermot South, Ullard and Arboe. The only non-Irish examples which place Stephaton on the left are found in England and Russia – in Russia in a silver plate found in the Perm (Russia), now in the Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg. In the St  Gall 51 Gospels (as in the Southampton Psalter) Stephaton’s pole has a crescent-shaped vessel on top, which, Harbison says, finds its closest parallel in the Perm plate (Harbison 1992, vol.  1, 277). We may note, of course, that in one branch of Irish literary tradition Longinus pierced Christ’s right side, and that Christ’s arm-pit (not his heart) was pierced (thus, for instance, the Old Irish Tract on the Mass in the Stowe Missal, a text noted further below). With regard to the Crucifixion miniature in St  Gall 51 we should note in particular the liquid (blood ; blood and wine ; blood and water ?) coming from Christ’s pierced side to Longinus’s right eye. Longinus’s right eye is clearly depicted as open and healthy, while the left is a slit rather than with an eyeball. Longinus is represented as holding the lance firmly with both hands. In this the difference with the Southampton Psalter is noticeable. In the overall plan of this St Gall codex the Crucifixion miniature (on the left, on page 266) was intended to be viewed in conjunction

536 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church with the other miniature of the Last Judgement facing it on page 267. Alexander (1978, p. 67) describes this miniature as follows : In the miniature on the opposite recto [to the Crucifixion picture] (page 267) the half-length Christ, above in the centre, blesses with His right hand and holds a cross and a book. On either side is a full-length angel blowing a trumpet. Below twelve half-length figures with haloes and books and looking up represent the twelve Apostles. The matching narrow frames filled with interlace and key pattern emphasize the connection between the two pictures. This is an early stage in the evolution of the iconography of the Last Judgement (cf. the Turin Gospel Book [Alexander 1987], no. 61). Christ suffering as Man is contrasted with His triumphant return as Lord and Judge.

Longinus and “Longinus the Blind” in later Irish tradition The earliest evidence we have on Longinus as a blind person and on his healing comes from the St  Gall miniature and the Poem of Blathmac, the two texts generally regarded as of eighth-century origin. Irish evidence on Longinus became more plentiful in later centuries, although the date of origin of the material in these later texts remains to be determined. In the Old Irish tract on the Mass in the Stowe Missal, added in the early ninth century, with reference to the symbolism of the particle which the priest breaks off from the wafer during the Mass, we read : The particle that is cut off from the bottom of the half which is on the (priest’s) left hand is the figure of the wounding with the lance (lágin) in the armpit of the right side ; for westwards was Christ’s face on the Cross, to wit, contra ciuitatem, and eastwards was the face of Longinus ; what to him was the left to Christ was the right (Stokes and Strachan 1903, p. 254).

The Irish Passion of Longinus, found in the Leabhar Breac and other manuscripts, probably dates from the second half or end of the eleventh century (Atkinson 1887, 60–4 ; 300–4 ; Vendryes 1911, p. 351 ; Latin text Acta Sanctorum 1865, pp. 377, 379–80). In general the Irish text of the Passion of Longinus seems to follow the Latin of the Passio Longini (McNamara 1975, p. 81, no.  69), apart from the very beginning. In some earlier manuscripts of the Latin Passio, the text begins :

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

537

| In the days of Our Lord Jesus Christ, there was a certain soldier, a Centurion (miles Centurio), by name Longinus, who at that time was standing by the cross ; at the command of Pontius Pilate he struck the side of the Lord with a lance, and seeing the signs which occurred (signa quae fiebant)  – the sun darkened, and the earth quaking – he believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, and striking his breast said in a loud voice : “This is truly the Son of God”. And afterwards, withdrawing from the army he was instructed in the precepts of the Lord. (Acta Sanctorum 1865, p. 377 ; other Latin texts, omitting the word centurio, Acta Sanctorum 1865, p. 379).

The beginning of the Irish text translates as follows : When Christ was being crucified by the Jews, one of the soldiers who was at his crucifixion, called Cennturus, and also Longinus, came and brought a long spear (laigin) in his hand, with which he wounded Christ in his side and split his heart in twain (co ro-ghon Crist i n-a shliss di, 7 scoiltis a cride ar dó), so that blood and wine (fuil 7 fín) came out (Atkinson 1887, pp. 60, 300 ; note “blood and wine”, as in Blathmac’s poem  – not “blood and water”).

In a manner more faithful to the Latin, the Irish text goes on to speak of the great darkness that followed : the sun darkened, the rocks rent, the graves opened. Then we read : When, therefore, Longinus saw that great miracle [mírbuil ; translating Latin signa ? or referring to the blood and wine from Christ’s wounded side ?) he forthwith believed in the one God, Jesus Christ, and quitted his worldly military services.

Longinus is mentioned by name in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus (Acts of Pilate) 16,7, as the soldier who pierced Christ’s side with a lance. We have an Irish translation (or perhaps Irish translations) of the Gospel of Nicodemus, made probably in the twelfth century (Hughes 1991, where it is dated to the twelfth century, following Dottin 1913, p. xviii). The Irish translation makes no mention of Longinus in the rendering of 16.7. Earlier, however, at the account of the death of Christ in chapter 10 (where there is no mention of Longinus in the Gospel of Nicodemus [Acta Pilati]) the Irish text reads (Hughes 1991, pp. 16, 17) : Then Jesus said on the cross : “I am thirsty”. The soldiers [lit. horsemen] filled a vessel with vinegar and gall and gave it to Jesus to drink. Then a certain soldier called Longinus i.e. blind

198

538 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church one (loinginus .i. dall) came forward and thrust his lance (buile da gaí) into the side (i slis) of Jesus. There rushed out at once two streams from his side  – a stream of blood and a stream of water  – and they rushed along the shaft to his hand so that when he put his hand on his forehead, there appeared two eyes and he believed in Jesus thereafter.

There is also a more popular account on Longinus in Leabhar Breac page 159b, lines 30 to end (as yet unpublished and undated). It comes at the end of a piece on the Holy Places and is headed “Longinus  … 7 egitianus”. It ends saying that Egitianus … uel cefaton (= Stephaton) was the second man at the Cross. In the poem “Caoin tú féin, a dhuine bhoicht” (“Mourn for yourself, O unfortunate man”) (O’Rahilly 1977, no.  65, p. 222 who dates it to the seventeenth century at the earliest), the reader is asked to lament for Christ, his two hands and his two feet, ‘s an croidhe do sgoilt an Dall, “and the heart that the blind one split”. An Dall, “the blind one”, in later Irish has become a name given to Longinus. The healing of the blind Longinus by blood from Christ’s side in Blathmac’s poem to Mary (eighth century) The poems of Blathmac, edited by James Carney (1964), are presented in the manuscript as follows : “It is Blathmac son of Cú Brettan son of Congus of the Fir Rois has made this devoted offering to Mary and her Son”. The Fir Roiss are of the Airgialla ; they were located in Co. Monaghan and extended into Co. Louth (Carney 1964, p. xiv, n.  18). Carney (1964, xiv) notes that fortunately Blathmac is genealogically identifiable. Blathmac’s father, Cú Brettan son of Congus of the Fir Roiss, is represented in the saga of the Battle of Allen (718) as the only prominent adherent of the high-king, Fergal, son of Mael Dúin, to escape alive, and he is shown as composing some quatrains on the battle. Cú Brettan’s death is recorded in the Annals of Ulster at 739 (= 740) : Cú bretan mac Congusso mortuus est. His name is found in the genealogy of the Uí Ségáin (BB [Book of Ballymote] 114  fol.  12) : “Ainbith m. Canannan m. Tigernaich m. Donngaili m. Duin[n] Bo m. Con Bretan m. Congasa m. Murgiusa…” Donn Bó, son of Cú Brettan, mentioned in this pedigree, was a brother of Blathmac. According to the Four Masters, Congal, lord of Airthera, was slain in 743 by Donn Bo, son of Cú Brettan ; and it is doubtless the same

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

539

Donn Bó who was slain in the battle of Emain Macha (Annals of Ulster 758  =  759). With his father’s death about 740 and his brother’s about 759 the period of Blathmac is well established. We may take it that the period of his maturity, and consequently of the composition of these poems, fell at the latest somewhere in the years 750–70. Blathmac describes his poem as a keening, a keening of Christ in union with Mary his mother (quatrain 1). He speaks of the conception of Christ, of his public life, his Passion and Crucifixion, of the events at Calvary, in which context he describes the piercing of Christ’s side as follows : | (q.  55) “When they thought that Jesus could be approached, Longinus then came to wound him with the spear (dïa guin cosind láigin)”. (q.  56) “The king’s son of the seven holy heavens, when his heart was pierced (o fu-rócbath a chride) wine was spilled upon the pathways (do-rórtad fín fu roenu ; i.e. the declivities of his body ?), the blood of Christ (flowing) through his gleaming sides”. (q. 57) “The flowing blood from the side of the dear Lord baptized the head of Adam, for the shaft of the cross of Christ had aimed at his mouth”. (58) “By the same blood  – it was a fair occasion !  – he instantly cured the fully blind man (is trait ron-ícc in n-ógdall) as he openly with his two hands was plying the lance (ossé díb dornnaib co glé/ oc imbeirt inna láigne)”. (After Carney 1964, as changed by Dooley 1997)

As already noted, as in this poem, so also in the Leabhar Breac text of the Passion of Longinus (Atkinson 1887, pp. 60, 300) we are told that “blood and wine came out”, flowed from Christ’s wounded side. Did the topos of Longinus the Blind One originate in Irish tradition ? A question arises as to the origins of the topos of the miraculous healing of Longinus. Did it originate in Ireland, or could it have come to Ireland from the east (Greek Church, Syria) through Rome or even Spain ? The miracle is richly attested in European medieval translations of the Gospel of Nicodemus from the twelfth century onwards (Fabrizio Beggiato 1996, pp. 6–7). The legend seems

199

540 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church to have been popular in Wales and Brittany. L’aveugle Longin is mentioned in a French Chanson de geste (1210 ; Peebles 1911). In an examination of the origins of the tradition (Longinus, the blind centurion healed by blood and wine/water from Jesus side) it will be as well to consider the individual elements involved. The earliest iconographic evidence we have for the healing of Longinus of physical blindness seems to be the portrait in Codex St  Gall 51 (probably of the eighth century), which has been the subject of this study. While it is not certain, it seems likely that quatrain 58 of the Poem of Blathmac also speaks of healing from physical, not mere spiritual, blindness. If so, this is the earliest attested literary evidence of this tradition, recorded in the mideighth century, if one follows the generally accepted date for Blathmac’s poem. With regard to the liquid (blood, blood and water, or blood and wine) coming from Christ’s wounded side towards or onto Longinus, this is present in the well-known fresco of Santa Maria Antiqua, Rome (741–52) and in the Gospel Book in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat.  257 (ninth century). The same theme, apparently, is to be found on the shaft of the west face of the South Cross at Clonmacnoise (Fig.  5) (Harbison 1992, vol.  2, fig.  156 ; vol.  3, fig.  899). Here, according to Harbison, we have the figure of Christ in comparatively low false relief placed against the background of a cross. Beneath Christ’s right arm is Stephaton, who holds up on a pole a sponge or vessel containing the hyssop. Facing him on the other side of Christ in the lower right-hand corner of the panel is the figure of Longinus. In his left hand he holds the spear with which he pierces Christ’s left side. The piercing of the left, rather than the right, side is in keeping with most of the Irish high crosses. What is unusual in this Clonmacnoise cross, however, is the representation of two streams of blood which spout out from Christ’s left side onto the face of Longinus, who according to tradition, was thereby healed of his blindness (thus Harbison 1992, vol.  1, p. 56 ; see also Harbison 1988, pp. 179–80). The South Cross dates probably from the mid-ninth century, possibly erected for the king Maelsechnaill who reigned 846–62. | The question arises as to the possibility of foreign influence 200 on the Irish texts witnessing to the healing of Longinus from his blindness. Commenting on the blood from Christ’s wound

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

541

pouring on to the face of Longinus in the South Cross, Clonmacnoise, illustrating the apocryphal tradition in the Blathmac Poems, Harbison notes that since this is found not only in the Codex  Gall 51 Crucifixion but also on a mid-eighth century fresco from Santa Maria Antiqua in Rome (with reference to Schiller 1972, fig.  328), and possibly on a tenth-century ivory from the collections of the Provinzial Museum (now Rheinisches Landesmuseum), Bonn, it is probably not an Irish feature, but one borrowed from Rome (Harbison 1992, vol.  1, pp. 281–82). Harbison favours a ninth-century date for Codex St  Gall 51 (Harbison 1988, p. 180 ; Harbison 1984b, p. 15). He notes that the Irish poet Blathmac, who according to him, probably lived in the ninth century, gives us in a long poem that sounds suspiciously like the description of an extensive Carolingian fresco cycle  – not necessarily in Ireland, where churches of the time were perhaps too small to accommodate fresco cycles, but more likely in Rome – or perhaps in France (Harbison 1984a, p. 469, and note 181). Harbison instances the mention in Blathmac’s poem of such fresco themes as the stoning of Stephen, Cyprian and Cornelius, the seven sons of Machabeus and Quiricus. On this one may remark that while the idea of Blathmac’s dependence on a European original is attractive, it is difficult to accept the ninth-century date Harbison wishes to assign to both the St  Gall manuscript and to Blathmac’s poem. We have seen above that the basis for so dating Codex St  Gall 51 (namely the ending of the text of John’s Gospel) has little to commend it, and, I may add, both the language of the poem and the genealogy of Blathmac argue in favour of an eighth-century date for this composition. Beggiato opts for an Irish origin for the topos of the belief in the healing of Longinus. He notes Irish creativity in such matters (Beggiato 1996, pp. 7–8). Ann Dooley also believes in an Irish origin : the Blathmac passage is but an indication of the artful weaving of different strands which Blathmac has brought together in his poem. She notes that in the poem the soldier who pierced the side of Christ with a lance, fused with the Roman centurion who testified to Christ’s divinity after Christ’s death, is named Longinus and described as having been cured of his blindness (1997, p. 366). She further writes (1997, p. 368) :

542 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The quatrains quoted above (qq.  20–21) combine, in his [Blathmac’s] mature yet impassioned expositional style, the apocryphal theme of Longinus with that of Adam’s baptism at Calvary. They create an emotive link with the multi-faceted image of the wounded Christ in majesty, who resumes in himself the whole of time and the cosmos and who, by his Passion, initiates the sacramental acts of the present age of salvation history. A link with the E[vangelium] N[icodemi] as a source is unlikely because the set of exegetical and meditative relations active here is much more complex than is suggested by the unremarkable centurion material in the EN.

She poses the question whether Blathmac’s understanding of the story of Longinus might not be governed by an iconographic model : in numerous Irish depictions of the Crucifixion, as in the poem, the lance-bearer grasps the spear firmly with both hands. While the earliest witnesses known for this topos are Irish, and probably both contemporary and of the eighth century, the question of the roots of the belief remain to be determined. One possibility is that the original lies in Jn 19.37 : “uidebunt in quem transfixerunt” (“they shall look on him whom they have pierced”), or in the variant in the Book of Armagh “quem transfixerunt uidebunt” (“they shall see the one they have pierced”). However, the belief may have originated in a tradition that Longinus (the centurion) was cured from spiritual blindness, coming from paganism to belief in Christ. Such an origin would be in keeping with the Passion of Longinus, found in Irish translation in the Leabhar Breac (page 181b, 46–64 ; Irish translation, eleventh century ? ; Atkinson 1998, 60 ; 300), already noted, which says that when Longinus saw the miracles that followed Christ’s death and the piercing of his side he believed in the one God, Jesus Christ. Such an origin is favoured by Louis Gougaud (1920, pp. 134–35). Possibly this and other sources besides stand behind the origins of the cure of Longinus. One worth mentioning is a homily once attributed to John Chrysostom (c.  347–407), now recognised as the work of Severian of Gabala (c.  400 ; see Voicu 1983–84) on “Zeal and the man born blind” (Patrologia Graeca 59, 543–54). The author passes from consideration of the man born blind to the good thief, who came to believe in Christ on the cross. He needed baptism for salvation, and was baptized by the blood and water from Christ’s wounded side. Commenting on Jn 19.54 (“blood and

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

543

water came out”) the homilist says : “The blood and water did not come out in the sense that they just flowed ; they came with such force that they sprayed the body of the thief” (Patrologia Graeca 59, 553–54). It would be easy to transfer a belief such as this from the good thief to the centurion, and the healing from spiritual to healing from physical blindness. The traditions behind the Blind Longinus tradition may have been many and complex. Future research may help clarify them. From some such literary and iconographic evidence early Irish tradition could have reached its own position with regard to Longinus. In any event the earliest attest|ation we have, whether 201 literary or iconographic, of the healing of Longinus from his physical blindness comes from early Ireland, represented by what appear to be two eighth-century witnesses. Bibliography Acta Sanctorum 1865, Acta Sanctorum (Bollandists), March vol.  2, ed. by G. Henschenius  – D. Paperbrochius, Paris and Rome. Alexander, J. J. G. 1978, Insular Manuscripts 6th to the 9th Century. A Survey of the Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles, Vol.  1, London. Atkinson, R. 1887, The Passions and the Homilies from the Leabhar Breac, Dublin. Beggiato, F. 1996, “Origine e diffusione del topos leggendario-narrativo del ‘Perdono di Longino’ nelle letterature romanze”. Paper read at the III Colloquio internazionale medievo romanzo e orientale : “Il viaggio dei testi”, Venice. Typescript. Later published. Beggiato, F., “Origini e diffusione del topos leggendario-narrativo del ‘Perdono di Longino’ nelle letterature romanze”, in Medioevo romanzo e orientale : Il viaggio dei testi, III Colloquio internazionale (Venezia, 10-13 ottobre 1996), Soveria Mannelli, 1999, pp. 217-28. Beggiato, F., “Il mito di Longino dall’Irlanda all’Europa continentale”, in Gli echi della terra. Cultura celtica in Friuli : dati materiali e momenti dell’immaginario, Pisa, 2002, pp. 85-92. Berger, S. 1893, Histoire de la Vulgate, Paris (reprinted 1961, New York). Bourke, C. 1993, “Chronology of Irish crucifixion plaques”, in The Age of Migrating Ideas. Early Medieval Art in Northern Britain and Ireland, ed. by R. M. Spearman  – J. Higgitt, Edinburgh, pp. 175-81.

544 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Carney, J. (ed.) 1964, The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan (= Irish Texts Society 47), Dublin. Cecchelli, C. 1959, “The iconography of the Laurentian Syriac Gospels”, in Cecchelli  – G. Furlani  – M. Salmi, pp. 23–82. Cecchelli, C. – Furlani, G. – Salmi, M. (eds) 1959, The Rabbula Gospels. Facsimile Edition of the Miniatures of the Syriac Manuscript Plut. I, 56 in the Medicaean-Laurentian Library, Olten, Lausanne. Chroust, A. 1905, Monumenta Palaeographica. Denkmäler der Schreibkunst des Mittelalters, I. Abt. Schrifttafeln in lateinischer und deutscher Sprache. I. Serie, III.  Bd., Lief.  19. (= Ser.  1, Vol.  3, fasc.  19), Munich. CLA see Lowe, E.A. De Waal, A. 1887, “Die apokryphen Evangelien in der altchristlichen Kunst”, Römische Quartalschrift 1, pp. 173ff. Dooley, A. 1997, “The Gospel of Nicodemus in Ireland”, in The Medieval Gospel of Nicodemus. Texts, Intertexts, and Contexts (Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 158), ed. by I. Zbigniew, Tempe, Arizona, pp. 361-401. Dottin, G. 1913, Manuel d’Irlandais Moyen, Paris. Duft, J.  – Meyer, P. 1954, The Irish Miniatures in the Abbey Library of St Gall, Olten, Berne, Lausanne. Fischer, B. 1988–1991, Die lateinischen Evangelien bis zum 10. Jahrhundert (Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel) : 1988, I.  Varianten zu Matthäus ; 1989, II.  Varianten zu Markus ; 1990, III.  Varianten zu Lukas ; 1991, IV.  Varianten zu Johannes, Freiburg. Gougaud, L. 1920, “The earliest Irish representations of the Crucifixion”, Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 50, pp. 128–39. Gregory, C. R. 1900, Textkritik des Neuen Testament. Vol.  1, Leipzig. Grillmeier, A, 1956, Der Logos am Kreuz, Munich. Grillmeier, B.  – Hesbert, R. J. 1940, Le Problème de la Transfixion du Christ dans les Traditions bibliques, patristiques, iconographique, liturgique et musicale, Paris, Tournai. Grondijs, L. H. 1960, Autour de l’Iconographie Byzantine du Crucifié mort sur la Croix (Bibliotheca Byzantina Bruxellensis 1), Utrecht, 1950 ; Leiden, 1960. Grüneisen, W. de 1911, Sainte-Marie Antique, Rome. Gurevich, W. 1957, “Observations on the iconography of the wound on Christ’s side with special reference to its position”, J. Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 20, pp. 358–62.

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

545

Gwynn, J. (ed.) 1913, Liber Ardmachanus. The Book of Armagh edited with Introduction and Appendixes, Dublin, London. Harbison, P. 1984a, “Earlier Carolingian narrative iconography – ivories, manuscripts, frescoes and Irish high crosses”, Jahrbuch des römisch-germanischen Zentral-museums 31, pp. 455–71. Harbison, P. 1984b, “The bronze crucifixion plaque said to be from St  John’s (Rinnagan), near Athlone”, J. Ir. Archaeol. 2, pp. 1–17. Harbison, P. 1987, “The date of the crucifixion slabs from Duvillaun More and Inishkea North, Co. Mayo”, in E. Rynne (ed.), pp. 73–91. Harbison, P. 1988, “The shield of Longinus”, in Bathron. Beiträge zur Architektur und verwandten Künsten (Festschrift Heinrich Drerup, Saarbrücker Studien zur Archäologie und Alten Geschichte 3), Saarbrücken, pp. 179–83. Harbison, P. 1992, The High Crosses of Ireland. An Iconographical and Photographic Survey, 3  Vols (Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Forschungs-institut für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Monographien 17, pp. 1–3), Bonn. Harbison, P. 1994, Irish High Crosses with the Figure Sculptures Ex­plained, Drogheda. Harbison, P. 1999, The Golden Age of Irish Art. The Medieval Achievement 600–1200, London. Henderson, G. 1987, From Durrow to Kells. The Insular Gospel-Books 650–800, London. Henry, F. 1965, Irish Art in the Early Christian Period to A.D. 800, London. Henry, F. 1967, Irish Art during the Viking Invasions, 800–1020 A.D., London. Henry, F. 1970, Irish Art in the Romanesque Period, 1020–1170 A.D., London. Hesbert, R.-J. 1940, Le Problème de la Transfixion du Christ : dans les Traditions bibliques, patristique, iconographique, liturgique et musicale, Paris. Hughes, I. (ed.) 1991, Stair Nicoméid. The Irish Gospel of Nicodemus (Irish Texts Society 55), London. Kenney, J. F. 1929, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland, vol.  1. Ecclesiastical, New York (later reprints : Dublin). Koehler, W. 1972, Buchmalerei des frühen Mittelalters : Fragmente und Entwürfe aus dem Nachlass, ed. by E. Kitzinger  – F. Mütherich, Munich.

546 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Lauer, P. 1939, Bibliothéque Nationale. Catalogue général des Manuscrits latins. Tome 1er (Nos  1–1438), Paris. Leclercq, H. 1931, “Marie Antique (Sainte)”, Dictionnaire d”Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie 10, col.  2078. Lindsay, W. M. 1913, “Irish cursive script”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 9, pp. 301–08. Lindsay, W. M. 1915, Notae Latinae. An Account of Abbreviations in Latin MSS. of the Early Minuscule Period (c. 750–850), Cambridge. Löffler, K. 1929, “Die Sankt Galler Schreibschule in der 2. Hälfte des 8. Jahrhunderts”, in Palaeographia Latina, part 6 (St Andrews University Publications 28), ed. by W. M. Lindsay, Oxford, pp. 5–68. Louandre, C. 1857–58, Les Arts somptuaires ; Histoire du Costume et de l’Ameublement et des Arts et Industries qui s’y rattachent. Introduction générale et Texte explicitatif, Paris. Louandre, C.  1857, Vol.  1. Introduction générale, Paris. Louandre, C.  1858a, Vol.  2. Texte explicatif, Paris. Louandre, C.  1858b, Vol.  1. Planches du Ve au XIVe siècle, Paris. Louandre, C,  1858c, Vol.  2. Planches du XVe au XVIIe siècle, Paris. Lowe, E.A. 1934–71, Codices Latini Antiquiores, vols.  I–XI, Supplement, Oxford. McGurk, P. 1961, Latin Gospel Books from A.D. 400 to A.D. 800 (= Publications de Scriptorium 5), Paris, Brussels, Antwerp, Amsterdam. McNamara, M. 1975, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin. McNamara, M. 1990, Studies on Texts of Early Irish Latin Gospels (A.D. 600–1200) (= Instrumenta Patristica 20), Steenbrugge, Dordrecht. McNamara, M. 1995, “The Celtic and mixed Gospel text : some recent contributions and centennial reflections”, Filologia Mediolatina 2, pp. 69–108. Manning, C. 1998, Clonmacnoise Co. Offaly (2nd edition), Clonmacnoise. Martin, J. R. 1955, “The Dead Christus on the Cross in Byzantine Art”, in Late Classical and Medieval Studies in Honour of Albert Mathias Friend Jr, ed. by K. Wuittzmann, with the assistance of S. Der Nersessia, et. al., Princeton, pp. 189–96. Merk, A. 1948, Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine, 8th edition, Rome. Micheli, G.-L. 1936, “Recherches sur les manuscrits Irlandais decorés de Saint-Gall et de Reichenau”, Revue Archéologique (6th ser.) 7, pp. 193–207.

202

bible text and illumination in st gall

51

547

Nees, L. 1993, “The Irish Manuscripts at St  Gall and their Continental Affiliations”, in Sangallensia in Washington : the Arts and Letters in Medieval and Baroque St Gall viewed from the Late Twentieth Century, ed. by J. King, New York, pp. 95–132, 314–24. Ochsenbein, P.  – Schmucki, C.  – Von Euw, A. 1990, Irische Buchkunst : die irischen Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek St Gallen und das Faksimile des Book of Kells, St  Gall. Ó Floinn, R. 1987, “Irish Romanesque crucifix figures”, in E. Rynne (ed.), pp. 168–88. O’Rahilly, T. (ed.) 1977, Measgra Dánta. Miscellaneous Irish Poems II, Cork. O’Reilly, J. 1987–8, “Early medieval text and image : the wounded and exalted Christ”, Peritia 6–7, pp. 72–118. Peebles, R. J. 1911, The Legend of Longinus in Ecclesiastical Tradition and English Literature and its Connection with the Grail (Bryn Mawr Monographs 9), Baltimore. Porter, A. K. 1931, The Crosses and Culture of Ireland, Newhaven, London, Oxford. Romanelli, P.  – Nordhagen, P. J. 1964, S. Maria Antiqua, Rome. Ryan, M. (ed.) 1983, Treasures of Ireland. Irish Art 3000 B.C.–1500 A.D., Dublin. Rynne, E. (ed.) 1987, Figures from the Past. Studies on Figurative Art in Christian Ireland in Honour of Helen M. Roe, Dun Laoghaire. Sauser, E. 1966, Frühchristliche Kunst. Sinnbild und Glaubensaussage, Innsbruck, Vienna, Munich. Schiller, G. 1968, Iconographie der christlichen Kunst. 2. Die Passion Jesu Christi, Gütersloh. Sinthern, P. (ed.), 1925, Roma Sacra. A series of one hundred and fiftytwo views in colors, Vienna, Munich, Biel. Steffens, F. 1929, Lateinische Paläographie, 3rd edition, Berlin, Leipzig. Stokes, W.  – Strachan, J. (eds) 1903, Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus, Vol.  2, Cambridge, (reprint Dublin, 1973). Thoby, P. 1959, Le Crucifix des Origines au Concile de Trente. Étude iconographique, Nantes. Thoby, P. 1963, Le Crucifix des Origines au Concile de Trente. Étude Iconographique. Supplément, Nantes. Tischendorf, C. (ed.) 1872, Novum Testamentum Graece ad antiquissimos testes denuo recensuit apparatum criticum omni studio perfectum apposuit, Vol.  I, Leipzig.

548 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Vendryes, J. 1911, Review of T. Ó Máille, Contributions to the History of the Verbs of Existence in Irish, Dundalk, in Revue Celtique 32, pp. 350–52. Verey, C. D. – Browne, T. J. – Coatsworth, E. (eds) 1980, The Durham Gospels (Early English Manuscripts in Facsimiles 20), Copenhagen. Voicu, S. 1983–84, “Nuove restituzioni a Severiano di Gabala”, Rivista di studi bizanti e neoellenici, n.s.  20–21, pp. 3–24. Wordsworth, J.  – White, H. J. 1889, Nouum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Latine. Pars Prior  – Quattuor Evangelia, Matthew, Oxford. Wordsworth, J.  – White, H. J. 1895, Nouum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Latine. Pars Prior  – Quattuor Evangelia, John, Oxford. Zimmermann, E. H. 1916, Vorkarolingische Miniaturen, 5  Vols., Berlin.

| APOCRYPHAL INFANCY NARRATIVES :

EUROPEAN AND IRISH TRANSMISSION1 Infancy narratives By apocryphal Infancy Narratives I mean the non-canonical accounts of the birth and upbringing of Mary and of the birth and infancy of Christ. In the canonical Gospels there are two wellknown narratives of the birth and infancy of Christ  – in Matthew chapters 1–2 and in Luke chapters 1–2. In recent decades there has been an ever increasing interest in the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, and in the New Testament apocrypha.2 The English language is well served with renderings of the New Testament apocrypha in the translations of Montague Rhodes James 3 and Edgar Hennecke-Wilhelm Schneemelcher,4 Two independent Italian translations have appeared.5 In 1981 a team preparing texts of New Testament apocryphal literature for publication by Corpus Christianorum in the Series Apocryphorum founded the Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne (AELAC).

1  First published in : Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Texts and Transmission, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Dublin, 2002, pp. 123-146. 2  For writings on New Testament Apocrypha see The New Testament Apo­ crypha and Pseudepigrapha. A Guide to Publications, with excursuses on Apoca­ lypses (ATLA Bibliography Series, no.  17), ed. by J. H. Charlesworth, N.J. and London, 1987. 3  M.R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1924. 4  E. Hennecke  – W. Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, Engl. trans., R. McL. Wilson (ed.), vol.  I. Gospels and Related Writings (London 1963) ; revised ed. (with omission of E. Hennecke’s name), Cambridge and Westminster, 1991 ; vol.  2, Writings Relating to the Apostles, Apocalypses and Related Subjects. London, 1963. 5  M. Erbetta, Gli Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento, Turin, 1966–75, 3  vols., in 4 books ; L. Moraldi, Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento (Classici delle Religioni, sezione 5), Turin, 1971.

123

550 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The first major Irish text regarding the Irish Infancy Narratives published was the Infancy Narrative of the Leabhar Breac, edited with translation by Edmond Hogan in 1895.6 Robin Flower made a study of the same narrative, from BL Egerton 1781, in 1926.7 The following year M.R. James published a new Latin Infancy Narrative, to which he says the Leabhar Breac text is related, and for this reason reprinted Hogan’s English translation.8 In 1989 the Irish Biblical Association reached an understanding with AELAC for the critical edition of Irish New Testament Apocrypha. Professor Jean-Daniel Kaestli of the University of Lausanne has a special interest in the transmission of the Protevangelium Jacobi in the west, and he soon recognised the importance of the Irish evidence.9 The Irish texts with Infancy Narratives, together with the relevant Latin ones, have been completed for publication in the Series Apocryphorum.10 | The following Infancy Narrative examples formed part of the 124 continental manuscript transmission : i.  Protevangelium Jacobi (PJ), c. ad  15011 (in Latin translation in SG, i.e. as found in MS Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève 2787) ; 6  E. Hogan, The Irish Nennius from L. na hUidre and Homilies and Legends from L. Brecc (Todd Lecture Series 6), Dublin, 1895. 7  R. Flower, Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts in the British Museum, London, 1926, reprint Dublin, 1992, with British Museum of title changed to British Library), pp. 534–37. 8  M. R. James, Latin Infancy Gospels. A new text, with a parallel version from Irish, Cambridge, 1927. 9  J.-D. Kaestli, “Recherches nouvelles sur les Évangiles latins de l’enfance et sur le récit apocrype de la naissance de Jésus”, Études théologiques et religieuses 72 (1997), pp.  219–33. 10  Apocrypha Hiberniae, t.  I., Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al. (CCSA 13–14), Turnhout, 2001. 11  É. Amann, Le Protévangile de Jacques et ses remaniements latins. Introduction, textes, traduction et commentaire (Les Apocryphes du Noveau Testament), Paris, 1910 ; La forme la plus ancienne du Protévangile de Jacques. Recherches sur le Papyrus Bodmer 5 avec une édition critique du texte grec et une traduction annotée (Subsidia Hagiographica 33), ed. by É. de Strycker, Brussels, 1961 ; English trans. of PJ (by R. McL, Wilson) in New Testament Apocrypha, rev. (6th) edition 1991 ed. by E. Hennecke  – W. Schneemelcher ; The Apocryphal New Testament, ed. by M.R. James, Oxford, 1953, pp.  38–49. A new edition is in preparation by AELAC for the series CCSA.

apocryphal infancy narratives

551

ii.  The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew12 (Pseudo-Matthew), between the Rule of St  Benedict c.  540 and the oldest MSS, but before 800 (from PJ and other material) ; iii.  De Nativitate Mariae,13 between 868 and 1000 ; iv.  Homily Inquirendum est,14 for the feast of the Birth of Mary ; an abridgement of PJ 1–8, s.  XI ; v.  Homily Postulatis,15 for the feast of St  Anne ; (c.  1230–50) ; vi.  Latin Infancy Gospels (the J Compilation) ;16 vii.  A work, with a section on the Magi, known either as Gospel of the Nazoreans or Gospel according to the Hebrews ; viii.  The Infancy Narrative (Gospel) of Thomas (“The Childhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus”), s.  II.

The following Infancy Narrative examples formed a part of the Irish manuscript transmission : i.  Liber Flavus Fergusiorum Infancy Narrative ; ii.  Leabhar Breac-type Infancy Narrative ;17 iii.  The Irish Verse account of “Boyhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus” (Infancy Narrative of Thomas) ; iv.  Seventeen Wonders of the Night of Christ’s Birth ; v.  Irish and Hiberno-Latin material on the Magi ; vi.  Newly identified abridgement of the Gospel of Ps. Mt (1.1–12.3)

12  Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium. Textus et commentarius, ed. by J. Gijsel (CCSA 9), Turnhout, 1997. 13  Libellus de Nativitate Sanctae Mariae. Introduction, édition, traduction et commentaire, ed. by R. Beyers (CCSA 10), Turnhout, 1997. 14  One of the texts of this homily, namely that in MS Vat. Reg. lat.  537, has been published by F. Vattioni, “Frammento latino del Vangelo di Giacomo”, Augustinianum 17 (1977), pp.  505–9. 15  See J.-D. Kaestli, “Un témoin latin du Protévangile de Jacques. L’homélie Postulatis filiae Jerusalem en honneur de Sainte Anne (BHL 483–5)”, Apocrypha 9 (1998), pp.  179–223. 16  The Arundel and Hereford versions, edited by M. R. James 1927 (PJ, Pseudo-Matthew, Special Source) ; for Hereford Form also De Nativitate Mariae and Sermon 195 De Annuntiatione Dominica (PL 39, 2107–2110) wrongly ascribed to St Augustine (s. VI ?). 17  MSS : RIA 23  P  16 (1230 ; the Leabhar Breac) ; BL Egerton 1781 ; RIA 23  E  29 (1134 ; the Book of Fermoy) ; RIA 24  P  25 (475 ; Leabhar Chlainne Suibhne) ; TCD H.2.17. The Irish text, with English translation, of the Leabhar Breac Infancy Narrative, from the beginning to the slaughter of the Innocents, was published by E. Hogan, under the title “Legends from the Childhood of Christ”, in Hogan, The Irish Nennius (note 6 above), pp. 38–85.

552 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | Brief description of the writings in Latin

The Protevangelium of James The Protevangelium of James was composed in Greek in the mid- or later second century, in Egypt or Syria. The lack of knowledge of Palestinian geography rules out Palestine as the place of composition. Its contents are as follows : 1.1–5.1.  Conception of Mary ; 5.2  Birth of Mary ; 5.3–7.1  Mary at 6 months ; 12 months ; 2 years ; 7.2  Mary presented in the Temple at 3 years ; 8.1  Mary in the Temple of the Lord as a dove : she received food from the hand of an angel ; 8.2  Mary in the Temple at 12 years ; choice of a protector for her from among widowers ; 11.  The annunciation ; 12.  The visitation to Elizabeth ; 13–14.  Mary found to be with child ; 15–16.  Trial and testing of Joseph and Mary with the “water of conviction”, another time laughing) ; 18.  Birth of Jesus ; 19–20.  Midwife ; 21.  Magi ; 22.  Murder of children ; search for John the Baptist ; 23–24.  Murder of Zacharias, father of John the Baptist ; 25.  Epilogue :“Now I, James, who wrote this history, when a tumult arose in Jerusalem on the death of Herod, withdrew into the wilderness until the tumult in Jerusalem ceased. And I will praise the Lord, who gave me the wisdom to write this history. Grace shall be with all those who fear the Lord.”

The author’s purpose and the theological character of the book are thus described by Oscar Cullmann :18 The whole work is written for the glorification of Mary. Not only are Jewish calumnies … by implication vigorously refuted ; all the themes of future Mariology are propounded : although, it is true, the “Immaculate conception” of the mother of Jesus is not taught, her miraculous birth is recorded. The virgin birth, in contrast to the more unbiased views of Tertullian and Origen, is already understood as implying Mary’s perpetual virginity …

The later influence of this work was immense, assured by the continuing cult of Mary, in particular her Nativity, originating in the Eastern Church and introduced to the West by the Syrian Pope Sergius I c.  700. The devotion continued to grow, paying 18  O. Cullmann, “The Protevangelium of James”, in E. Hennecke, New Testament Apocrypha, as above note 4, p. 373.

125

apocryphal infancy narratives

553

attention to the name of Mary, and her Immaculate Conception. Later, devotion to St  Anne was introduced. The Infancy Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew This work was composed in Latin and is tentatively datable to 600–50. The author’s purpose is to give further honour to Mary, in keeping with the increasing devotion to her, and to present her as the Regina Virginum, “Queen of Virgins”, and as the model of the monastic life. He gives an account of Mary’s life in the Temple between 3 and 12 or 14 years. Mary is presented as having recited the Divine Office (in the Benedictine tradition) daily ; five named virgins accompany Mary from the Temple to Nazareth (ch.  8). When Mary obtains purple for making the veil for the Temple, these virgins in jealousy, facetiously call Mary Regina Virginum but are told by an angel that this is really so. | The contents of the work are as follows : 126 Chapters 1–17, to the murder of the Innocents follows PJ, with some alterations in keeping with the compiler’s purpose in writing. Chapters 18–24, on the flight into Egypt and the sojourn there, are from the author’s imagination or from mainly unknown traditions. Chapters 18–24 recount miracles on the way to Egypt, some fulfilling scripture texts : dragons worshipping Jesus in a cave (18) ; lions and leopards adoring him (19) ; a palm tree bending down to give food to Mary (20) ; a branch of this palm tree taken up to heaven, to be the palm of victory for those who conquer (21) ; the road to Egypt shortened ; they arrive at Hermopolis and enter a city called Sothinen and are told to lodge in a temple which had 365 gods (22) ; as Mary and the Child enter all the idols fell down (23) ; Affrodosius, governor of the city, heard and saw and was converted (24).

In some branches of the transmission, the Infancy Narrative of Thomas is added to Pseudo-Matthew, as chapters (25)26–41(42).19 The popularity of this text is evident from the number of manuscripts in which it has been transmitted, in four branches and the sub-divisions of these. It reflected the growing Marian devotion, and was itself recast in line with developing Marian devotion 19  Latest critical edition of Ps.-Matt as at note 12 above ; an earlier edition, with the Pars altera (chapters 25–42) by K. Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocrypha, Leipzig, 1876, pp.  51–112.

554 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church and theology to give us the De Nativitate Mariae. Pseudo-Matthew had also a strong influence on western medieval iconography. Latin Infancy Gospels (the I Compilation and the J Compilation) Very significant in the history of the study of Latin and Irish Infancy Narratives was the publication by James of the work, Latin Infancy Gospels.20 James edited from two MSS (BL Arundel 404 and Hereford, Library of the Dean and Chapter, O.3.9) an Infancy Narrative extending from the conception of Mary (beginning of PJ) to the murder of the priest Zacharias. With it he republished Hogan’s translation of the Leabhar Breac text, with the narrative from the journey of Joseph and Mary from Nazareth to Bethlehem as far as the account on the Magi. James printed the Latin texts on facing pages, since he judged that while both belong to the same Infancy Narrative there were significant differences between them. For both, from the beginning as far as the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem the narrative follows PJ, intermingled with Ps.-Matt ; for the journey from Nazareth to the narrative on the Magi (inclusive), a “Special Source” (in James called “New Source”), otherwise unknown is used. James also noted that besides these sources the Hereford text also used De Nativitate Mariae and Sermon 195 De Annuntiatione Dominica (PL 39, 2107–2110) wrongly ascribed to St  Augustine (s.  VI ?) as well as the Latin Vulgate. James believed that what he called the “New Source” is tainted with docetism and derived originally from the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. The Irish Leabhar Breac tradition, including the “New Source”, belongs to this newly discovered Latin Infancy Gospels tradition. Significant advances in this area were made by Jan Gijsel.21 He identified further manuscripts of this tradition : for the Arundel version text Trier, Stadtbibliothek 550/1538 (end of s.  XIV ; siglum V) | and Stadtbibliothek 615/1558 (s. XV, a copy of the for- 127 mer), Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 13707 (a.d. 1472 ; siglum W), Milan, Bibl. Trivulziana, Cod. N.  43 (s.  XII  med. ; siglum Z), Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, Aug.  LXIII (a.d.  1385 ; siglum L) ; for the Hereford version Alençon, BiblioJames, Latin Infancy Gospels. J. Gijsel, “Les ‘Évangiles latins de l’Enfance’ de M.R. James”, Analecta Bollandiana 94 (1976), pp.  289–302. 20 

21 

apocryphal infancy narratives

555

thèque municipale 17 (s.  XIII ; siglum C). To these we must add Montpellier, École de Méd.  55, fols  94r–97v (c.  800 ; siglum M), identified as containing the Arundel version by Kaestli. Gijsel brought to light some shortcomings in James’s edition : some faulty readings of the manuscript, and in particular the fact that James had published only the portion of the Arundel text (ending with the murder of Zacharias), which in fact goes on to narrate the journey into Egypt, the sojourn in Egypt, the return, and even contains a form of the Infancy Narrative of (Pseudo-)Thomas. Gijsel does not believe that the “Special Source” is derived from the Gospel of Peter, seeing in it rather the Gospel of the Nazoreans. The publication of a critical edition of the Irish Infancy Narratives prepared by Jean-Daniel Kaestli and the present writer (as noted above note 10) refers to the work edited by James as the “J Compilation”, the Arundel version as JAr, the Hereford version as JHer. The evidence seems to indicate that the Irish texts derive from an earlier stage of the Latin tradition (referred to as the “I Compilation”) than that now preserved in the J Compilation, which was later combined with Ps.-Matt to give us the J Compilation. One branch of this J Compilation, combined with influence from De Nativitate Mariae and the pseudo-Augustinian sermon and other texts, gave us the Hereford version ; another with further influence from Pseudo-Matthew has given the Arundel version. Contents of Latin Infancy Gospels (J Compilation) : A.  Prologue on the origin and the author of the narrative (in A and V introduced by the apocryphal correspondence between the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus and Jerome ; in H and C by the prologue Ego Jacobus ascribing it to James [son of Joseph]). B.  §§  1–58 : Birth and infancy of Mary. Joseph chosen as her spouse. The annunciation and visitation. The testing with the water (aqua probationis) (PJ 1–16 ; Pseudo-Matthew 1–12 ; Mary’s address to the water §  55, Aqua pura, aqua uera not in PJ or Pseudo-Matthew). C.  §§  59–97 : Journey to Bethlehem for the census (mainly from the “Special Source” ; Joseph is introduced as Joseph, qui ante Moab uocabatur, Joseph’s children James and Simeon are named ; Joseph presents himself as an emigrant from Bethlehem ; he praises Bethlehem). D.  §§  98–101 : Flight and miraculous protection of Elizabeth and John. Murder of Zacharias, who is replaced by the priest Simeon (PJ 22,3–24,4).

556 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church E.  §  102 : The manner of life and the teaching of John the Baptist in the desert (inspired by the canonical Gospels). F.  §§ 103–110 : The miracles of the child Jesus on the journey to Egypt and on arrival in Egypt (§§ 103–109 = Pseudo-Matthew.. 18–24). End of the sojourn in Egypt and settling in Nazareth (§  110 ; Pseudo-Matthew. [Pars altera] 25 in Tischendorf’s edition ; see Pseudo-Matthew 24,1 ; pp.  477–81 in Gijsel’s edition). G.  §§  111–125 : Story of the compassionate robber, on the return journey from Egypt (only in A and V ; source not identified). H.  §§  126–142 : Miracles of the child Jesus, related to those of the Infancy Narrative of Thomas (see Pseudo-Matthew. Pars altera, 26–42, in Tischendorf’ s edition as in note 18).

The “Special Source” (Gospel according to the Hebrews ; Gospel of the Nazoreans) The “Special Source”, now part of the J Compilation, as it was of the I Compilation, must have once circulated | as an independent 128 work in Latin. We know it only through the I and J Compilations, and through a text of the Irish exegete Sedulius Scottus, writing on the continent c. 850. Commenting on the visit of the Magi in Mt 2.2 Sedulius cites from a work known to him as Euangelium secundum Ebreos, which coincides almost verbatim with the Latin texts of the J Compilation. I here cite in extenso Sedulius’s text from his Collectaneum in Matthaeum :22 Quot autem fuere magi, qui munera Domino attulerunt, hoc incertum habetur. Nam licet tria dona Domino obtulisse narrentur, nec tamen certus ipsorum numerus magorum in euangelio describitur. Ita namque refert euangelium, quod “secundum Ebreos” praetitulatur : Intuitus Ioseph oculis uidit turbam uiatorum comitantium, uenientium ad speluncam, et dixit : “Surgam et procedam foras in obuiam eis”. Cum autem processisset, dixit ad Simonem Ioseph : “Sic mihi uidentur isti qui ueniunt augures esse ; ecce enim omni momento respiciunt in caelum et inter se disputant. Sed et peregrini uidentur esse, quoniam et habitus eorum differt ab habitu nostro ; nam uestis eorum amplissima est, et color fuscus est eorum densius, et pileos habent in capitibus suis, et molles mihi uidentur uestes eorum, et in pedibus eorum

22  Sedulius Scottus. Kommentar zum Evangelium nach Matthäus 1,1–11,1 (Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel 14), ed. by Ed. B. Löfstedt, Freiburg, 1989, pp. 66–7. Translation by M. McNamara.

apocryphal infancy narratives

557

sunt saraballae, et ecce steterunt et intendunt in me ; et ecce iterum coeperunt huc uenientes ambulare.” Quibus uerbis liquide ostenditur non tres tantum, sed turbam uiatorum uenisse ad Dominum, quamuis iuxta quosdam eiusdem turbae praecipue magistri certis nominibus Melchus, Caspar, Phadizarda nuncupentur. Nam Melchus eorum senior, cuius barba prolixa, tonica iacintina, sago millino et caltiamentis de iacintho albo mixtis opere polimitario uarie compositis indutus aurum regi Domino obtulit. Secundus Caspar nomine iuuenis imberbis, rubicundus, millina tonica, sago rubeo et caltiamentis indutus tus Domino obtulit. Tertius fuscus integre barbatus Phadizarda nomine pallio rubeo et caltiamentis millenis amictus per mirram filium hominis confessus est. It is quite uncertain how many Magi there were who gave gifts to the Lord. For though it is narrated that three gifts were offered to the Lord, the precise number of these Magi is still not described in the Gospel. Indeed, the Gospel with the title ‘According to the Hebrews’ reports as follows : Joseph, observing with his eyes saw a crowd of wayfarers travelling together coming towards the cave, and said : ‘Let me stand up and go out to meet them.’ When he had proceeded (somewhat), Joseph said to Simon : ‘Those who are coming look to me to be diviners. Look ! Every (second) minute they look into the sky and debate between themselves. They also appear to be foreigners, since their clothing differs from our clothing. For their clothing is free-flowing and their colour is dark. Finally [correcting Sedulius’ obscure densius to denique of JAr-Her], they have pointed Phrygian caps (pileos) on their heads, and their clothes seem to me to be soft ; and on their legs are Persian breeches (saraballae). And look ! They have stood still and are looking at me. And look ! They have again begun to walk, coming in this direction’.

| By these words it is clearly shown that it was not just three men, but a crowd of travellers that came to the Lord, although according to some the chief leaders of this crowd were called by the names Melchus, Caspar, Phadizarda. Melchus, indeed, the senior of the three, whose beard was long, (his) tunic of hyacinth-colour (green), (his) mantle yellow (millino), clad with shoes made of mixed (colours), hyacinth, white, damask material (opere polimitario) of varied ornament, offered gold to the Lord, the king. The second, Caspar by name, young and beardless, ruddy, with a yellow (millina) tunic, a reddish mantle, and clad with shoes, offered incense to the Lord. The third, sallow, fully bearded, Phadizarda

129

558 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church by name, wrapped in a reddish cloak and with yellow (millenis) shoes, by myrrh made confession of the Son of Man.23

Sedulius’s own tradition was probably that giving the names of the Magi, one found in a number of Irish sources. We do not know where Sedulius found his citation from the work entitled Evangelium secundum Hebraeos, whether he had access to an independent work by this name, or whether he was citing from some lost commentary on Matthew, 24 or from a collection of texts on the Magi and possibly other themes. If he was citing from an independent work, it is not clear whether this was the J Compilation or an apocryphal gospel rightly or wrongly entitled as “The Gospel according to the Hebrews”. From early citations we know of a Jewish-Christian work under this name, dating from c.  150, which was used in Egypt. It was, apparently, written in Greek. The same name was also used to designate another Jewish-Christian work, The Gospel of the Nazoreans, known only from citations, and written in Aramaic. James, as we have seen, believed that the “Special Source” was from the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, while Philip Vielhauer25 and J. Gijsel 26 think that it derives rather from the Gospel of the Nazoreans. Infancy Narrative of Thomas The work known as The Infancy Narrative of Thomas (Pseudo-Thomas) tells of marvels and miracles worked by the boy Jesus 23  Translating the Latin words millinus and iacintinus as does a Leabhar Breac homily on the Epiphany (LB p.  199a), which glosses them respectively as “yellow” and “green”. 24  We may note that in his commentary on 1 Co 15.7 in Collectaneum in apostolum Sedulius Scottus cites a text on James (whom he calls filius Alphaei) with the comment : sicut in Evangelio secundum Hebreos legitur. This particular text, however, as from The Gospel according to the Hebrews derives (at least ultimately) from Jerome’s De viris illustribus (2,12), and is found in a number of other Latin authors. On this text see A. F. J. Klijn, Jewish Christian Gospel Tradition (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 17), Leiden, 1992, pp. 79–86 (82 and 85 for Sedulius’ text). 25  P. Vielhauer, “Jewish-Christian Gospels”, in Hennecke  – Schnee­ melcher, New Testament Apocrypha 1, pp.  117–65, at p.  138. Klijn, Jewish-Christian Gospel Traditiion, pp. 128-29, keeps an open mind on the matter : “An origin within a Jewish-Christian community cannot, however, be totally excluded”. 26  Gijsel, “Les Évangiles latins”, pp. 298 and 301–02.

apocryphal infancy narratives

559

between his infancy, the age of five years after the return from Egypt (in some texts during the sojourn in Egypt) and the age of twelve (the next biblical episode narrated after the return from Egypt ; Lk 2.41–51). This particular apocryphon has been transmitted in many ancient languages : in at least four Greek forms, in Syriac, Georgian, Ethiopic, Slavonic and in Latin. The forms as found in these languages differ significantly from one another. S. Voicu, 27 the greatest specialist in this field, has suggested that the primary witnesses for a lost Greek original are not the Greek texts, but the translations in Syriac, Georgian (incomplete), Ethiopic, and the old Latin version partly extant in the Vienna palimpsest and in the extended text as transmitted as the Pars Altera of Pseudo-Matthew. The title of the original was probably neither “The Gospel of Thomas”, nor “The Infancy Gospel of Thomas”, but rather “The Childhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus”, or “The Narratives of the Childhood of the Lord Jesus”. | Brief description of the writings : Irish

Liber Flavus Fergusiorum Infancy Narrative (InfLFF) This is preserved in MS RIA 23 O 48 (476), written between 1437 and 1440, O. It has the PJ text as far as the testing of Mary and Joseph, with waters for testing (with an insertion of an address by Mary to the water, as in the Latin translation of PJ in the MS, Paris Bibliotèque Sainte-Geneviève 2787, JAr and JHer) ; from there to the birth of Christ, it follows the “Special Source”. Our present text ends with the midwife’s account of the birth of Christ, possibly due to loss of the ending. The first part has no admixture of Pseudo-Matthew (unlike the J Compilation). In the second part, the “Special Source” has differences from the Latin text of the J Compilation. These differences probably derive from an earlier text form (representing the I Compilation). InfLFF has the Prologue Ego Iacobus (but in the third person) : “James son of Joseph the smith (= filius Ioseph fabri) wrote”.

27  S. Voicu, “Notes sur l’Histoire de l’Enfance de Jésus”, Apocrypha 2 (1991), pp. 119–32 ; more recently S. Voicu, “Verso il testo primitivo dei Παιδικὰ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ ‘Racconti dell’Infanzia del Signore Gesù’”, Apocrypha 9 (1998), pp.  7–95.

130

560 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Leabhar Breac-type Infancy Narrative This, or portions of it, is preserved in the following MSS : Leabhar Breac (RIA 23  P  16 [1230], s.  XV), B 28 ; BL Egerton 1781 (c.  1484–1487), E ; Book of Fermoy (RIA 23  E  29 [1134], s.  XV), F ; Leabhar Chlainne Suibhne (RIA 24  P  25 [475], this part of the MS 1513–1514), P ; TCD H.2.17 (1319) (s.  XV), T. The section of the Leabhar Breac with the Infancy Narrative (InfLB) is part of a longer New Testament history. The contents of this Leabhar Breac New Testament history, within which the Infancy Narrative is found, is as follows (with indication of the manuscript[s] carrying the particular piece ; paragraph numbers according to the critical edition published in Apocrypha Hiberniae .i. Evangelia Infantiae CCSA 13–14 [Turnhout, 2001, n.  10 above]) : 1. Six distinct items on synchronisms and events at the birth of Christ (BEFP). 2.  Prose account of the “Seventeen Wonders of the World on the night on which Christ was born” (BEFP). 3.  The Journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem and the Birth of Christ : InfLB §  59–81.4 (BEF ; P only for §  59b–63.1). 4.  The Shepherds : InfLB 81.5–85.2 (BEF). 5.  The Magi : InfLB §  81.5–85.2 (BEF ; P has only 59b–63.1). 6.  The Murder of the Children, with a long passage on the Herods : InfLB §  97–123 (BEF). 7.  The Flight into Egypt, and sojourn in Egypt : InfLB §§  124–138 (BEF) 8.  The Death of Herod : InfLB §§  139–158 (BEF). 9.  The Death of Zacharias : InfLB §§  159.1–162.2 (BEF). 10.  On the Baptism of Christ (BF). 11.  On the Apostles (BF). 12.  On the Household of Christ, with the Letter of Abgar (BFT). 13.  On the First Preaching of Christ (BF). 14.  On the Destruction of Jerusalem (Digal Fola Crist, “The Avenging of Christ’s Blood”, B and in part F). Transmitted independently elsewhere.

| The Irish Verse (Infancy Narrative This is preserved account in verse Infancy Narrative 28 

account of “Boyhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus” 131 of Thomas) in MS NLI G 50, s.  XVII. This contains an of the material found in the widely-attested of Pseudo-Thomas.

MSS already indicated in note 17 above.

apocryphal infancy narratives

561

Seventeen Wonders of the Night of Christ’s Birth On the prose accounts see above under the Leabhar Breac-type Infancy Narrative. There is also a verse account of these wonders. Both the prose and verse accounts have been critically edited by the late Brian Ó Cuív, and Caoimhín Breatnach with the other Irish Infancy Narratives.29 Irish and Hiberno-Latin material on the Magi The texts with this material have been studied and edited by Robert E. McNally. 30 Newly identified abridgement of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew (1,1– 13,1) See below pp. 565-72. Continental Transmission Latin Transmission of the Protevangelium Jacobi 31 Only one full Latin translation of PJ is known, preserved in the manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève 2787 (s.  XIII ; with siglum G). This at times expands on the accepted Greek text. It was discovered by Rita Beyers, and will be published by her with an introduction in the forthcoming volume with the Irish Infancy Narratives. 32 Portions of the Latin translation of PJ have also been transmitted as liturgical readings or in sermons, for the feasts of the conception or the birth of Mary or the feast of St  Anne, partially combined with texts of canonical Mt 1–2 ; Lk  1–2. An abbreviated form of PJ 1–8 is also found in the homily Inquirendum est for the feast of the Birth of Mary transmitted 29  Apocrypha Hiberniae, t.  I., Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al. (CCSA 13–14), Turnhout, 2001, pp. 539-617, at 582-617. 30  “The Three Kings in Early Irish Latin Writing”, in Kyriakon. Festschrift Johannes Quasten, ed. by P. Granfield  – J. A. Jungmann, vol.  2, Münster, 1970, pp.  667–90. 31  For the Latin transmission of PJ see J.-D. Kaestli, “Le Protévangile de Jacques en latin. État de la question et perspectives nouvelles”, Revue d’histoire des textes 26 (1996), pp.  41–102 ; J. Gijsel, “Het Protevangelium Iacobi in het Latijn”, in Antiquité classique 50 (1981), pp.  351–66. 32  As above, note 10.

562 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in three manuscripts in the Vatican, Karlsruhe and Frankfurt ; with sigla KPR. 33 The final part of a summary of the Protevangelium has been preserved in a manuscript from Fleury, now in Paris, siglum F, BN, Nouv. acq. lat.  453 ; s.  X–XI ; fragments ; PJ 17,2–18,1 ; 19,1–2 ; 20,4 [end] 21,2. The Latin PJ has also been transmitted, combined with other texts, in the J Compilation (to be considered below) and stands behind the Irish Infancy Narrative in the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum. Jean-Daniel Kaestli, who has made a detailed study of the transmission of PJ in the west, believes that there were at least two distinct Latin translations of the work : Latin translation I MS Montpellier, École de méd.  55, fols  179 r –182 v (M 2) and the Soyons Breviary (S) (MS Paris BN, nouv. acq. lat.  718). | Latin translation II Kaestli posits two forms of this translation : IIa : G ; F IIb : in the I Compilation ; InfLFF ; in the J Compilation ; in the homily Inquirendum est for the feast of the birth of Mary KPR.

Latin Transmission of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew The text of its various families has been preserved in Latin in some 189 manuscripts (by family : Family A 60 ; P 34 ; Q 47 ; R 14 ; with some 31 other MSS of mixed type). It is often transmitted in MSS with the Gospel of Nicodemus. Its transmission history has been examined by Jan Gijsel, 34 who identified four large Text families, with sub-groups for each. Family A, which originated about 800, is preserved in 4 subgroups. Family P also originated about 800, and from the original text, not from family A ; its purpose was to polish up the original, and have its biblical text conform with that of the Vulgate. Family Q originated about 1150 ; it has 33  Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. lat.  537 (s.  XII) ; Karls­ ruhe, Badische Landesbibliothek, K 506 (s.  XII–XIII) ; Frankfurt, Stadtund Universitätsbibliothek, Praed. 43 (s. XV). 34  J. Gijsel, Die unmittelbare Textüberlieferung des sog. Pseudo-Matthäus (Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Akademie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België), Brussels, 1981 ; Gijsel, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium. Textus et commentarius.

132

apocryphal infancy narratives

563

six subgroups ; most of the MSS are of French or English origin. Q is a revision of P, and a witness of growing devotion to Mary. In this revision (and in some texts of other families) the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is added as part of Pseudo-Matthew. Family R originated about 1200. It is a revision into which narratives from various other sources have been worked, notably De Nativitate Mariae and the Infancy Narrative of Pseudo-Thomas (The Boyhood Deeds of Jesus). We may also note that there are a number of manuscripts in Welsh translating Pseudo-Matthew, texts that merit publication and translation. The Welsh tradition tends to carry the Pars Altera of Pseudo-Matthew with the Infancy Narrative of Pseudo-Thomas. 35 For the Latin manuscripts of Pseudo-Matthew connected with Ireland, see below pages 567-68. Latin Transmission of the Infancy Narrative of Thomas (the Boyhood Deeds of Jesus) The Infancy Narrative of Thomas has been transmitted in three Latin translations. The oldest is extant in a very fragmentary manner in the Vienna palimpsest, Vienna lat. 563 (probably s. V.). A translation has also been preserved as chapters 26–42 in the Pars Altera of Pseudo-Matthew, found as already noted in the Family Q (compiled c.  1150) of Pseudo-Matthew texts. There is a more recent translation in the Vatican Library Codex Reg. lat. 648 published by Tischendorf. 36 Continental Transmission of the Latin I Compilation The I Compilation is the Latin text combining PJ and the “Special Source”, but unaffected by Pseudo-Matthew, that stands behind the Irish Infancy Narratives of InfLFF and InfLB. It is older than the J Compilation. The I Compilation must have come to Ireland from the continent. There is no extant evidence for the transmission of the I Compilation on the continent. It probably got completely lost after it developed into the J Compilation through the addition of Pseudo-Matthew.

35  J.E. Caerwyn Williams, “Welsh Translations of Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium”, PIBA 17 (1994), pp.  102–25. 36  Tischendorf, Evangelia Apocrypha.

564 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church We can presume that the I Compilation reached Ireland from the continent at an early date, probably before the J Compilation originated, or at least before it became commonly accepted, c. 700. | Continental Transmission of the Latin J Compilation

The J Compilation has been transmitted in two versions, the Arundel version, JAr (MSS M ZL AVW) and the Hereford version (MSS H and C). M is the oldest witness of the Arundel version, dating from c.  800 ; it has kept some original elements  – among which the prologue Ego Iacobus  – but it gives only the first part of the narrative (§§  1–21) and its text has already undergone a revision. There is another branch of JAr transmitted in the manuscripts Z (middle of the twelfth century) and L (1385). A further branch of JAr, and the best attested, is characterised by a secondary influence from Pseudo-Matthew, and by the addition of the apocryphal correspondence instead of the original prologue Ego Iacobus. This modified text has been transmitted in the manuscripts A, V and W. The Hereford version (JHer) is transmitted by the MSS H and C. These manuscripts have kept the original prologue Ego Iacobus and some other primitive readings which they share with M. They have, however, incorporated into the narrative elements from two further sources, De Nativitate Mariae and a Sermon on the Annunciation wrongly ascribed to Augustine. Continental Transmission of the “Special Source” It seems clear that the text now referred to as the “Special Source” circulated as an independent work in Latin before becoming conjoined with a Latin translation of the Protevangelium Jacobi to form the I Compilation, which later became the J Compilation. We have no clear evidence for a direct or indirect transmission of this as an independent work, for the time before or after it became joined to PJ. The text from Sedulius Scottus, considered above, does not prove that Sedulius knew the “Special Source” as a separate work. Irish transmission The Protevangelium Jacobi We have no evidence that PJ ever came to, or circulated in, Ireland as an independent work but only as part of the I Compila-

133

apocryphal infancy narratives

565

tion. This is how we find it in the Infancy Narrative of the Liber Flavus (InfLFF). The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew in Ireland Pal. lat.  68 on Ps 148.7 The Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Psalms preserved in the Vatican codex Palatinus latinus 68 comments as follows on Ps 148.7 : laudate dominum de terra. Id est hucusque de caelo canit et de mirabilibus eius. Nunc de terra incipit et de mirabilibus eius per quae meruit laudari. dracones et omnes {abyssi}. Id est hoc genus terrenum dicit quod in aquis terrae nascitur quod inpletur cum fugit Ioseph in Aegyptum cum filio et Maria ; dormientes in spelonca uenerunt dracones et laudauerunt pedes eorum. 37

| (“Praise the Lord from the earth.” That is (to say) : up to this he (the psalmist) sings of the heavens and of their marvels. Now he begins to speak of the earth and its marvels, by reason of which he (God) deserves to be praised. “(You) dragons and all you deeps”. That is he refers (by dragons) to an earthly species which is born in the waters of the earth. And this (text of scripture) was fulfilled when Joseph fled into Egypt with (his) son and Mary ; when they were sleeping in a cave dragons came and praised their feet.)

This text is similar to the account of one the miracles worked by the child Jesus on the flight into Egypt as recounted in the apocryphal Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew 18.1 : When they arrived at a cave, in which they wished to take a rest, Mary dismounted from the animal, sat down, and she had Jesus on her lap. Travelling with them there were three (servant) boys, and with Mary one (servant) girl. And suddenly a large number of dragons came out of the cave, and on seeing them the ser­ vant boys cried out. Then the Lord, who was not yet two years old, woke up and getting on his feet stood in front of them. The dragons, however, adored him and after they had adored him they went away. Then was fulfilled that which was said by the prophet

37  M. McNamara, Glossa in Psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus Latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11–151.7). Critical Edition of the Text together with Introduction and Source Analysis. Studi e Testi 310, Vatican City, 1986, p. 308. (In the edition per (quae) has been erroneously written as ner.)

134

566 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church psalmist, saying : “Praise the Lord from the earth, you dragons and all you deeps” (Ps 148.7). 38

In the edition of the Vatican codex there seems to be a reference to this text of Pseudo-Matthew. If the Vatican commentary on the Psalms depends on Pseudo-Matthew, this text, dating c. 700, would be the earliest evidence for the existence of Pseudo-Matthew. While there are clear similarities between the texts, the differences must also be borne in mind. The gloss on the psalm speaks of Joseph, Mary and Jesus being asleep, and of the dragons “praising” (laudauerunt) their feet. Whatever this might mean, the word laudauerunt is to be retained, since its presence is determined by the biblical lemma. Most probably the compiler of the gloss knew of an old tradition, presented in a slightly different form in Pseudo-Matthew. The close relationship of the two texts does not, then, prove the existence of Pseudo-Matthew by 700 (a date assigned to the compilation of the gloss in Pal. lat.  68). 39 There are also some other rare traditions common to Pseudo-Matthew and some early medieval Irish texts, such as Abel as a model of virginity (7,2), also found in the Infancy narrative of the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum,40 in the Irish Augustine’s De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae (ch.  3 ; PL 35, 2149–2200 at 2154), and the Oratio Brendani, recensio breuis (CCCM 17, Turnhout 1977), p. 22.41 These are arguments

38  Translating the text of the sub-group A, as in the critical edition of Gijsel, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, as above note 12, pp.  449–51 : Cumque peruenissent ad speluncam quandam ut quasi sub ea refrigerarent, descendit Maria de iumento et sedit et habebat Iesum in gremio. Erant autem tres pueri et cum Maria una puella iter agentes. Et ecce subito egressi sunt de spelunca dracones multi, quos uidentes pueri exclamauerunt. Tunc dominus cum esset nondum bimulus excussit se et stans in pedibus stetit ante eos. Illi autem dracones adorauerunt eum et cum adorassent eum abierunt. Tunc adimpletum est quod dictum est per psalmographum prophetam dicentem. Laudate dominum de terra dracones et omnes abyssi. The text of sub-group P differs somewhat : the three servant boys are with Joseph ; Jesus comes down from his mother’s lap and stands on his feet before the dragons. 39  Thus R. Beyers in the general introduction to Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium (CCSA 9), p.  13, n.  3. 40  In the “Liber Flavus Fergusiorum Infancy Narrative”, §  34 ; in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae¸ I., pp 180-83. 41  See J. Gijsel, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, p. 344, note 2.

apocryphal infancy narratives

567

in favour of contact of traditions rather than of dependence on the text of Pseudo-Matthew. | Pseudo-Matthew and Infancy Narratives of the Leabhar Breac A notable feature of the Liber Flavus Infancy Narrative is the absence in it of influence from Pseudo-Matthew, in the earlier text on the life of Mary before the Caesarean tax and the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem, and in the later text dependent on the “Special Source”. Matters are somewhat different with regard to the Infancy Narrative of the Leabhar Breac. There mention is made of the five virgins who accompanied Mary from the Temple to Nazareth, and their names given as in Pseudo-Matthew 8,5. In the narrative of the flight into Egypt in both Pseudo-Matthew 18–21 and the Leabhar Breac Infancy Narrative42 we have the story of the palm tree and the episode of the animals worshipping Jesus. Close comparison of the two narratives, however, indicates that the Leabhar Breac text does not depend on that of Pseudo-Matthew. What appears more likely is that the Leabhar Breac text is a later witness to a cycle of legends on the journey into Egypt, which has also inspired the author of Pseudo-Matthew.43 Similarly with regard to the Leabhar Breac narrative of the sojourn of the Holy Family in Egypt. This, too, has its counterpart in Pseudo-Matthew. Examination of the two texts, however, seems to indicate that the Leabhar Breac text does not depend on Pseudo-Matthew. Irish and Irish Related Latin Manuscripts of Pseudo-Matthew Jan Gijsel lists some 190 manuscripts of Pseudo-Matthew. Of these two are of Irish provenance and two are in Irish libraries. Trinity College, Dublin, has two manuscripts : TCD MSS 312 and 604. Both are of British origin, and both belong to the Q subgroup, which originated c.  1150, MS 312 with text Q2a1, written by a number of English scribes, MS 604 with text Q1a4, comprising two codicological units, written in Britain, and later united. The BL MS Royal 13 A XIV (s.  XIII–XIV), of Irish origin, is composed of three distinct parts. It was put together in Limerick (there is an ownership mark of the Augustinian Convent, Limer42  In the “Leabhar Breac Infancy Narrative”, §§  126–9 ; text forthcoming in Apocrypha Hiberniae, as above note 10. 43  See J.-D. Kaestli, “Le Protévangile de Jacques en latin”, p. 99.

135

568 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ick, on fol.  10v). It has extracts from the Gospel of Nicodemus.44 The text of Pseudo-Matthew in fols  260v–270v, belongs to the subgroup Q (Q1a3), and thus represents a later and imported form of the apocryphon. The Oxford manuscript, Bodleian Rawlinson D 1236 (s.  XIII) comes from the Cistercian house monasterium beatae Mariae Virginis iuxta Dublin.45 The manuscript has only apocryphal texts, with Pseudo-Matthew on fols  22r–37v. The text of Pseudo-Matthew is broken by detailed excursuses, for instance on the cloister built on Mary’s birthplace in Jerusalem, the external signs of Mary’s pregnancy and Joseph’s state of despair, on the inn that had no place for the Holy Family ; on the foreskin of Jesus, brought by an angel to Charlemagne, and given by him to the cathedral of Aachen, and on the ecclesia Saluatoris apud Carolum later founded by Charlemagne’s son. The text is a good example of progressive accretions to a basic text. Gijsel classes the text in the early A subgroup (as A1e4).46 We can presume that in Ireland in the thirteenth century and later many more than four copies of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew were in circulation, most, probably, recent imports by the new religious orders, and representing in particular the later subgroup Q recension of the text. Influence of Pseudo-Matthew on later Medieval Vernacular Irish Texts ? Evidence is coming to light of the presence and influence of Pseudo-Matthew in some later medieval Irish texts. | Text in TCD MS 1336 (H.3.17) (Lebar buide meic murcada ; s.  XIV2)

Dáibhí Ó Cróinín has recently brought to our attention two vernacular Irish texts in the library of Trinity College Dublin which

44  D. Lewis, “A Short Latin Gospel of Nicodemus Written in Ireland”, in Peritia 5 (1986), pp.  262–75. 45  See the description in C .M. Macray, Catalogi codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae, 5, 4, Oxford, 1898, pp.  371–2 ; Gijsel, Die unmit­ telabre Textüberlieferung, pp. 55–7. 46  See Gijsel, Die unmittelbare Textüberlieferung, p. 57.

136

apocryphal infancy narratives

569

seem to depend on the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew.47 These are found in MS 1336 (H.3.17) and MS 1318 (H.2.16), the Yellow Book of Lecan. Trinity College Dublin MS 1336 (H.3.17) is a volume made up of various vellum books and fragments. The section of the manuscript that interests us (cols  710–39) was written by an unidentified scribe, also known to have written legal texts in TCD MS 1316 (H.2.15). Thomas Kingsmill Abbott assigned the script to the end of the fourteenth or the beginning of the fifteenth century, Richard Irvine Best appears to have favoured a date in the second half of the fourteenth century. Col.  729 of MS 1336 is on a page, in seven columns, of mostly scriptural genealogies, beginning with Noah and his sons, and ending with Mary and Joseph. The final seventeen lines of column g are occupied with a brief piece of apocryphal lore on the subject of the Virgin Mary’s age at death, a note on Joachim on the tribe of Judah that seems ultimately drawn from the apocryphal Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew,48 and a prayer to the Virgin. A note added at the foot of the page reads : Amail adeir in Lebar Buidhe Meic Murcada annso anuas (“the foregoing, as the Lebar Buide Meic Murchada says”). The text that interests us reads : Secht mbliadna cethrachat ba slán do Muiri in tan dochuaid dochum nime 7 rogab crábud asa n-aigh indsin. 7 fuair anoir o Dia 7 o dainaib. Bai araile fear firen i tir Israel .i. Iacim a ainm, do treib Iuda. 7 ba he a monar, ingaire caerach. 7 do roinned a t[rí] a n-urtorradh 7 doberead a da trian do Dia 7 aen trian do fein 7 da muinntir. 7 in tan ba slan fiche bliadan do tuc bean .i. Anna, ingen Isachair. Mary was forty-seven years old when she went to heaven, and she was the object of devotion after that ( ?), and she received great honour from God and people. There was a certain faithful man in the land of Israel, Joachim was his name, of the tribe of Judah. And he was a shepherd by occupation. And the produce of his sheep was divided into three parts, and two parts were given to

47  D. Ó Cróinín, “Lebar buide meic murcada”, in A Miracle of Learning. Studies in Manuscripts and Irish Learning. Essays in honour of William O’Sullivan, ed. by T. Barnard – D. Ó Cróinín – K. Simms, Aldershot, 1998, pp. 40–51. 48  Ó Cróinín, “Lebar buide”, p.  50, note  13. The text of Pseudo-Matthew was supplied by J. Carey.

570 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church God and one to himself and his family. And when he was twenty years old he took a wife, i.e. Anna, daughter of Issachar. Irish Homily for the Feast of the Assumption in the Yellow Book of Lecan (cols  839–43) (s.  XIV–XV ?) and in the King’s Inns Library, Dublin, Irish MS no.  10 (fols 51a23–54b16) (s.  XV)

Ó Cróinín notes that the text on the subject of Anna, Joachim and their daughter Mary, while ultimately derived from the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, occurs also in (in part) in an interesting homily for the Feast of the Assumption of Mary (August 15) in the Yellow Book of Lecan, cols  839–43.49 The YBL text is incomplete owing to the loss of some leaves at the end, but enough has survived to show the close affinity with the Lebar Buide fragment. This text ends imperfectly with the words : Do-deachaid iar sin co haltoir an Choimdead 7 at-ib uisci (= Pseudo-Matthew  12.3). Caoimhín Breatnach has identified an entire text of the same homily in MS King’s Inns Library, Dublin, Irish MS no.  10, fols.  51a23– 54b16, and is preparing a critical edition of the entire homily. After an introductory section, the homily gives us texts from the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew | from the beginning, through the testing of 137 Mary by the drinking of the water, to the proclamation of the Roman taxation and an indication of the journey to Bethlehem for this. (As yet we cannot say if the texts from Pseudo-Matthew can be assigned to any one of the four great families.) The remainder of the text is devoted to praises of Mary and an account of her assumption, in a form related to the apocryphal Transitus Mariae. The homily has the typical Irish ending, particularly close to that in Bethu Pátraic : Áleim trocaire De tre impidi noebMairi. Ro issam huile in n-oentaidh sin 7 ross aitrebum in saecula saeculorum. Amen. The homily begins with an excerpt from a commentary on the psalms, according to the different “senses” (iuxta historialem and iuxta spiritualem intellectum). This is followed by an account of the Annunciation, and this in turn by a detailed account of Mary’s early life. It is in this section that the homily parallels our fragment, as the following demonstrates (italics indicate the parallel phrases) :

49  Ó Cróinín, “Lebar buide”, p.  44, and p.  50, note  14, noting that J. Carey drew this text to his attention.

apocryphal infancy narratives

571

Ceastnaigthear immorro cia h-ais a roibi Muiri in tan ro-thuisim a mac. Ní ansae. A nais a da bliadain dec go deimin, amail adearar isin scribtuir diada…  … In .xuiii. Kl. Septimber [Aug.  15], ar ai laithi mis grene. Isin laithi-sea indiu, ar ai laithi seachtmaine, isin bliadain i tam .i. ord choimperta 7 genemna naem Muiri fodesin tuirtheachta na tuistitheadh togaidi or chin. Et nida coimpert beithead asa naideandocht fo chetoir 7 dan onoir 7 dan airmidid fuair o Dia 7 o daenaib in aimsir a h-eisteachta. Bui didiu araile firen a tirib hIsrahel .i. Iaichim a ainm 7 do threib Iuda do shonnrad. Ba he immorro a monur .i. ingairi chaerach 7 didiu ro-roindead ar tri a n-urrthorad .i. a da trian don Choimdid 7 a aentrian do fen cona muinnter. Dognid immorro int ordugud sin on dara bliadain deg a aisi co fuair bas. An tan didiu robo slan a fhichi bliadain tucastair mnai .i. Anna ingean Isacar do shil Dauid. Robai tricha bliadain aici do mnai iar sin 7 ni ruc aen duine do chloind do. Rogab immorro fearg 7 toirrsi mor eisiun fri [erasure] sin. Uair ba hathais mar ic macaib hIsrahel nech cen tuismead cloindi, amail is follus o Maisse, uair ideir andsa reacht ni aile, amail is follus : dictus. [I emend ; Ms has simply dictus] qui non seminad in n-Israhel .i. is comartha mallachtan don ti nach fagaib a chland ic macaib hIsrahel, etc.50

With regard to the relationship of this text to Pseudo-Matthew we may note that as in Pseudo-Matthew 1.1 Joachim is said to be of the tribe of Judah and in Pseudo-Matthew 1.2 Anna is said to be the daughter of Issachar. Pseudo-Matthew 1.1 also speaks of Joachim dividing his goods into three parts, but his offering of them is not as in the Irish text. According to Pseudo-Matthew he gave one part to the widows, orphans and pilgrims, and the poor ; a second third to those dedicated to the worship of God (colentibus Deum), and reserved the third part for himself and his household. A significant difference between the Irish text and Pseudo-Matthew is that in Pseudo-Matthew. 2.1 the priest (Reuben) in the temple tells Joachim that he cannot offer sacrifice since God has not blessed him by giving him seed in Israel (quia non te benedixit deus ut daret semen in Israel). The Irish text, on the contrary, has a well 50  Ó Cróinín, “Lebar buide”, p.  44. The story of Mary’s birth and childhood, and her bethrothal to Joseph follows. Breatnach’s edition will be published in Ériu, volume 51. I am grateful to the latter for the text of the ending of the homily given above.

572 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church attested logion, cited as a scripture text by the Fathers, quoted by Origen, “Cursed be the one who has not left seed in Israel” (Origen, Hom. on Genesis 11,1 and Hom. on Ezekiel 4,1, known also to Augustine, Jerome and Quodvultdeus).51 | It is beyond doubt that the first part of this homily follows 138 Pseudo-Matthew 1.1–13.1. It remains to be determined whether we can assign its text to one of the great text families of this apocryphon. The Infancy Narrative of Thomas In the manuscript National Library of Ireland G 50 (pp.  116–120) we have a versified narrative of the Infancy of Christ.52 Although this manuscript is of the seventeenth century, the nature of the Irish language in the verse account indicates that the original was composed c.  700. The verse account clearly belongs to the tradition of the Infancy Narrative of Thomas. The Irish poet author, however, has seemingly taken liberties with his original, which he has reworked and recast in keeping with his own poetic aim. Each of the episodes in the Irish text is given only a few lines. For this reason it is almost impossible to relate it to any one of the known forms of the apocryphon. However, source analysis of the Irish verse form of the Infancy Gospel of Thomas shows that it is closely related to the Latin tradition of this apocryphon as found in the added section (Pars altera) in later recensions of Pseudo-Matthew (chapters 25–42 ; given the siglum Lm). Since the Irish text was composed c.  700, it is evidence for the early date of this Latin version.

51  Gijsel, note to Pseudo-Matthew 2.1 in Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, p. 292, note 4 ; L. Doutreleau, Origène. Homélies sur la Genèse, (Sources Chrétiennes 7 bis), Paris 1976, pp. 395–7 ; N. Adkin, “An Undefined Latin Quotation of Scripture Related to Is. 31.9”, Revue Bénédictine 93 (1983), pp. 123–25. 52  J. Carney, “Two Old Irish Poems”, Ériu 18 (1958), pp.  1–43 ; J. Carney, The Poems of Blathmac son of Cú Brettan together with the Irish Gospel of Thomas and a Poem on the Virgin Mary (Irish Texts Society 47), Dublin, 1964 ; English translation by M. Herbert in Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, ed. by M. Herbert  – M. McNamara, Edinburgh, 1989, pp.  44–7 ; new critical edition, with translation (notes by McNamara), by Herbert, in Apocrypha Hiberniae, t. I.

apocryphal infancy narratives

573

Irish Transmission of the I Compilation ; The “Special Source” in Ireland ; The “Gospel according to the Hebrews” (The Gospel of the Nazoreans) The I compilation from the beginning to the midwife’s witness on the birth of Christ has been transmitted in InfLFF, with some addition from other sources for individual passages, possibly from travel guides to the Holy Land or pilgrim accounts. As already noted, in the Leabhar Breac Infancy Narrative (InfLB), which extends from the journey to Bethlehem for the census to the sojourn in Egypt, the slaying of Zacharias and his replacement by Semion has the I Compilation form of the “Special Source”. In the J Compilation this extends at least as far as the account of the Magi. How far it originally went beyond that in the I or J Compilation is uncertain. We can presume that on the continent the I Compilation did not survive too long after it was combined with Pseudo-Matthew to form the J Compilation, and this occurred c.  700. It is likely that the I Compilation came to Ireland about this time. It is unlikely that the J Compilation ever came to Ireland. The Latin text of the I Compilation continued to be transmitted at least until it was translated into Irish at an indeterminate date. The InfLB may represent a twelfth-century translation. It has yet to be determined whether or not the InfLFF represents basically the same Irish rendering as that of InfLB. In the marginal note on Mt 2.11 (Et intrantes domum) in the Gospels of Máel Brigte (written in Armagh in 1138) we have a text said to come from the Gospel according to the Hebrews which is very similar to that from Sedulius Scottus cited above. legitur in euangelio secundum ebreos quod uenit ioseph foras ex diuersorio antequam intrarent domum et admirans eos dixit ad semeon filium suum quod perigrini [this word added interlinearly in the manuscript] essent cognoscens ab habitu.

| It is possible, but unlikely, that the glossator is citing directly 139 from an apocryphal gospel, circulating under the name of the Gospel according to the Hebrews. It is more unlikely still that the original “Special Source” (under whatever name) circulated in Ireland as an independent narrative. Nor does it appear that the glossator of the Gospels of Máel Brigte was drawing from the text of Sedu-

574 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church lius (which does not appear to have been known in Ireland). For one thing, unlike Sedulius’s text (Intuitus Ioseph oculis uidit turbam uiatorum comitantium, uenientium ad speluncam), the Máel Brigte gloss makes no mention of a cave. It appears that the glossator was drawing on a text of the J Compilation (§  89), or more probably of the I Compilation, known to him as the Gospel according to the Hebrews. Note that, glossing Mt 2.11 Intrantes domum, the glossator speaks of Magi entering the house, but of Joseph coming ex diuersorio (an inn) (probably under the influence of Lk 2.7). The J Compilation speaks only of the cave. However, it must be observed that in InfLB there is no mention of a cave, and we hear only of a “house”. In §  87 (immediately preceding §  89 in InfLB) Joseph is said to be standing “in front of the house” as the Magi are seen arriving. While we cannot be sure of the text from which the glossator drew his brief text, the evidence seems to indicate that he knew of a Latin writing on the Magi similar to the contents of the J (I) Compilation, possibly in a redaction of the kind we find in the Irish InfLB. Regarding the transmission of the Protevangelium Jacobi and the “Special Source” in Ireland With the establishment of a relationship of the Irish material in the InfLFF and the InfLB with the Latin tradition, there follows the task of examining the Irish material for two purposes, namely to seek to identify the original form of the text behind all the known Irish vernacular material and the Latin texts, and secondly to seek to trace the transmission of the texts within Ireland itself. Mary’s address to the water for testing the texts of the InfLFF 57 ; SG 16,2 ; JAr 55 ; JHer 55 According to PJ 16, when Mary’s pregnancy became known, both Joseph and Mary were subjected to the trial of drinking the water in accord with what was considered the prescribed test for such cases (Nb 5.11–31). The text of PJ is brief. (16.1) And the high priest said (to Joseph). “Give back the virgin whom you have received from the temple of the Lord”. And Joseph wept bitterly. (16.2) And the high priest said. “I will give you [both] to drink the water of the conviction of the Lord, and it will make manifest your sins before your eyes”. And the high

apocryphal infancy narratives

575

priest took it and gave (it) to Joseph to drink and sent him into the wilderness (variant. into the hill-country) ; and he came (back) whole. And he made Mary also drink, and sent her into the wilderness (variant. into the hill-country) ; and she (also) returned whole. And all the people marvelled, because (the water) had not revealed any sin in them.

The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew 12.1–3 has an account of the testing of Joseph and Mary, with its own rewriting of the PJ text. And it came to pass that a rumour went out that Mary was pregnant. And she was arrested by temple attendants, together with Joseph, and they were taken to the high priest, who | together 140 with the priests began to reproach him. “Why have you cheated such a noble and eminent virgin, whom the angel of God used to nourish in the temple of the Lord, who never really wished to see a man, who had received the best of training in the law of the Lord ? Unless you had violated her she would have remained a virgin until this day”. He, however, swore to God that he had never even once touched her. And the high priest Abiathar said to him. “As the Lord lives, I will now make you drink the Lord’s water for drinking, and your sin will immediately be made manifest”. (12,2) Then the whole multitude, too numerous to be numbered, gathered together, and Mary was also taken to the temple of the Lord. And the priests, her relatives and neighbours said to Mary. “Confess your sin to the priests, you who were like a dove in the temple of God and used to receive food from the hand of an angel”. Joseph was also called up to the altar and he was given the water for drinking. When a person had lied, tasted (this water), and gone around the altar seven times, God used to give some sign on his face. When Joseph had confidently drunk the water and had made the round seven times, no sign of sin appeared on him. Then all the priests, and the attendants (of the temple) and the people declared him clear of sin, saying. “Blessed are you, for no fault has been found in you”. (12,3) And calling Mary, they said to her. “And you, what excuse can you offer, and what sign can appear in you greater than that which gave you away  – the pregnancy in your womb ? This alone do we ask of you, that since Joseph has been exonerated in your regard, that you make known who has seduced you. For it is better that your own confession betrays you rather than that the anger of the Lord by giving a sign on your face should make you manifest in the midst of the people.” Then Mary, firmly and undaunted, said. “If there is any defilement in me, or any sin, or if there was any concupiscence, may the Lord unmask me in the sight of all peoples, so that I may be cleansed from error by all, (to serve) as an example of cleans-

576 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ing from error”. And she went forward to the altar of the Lord and took the water for drinking, and tasted it and did the round seven times, and no sign or trace of any sin was found in her. 53

There is a distinct development beyond these two traditions in the three Latin texts SG, JAr, and JHer, and in the Irish text InfLFF. The development consists in an address of Mary to the water before she proceeds to drink it. Mary’s address in JAr and JHer is introduced by words borrowed from Pseudo-Matthew. All four texts clearly represent the same tradition, but still differ from one another. InfLFF is close to that of SG. The question arises as to the reconstruction of the original text of Mary’s address, and the value of the individual texts in the reconstruction of this original. The central question at issue is Mary’s innocence with regard to her pregnancy. In all texts she says that the water will bear witness to this her innocence. In InfLFF (§  57.2) Mary says of the water. “… it is ever-living water, and it will bear witness to the pregnancy that is mine from the Holy Spirit”. In the corresponding Latin texts Mary says that the water will bear witness to her virginity and immaculate conception. In speaking of her pregnancy, rather than her immaculate conception, the Irish InfLFF would appear to represent the original as the formulation of the doctrine of Mary’s immaculate conception came later than the time one would assign to the original of this | composi- 141 tion. However, the Irish InfLFF text in question comes later in the composition than it does in the Latin texts, and this its present position may well be secondary. The Latin SG text, although in places difficult to understand, and probably in part corrupt, may be nearest to the original. Only by careful evaluation of all four texts can we arrive at a reconstruction of the original. Our attempts to do this will give an indication of how faithful the Irish InfLFF text here is to the presumed original, and how much it has been changed in its Irish transmission. I give the texts here in synopsis, as an indication of work yet to be done in the study of these Latin and Irish compositions. English translations of the Irish text of InfLFF and of the Latin text of SG follow immediately below. 53  Translation of J. Gijsel’s critical edition of the subgroup (A text). Gijsel, Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium, pp.  393–403.

577

apocryphal infancy narratives InfLFF § 57 Ibai[d] mé gu hinill 7 gu hindruic 7 go subach in t-usci sea, uair is é usci na fírinni é .i. usci maith 7 usci slánti 7 usci inmhuin

7 usci furtachta do gach neamurcóideach ibas hé, usci glan neambocóideach 7 deoch subach sítheamhuil do gach aen aga mbia beatha díreach é, 7 usci beireas fianaisi dona fíré[na]chuibh 7

SG 16,2

JAr 55

JHer 55

Aqua iusta, aqua uera, aqua bona, aqua amabilis, neminem nocens,

Aqua iusta, aqua uera, aqua bona et amabilis, que arguis peccantes, innocentes uero a morte liberas, aqua adiutrix uite mee,

Aqua iusta, aqua

aqua adiutrix uite, aqua liberorum, defensor, aqua sine macula aqua pura et sine aqua pura et sine uiuenti et confidenti iusticie Dei. Appare aqua iocunda castitati mee uirginitatis et

immaculate conceptionis testis presens et proditor aithnius an égóir meus, mihi singulari arna hanfíréna- reseruata remiscuib é. sio peccatorum et infamia falsa uindex et remissio Dei altissimi, Dei munus et Domini deficiencium, tibi gratias ago, aqua uiua, aqua perhempnis.

Et beannaidimsi in

uera, aqua bona Et amabilis, que arguis peccantes, innocentes uero a morte liberas, aqua uite mee

Benedixi te ego

macula,

macula,

et iocundus potus iocundus potus, in me caste uirgi- testis mee caste nitatis uirginitatis et inmaculate

et immaculate conceptionis,

conceptionis, gratias ago Deo meo

gratias ago.

Et benedico te,

Aqua perhennis,

Domine Deus Israel, [testis mee caste

benedico te

578 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church t-usci so, uair is [castitati mee uirusci ginitatis beó bithbeó hé et immaculate conceptionis testis presens] | 7 bérai[d] fiadhnuisi don torcis idhanglan fil agum-sa arna gabáil ón Spirud Naemh [tre] teachtuirecht an aingil. Et is mé an ógh bias “na máthair gan dith n-óigi, 7 ro cuir an Coimdhi cumachtach a comurtha féin forum, 7 mairidh fós 7 mérai[d] tre bithub.

[in me caste uirgi- uirginitatis nitatis et inmaculate et immaculate conceptionis,]

conceptionis,]

ego mater que sum uirgo,

ego mater que sum uirgo, quoniam signum salutis tue manifestatum est in me.

quoniam signum reseruatum est Dei reseruatum mihi est et lucis et ueri- mihi, baptatis. tismum lucis. quoniam signum

The most difficult of the Latin texts is that of the Saint Gene­ viève manuscript (SG), which would also appear to be that nearest the original.54 For this reason I here give in parallel columns the translation of InfLFF and of SG. 54  See the translation of SG 16.2 by J.-D. Kaestli, “Le Protévangile de Jacques”, at p.  88. Kaestli renders as follows. “Eau juste, eau véritable, eau bonne, eau digne d’amour, qui ne nuit à personne, eau qui aide la vie, eau des hommes libres, eau sans souillure pour qui est vivant et confesse la justice de Dieu. Manifeste-toi, eau agréable à la chasteité de ma virginité et à ma conception immaculée, (toi) mon témoin efficace et révélateur, rémission des péchés réservée pour moi en particulier, défenseur contre la fausse infamie, et rémission du Dieu trèshaut, eau intarissable ; je te bénis, parce que tu es signe réservé pour moi, de la lumière et de la vérité.” The chief difficulties in the Latin text are in the central section (castitati mee uirgini-

142

apocryphal infancy narratives

579

InfLFF §  57

SG §  16.2 (translation M. McNamara) I will drink readily and uprightly and Upright water, truthful water, joyfully this water, for it is the water of truth, good water, namely, good water, and the water of beloved water, health, a beloved water, injuring no one, water the help of life, a water of help to every innocent water of the free, person who drinks it, water without stain to the one water pure and who lives and confesses God’s uncontaminated, a joyful, pleasant righteousness. drink for all who lead an upright life, Be made manifest pleasant water that bears witness to the just water, prompt witness and for me a revealer and shows up the wrong in the unjust. to the chastity of my virginity and of (my) immaculate conception, | reserved for me as a special person, remission of sins, and in false accusation a vindicator, and a “remission” ( ? ? ?) of God Most High, a gift of God and of the Lord of And I bless this water, those in want ; for it is ever-living water, I give you thanks, living water, everlasting and it will bear witness to the water. pure pregnancy that is mine I have blessed you from the Holy Spirit by the message of the angel.

tatis et immaculate conceptionis testis presens et proditor meus, mihi singulari reseruata remissio peccatorum et infamia falsa, uindex et remissio Dei altissimi, Dei munus et Domini deficiencium), with questions regarding syntax, punctuation, the exact understanding of certain terms and phrases (if original) such as presens, proditor, remissio Dei, munus deficiencium. The general sense of the corresponding texts of the J compilation may help. JHer has. “Water, pure and without stain, joyful drink, witness of my chaste virginity and immaculate conception. I give thanks to my God”. JAr is almost identical, but omits the word “witness”. “Water, pure and without stain, and joyful drink. (For the presence ?) In me of my chaste virginity and immaculate conception I give thanks”. The text, however, may be corrupt.

143

580 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church And I am the virgin who will become a mother without loss of virginity, and the mighty Lord has put his own sign on me, because (you are) a sign set aside for me and he lives, moreover, and will live of light and truth. for ever.

The witness of the midwife on the birth of Christ : JAr § 73–74 and InfLFF § 73–74 In the Latin texts of JAr and JHer the midwife describes the birth of Christ. The more important of these two Latin texts (differing but little from one another) seems to be JAr. Montague Rhodes James was quite taken with this text, which he believed to be docetic : the birth of Jesus was not a real human birth at all. He published the JAr text in English translation, but with omissions of difficult or obscure sections. A prime desideratum in texts such as these is to restore the original form of the passage, as best we can. In this task together with the Latin we now have the Irish texts to help. InfLB for practical purposes can be ignored, since for theological reasons the tradition it represents has reduced the text and removed passages that might be thought obscure or offensive. For comparison, however, I reproduce it here :55 InfLB 73.1–2 Then, while Joseph was at the entrance of the house and Mary within, there came at once a bright shining cloud down from heaven till it was over the cave and the city as though it were the sun which had been made to rise in the midst of the city and of the cave. Then, Mary brought forth her Son, and all the miracles which we have already related took place. For it has not been possible for anybody to recount or relate them, and even if it were possible, such would not be proper.

| InfLB 73.3. Then the cave was pervaded with a very great fragrance as if it had been filled with ointment, wine, and the true fragrance of the whole world, so that all were refreshed by that for a long time. And a great conspicuous star was seen above the 55  InfLB translation by P. Ó Fiannachta, M. Herbert and C. Breatnach ; InfLFF translation by D. Ó Laoghaire, M. Herbert and C. Breatnach, Apocrypha Hiberniae, I, Evangelia Infantiae, pp. 318-21 (InfLB) ; pp. 242-45 (InfLFF).

144

the bible : texts and commentaries

581

cave from morning till evening and neither its like nor its equal was seen before or since.

Matters are different with regard to InfLFF 73–75. This Irish text seems to have remained faithful to the original, and can be used in attempts to reconstruct the presumed original text. In places where it differs from JAr it will be necessary to decide in each case which text has the most likelihood of being the original one. Synopsis of InfLFF §§  73–74 ; JAr §§  73–74 InfLFF §§  73–74 73.1. Truly also, the attendants of the true virgin, namely angels of heaven and Joseph with his family and the woman with her assistant were empowered. The inhabitants of hell that night, moreover, were bound and derided and in deep depression, without power of evil or temptation against anything created by God, on the night of the divine birth, for all creatures were silent thus, serving their Saviour and bowing to the High Lord and considering the Old Testament and the prophecies made by the prophets and the faithful from the beginning of the world till that night. 73.2. And the virgin, moreover, was praying continually, with her face raised up and it seemed to me that she was entirely ethereal. A shining light came from her to us throughout the cave till it became one great, beautiful light, a delight at the coming into the world at the very time of the divine birth  – namely, at the birth of Christ, so that heaven and earth were full of peace and health.

73.3. And above the cave were heard many angelic voices, praising the great Lord and giving strength to the holy virgin who was in the cave. And that light obscured the light of the sun and the moon and all the stars.

JAr §§  73–74 §  73.1 When, therefore (then), the hour drew near, the power of God went forth openly.

73.2. And the girl, standing gazing at the heavens, became as white as snow. For the determined end of the good things was already coming forth. When, therefore, the light had come forth, she adored him (or : the one) whom she saw she had brought forth. The child himself was (indeed) radiating (light) round about in a unique manner, extremely clean and beautiful to look at, because he appeared alone (as) peace, bringing everything into a state of peace. | 73.3. Indeed in that hour in which 144 he was born, the voice of an invisible multitude was heard, with one voice saying “Amen”. And that light which was born grew greater and from the clarity of its brightness it dar-

582 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | There came to us from it also an

aroma satisfying to every noble soul for eternity and beyond. Better than all the world’s wine and fine perfume, aniseed, wax, saffron and all fair ointments, than all the plants and herbs that ever grew, and than all the fair fruits ever in holy Paradise, better than all of these was the satisfaction we received from that aroma. And the angels of heaven were serving him unfailingly, for there was no human being worthy to have knowledge of that mystery but the Virgin Mary alone. 43774.2. And as I saw him thus, I was filled with great mental vigour, and I bent over him and raised him from the ground. And he did not weigh like an infant.

74.3. And as I looked at him intently I found no spot or defect or sign of blood on him, but he was as if he had been bathed in the soft, ever-beautiful dew of the glorious, heavenly Father, and so beautiful a body was not known, and few infants were lighter, and no more comely human being was ever seen. I marvelled that he was not in nature like any other child, for he neither cried nor wept, but just a little, when he was put into the manger 74.4. And no sickness of infancy was known to be in him, and when I looked into his face he smiled at me, and there was never in the world anything so lovely. And the flash of light that came from his eyes darkened the light of the early morning sun coming towards us throughout the cave from the east.

kened the brightness of the sun. 145 And this cave was filled with clear brightness, together with a most pleasing aroma. Thus was this light born [in the same manner] as the dew which comes down from heaven upon the earth. For the odour from it emitted a fragrance that was stronger than any odour of ointments.

74.2. And I made bold and bent down and touched him, and I was thoroughly frightened, since there was no weight in him as (there would be in the case of) a new-born person. 74.3. And I examined him and there was no defilement in him, but he was as if in the dew of God the most High, all shining in (his) body, light to carry, bright to look at. And while I was amazed greatly in that he did not cry as new-born children are wont to cry.

74.4 and while I held him, looking into his face, he smiled at me with a most pleasant smile, and opening his eyes he looked at me intently and suddenly there came from his eyes a great light like a great flash of lightening.

| Conclusion

I have examined here the European and Irish transmission of certain Infancy Narratives, specifically the Protevangelium Jacobi, the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, the so-called Infancy Narrative of

146

apocryphal infancy narratives

583

Thomas (apparently originally entitled “The Childhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus”, or “Narratives of the Childhood of the Lord Jesus”), and the Latin Infancy Gospels edited by M. R. James, studied anew under the title “The J Compilation”, and its presumed earlier form, “The I Compilation”. The J Compilation was made before 800 by a combination of the Protevangelium Jacobi, the text known as “The Special Source” and Pseudo-Matthew. The Infancy Narratives as found in the Irish tradition of the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (InfLFF) and in the Leabhar Breac and related texts (InfLB), belong to this tradition, but without influence from the text of Pseudo-Matthew. Known as the “I Compilation” it is earlier than the J Compilation, and can be presumed to have come to Ireland well before 800, possibly in the seventh century. The Irish verse rendition of the Infancy Narrative of Thomas, made c. 700, indicates that a Latin version of this apocryphon circulated in Ireland at an early date  – in the seventh century at the latest. The Irish Infancy Narratives as preserved in InfLFF and InfLB help us in the examination of some expansive Latin translations of the Protevangelium Jacobi such as that found in SG, and also in the attempt to reconstruct the originals behind the J Compilation. This comparative study also indicates that there has been development and expansion and transpositions of texts in the course of the transmission of the apocryphal material in Ireland. There is little or no evidence for the presence of the text of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew in early medieval Ireland. New evidence is now emerging, however, that a summary of the first part of this work (from the birth of Mary to the proclamation of the Roman tax or census) was used in an Irish homily for the Feast of the Assumption of Mary, a homily which seems to have been composed in the twelfth century. A rich field of research has been opened up in this area of Irish studies. Much work yet remains to be done, not least in an examination of the traditions of the Magi found in vernacular Irish and Hiberno-Latin texts.

| JESUS IN (EARLY) IRISH APOCRYPHAL GOSPEL TRADITIONS1 Apocrypha Old and New and Jesus Traditions In the contemporary study of the Gospels, apocryphal writings, or what are classed as New Testament Apocrypha, play a prominent role. These are principally the Nag Hammadi manuscripts and related works such as the Gospel of Thomas. In this instance their evidence is invoked with regard to the historicity of the Gospel narrative and in the sphere of Historical Jesus studies. They have, of course, been earlier used in relation to the Jesus tradition, and some introductions to New Testament Apocrypha devote a section to such questions as “The Relatives of Jesus.”2 Before these contemporary discussions, the writings commonly described as New Testament Apocrypha had been considered in relation with the person of Jesus and with the Jesus tradition. Some of them were written in opposition to New Testament writings, the position of Jesus as Messiah and Redeemer in the New Testament Gospels, or in the Christian community that produced them. Others were intended to supplement what appeared to be lacking in the canonical Gospels and other canonical writings, or to attend to theological questions arising from them or not sufficiently developed in them. An essay such as one of the present nature is not the place to develop these points further. The contents of the New Testament Apocrypha have not to do solely, perhaps even chiefly, with matters of doctrine. Devotion to Christ, and the ongoing expression of this devotion, also played a central role in their composition and in their popularity from 1  First published in : Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, ed. by J. Frey – J. Schröter, Tübingen, 2010, pp. 685-739. 2  See, for instance, New Testament Apocrypha, vol.  1. Gospels and Related Writings, ed. by E. Hennecke  – W. Schneemelcher ; English translation by R. McL. Wilson, London, 1963, pp. 415–32 ; revised edition edited by W. Schneemelcher, English translation by R. McL. Wilson, Cambridge and Louisville, KY, 1991, pp. 470–88.

685

586 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church early times and also after the New Testament and patristic periods, and even later. | This takes us to a consideration of how define New Testament 686 Apocrypha and the period of their production  – both being questions of relevance for the sources to be used in this present essay. Definition of Apocrypha The terms “Apocrypha” and “New Testament Apocrypha” are accepted designations for a certain form of literature, and these terms have for long been acceptable and continue to be so. Individual works and collections under the title “New Testament Apocrypha” have been published in critical editions and in translations in various languages. Closer inspection of the term “apocryphon” (plural, and generic, “apocrypha”) and the dates of composition lead to division of opinion. The term “apocryphon” itself would connote a work that is “hidden” or “secret”, a designation which is not true of many, or perhaps most, of the compositions accepted as belonging to this group. Although not indicated by the term itself one note associated with the term “apocryphal”, is that a work so designated was not accepted as canonical. The New Testament Apocrypha are often set over against the Canon and canonical. While this is true of some, or many, of such writings it does not hold for all. Some of them were never intended to be set against the canonical texts, and were possibly intended to supplement them, or even supply material for the Christian imagination on Jesus absent from the canonical writings. Another question in relation to New Testament Apocrypha and their inclusion in collections, or as apocryphal sources in theological matters, is the date of composition of the originals. Some authors and publishers apply the fourth century as a cut-off date. Works of later origin than this are not included. That is a principle followed in the renowned collection New Testament Apocrypha edited by Hennecke and Schneemelcher (1904 and later). While arguments have been, and are, put forward in favour of this, the fact is that the literature which can be described as apocryphal did not cease to be composed in the fourth century. It was an ongoing process, in part serving a developing Christian theology and Christian devotion. Thus, the second-century Protevangelium of James was taken up and developed in the Gospel of Pseudo-Mat-

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

587

thew (Liber de nativitate Mariae), a Latin work composed between the middle of the sixth and the last decades of the eighth century. This tradition went on to develop further compositions on the Life of Mary. One of the categories for classification of New Testament Apocrypha is “Epistles”. An early example is the correspondence between Christ and Abgarus (the earliest Greek text being in Eusebius’s Hist. | Eccl.  1.13), given in Hennecke-Schneemelcher. 3 A 687 later composition in this category is the Letter of Lentulus of the thirteenth to fourteenth century, which does not feature in the New Testament Apocrypha of Hennecke-Schneemelcher, but is registered by Mauritius Geerard in Clavis Apocryphorum Novi Testamenti (1992),4 and is given in English translation in the collections of Montague Rhodes James,5 J. Keith Elliott (1993),6 in Italian and other vernacular translations. With the apocrypha we are dealing with a phenomenon of Christian literature, in which precise definitions prove difficult. A related question is the occasional connection of popular traditions with known apocrypha. Some apocrypha contain traditions which probably existed independently before insertion into the written work and may well have continued to exist after composition of a given apocryphon, and remain extant in other writings. I instance two examples of apocryphal works : the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Gospel of Nicodemus. Pseudo-Matthew 18–25 narrates the miracles that occurred to the Holy Family on the journey into Egypt and while in Egypt. These are also found in the Irish Infancy Narrative of the Leabhar Breac (§§  126–129 ; 133–136), a composition which does not appear to have known or used Pseudo-Matthew. Both probably depend on a common source. The account of miracles during the entry into Egypt is also found in a Latin eighth-century commentary on Matthew in the work known as De enigmatibus (Das Bibelwerk ; the Reference Bible), probably of Irish origin, not dependent on Pseudo-Matthew. The evidence seems 3  Hennecke – Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1, pp. 437– 44’ rev. edition, pp. 492-99. 4  M. Geerard, Clavis Apocryphorum Novi Testamenti, Corpus Christianorum, Turnhout, 1992, p. 187 (305). 5  M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford 1924 ; corrected edition, Oxford, 1953, pp. 477–78. 6  J. K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1993, p. 542.

588 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church to indicate that all three works contain old traditions, incorporated in different ways in the different texts. Similar observations could be made with regard to the Gospel of Nicodemus. Two Latin recensions of this are known. A Greek recension differing from these is also known, referred to as Greek Recension B. A noted passage of this recension has the well-known tradition on Judas, his wife roasting a cock on a fire, mention of Christ’s resurrection, the cock rising, spreading its wings and crowing three times. Montague Rhodes James translated this section into English, noting that this story of the cock made its way into Latin and thence into many medieval vernacular legends.7 This is a matter to which we shall return. No Latin version of this Greek recension is | known. Rémi Gounelle has shown that the 688 text on Judas in this Greek recension actually derives from Latin tradition, the oldest witnesses of which are of Anglo-Irish origin.8 While I have raised some questions with regard to the concept “Apocrypha”,9 and the problem of cut-off date in their use, in any study making use of these documents we must have a concept of what can, and cannot, be regarded as apocrypha in any acceptance of the word. The esteemed Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne (AELAC) has a broad understanding both of apocrypha and the question of a cut-off date, but still has a clear concept of what can and cannot be accepted as an apocryphon. To be so reckoned, such a work must in some way be connected with canonical literature, a biblical character, or biblical themes. In The Apocrypha in the Irish Church (1975) the present writer listed a number of Irish texts (nine in all) under the heading “The Other World”.10 When it came to preparing an edition of texts for the volume Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 2 : Apocalyptica et Eschatologica it

James, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 116. R. Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites qui ont chanté lors de la passion du Christ”, Recherches Augustiniennes 33 (2003), pp. 19–63, at 33–38 ; with translation of the Greek text (34) ; observation on Anglo-Irish origin (37). 9  Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, pp. xii–xiii, discusses the problem with the title “apocrypha”. 10  M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975, pp. 126–43 ; ##  99–108. 7  8 

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

589

had to be recognised that a number of those texts, while apocalyptic and eschatological, could not be classified as apocryphal. Research on Irish Apocrypha For many years scholars have expressed the view that the early Irish Church was a haven for apocryphal literature, and that in the later Middle Ages exotic otherworldly literature was widely available there. In his ground-breaking essay of 1954 treating of Irish exegetical activity between 650 and 800 Professor Bernhard Bischoff wrote :11 In the early period of Irish Christianity, one in many respects still dark, a refuge was offered for portion of the heretical and apocryphal literature which on the Continent was | destined to disappear. The authentic form of Pelagius’ commentary on the Pauline Epistles, and portion of the commentary on the Psalms by Theodore of Mopsuestia, were preserved there. Traces of the transmission of the Gospel according to the Hebrews and of other apocrypha also point to Ireland.

Towards the end of a study of the subject, David Dumville, a leading scholar in the field, makes observations somewhat similar to those of Bernhard Bischoff. He writes :12 We have, then, a confused picture of the position of the apocrypha in the eyes of the early Irish Church. What is perhaps clearest of all is that, beginning first with the semantic evidence  – which pointed out the absence of a clear dividing line protecting the exclusivity of the Canon  – and then considering the use of apocryphal works in liturgical and exegetical contexts, the early Irish seemed to have allowed themselves a remarkable freedom to use the apocrypha and appear generally to have held such works in a high regard which would have been impermissible elsewhere. 11  B. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), pp. 189–279, at 195 (essay reproduced in revised form in Dr  Bischoff’s collected essays. Mittelalterliche Studien. Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, vol.  1, Stuttgart 1966, pp. 205–73, at 210 ; English translation, “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, by C. O’Grady, MSC in Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, PIBA 1, ed. by McNamara, Dublin, 1976, pp. 73–160, at 78). 12  D. Dumville, “Biblical Apocrypha and the Early Irish. A Preliminary Investigation”, PRIA 73  C (1973), pp. 299–338, at 336.

689

590 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Visigothic Spain was regarded by some as a possible channel for the entry of such literature to Ireland. In his summary of the available evidence in 1928 on Irish ecclesiastical learning, James Kenney in his standard reference work writes :13 [A]bout the beginning of the tenth century, almost contemporaneously with those linguistic changes which modern philologists have selected as marking the transition from Old to Middle Irish, a change came over Irish ecclesiastical literature and culture. To the predominantly Latin, or Hiberno-Latin, culture of the earlier period succeeded the predominantly Gaelic of the later. The new age is distinguished not only by partially original works in Irish, but also by extensive translations from Latin into Irish. And the greater part of this literature, although falling into several different classes, has its own common and distinctive note.

Kenney goes on to list six chief classes of this later literature. The sixth is :14 Imaginative expositions of biblical and church history, of cosmic and eschatological ideas, based partly on the scriptures but mainly on Latin apocrypha and legends of continental origin. Although little of it has been preserved in its original form through Irish media, a vast amount of this Christian mythical lore must have been circulating in Ireland in the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries, some of it very curious and unusual and but little known elsewhere in Europe. It was all used freely and fully by what we may call popular writers in Irish on religious subjects. Indeed, all this later Irish ecclesiastical literature (both apocryphal and otherwise) … is characterized by an intense interest in the supernatural and the eschatological and a constant delight in the wonderful and bizarre.

| James paid attention to some of the Irish evidence on the Apoc- 690 rypha in essays in The Journal of Theological Studies in 1909/10 and 1918/19 and in other studies besides.15 The most significant early contribution in the field was made by St.  John D. Seymour in a 13  J. F. Kenney, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland. Ecclesiastical. An Introduction and Guide, Columbia, 1929 (later reprints, New York, 1966 ; etc.), pp. 732–33. 14  Kenney, p. 733. 15  M. R. James, “Notes on Apocrypha”, Journal of Theological Studies11 (1909/10), pp. 288–91 ; James, “Irish Apocrypha”, Journal of Theological Stud-

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

591

series of studies during the 1920s,16 culminating in his book Irish Visions of the Other-World : a Contribution to the Study of Mediaeval Visions in 1930.17 Among his more significant contributions was an essay in 1923 on “The Irish Versions of the Transitus Mariae”18 in which he gives what he himself describes as “a fairly full resume” of the form of this apocryphal writing as found in Liber Flavus Fergusiorum of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin (MS 23  O  48). Both Seymour and James repeatedly commented on the relationships between Irish apocryphal literature and that of the East, in particular with the Apocrypha of the Syrian Church. In 1937 Rudolf Willard took up Seymour’s “fairly full resume” of the Liber Flavus text of the Transitus Mariae.19 He agrees with Seymour and James regarding its close connection with the Syriac form of the apocryphon, and comments on its value : “There can be no doubt that in the final evaluation of the Apocrypha relative to the Dormition and Assumption, the Irish must play an important part”.20 In a footnote he says : “It is to be hoped that we may have soon an adequate edition, with full editorial apparatus and

ies 20 (1918/19), pp. 9–16 ; James (ed. with an Introduction), Latin Infancy Gospels. A New Text, with a Parallel Version from Irish, Cambridge, 1927. 16  St. J. D. Seymour “The Bringing forth of the Soul in Irish Literature”, Journal of Theological Stidies 22 (1920-21), pp. 16–20 ; Seymour, “Irish Versions of the Transitus Mariae”, Journal of Theological Studies 23 (1921-22), pp. 36–43 ; Seymour, “Irish Versions of the Vision of St  Paul”, Journal of Theological Studies 4 (1922-23), pp. 54–59 ; Seymour, “The Seven Heavens in Irish Literature”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 14 (1923), pp. 18–30 ; Seymour, “The Eschatology of the Early Irish Church”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 14 (1923), pp. 179–211 ; Seymour, “The Book of Adam and Eve in Ireland”, PRIA 36 C (1921–24), pp. 121–33 ; Seymour, “The Signs of Doomsday in the Saltair na Rann”, PRIA 36  C (1921–1924), pp. 154–63 ; Seymour, “Studies in the Vision of Tundal”, PRIA 37  C (1924–1927), pp. 87–106 ; Seymour, “Notes on Apocrypha in Ireland”, PRIA 37 C (1924–1927), pp. 107–17 ; Seymour, “The Vision of Adamnan”, PRIA 37  C (1924–1927), pp. 304–12. 17  St. J. D. Seymour, Irish Visions of the Other-World. A Contribution to the Study of Mediaeval Visions, London, 1930. 18  Seymour, “Transitus Mariae”, pp. 36–43. 19  R. Willard, “The Testament of Mary. The Irish Account of the Death of the Virgin”, Recherches de Théologie ancienne et médievale 9 (1937), pp. 341– 64. 20  Willard, “The Testament”, p, 364.

592 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church translation”.21 A few years later Irish texts on the Assumption of the Virgin | were published by Charles Donahue, together with an 691 examination of the Irish tradition of the Dormitio,22 that is, an edition of the Irish text of Oxford, Bodleian, MS Laud Misc.  610, fols  34–38, together with translation, and cognate Latin text of Trinity College, Dublin, MS F.5.3, pp.  143–144. The importance of the Irish evidence for the full understanding of the Transitus Mariae was again stressed by Victor Arras in his edition and study of the Ethiopic text of this apocryphon.23 He regrets that the edition of the text is extremely rare even in the largest European libraries, and expresses the hope that it will be reprinted.24 Seymour’s view on the close relation of the Irish to the Syriac tradition was a little later reinforced by Michel van

21  Willard, “The Testament”, p. 364. The first full translation of this important Liber Flavus text, made by Máire Herbert, was published in 1989 in Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, ed. by M. Herbert – M. McNamara, Edinburgh, 1989, pp. 119–131. 22  C. Donahue, The Testament of Mary. The Gaelic Version of the Dormitio Mariae together with an Irish Latin Version, New York, 1942. 23  De Transitu Mariae (Apocrypha Aethiopice I, CSCO 343, Scriptores Aetiopici 67), ed. by V. Arras, Louvain, 1973 ; see pp. vii–viii. “Magno in numero habendus est auctor qui in Irlanda Testamentum Mariae gaelice confecit. Quod ille solus narrationem retinuit de itinere in Aegyptum, quod solus probationem Pauli retulit et quod de itinere per transmundana testimonium servavit, satis est argumenti eius adhuc tempore codices graecos vel latinos exstitisse multo integriores codicibus nobis hodie notis. Hoc autem dolendum est quod qui acutiores de variis Transitibus scripserunt, hunc librum gaelicum, mole exiguum, momento vero magnum, utpote perrarum in europaeis vel maximis bibliothecis, inspicere non potuerunt. Qui expendere velit quomodo varii textus de Dormitione agentes, omnibus vestigiis indagatis, connexi sint, exoptabit fore ut gaelicum scriptum rursus prelis subiciatur. Non enim sufficit legere quae optima de eo Seymour et willard exposuerunt ; horum doctorum observationes ad unum tantum codicem, scil. Ms. 23048 b Dublinensis Irisch [ !] Academy referuntur ; cui nomen Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (XV saec.), quem Seymour legit, donahue vero suum textum sumpsit e codice Laud. Misc. 610 Bibliothecae Oxoniensis (etiam XV saec.) ; codices alius ab alio discrepant, ut verbis donahue suum apocryphum explanantis patet”. 24  A critical edition of the Irish text, with translation, apparatus and notes, is currently being prepared by Dr  Caoimhín Breatnach for inclusion in volume 2 of the Apocrypha Hiberniae series of the Brepols Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

593

Esbroeck, another leading authority on that particular apocryphal writing.25 In 1975 the present writer published an initial list, with summary information (a catalogue raisoné) of what he considered Irish apocryphal texts of the Old and New Testaments, 108 items in all, with 34 on Old Testament material, most of these not apocryphal in a strict sense. An agreement was entered with AELAC (Association pour l”Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne) for a critical edition of Irish New Testament Apocrypha. The first volume (Evangelia Infantiae) of this has been published, the second (Apocalyptica et Eschatologica) is in the process of production and | the third (The Public life of Jesus and Passion Narratives) has 692 been planned. Irish Apocrypha relevant to Jesus Traditions Before approaching the study of Jesus in Irish apocryphal tradition it is indicated that we try to ascertain which apocryphal works were known or used in the early Irish Church. The following merit consideration. Latin Protevangelium Iacobi The influence of the Protevangelium of James has been ubiquitous through the Christian world, in literature and art, whether directly or indirectly throughout derivative compositions. Until very recently no Latin translation of the work was known. It is now known to be extant in a single manuscript : Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève 2787, critically edited by Rita Beyers.26 We cannot say whether this work itself was known in Ireland. Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew Mention in the Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican manuscript Pal. lat.  68 (an Irish compilation ; early eighth century) of the miracle 25  M. van Esbroeck, “Les textes littéraires sur l’Assomption avant le Xe siècle”, in Les Actes Apocryphes des Apôtres, ed. by F. Bovon, Geneve, 1981, pp. 265–85, esp. 267, 571. 26  R. Beyers (ed.), “Latin translation of the Protevangelium of James in MS. Paris, Sainte-Geneviève, 2787”, in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1. Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al. (CCSA 14), Turnhout, 2001, pp. 881– 957.

594 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of the dragons honouring the feet of Jesus in the cave (in fulfilment of Ps 148.7) during the flight into Egypt as in Pseudo-Matthew 18,1 might indicate direct dependence on Pseudo-Matthew. However, the fact that there seems to be no influence of Ps.-Matthew in evidence in the Irish Infancy Narrative of the Leabhar Breac and other texts (to be next considered) or in the Latin text behind it might indicate the contrary, and a lack of knowledge of Pseudo-Matthew in the early Irish Church. However, Caoimhín Breatnach has identified and critically edited, with translation, a ninth-century Irish Homily on the birth and the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, the section on the birth of Mary clearly drawn from Pseudo-Matthew.27 We may presume that the entire Gospel circulated in Ireland. Latin Infancy Gospel and its “Special Source,” and the “Irish Parallel Text” In 1927 Montague Rhodes James published from two manuscripts works he described as Latin Infancy Gospels : A New Text, with a Parallel Version from the Irish.28 James published two distinct recensions of this, | one from the British Museum (now British Library) 693 MS Arundel 404, the other from MS O.3.9 from the Library of the Dean and Chapter of Hereford, together with reprint of an English translation of a parallel Irish text from the manuscript known as the Leabhar Breac. More manuscripts of both recensions were later identified by Jan Gijsel and critically edited by Jean-Daniel Kaestli and Martin McNamara,29 and given the name “The J Compilation” (“J” from the original editor James). For the account from the conception of Mary to the Annunciation and Visitation the narrative is from a Latin translation of the Protevangelium of James, with insertions and influences from Pseudo-Matthew. The narrative from the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem for the census to the visit and witness of the Magi is from what James has described as a “Special Source,” a text otherwise unknown (but with certain influences from Pseudo-Mat27  C. Breatnach, “An Irish Homily on the Life of the Virgin Mary”, Ériu 51 (2000), pp. 23–58. 28  Cambridge 1927. 29  Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, ed. by McNamara et al., Turnhout, 2001, pp. 622–880.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

595

thew). The text continues as far as the murder of Zacharias with the narrative of the Protevangelium, and for the remainder follows Pseudo-Matthew with the miracles during the Flight into Egypt and in Egypt, ending in the Arundel recension with a form of the apocryphal Infancy Deeds of the Lord Jesus (Pseudo-Thomas). The “parallel Irish text” is now known from two manuscripts, one called the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (MS, Dublin, Royal Irish Academy 23  O  48 [476]), the other the Leabhar Breac (MS, Dublin, Royal Irish Academy 23  P  16 [1230]). The Liber Flavus runs from the beginning to the witness of the midwife at Christ’s birth, ending imperfectly ; that of the Leabhar Breac continues onwards through the visit and testimony of the Magi, the journey into Egypt and sojourn there. It also inserts sections on the history of Herod. A comparison of this parallel Irish text with the “J Compilation” shows that, unlike the “J Compilation,” there was no influence of Pseudo-Matthew. It seems that the Irish translation was made from an earlier text, one (now known as the “I-Compilation”) that must have come to Ireland before the composition of Pseudo-Matthew was made (c.  800), or at least before its influence was felt. Presumably the Irish translation was made from an “I-Compilation” in which the narrative of the Protevangelium and the “Special Source” were already conjoined. The origin and date of the “Special Source” still remain to be determined. Believing that the account of Christ’s birth in the Arundel text (§  73–74) was docetic, M.R. James (1927) expressed the view that it probably belonged to the Gospel of Peter (second century ?). While Marie-Joseph Lagrange | disagreed with this in 694 his review of James’s edition, 30 a docetic origin is still proposed by J. Keith Elliott. 31 The matter has been discussed in detail in the re-edition of Latin text, with the corresponding Irish material, with arguments against the docetic nature of the passage. With regard to origin the “Special Source” the view proposed there is M.-J. Lagrange, “Un nouvel Évangile de l’Enfance, édité par M. R. James”, Revue Biblique 37 (1928), pp. 544–57. 31  Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 108. “The chapters … (72– 74), where most of the unique material is to be found, reflect second-century Greek docetic tendencies and may well have been the raison d’être for the original composition, namely, to give a Gnostic or docetic view of Jesus’ birth.” 30 

596 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church that it is probably the hitherto unidentified work Liber de natiuitate saluatoris et de Maria uel obstetrice of the Decretum Gelasianum, indicating a date prior to A.D. 500  for the “Special Source.” M.-J. Lagrange had already expressed the view that the text may possibly be very much older than the sixth century. 32 The “Gospel according to the Hebrews” (Evangelium secundum Hebreos) ? The “Special Source” is connected with a work known by an early Irish writer as “The Gospel according to the Hebrews” : the Irish Exegete Sedulius Scottus (c.  850) cites a passage from it under this title. 33 In his comment on the passage on the Magi in Mt 2.2 Sedulius remarks that the number of the Magi who took gifts to the Lord is quite uncertain. For although it is narrated that they presented three gifts to the Lord the number of the Magi is not precisely given in the Gospel. He then proceeds to give a citation on the issue from the Gospel entitled “According the Hebrews” (secundum Ebreos), with citations from Joseph and his son Simon on the Magi, their headdress, clothes and footwear. There was a whole troupe of them (uidit turbam uiatorum), apparently astrologers (star gazers). This citation of about ten lines (some 100 words) coincides verbatim with the relevant section of the “Special Source” (§  98). Three Jewish-Christian Gospels are mentioned by early Christian writers, namely the Gospel of the Nazareans, the Gospel of the Ebionites and the Gospel of the Hebrews (“According to the Hebrews”). 34 Consideration of these does not concern us here. We can presume that Sedulius Scottus knew an entire work entitled The Gospel according to the Hebrews. His comentary on Matthew, | with the citation, was composed on the Continent, but he 695 can be presumed to have known the apocryphal work in Ireland. Whether this was the “Special Source” alone, or combined (as the “I Compilation” or “J Compilation”) with the Protevangelium of Lagrange, “Un nouvel Évangile”, p. 557. Sedulius Scottus, Super Evangelium Matthaei (2.2) ; Sedulius Scottus. Kommentar zum Evangelium nach Matthäus 1,1–11,1, ed. by B. Löfstedt, Freiburg, 1989, p .66. 34  For a detailed discussion of these see P. Vielhauer  – G. Strecker, “Jewish-Christian Gospels”, in New Testament Apocrypha. Vol. 1 : Gospels and Related Writings, rev. edition, ed. by W. Schneemelcher, Louisville, KN and London, 1991, pp. 134–78. 32 

33 

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

597

James is not clear. It was probably the “Special Source” alone. Any connection with this work and the earlier Jewish-Christian Gospels remains to be examined further. In an introductory study of the background to the “Special Source” in the critical edition of all the texts, Jean-Daniel Kaestli and the present writer raise the question of the possibility of a Jewish-Christian origin for the “Special Source”, giving arguments for and against, but finally leaving the question open. They note Jan Gijsel’s proposal, following Philip Vielhauer, that it is reasonable to hold that the “Source” comes from the Gospel of the Nazaraeans. Among other arguments, they advance the presence of a third son of Joseph in the “Source” called Ameon / Abion (=Ebion) otherwise unattested, which may link the work with the Ebionites. 35 The Boyhood Deeds of Jesus (Infancy Narrative of Thomas) The work commonly known as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, but more accurately named the Boyhood Deeds of Jesus, was probably originally composed in Greek. It has been transmitted in many forms and languages. There are three Latin versions : in some fragments in a Vienna palimpsest text (fifth century), in an extended form (chapters 26–42) of the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and in a more recent version in a single Vatican manuscript (Reg. lat. 648). We have a very early Irish versified version of the apocryphon, composed about 700. We shall speak of this further below. The Irish “Gospel History” In the Irish manuscript known as the Leabhar Breac, and partly in other Irish texts, we have a composition which can be described as a Gospel History. Much of it is apocryphal material, while some of the elements are from historical, semi-historical, or imaginative sources. It opens with synchronisms and events at the birth of Christ. This is followed by a text on the Seventeen Wonders on the night of Christ’s birth. There follows the text of the “Special Source” from the journey to Bethlehem to the flight into Egypt, ending with an account of the death of Herod and of the priest Zacharias. All this has been published. 36 There follow on 35  J.-D. Kaestli  – M. McNamara, in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 127–29. 36  In McNamara et al, pp. 247–439, 541–77, 582–617.

598 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church this four items on the public life of Jesus (all except one unpublished) : (item a : LB p. 144) on the baptism of Christ ; on the apostles, their names, occupations, tribes, manner in which they were called, and the fulfilment | of prophecies. Next comes a text (item 696 b : LB p.  145a–146b) with a list of the apostles sharing the same names (three Jameses, two Thaddaeuses etc.) into which a text of the Letter of Abgarus has been inserted. Then comes a text (item c ; LB p.  147b–150b) on the “First preaching of Jesus” (at Nazareth). In two manuscripts this is followed by a lengthy apocryphal text, headed Dígal Fola Críst, “The Avenging of Christ’s Blood,” quite distinct from the apocryphal Vindicta Salvatoris. This may have originally been intended as the ending of the “Gospel History”. In the use of such material for our purpose the nature of each element has to be considered whether apocryphal, legendary, pseudo-historical, historical or exegetical. The Evernew Tongue (In Tenga Bithnua) will be considered in detail below (pages 642-50). The Letter of Lentulus, the Abgar Correspondence and Exegetical Gospel Commentaries may be mentioned in passing here, and occasional texts from them considered in passing below. Jesus and John the Baptist In the Irish material there is not too much that can be regarded as apocryphal regarding John the Baptist’s relationship to Jesus. 37 The Infancy narrative of the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (46,1–2) recounts the narrative of the visitation of Mary to her cousin Elizabeth within the framework of the Protevangelium of James (12,2), and, in keeping with the Trinubium Annae, notes that Anna, mother of Mary, and Esmeria, mother of Elizabeth, were sisters. When Elizabeth opened the door and greeted Mary “John the Baptist went on his knees in his mother’s womb in honour of his Creator  – who was in his own mother’s womb, that is, Mary  – Jesus Christ. For John was the voice and prophet and herald of the Son of God in every path he travelled. And that was his first prophecy  – in his mother’s womb before Christ, as he was but six months in the world. And he lived for twenty-nine years, baptising 37  For the question in the apocrypha in general see Geerard, Clavis Apocryphorum, pp. 97–100 (nos. 180–185 ; “Apocrypha de Iohanne Baptista”).

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

599

and preaching and announcing the Son of the heavenly Father to all before he baptised Christ. And he was a year and forty hours in hell before him, moreover, before Christ came for the captives there”. 38 | Mention of John’s worship of Christ in his moth- 697 er’s womb seems to be found only in Irish sources. The tradition occurs again in a thirteenth-century Irish poem on the infancy of Christ. “John went on his knees yonder inside the blue-eyed bright one ; the brown-haired child all but pierced her side as he faced the Creator.”39 The final part of the Liber Flavus Infancy text on the length of John’s life and of his sojourn in hell represents medieval Irish computistics rather than apocryphal literature. We have a number of other texts on all these points in Irish writings.40 In the “Irish Gospel History,” in a section on the “First Preaching of Christ” (at Nazareth, that is) we read that John was a year and a day in hell before Christ’s passion.41 The text goes on to remark that others say that “Christ was teaching for three years and a half from baptism to his passion, and this is true, since he was delayed without teaching in the town whose name is Capernaum, namely from the epiphany of baptism to the next Easter”. While it is not altogether clear what is precisely intended here, the text goes on to say that “it is manifest that he did this for the honour of John the Baptist, because John was likewise teaching at this time. However, Christ was teaching at this time, although he was not doing it manifestly to the crowds and folk”. After John was taken, Christ began at once to teach publicly, with his first preaching at Nazareth. He later went from Nazareth to Capernaum and began teaching publicly there to all, this is what he said. Agite penitenciam et annunciate. All this seems inspired by a Gospel harmony rather than any apocryphal work. The intention behind it seems to be to harmonise the accounts of Mark (1.14–21) and Matthew (4.13–22) that state that Jesus began his preaching at the Sea of Galilee (including Capernaum) with that of Luke 38  Edited in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  1, ed. by McNamara et al. (CCSA 13), pp. 198–99. 39  Poem edited in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, ed. by B. Ó Cuív (CCSA 14), pp. 504–50. 40  For references see in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  1, ed. by McNamara (CCSA 13), pp. 200–01. 41  Compare Apocrypha Hiberniae, ed. by McNamara, p. 200, note 125.

600 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (4.14-15, 16–30) which might give the impression that he began his preaching at Nazareth. Jesus and Joseph of the House of David With regard to Irish apocryphal material concerning Joseph, concerning his sons and the house of David, the birth of Jesus, the midwife and the Magi, our chief, if not sole, source for information will the “Special Source.” This is now represented by the two Latin traditions of the “J Compilation,” Arundel (JAr) and Hereford (JHer) and the two Irish translations in the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (InfLFF) and the Leabhar Breac (InfLB). These on | occasion differ among themselves, giving rise to the question 698 on a number of occasions as to which best represents the original “Special Source.” A related question, naturally, will be which are the best representatives of the apocryphal work as known in Ireland. With regard to this latter point we probably have to do with different texts for different centuries – an original “I Compilation” in Latin, a text modified at a later period to give us some of the passages in InfLB. The essentials with regard to Joseph are given in InfLFF in the opening section of the text corresponding to the “Special Source,” at the proclamation of Caesar’s tax, in InfLFF 60, which reads : Joseph  – who was formerly called “Moab Justus”, because he was a just man —, when he heard that, went with his family, himself and the virgin Mary and his three sons, Simeon and Ameon and James of the Knees, from Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem of Judah, for that city was the city of David son of Jesse, and Joseph had been born there, for Joseph and Mary were of the seed of David.  … Therefore they came to Bethlehem of Judah to pay Caesar’s tax.

He apparently called “Justus” through an influence from 1 :19 : “Joseph ... cum esset iustus”. We shall now treat of these elements individually. Joseph, who was formerly called Moab Justus At the point of the text just quoted the Latin texts of the J Compilation have the same as the Irish translations : Joseph … qui ante Moab uocabatur. The Irish InfLFF text names him “Moab Justus”, the adjective iustus probably due to the Vulgate text of

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

601

Matthew 1.19. Why Joseph was (formerly) so called and why it is considered proper to recall this name precisely at this point of the narrative is not clear. It may be that in the narrative Joseph is regarded as the exile par excellence from his native Bethlehem, and his earlier exile merited for him a recollection of the earlier exile from Bethlehem of the family of Elimelech, a descendent of David, forced by famine to leave Bethlehem and settle in the land of Moab, as recounted in the Book of Ruth (Ruth 1.1–2). This same book also tells of the return to Bethlehem of Elimelech’s wife Naomi and of her daughter-in-law Ruth the Moabitess, who was to give birth to Obed, grandfather of David (Ruth 2–4). Joseph and Mary of the seed of David That Joseph (and Jesus) were of the house of David is clear from the New Testament (cf. especially Matt 1.20). As Zacharias was from the tribe of Levi so we can presume was his wife Elizabeth. From this it would be natural to expect that Mary, her cousin, was also from that tribe, not of the tribe of Judah, and Mary was so considered in an early tradition. However, from the second century onwards the central Christian tradition (as the “Special Source”) asserted that Mary, like Joseph, was of the house of | David.42 Thus also in Pseudo-Matthew 13.1 : Joseph and Mary 699 had to journey to Bethlehem because both were from the tribe of Judah and from the house and homeland (patria) of David. The three sons of Joseph – Simeon, Ameon (Abion) and James of the Knees These are the names, and order, of the sons in InfLFF §  60 ; see also 62,5 ; in InfLB §  59b the order is Abion, Semion and James of the Knees. Ameon and Abion can be presumed to be the same name (the letters “m” and “b” when lenited could sound the same – as “v” or “w”). In the Protevangelium of James only one son of Joseph is mentioned, namely Samuel. They are not mentioned 42  See W. Bauer, Das Leben Jesu im Zeitalter der neutestamentlichen Apokryphen, Tübingen, 1909 ; reprint, Darmstadt, 1967, pp. 15–17 ; A. Meyer  – W. Bauer, “The Relatives of Jesus”, in New Testament Apocrypha, ed. by E. Hennecke – W. Schneemelcher, 1963, p. 427. See also W. A. Bienert, “The Relatives of Jesus”, in New Testament Apocrypha, ed. by W. Schneemelcher, revised edition 1991, vol. 1, pp. 470-88.

602 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church at all in Pseudo-Matthew. In the J Compilation (JAr, JHer) (§  60) Joseph travels with “his sons” and only one of them is mentioned, Symeon, who plays an important role with his father, especially as speaker with his father or with the midwife. In the Irish texts the roles of the sons are different : Ameon / Abion goes ahead with Joseph to get lodgings and pay the tax, while Simeon and James remain behind with Mary who travels slowly and will arrive later (see InfLFF-InfLB 62,1 and 64,1–2). In the Irish texts James is also given as the author of the work “from the birth of Mary to the birth of Christ and from the birth of Christ to his crucifixion” (InfLFF 1 ; InfLB 59b). In InfLB 59b James is said to have assumed the abbacy of Jerusalem after Christ, and to have been a cousin of Jesus (“a sister’s son of Mary”).43 By the inclusion of Ameon / Abion among Joseph’s sons the Irish texts go beyond the J Compilation (JAr, JHer), but probably represent the original “Special Source.”44 Joseph an exile from Bethlehem In the “Special Source” Joseph’s birthplace is given as Bethlehem, from where poverty forced him to move to Galilee. This essential tradition is found in all our four witnesses (JAr ; JHer ; InfLFF ; InfLB), but with occasional differences. Joseph’s praise of Bethlehem is given in three distinct | discourses in InfLFF, not equally 700 represented in all the other sources. First (a)  there is a discourse of Joseph on entering Bethlehem, found in InfLFF 62,2–3 ; JArHer 62,2, but not in InfLB. This is followed (b)  in the Irish texts only (InfLFF-InfLB 62,4) by a discourse decrying exile, and a third discourse (c) in InfLFF (62,5) alone on Joseph’s personal situation and his reason for coming to Bethlehem. They merit citation, at least in part. Joseph’s praise of Bethlehem (InfLFF) : 62.2  When Joseph came into the centre of the city he was filled with great joy, and he said : “There is nothing more righteous than that everyone should love his native land, and there is no law more just than that everyone should remain in his own native land, and 43  See further note 6 to InfLB 59b in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  1, CCSA 13, p. 300. 44  See Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 68–73.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

603

there is nothing more dignified than that everyone should be in his ancestral dwelling. And I have been a long time absent from you, Bethlehem of Judah, and I rejoice at the sight of you, for you were a worthy lodging for David, king of the children of Israel.     62.3  And although some might think little of you, I esteem you, and I am as happy at seeing you as if mine were the inheritance of the heavenly city. Thus I come to you, and you are more wonderful than the feasts and banquets of the whole world, and I have the same love for you as I have for the mother who bore me. And the scent of your flowers, plants and royal fruits is better than every unction. Nobler the stones in your walls and the ornamentation of your temples than every land that the people of Israel possess. And to you were promised kingly grace and abundance of all good. The sound of the harp-music of your leader and lord, David son of Jesse, has been revealed to me, as he praised the great Lord, and it is to you that he prophesied, through the grace of the Holy Spirit, the coming and arrival of the divine glory.”

Joseph descries exile (InfLFF) : 62.4  Having spent some time in that manner praising his Lord, he sat down on a big stone in the middle of the city, and he was decrying exile and disparaging poverty, saying : “Woe to him who closely follows destitution and whose boon companion is poverty, and whose unmitigated disease is famine, and whose dwelling is exile, and whose neighbours are foreigners. Earthly poverty, it is because of you I left this city and my native land, and went into the land of Galilee, where I saw little of wealth and many people and scarcity of food. For the food of Galilee consists only of herbs and plants and that which doctors give to the sick. That is the food of the people of that land, and there remains nothing which keeps strength or nourishment in the bodies of people but only enough to preserve life. And even if the foreign city be good, it is not favourable to strangers, and if it be evil, hanging will be the fate of strangers. And no one is poor although he be destitute, if he is in his native land. And the foreigner, even if he be rich, is called poor and will be treated with contempt, disrespect and dishonour. And my heart is joyful before you, Bethlehem of Judah, and I rejoice at your sight. You are the inheritance that God bestowed on the noble, venerable patriarch, Abraham. As for me, I have come to this city to pay Caesar’s tax and to fulfill the will of God.”

Excursus on Joseph, Bethlehem and the Brothers of Jesus After this treatment of Joseph and his sons (“brothers of Jesus”) we may digress a little on the possible bearing of this evidence on

604 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the much discussed | question on the identity of the “brothers of 701 Jesus”, and the likelyhood of Richard Bauckham’s view that they formed a special group that extended in history beyond the passing mentions of them in the Gospels. James was one of the “brothers of Jesus” mentioned in the Gospels (Mark 6.3 ; Matt 13.55). After the murder of James, brother of John, Peter on the release from prison refers to James (brother of the Lord, evidently) as the leading man in the Jerusalem community (“Tell this to James and the believers” ; Acts 12.17). It is clear from the Acts of the Apostles that James (brother of the Lord) was leader of the Jerusalem Christian community (see Acts 15.13 ; 21.8). He is almost certainly the James honoured by an appearance of the risen Lord mentioned by Paul in I Cor 15.7. James, the Lord’s brother, was the only other person that Paul met in Jerusalem at his visit to Cephas three years after his conversion (Gal 1.18–19). James, with Peter and John, supported Paul’s mission to the gentiles (Gal 2.9). These three were regarded as pillars of the Church in Jerusalem. Despite James’s backing for Paul’s mission, certain people from James, came from Jerusalem to Antioch and attempted to lead the Church there to observe Jewish observances (Gal 2.12). While James and Paul represented two different approaches with regard to fidelity to the Gospel, both agreed on the other’s approach. According to Josephus James was stoned by order of the high priest Ananus on the occasion of the death of the procurator Festus (therefore A.D. 62, before the outbreak of the Jewish war). According to Hegesippus, as reported by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl.  2.23.12–18), the scribes and Pharisees cast James down from the battlement of the Jerusalem Temple. We may here take up the evidence of Hegesippus on the brothers and relatives of the Lord as transmitted by Eusebius. We do not know whether Hegesippus was a Christian of Jewish extraction, as Eusebius believes (Hist. Eccl.  4.22.8). In any case, he had access to Palestinian Jewish tradition, most likely a written source from the first half of the second century.45 Eusebius devotes chapter 23 of Book 2 of 45  See R. Bauckham, Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church, Edinburgh, 1990 ; A. Meyer  – W. Bauer, “The Relatives of Jesus,” p. 419 ; see also W. A. Bienert, “The Relatives of Jesus”, pp. 470-491 ; “The Genealogy of Jesus. Further Relatives”, pp. 486–88.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

605

his Church History to James, citing Hegesippus’s Memoirs. James, brother of the Lord (ho adelphos tou kyriou) received the governing of the Church. He was called “the Just” by everyone, since there were many persons called James. The church historian goes on to note that James’s knees became like the knees of camels because of his constant prayer on his knees for his people. The account given of his martyrdom differs from the account of Josephus, as has been noted above. | According to Hegesippus (as cited by Eusebius), James the 702 brother of the Lord was succeeded by Symeon, son of Clopas (uncle of the Lord ?), and Mary, wife of Clopas, hence a cousin (anepsios) of the Lord (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 4.22.2). Another relative of the Lord who features prominently in Hegesippus’s narrative is Jude, grandson of Jude the brother of the Lord. It appears that Hegesippus’s work had two sequences, two parallel accounts of Symeon son of Clopas (and Jude grandson of Jude brother of the Lord). The first sequence concerns the preservation of the Jerusalem church in apostolic teaching during the period of Symeon’s leadership, the origin of heresy with Thebouthis and its success coming only after Symeon’s death (thus in Hist. Eccl.  4.22.42 // 3.1 ; 4.22.4b–6 ; 3.32.3 ; 3.32.7–8). The second sequence concerns the Roman persecution of Davidides in the reigns of Vespasian, Domitian and Trajan. Its main apologetic purpose seems to be to show that the relatives of Jesus who were accused and suffered as Davidides, did so unjustly.46 With regard to Symeon’s succession Eusebius (possibly following Hegesippus) says that on the martyrdom of James the apostles and disciples of the Lord who were still surviving came together from all quarters, together with the Lord’s relatives (genous) after the flesh, took counsel in common and as successor to James elected Symeon, son of Clopas (mentioned in the Gospels ; see John 19.25). Symeon was thus a cousin (anepsios) of the Lord, for Hegesippus relates that Clopas was Joseph’s brother (Hist. eccl.  3.11 ; 4.22.42). Symeon is reported as having been martyred at the age of one hundred and twenty years in the reign of Trajan (96–117 ; Hist. Eccl. 2.23.18). As such he is one who would have known Jesus during his lifetime. While this age is considered as too high, we do 46 

See Bauckham, Jude, p. 81.

606 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church not know how old he was in A.D. 62, possibly between forty and fifty years, which would still mean that he was just an adult at the time of Jesus’ ministry – in keeping with his asserted relationship to Clopas, Joseph’s brother.47 In any event, going on the evidence of Eusebius / Hegesippus, Symeon was leader of the Jerusalem church and probably the most important figure in Jewish Christianity for nearly forty years, and possibly longer. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl.  3.19–20), citing Hegesippus, on two grandsons of Jude, brother of the Lord, during the reign of Domitian, writes as follows :48 (Hist. Eccl.  3.19.1) Now when this Domitian gave orders that those who were of the family of David should be put to death, it is recorded in an ancient authority that some heretics brought an accusation against the descendants of Jude, who was the Saviour’s brother after the flesh, on the ground that they were of the family of David, and that they bore kinship to Christ himself. This is shown by Hegesippus, who speaks as follows in these | very 703 words : (Hist. Eccl.  3.20.1) But there still survived of the family of the Lord the grandsons of Jude, his brother after the flesh, as he was called. These they informed against, as being of the family of David ; and the “evocatus” brought them before Domitian Caesar. For he feared the coming of the Christ, as did also Herod. (20.2), and he asked them if they were of David’s line, and they acknowledged it. Then he asked them what possessions they had or what fortune they owned. And they said that between the two of them they had only nine thousand denarii, half belonging to each of them ; and this they asserted they had not in money, but only in thirty-nine plethra of land, so valued, from which by their own labours they both paid the taxes and supported themselves.

A little later Eusebius’s text (Hist. Eccl. 3.20.3) says that Domitian saw no threat in them and let them go free. Eusebius also notes that after their release they became leaders of churches, both for their witness and because they were of the Lord’s family (apo genous ontas kyriou), and remained alive until the time of Trajan (see also Hist. Eccl.  3.32.5–6). In other texts Jude’s two grandsons are named Zoker and James.49 Eusebius, following Hegesippus, had already informed his readers of the persecution of members of 47  48  49 

See Bauckham, Jude, p. 87. On the grandsons of Jude, see Bauckham, Jude, pp. 94–106. See Bauckham, Jude, pp. 97-98.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

607

the house of David by Vespasian. After the conquest of Jerusalem this emperor is said to have given orders that all that belonged to the lineage of David should be sought out, in order that none of the royal race might be left among the Jews ; and in consequence of this a most terrible persecution again hung over the Jews. The extent of the land holdings (thirty-nine plethra) of the two grandsons of Jude depends on one’s understanding of the meaning of plethora in Hist. Eccl.  3.20.1. If the plethron here is the equivalent of the Roman iugerum it would be in size about 29 acres (11.7 hectares), but another calculation is nine or ten acres (4 hec­ tares)  – in any event a very small holding for two.50 A question naturally arising from this evidence is the location of the holding. Bauckham observes that the farm was no doubt the inherited family property, which may have remained in the possession of the family and its size may have been well known in the second-century Palestinian Jewish Christian circles in which the tradition reached its present form. Though not located by Hegesippus, Bauckham believes we can safely assume that the farm was in Galilee.51 Support for this view might come from Julius Africanus (probably born in Jerusalem about A.D. 160). In his Letter to Aristides, from the first half of the third century, he wrote of a group | known as the desposynoi (“those who belong to 704 the Master”), a term he explains as one that was used to designate the relatives of Jesus. He says that they preserved their family genealogy and interpreted it wherever they went on their travels throughout Palestine. Julius writes as follows :52 From the Jewish villages of Nazareth and Kokhaba they travelled around the rest of the land and interpreted the genealogy they had [from the family tradition] and from the Book of Days [i.e. Chronicles] as far as they could trace it [or : as far as they went on their travels] (cited by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl.  1.7.14). 50  See Bauckham, Jude, 104 (about 29 acres), with reference to P. Carrington, The Early Christian Church, vol. 1, Cambridge, 1957, p. 334 (nine or ten acres) ; according to Meyer  – Bauer, “The Relatives of Jesus”, p. 423, also “about ten acres”. 51  Bauckham, Jude, pp. 104–05, with reference to E. Lohmeyer, Galiläa und Jerusalem, Göttingen, 1936, p. 54, and B. Bagatti, Excavations at Nazareth, vol. 9, trans. E. Hoade, Jerusalem, 1969, p. 13. 52  Text cited in Bauckham, Jude, p. 61.

608 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church In three rabbinic texts (t. Hull.  2.24 ; Ecclus. R  1,8.3 ; b. Abod. Zara 16b–17a) there is mention of a Jacob of Sikhnin who spoke of a Yeshu (Yeshua) ben Pntyry (with variants) to the well-known Jewish sage Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (c. A.D. 100). The texts, and their bearing on the person of Jesus of Nazareth, are much discussed. In any event, it is presumed by the texts that Jacob of Sikhnin was a well-known Christian of the period. Bauckham thinks that, while this identity with James grandson of Jude cannot be proved, it could be said to be somewhat probable. Sikhnin (modern Sakhnin) is only six kilometres from Kokhaba, one of the two main centres of the mission of the desposynoi.53 At the end of this excursus the question may be asked whether there could be any connection between this group of desposynoi and the memory of Joseph’s exile from Bethlehem as presented in the “Special Source” and Irish texts dependent on it. Virginal Birth and Question of Docetism The texts As already noted, in his original edition of the Arundel and Hereford texts of Latin Infancy Gospels in 1927, Montague Rhodes James, believing that the account of Christ’s birth in the Arundel text (§§  73–74) was docetic, expressed the view that the work probably belonged to the Gospel of Peter (second century ?). While Marie-Joseph Lagrange disagreed with this in his review of M. R. James’s edition,54 it is still proposed by J. K.eith Elliott.55

53  Bauckham, Jude, pp. 106–21, at 116. J. Meier (A Marginal Jew, vol.  1, New York, 1991, 97), following J. Jeremias (Unknown Sayings of Jesus, 2nd edition, London, 1964, 28–30) examines the tradition regarding Eliezer Ben Hyrcanus in these texts (Abod. Zara and t. Hull.), with consideration of Jacob of Sikhnin. Both regard it as unreliable. The central saying attributed to Jesus in it that the wages of a prostitute should not be used to buy the high priest a latrine they regard as a polemical invention meant to make Jesus look ridiculous. 54  M.-J. Lagrange, “Un nouvel Évangile”, pp. 544-57. 55  Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 108. “The chapters … (72– 74), where most of the unique material is to be found, reflect second-century Greek docetic tendencies and may well have been the raison d’être for the original composition, namely, to give a Gnostic or docetic view of Jesus’ birth.”

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

609

| To set the passage in context : The account of the birth is that 705 of the midwife, who goes into the cave, and is followed by Joseph. Both of them come out, and Simeon asks concerning Mary (“the virgin”) : (I give Simeon’s question and the midwife’s reply as in InfLFF, which is substantially also that of the two Latin texts.) 70.2  ”Dear woman,” said Simeon, “how is that virgin or is there hope for her life ?” “There is, indeed”, she said, “and Simeon, you do not know her whole story”. And Simeon rejoiced greatly. “What is that (you say), man,” she said, “no one can tell the marvellous wonders that are in there.” 70.3  ”And Oh Lord, why were there revealed to me, beyond all the women of the world, the things that have surpassed thought and nature, and are full of the marvel of your words, namely, the sacraments of the heavenly Father and the secrets of the heavenly Father and of the Holy Spirit, and the perfection of every good and the liberation of the human race ? And I bless my God and my Lord who has revealed these things to me, his handmaid, who am unworthy to see them. And how shall I relate them”, said she, “for they are novel and strange things for which there never has been any likeness or similarity ?” 70.4  “I entreat you, for the love of God, to describe them to me”, said Simeon. “They will not be hidden from you”, said she, “for they will be common (knowledge) throughout the whole world yet, although till now they are hidden. And, son”, said she, “attend to these words and fix them in your heart”. 71  “When I went to where the virgin was, I saw her praying and blessing the eternal Lord, and I asked her if she had pain in head or body, and she no more answered me than as if she were a solid rock, with her eyes raised to heaven as she prayed without ceasing”.

The midwife then goes on to describe the birth, part of this account (§§  73–74) containing what James regards as docetic. James gives his translation of this section (§§ 73–74 in his numbering, retained in the new critical edition in the Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum),56 and then adds his comments on their “docetic” character. I first give both texts, highlighting in bold the “docetic”-type words, followed by a translation of Arundel.

56  James, Latin Infancy Gospels, pp. xx–xxi. In his edition James has misread the word niuea (‘snow white”) as vinea (“a vine”), marking his translation “vine” as uncertain, with cruces (††).

610 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | J compilation : Arundel form §§ 73–74 J compilation : Hereford form §§ 73–74 73.1  Cum ergo approximauit hora, processit uirtus Dei in palam. 2 Et stans puella, intuens in celum, ut niuea facta est. Iam enim procedebat terminus bonorum. Cum uero processisset lux, adorauit eum quem se uidit enixam. Erat autem ipse infans solummodo circumfulgens uehementer, mundus et iocundissimus in respectu, quoniam totum pax pacans solus apparuit.

73.3  In illa autem hora qua natus est audita est uox multorum inuisibilium una uoce dicencium “Amen.” Et ipsa lux que nata est multiplicata est et de claritate luminis sui solis lumen obscurauit. Et repleta est hec spelunca lumine claro cum odore suauissimo. Sic autem nata est hec lux quemadmodum ros qui de celo descendit super terram. Nam odor illius super omnem odorem ungentorum fragrat. 74.1  Ego autem steti stupens et mirans, et timor apprehendit me. Intendebam enim in tantam claritatem luminis nati. Ipsa autem lux paulisper in se residens assimilauit se infanti et in continenti factus est infans ut solent infantes nasci. 74.2  Et sumpsi audaciam et inclinaui me et tetigi eum, leuauique eum in manibus meis cum magno timore, et perterrita sum quia non erat pondus in eo sicut hominis nati.

73.1  Cum autem appropinquaret hora ut procederet in palam uirtus Dei, 2 perstitit puella immobiliter intuens in celum. Iam enim adueniebat tempus omnium bonorum uel benedictionum. Et cum processisset infans Deus de uentre uirginis matris, statim ipsa que genuit prima adorauit eum quem uidit se enixam. Est autem infans ad modum solis circumfulgens uehementer. Mundissimus itaque est et iocundissimus aspectu supra omnes pueros. Ideoque in illo omni mundo pax uera aduenit. 73.3  In illa ergo hora qua egressus est de matre, audita est uox multitudinis in sublimitate celi clarissime dicens. “Amen, amen, amen. Deo alleluia.” Ipsa quoque lux que iam nata est claritate lucis sue obumbrauit solis lucem. Nam et hec spelunca impleta est lumine claro et omni odore suauissimo. Sic autem nata est hec lux quemadmodum nascitur ros qui de celo descendit in terram. Odor etiam illius est super omnem odorem unguentorum fragrans. 74.1  Ego autem hec omnia cernens steti stupens ualde et admirans uehementer. Timor enim magnus apprehendit me cum in tantam claritatem nati luminis intendissem. Ipsa uero lux paulisper in sese residere cepit et assimulauit se infanti. Et in continenti splendore natus est infans, sicut solent alii infantes nasci. 74.2  Tune itaque sumens audaciam inclinaui me ad puerum et postquam adoraui eum ausa sum tangere illum. Leuaui ergo eum in manibus meis timore simul et gaudio repleta ingenti, eo quod eum cum portarem nullum sensi omnino pondus habere.

706

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions 74.3  Et inspexi eum, et non erat in eo aliqua coinquinatio, sed erat quasi in rore Dei altissimi totus nitidus corpore, leuis ad portandum, splendidus ad respiciendum. Et dum nimis mirarer eo quod non ploraret, sicut soliti sunt nati infantes plorare, 4 et dum tenuissem eum in faciem eius intendens, risit ad me iocundissimum risum, aperiensque oculos intendit in me argute, et subito progressa est lux magna de oculis | eius tamquam choruscus magnus.

611

| 74.3 Cum uero eum circumspice- 706 rem, non erat in eo aliqua coinquinatio, sed omni gratia plenus et quasi in rore Dei altissimi lotus, corpore nitidus, in portando leuis ac splendidus in respiciendo. Illa igitur hora qua tuli infantem in manus meas, respiciens uidi eum corpus habere mundissimum et nulla parte coinquinatum sicut solent alii infantes cum inmundicia nasci. Dum autem intra me stupens ualde hec mirarer, 707 | etiam animaduerti quia non plo- 707 raret, sicut omnes solent homines primum nati plorare. 4 Sed insuper dum super genua mea tenerem cum, intendens in dulcissimam faciem illius, risit ad me iocundissimo risu, intendens oculis in me nimis argute, et subito processit ex oculis eius lux magna tanquam coruscus.

Translation of the J Compilation, Arundel, §§ 73–7457     73.1  When, therefore, the hour drew near, the power of God went forth openly.     73.2  And the girl, standing gazing at the heavens became as white as snow. For the determined end of the good things was already coming forth.    When, therefore, the light had come forth, she adored him whom she saw she had brought forth. The child himself was (indeed) radiating (light) round about in a unique manner, extremely clean and beautiful to look at, because he appeared alone (as) peace, bringing everything into a state of peace.     73.3  Indeed in that hour in which he was born, the voice of an invisible multitude was heard, with one voice saying “Amen.” And that light which was born grew greater and from the clarity of its brightness it darkened the brightness of the sun. And this cave was filled with clear brightness, together with a most pleasing odour. Thus was this light born (in the same manner) as the dew which comes down from heaven upon the earth. For the odour from it emitted a fragrance that was stronger than any odour of ointments.

57  Translation by McNamara et al., in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 106–12.

612 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church     74.1  I stood (there) astonished and marvelling and fear gripped me. I turned my attention to the great clarity of the brightness that had been born. That light withdrawing into itself for a little while took on the likeness of a child, and immediately it became a child as children are wont to be born.     74.2  And I made bold and bent down and touched him, and lifted him up in my hands with great fear, and I was thoroughly frightened, since there was no weight in him as (there would be in the ease of) a new-born person.     74.3  And I observed him and there was no defilement in him, but was as if in the dew of God the most High, all shining in (his) body, light to carry, bright to look at. And while I was amazed greatly in that he did not cry as new-born children are wont to cry,     74.4  and while I held him, looking into his face, he smiled at me with a most pleasant smile, and opening his eyes he looked at me intently and suddenly there came from his eyes a great light, like a great flash of lightening.

Montague Rhodes James’s interpretation and the question of Docetism James comments on this passage as follows.58 “What seems to emerge from this is that a Light is born of the body of the Virgin and takes the likeness | of a Child”. When he later asks what 708 the ruling motive or object of the author or compiler is, he says it is not the glorification of the Virgin.59 In his view the author’s main concern is to demonstrate the perpetual virginity, and in his emphasis on this he goes beyond the Protevangelium, and vastly increases the importance of the physical phenomena. James goes on to ask himself why the author of the “Source” doubles the attestation on the birth found in the Protevangelium and increases the importance of the phenomena. The answer seems to him inevitable and of weighty consequence : the aim is to show that the birth was not a real birth at all. In other words the author of the “Source” wants to impress the docetic view. The Protevangelium has been called docetic by some, he notes, but the Protevangelium tells how the Child, when born, came and took the breast of his mother Mary. There is no such thing in the “Source”. Here, that which is born is a Light which gradually takes the form of a

58  59 

James, Latin Infancy Gospels, p. xxi. See James, Latin Infancy Gospels, pp. xxiv–xxv.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

613

Child. If ever there was a docetic account of the Lord’s birth, it is here.60 Scholars today would agree with M. R. James’s comment on the docetic nature of the passage. However, James would appear to be wrong in concluding from this that the “Source” as such is docetic. It is recognized that the doctrine of virginitas in partu (which is the doctrine at issue here) is closely allied to Docetism and can be held suspect of being docetic. In any writing, be it theological or apocryphal, it would seem to be hard to describe a virginitas in partu, a virginal birth without the opening of the womb in language that seems other than docetic. Mary’s uirginitas in partu is a theme of a number of apocryphal writings, notably the Protevangelium of James, the Ascension of Isaiah (11.2–14), the Odes of Solomon and (perhaps) the eighth Sibylline Oracle. In his essay on uirginitas in partu, Karl Rahner notes these texts, with the comment : “We may undoubtedly say that they all have an unmistakably docetic tinge in this matter : the birth as such, which is asserted by St Luke, is passed over (the child is simply there), or more or less clearly replaced by another process (a luminous cloud which condenses into a child). The child takes its mother’s breast, but merely so as not to be recognized.”61 | The doctrine of Mary’s virginitas in partu was proposed as 709 part of Christian teaching in particular by Ambrose and Augustine, and seems to have become an unquestioned part of Christian doctrine since.62 Jesus’ birth, his exit from Mary’s womb without violating the signs of Mary’s virginity, was commonly compared to his exit from the tomb at the resurrection, his passing through See James, Latin Infancy Gospels, p. xxv. K. Rahner, “Virginitas in partu,” in Theological Investigations. Collected Essays of K. Rahner, vol. 4. More Recent Writings, trans. K. Smyth, Baltimore and London, 1966, pp. 134–62, at 149. See also the texts instanced with comments in Mary in the New Testament. A Collaborative Assessment by Protestant and Roman Catholic Scholars, ed. by R. E. Brown et al., London, 1978, pp. 249–53 and 273–78, esp. the following comment. “Actually, the line between the assertion of a uirginitas in partu and a docetic christology is hard to draw. Some of the sayings just quoted [from apocryphal literature] sound very much like the Gnostic and docetic denials of a real birth of Jesus” (278). 62  See the texts in Enchiridion Marianum Biblicum et Patristicum, ed. by D. Casagrande, Rome, 1974, in the index sub “Maria, virgo in partu,” 1996–1997. 60  61 

614 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church closed doors after the resurrection, or his walking on the waters. Jerome avoids the expression in partu but has the doctrine and the comparison with the post-resurrection passage through closed doors.63 Similarly Augustine, Sermo 215 : in ea carne natus, ut per clausa uiscera paruus exiret, in qua resuscitatus per clausa ostia magnus intraret.64 He puts it more forcefully in Sermo 247, instancing again the passage through closed doors and the walking on the waters, and addressing comments to persons who might doubt how this can be reconciled with Christ’s humanity.65 Another image used for Jesus’ birth from Mary is that of a ray of light from a star. Virginal Birth in Irish Sources As we have seen, we do not know where and when the Latin texts of the “J Compilation” (JAr and JHer) originated. Its earlier form, the “I Compilation” was probably in Ireland before 800. A comparison of the InfLFF text with the Latin tradition has been carried out in the critical edition of the Irish Infancy narratives.66 As stated there, in §  73,2–3, InfLFF differs from the Latin text of JAr on several significant points. In this Irish text there is no mention of “the end of good things” ; the light which appears and pervades the cave comes from the Virgin herself ; nothing is said of Mary adoring “whom she saw she had brought forth” ; no mention is made of the “child radiating round about” ; there is no trace of the comparison between the light and the dew coming down from heaven. The Irish text (“a shining light came from her to us”) seems to confirm James’s interpretation about the origin of the light (“born of the body of the virgin”67 ). But this does not imply that the original text of the “Source” is to be found in InfLFF. The position taken in the edition of the texts is that in the case of the differences just pointed out, the Irish text (of InfLFF) is clearly the result of a rewriting. In this text JAr remains the best witness of the “Special Source.” 63  Jerome, Homilia in Iohannem 1.1, in Casagrande, Enchiridion Marianum (see n.  61), 826. 64  Sermo 215,4, quoted in Casagrande, Enchiridion Marianum, 863. 65  Sermo 247,2 ; quoted in Casagrande, Enchiridion Marianum, 886. 66  See McNamara et al., Apocryha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 114–15. 67  James, Latin Infancy Gospels, p. xxi.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

615

| So little of the original composition is retained in the Leabhar 710 Breac text (InfLB) that it is irrelevant in the present discussion. We cite it here for the sake of comparison, and shall give it again later in its larger context of the wonders at Christ’s birth. Leabhar Breac Text

73.1–2  Then, while Joseph was at the entrance of the house and Mary within, there came at once a bright shining cloud down from heaven till it was over the cave and the city as though it were the sun which had been made to rise in the midst of the city and of the cave. Then, Mary brought forth her Son, and all the miracles which we have already related took place. For it has not been possible for anybody to recount or relate them, and even if it were possible, such would not be proper. 73.3  Then the cave was pervaded with a very great fragrance as if it had been filled with ointment, wine, and the true fragrance of the whole world, so that all were refreshed by that for a long time. And a great conspicuous star was seen above the cave from morning till evening and neither its like nor its equal was seen before or since.

Liber Flavus Fergusiorum Text 73.1  Truly also, the attendants of the true virgin, namely, angels of heaven and Joseph with his family and the woman with her assistant were empowered. The inhabitants of hell that night, moreover, were bound and under subjection and in deep depression, without power of evil or temptation against being or creature created by God, on the night of the divine birth, for all creatures were silent thus, serving their Saviour and bowing to the High Lord and considering the Old Testament and the prophecies made by the prophets and the faithful from the beginning of the world till that night. [Presumed “docetic” character of the birth narrative (LFF §  73–74)] 73.2  And the virgin, moreover, was praying continually, with her face raised up and it seemed to me that she was entirely ethereal. A shining light came from her to us throughout the cave till it became one great, beautiful, light, gentle and reaching the whole world at the time and occasion of the divine birth  – namely, at the birth of Christ, so that heaven and earth were full of peace and salvation at that time. 73.3  And above the cave were heard many angelic voices, praising the great Lord and giving strength to the holy virgin who was in the cave. And that light obscured the light of the sun and the moon and all the stars. There came to us from it also an aroma satisfying to every noble soul for eternity and beyond. Better than all the world’s wine and fine

616 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church perfume, sweetness, wax, saffron and all fair ointments, than all the plants and herbs that ever grew, and than all the fair fruits ever in holy Paradise, better than all of these was the satisfaction we received from that aroma. And the angels of heaven were serving him unfailingly, for | there was no human being worthy of having knowledge of that mystery but the Virgin Mary alone. 74.1  A great silence came over me and I was filled with fear and terror seeing those marvellous things, for the child was like a mass of light that human eyes could not gaze on. And he was not long like that till he assumed the shape and form of an infant. 74.2  And as I saw him thus, I was filled with great mental vigour, and I bent over him and raised him from the ground. And he did not weigh like an infant. 74.3  And as I looked at him intently I found no spot or mark or sign of blood on him, but he was as if he had been bathed in the soft, ever-beautiful dew of the glorious, heavenly Father, and so beautiful a body was not known, and few infants were lighter, and no more comely human being was ever seen. I marvelled that he was not in nature like any other child, for he neither cried nor wept, but just a little, when he was put into the manger. 74.4  And no sickness of infancy was known to be on him, and when I looked into his face he smiled at me, and there was never in the world anything so lovely. And the flash of light that came from his eyes darkened the light of the early morning sun coming towards us throughout the cave from the east.

The doctrine appears repeatedly in Hiberno-Latin exegetical and theological works, with use of the examples of Christ passing through closed doors, with occasional mention of his passing at

711

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

617

birth as light from a star. Thus, for instance, in the work commonly referred to as Das Bibelwerk, in English as “The Reference Bible”, in scientific works now entitled De enigmatibus, a commentary on the entire Bible from Genesis to the Apocalypse (composed about 750), preserved for the New Testament in two manuscripts (Paris and Munich). A comment on Luke 2.23 (“… omne masculum adaperiens vulvam…”) reads as follows :68 | ORIGENIS dicit :69 “Quod apperit uuluam sanctum Domino 712

uocabitur. Id est, omnis partus aperit uuluam in coitu uiri et in nascendo. Christus uero non apperuit in coitu uiri. Idea dicit propheta : “Ego uermis et non homo”. Id est, uermis non inter patrem et matrem concipitur sed ex terra. Sic Christus ex patre in caelo tantum, et ex matre tantum in terra. 70 quando et partu est editus”. Item GREGORIUS dicit :71 “Christus post resurrectionem ianuis clausis ingressus ad apostolos et exiuit et non apertis ostiis cenaculi sic in uterum Marie intrauit et exiuit et non aperta uulua Marie.” ITEM AUGUSTINUS dicit :72 “Sicut radius solis per fenestram uitream

Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat.  11561, fols  162v–163r ; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 14277, fol. 248v. 69  For this citation see Origen, Hom. Luc. XIV, in the translation of Jerome, on Luke 2.21–24 (GCS 49, 90–91). The Reference Bible summarizes and recasts the text somewhat. 70  The text in angular brackets is absent from the Paris manuscript, in which the space it would have occupied is left blank, with a line drawn through it. The text is in the Munich manuscript, where, however, the word non is interlineated. The text of Origen, in Jerome’s translation, lying behind the ending is : Matris uero Domini eo tempore uulua reserata est, quo et partus editus, quia sanctum uterum et omni dignatione uenerandum ante natiuitatem Christi masculus omnino non tangit. The omission or erasure in the Paris manuscript, and the interlineation of non in the Munich text may have been intentional. 71  For this text see Gregory, Homilia XXVI, 1 in Evangelia (PL 76, 1197 CD). 72  I have been unable to find this text in Augustine, or in the writings of a Pseudo-Augustine in CETEDOC. Augustine does have texts on the uirginitas in partu similar to that of Gregorius just cited ; see Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis, tract.  121, 4 (PL 35, 1958) and Sermo 191, 2 (PL 38, 1010). The text attributed to Augustine may depend, ultimately at least, on the following passage of the Pseudo-Augustinian sermon on the Nativity (In Natale Domini I, no. 22), beginning : “Sanctus hic cum declinat”. Solis radius specular penetrat, et soliditatem eius insensibili subtilitate pertraiicit, et uidetur intrinsecus qui extat extrinsecus. Nec cum ingreditur dissipat, nec cum egreditur uiolat ; quia et ingressu et egressu eius specular intergum perseuerat. Specular 68 

618 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in domum intrat et exit non aperta fenestra, sic Christus intrauit in uterum matris et exiuit”. (ORIGEN says : “That which opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord (cf. Luke 2.23) : that is, every offspring opens the womb in male intercourse and at birth. Christ, however, did not open (the womb) in male intercourse. Therefore the prophet says : “I am | a worm and no man” (Ps 21.7). That is, a worm is conceived not (by intercourse) between father and mother, but from the earth. Thus Christ (is conceived) from a Father only in heaven, and from a mother only on earth. The womb of the Lord’s mother was indeed not opened when he was given birth”. Likewise GREGORIUS says : “Christ after the resurrection came in to the apostles through closed doors and went out without the doors of the upper room being open. In like manner did he come in to the womb of Mary and came out without Mary’s womb having been opened”. Likewise AUGUSTINUS says : “As a ray of sun enters through a glass window into a house, and goes out without the window being opened, thus did Christ enter the womb of Mary and come out”.)

Joyous Proclamation of the Saviour’s Birth A joyful proclamation from heaven at the birth of Jesus is already presented in Luke’s gospel (Luke 2.8–20), by the angels and the shepherds. It was natural that this would continue and be extended ergo non rumpit radius solis ; integritatem Virginis ingressus aut egressus uitiare poterat ueritatis ? (PLS 2, 1960, cols  909–25, at 922) (“The sunbeam passes through [window] glass and by an unperceived subtlety penetrates its solid state ; and what exists outside is seen within. It neither destroys when it goes in nor violates when it goes out, because in its entrance and its exit the glass remains intact. The sunbeam, therefore, does not break the glass ; can the entrance or the exit of the truth mar the integrity of the Virgin ?”) On this homily see J. Machielsen, Clauis putristica pseudepigraphorum Medii Acvi, vol. 1A. Opera homiletica, Pars A, no.  1237, Turnhout 1990, pp. 283–291. This sermon, wrongly attributed to Augustine, is old (fifth to sixth century ?), of African origin, and noted for the use of rare or new words. The sermon was highly influential from Patristic times, through the Middle Ages, on Latin and vernacular writings with reference to the virginal conception and birth. For the theme in Latin, and Cornish and other European languages, see A. Breeze, “The Blessed Virgin and the Sunbeam through Irish, Welsh Glass”, Celtica 23 (1999), pp. 19–29. For this particular theme, and generally on the Virgin Birth, see Y. Hirn, The Sacred Shrine. A Study of the Poetry and Art of the Catholic Church, London, 1958, pp. 213–18, for the theme of light and the sunbeam.

713

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

619

in Christian literature, in which texts it will often be difficult to distinguish the apocryphal from the theological, doctrinal, liturgical and devotional. We shall present different texts of such proclamations here from Irish tradition (presumed mainly apocryphal). Testimony of nature The account of the silence of nature at Christ’s birth is given in detail in InfLFF §  72,1–2, as follows :     72.1  Then all created things were silent : winds free from storm, the sea without a murmur, the water in a dead calm, waves without clamour, land without movement, rivers without a stir, deserted stream-waters asleep, fish subdued, woods without quiver, foliage without movement, cattle at rest, birds without flight, human beings without power of speech or activity, at the time and moment of the divine birth, while the virgin brought forth the eternal Lord. It is certain that creation attended fittingly on its Creator.     72.2  There was not in the earthly world wild animal or winged creature or brute beast in the sea or on bright land, there were no animals, reptiles or serpents that did not realize that their Lord, Reconciler and Saviour was born and ever-protected for them into this world on that bright Christmas night in ever-fortunate Bethlehem  – except for unfortunate Herod son of Antipater the baneful, son of Herod the Great, and the descendants of the noble fair priest of the magnificent temple of Apollo, the accursed descendants of great warlike Judah, the noble ancestor of the great noble strong people of Israel. …

This in 72,1 corresponds to the Latin texts of JAr-JHer 72, except that at the end the Irish text is more explicit on the divine birth, and Christ as Creator at the end. (JAr, substantially as JHer, ends : “… because all were astounded and awaiting the coming of the sublimeness of the great God as the end of the ages.”) In JArJHer there is nothing corresponding to InfLFF 72,2. The theme of the silence of nature has had a long history, and apparently | originated with the desire of stressing the entry of eternity into 714 history at the birth of Christ.73 It is found in the Protevangelium 73  There seems to be something similar in a gloss on Perseuerat dies of Ps 118 (119).91 in the apparently Irish work (c.  700–750) Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican Codex Pal. lat.  68 : “Perseuerat dies. Id est Sol stetit in Gabon (Joshua 10.12–13) reliqua ; id est non turbabit ordinem dierum quia de

620 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of James 18,1–2, but in a text where the narrative changes from the third person to the first, with Joseph (it appears) as narrator, indicating a disturbed history in the motif’s transmission. In InfLFF and the “J Compilation” (JAr-JHer) this section is narrated by the midwife. The Leabhar Breac text omits all mention of the midwife, and with it most of the midwife’s narrative of events in the cave. However, it appears that the redactor of InfLB knew of the longer Irish Infancy narrative now preserved in the Liber Flavus, attributed to James (of the Knees), with its account of the marvels apparently alluded by him in InfLB 67/70, and apparently also in 75.4 where the birth is described as if sunlight through glass. (There is nothing corresponding to §  71 in InfLB.) The relevant texts of InfLB read :74     66.3  Joseph then said : “Go to your bed, Virgin”, said he, “and sleep in it. And let Semion apply oil to your feet and rest you thus till God brings you to birth”.     67/70  They were thus for a long portion of the night. It is at this juncture that James of the Knees then related the benevolences, mysteries, and secrets of Christ, and some of the miracles of the divine Child. And it would be proper for none other than angels or apostles or God himself to relate them such is their nobility and sanctity, that is, the illustrious miracles that have been, that shall be, and that already exist.     72.1  At all events when the Virgin was bringing forth her Son, all the elements were silent, motionless, without stir or movement, waiting on their Creator.     72.2  For among all that was created there was none that did not recognise the Creator, save the unbelieving Jews only. prima parte noctis demptum est, ut pars extrima noctis in nocte natiuitatis Christi dempta est, quia in nocte illa ortus est .” See edition of text in M. McNamara, Glossa in Psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus Latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11–151.7). Critical Edition of the text together with Introduction and Source Analysis (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1986, p. 255 : “[T]he day goes on. That is. Why does it say (so) when it is said : The sun stood still at Gabon, etc. ? That is, it did not disturb the order of the days because it was taken away from the first part of the night, as the final part of the night was taken away in the night of Christ’s birth, because on that night (the Sun ? Christ ?) arose”. (The Vatican gloss is taken up on a gloss on this verse in the so-called Psalter of Caimin, but ends with “ortus est sol”, sol being absent from the Vatican text). 74  Translation as in McNamara et al., Apocryha Hiberniae, vol.  1, pp. 314– 22.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

621

    73.1–2  Then, while Joseph was at the entrance of the house and Mary within, there came at once a bright shining cloud down from heaven till it was over the cave and the city as though it were the sun which had been made to rise in the midst of the city and of the cave. Then, Mary brought forth her Son, and all the miracles which we have already | related took place. For it has not been possible for anybody to recount or relate them, and even if it were possible, such would not be proper.     73.3  Then the cave was pervaded with a very great fragrance as if it had been filled with ointment, wine, and the true fragrance of the whole world, so that all were refreshed by that for a long time. And a great conspicuous star was seen above the cave from morning till evening and neither its like nor its equal was seen before or since.     75.3  Mary then laid down her Son, wrapped in strips of white linen, in the stall of the ass and the young ox because no other place was found for him in the lodging-house. And then the brute creatures recognised their Creator, as the ass and the young ox were licking and worshipping him, as he was in their midst, between them. Then there was fulfilled what the holy prophet, Isaias son of Amos, said of old. And when the animals had finished their licking and worshipping, Mary then took her Son to her bosom.    75.4  She was perfectly well in body and soul because she had no pains or birth pangs, and she had neither ache nor soreness in body or in flesh but it was as if sunlight came through glass, without sigh, without pain, without damage.     75.5  Joseph then went into the cave and saw Mary, and her Son at her bosom, as she suckled him, for her breasts were flowing like the gushing of spring water. Joseph came then, followed by Semion, both glad and overjoyed. And Joseph said : “Go son”, said he, “and behold the one you have been seeking, that is, the Saviour in the bosom of Mary, his own mother. And welcome him, and show him joy and delight”. And they both then welcomed the Son.     75.6  Then came the morning of the next day. And then every wonder and every miracle, every prediction and every prophecy which was made in the Old Law and in the New Testament concerning the divine Child was fulfilled. And only a small number of his miracles and wonders are told here.

Testimony of Joseph In the Leabhar Breac Infancy narrative the numbering passes from §  75.6 to § 81.1. In the intervening section the “J Compilation” (JAr-JHer), in a combination of the Protevangelium of James and

715

622 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Pseudo-Matthew, narrates the episode of Salome, the second midwife who wanted physical testimony of Mary’s virginity at childbirth. This is omitted in the Leabhar Breac narrative, possibly on purpose as it did with the narrative of the first midwife, but more probably because it was not in the original “Special Source”. (InfLFF ends at 75.5, with Simeon’s reaction to the [first] midwife’s account of the childbirth.). InfLB 81.1–5 is close to JArJHer 81, where Joseph expresses interest in purchasing food especially because it is the child’s birthday : Joseph, coming out of the cave into the forecourt said : “O new city ! O singular childbirth ! I do not know how I have become a father ; for, behold, today there has been born to me a son who is Lord of all.” When he had said this he came out to the street outside and said : “It is fitting for me today to search for some food for ourselves, especially since it is the birthday of this child. For I believe that today a great glory is celebrated in heaven and that there is joy to all the archangels and to all the heavenly powers. It is then proper for me to celebrate in a fitting manner this day in which the glory of God has shown itself to the whole world” (JAr 81).

| This text presented an occasion for the Irish author or com- 716 piler for further development. However, in § 81.1 InfLB simply expresses the central sentiments of the corresponding text of JArJHer, omitting all reference to Joseph being the father of the child Jesus. The author of InfLB then gives the further development in § 81.2–4, which is in the nature of a praeconium for Christmas, very close to the one in manuscript Paris, Bibliotheque nationale de France, Fonds celtique 1.75     81.1  Joseph, then, was happy and overjoyed as he thus praised and extolled the divine Child. Joseph said afterwards : “I had better go into the city to buy food for the Virgin and for my family, for this is a noble and honourable festival in heaven and on earth, because today was born the Lord of the human race, of the angels, of the gods, and of all the creatures besides.     81.2  Today has come into the world the one through whom the world was brought to nought. Today the power of the devil was weakened and the power of the church, heavenly and earthly, was brought to completion.

75  Published in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.1, pp. 606–11 (see also the synopsis given there, pp. 547–50).

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

623

Today the light of wisdom and knowledge has been shed on the Israelites who were in the darkness of ignorance and lack of wisdom. Today the holy prophets are glorified and honoured, their prophecy having been fulfilled.     81.3  Today the revered satisfaction of the angels was placed among the wretched food of men in the stall of an ass and a young ox. Today the brute animals without intelligence recognised their Creator because every creature is very aware as regards its Creator. Today the kingly star first appeared to the three druids so that they travelled with it to worship Jesus. Today the abbacy and kingship of the heavenly city was given to a man, that is, to Christ, Son of the living God.     81.4  Today the angels of heaven have submitted to the men of earth, because a King from among men has obtained the kingship over angels. Today an awesome compact was amicably made between the two realms of the Lord, that is, between heaven and earth. Today the entrance of the heavenly city was opened so that the doors of heaven are wide open to the human race to enter and dwell therein. Today quarrels and bad feelings shall be banished from the world for the prophet of everlasting truth and true peace has come into it, that is, Christ, Son of the living God. Today has been made known the true love of the heavenly Father for the human race when the noble person of the divinity assumed humanity to rescue it, for up to now people died in slavery to the devil on account of the sin and transgression of Adam and Eve”.

Testimony of shepherds The Leabhar Breac text goes on to narrate the “Tidings of the Shepherds” who came looking for the new-born babe. They tell of the message of the | angels, praising God. They say to Joseph 717 (InfLB 84, 1–2) : “Happy are you, for to you first has God been revealed, that is, the greatest good that has come and will come”. Joseph led them to the entrance of the house to visit the child, remaining outside himself. He gives thanks to God, thus : “O great God, great is the miracle. We had thought that none other save ourselves knew of the divine birth, and the shepherds heard of it while they were a thousand paces east of Bethlehem”. After a long time the shepherds came out to Semion and Joseph, and said :     84.3 :  ”We have seen the Son of the heavenly Father,” said they. “How did he appear ?” said Joseph.

624 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church “Fairer than the earth”, said they, “More wonderful than heaven, Brighter then the sun, Clearer than streams, Sweeter than honey, Greater than the world, Higher than the stars of heaven, More comely than angels, Nobler than life, More expansive than the world is his speech, Better than existence, More dear than the elements, Eye does not reach him, And he fits not in ears, The world has not found, nor will it find, his like”. And they said : “We kissed his feet”, said they, “and we touched his hands, and we beheld his face. And he has done wonders and great miracles in our presence. 84.4  And happy are you, Joseph”, said they, “because to none before you was ever given, nor will it befall anybody after you, a dignity like that bestowed on you. And grant us a favour”, said they, “because we are grateful thus far for you have permitted us to behold the divine splendour”.     85.1a.  Now the reason why the Saviour was first seen by the shepherds is that it is they who were sleepless, watching and waiting for the light of day. This, indeed, is what it denotes : whoever wishes to obtain everlasting life, he ought to be without sleep during the night, keeping vigil for the eternal light, that is, for the face of almighty God.

Testimony of the Magi We shall discuss the Irish traditions on the Magi (in the Irish tradition called “druids”) in the next paragraph. In the detailed account of their visit in the “J Compilation” (JAr-JHer) and InfLB, after their visit to Herod they come to Bethlehem and Joseph and ask his permission to visit the new-born king of the Jews in the house, while Joseph and Semion converse outside. The text then continues in the Latin tradition (JAr-JHer) as follows : | (93,1).  They came out, however, and said to Joseph : “O most 718 blessed man ! Now you will realise who this boy is whom you are rearing !” Joseph said to them. “I believe the child is my son.” They said to him : “His name is greater than yours. But perhaps

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

625

it so is that you, nonetheless, are worthy to be called his father, because you serve him not as your son but as your God and Lord. And as you touch him with your hands, take note (of him) with great fear and attention. And please do not regard us as people who are unaware (of the significance of the event). Learn this from us that the one to whom you have been appointed as foster-father is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the God and king of all princes and powers, God of the angels and of the just. It is he who will deliver all peoples in his name, because his is the majesty and the dominion, and he shall crush death’s sting and shall put hell’s power to flight. All kings will obey him, and all the tribes of the earth will adore him, and every tongue will make confession to him, saying : You are the Christ Jesus, our redeemer and saviour. For you are God, the power and the splendour of the eternal Father.” (JAr 93.1–2 ; JHer differs only slightly).76

The InfLB Text (§ 93.1–2) The InfLB text is faithful to the “J Compilation” (JAr-JHer), but omits the reference to Joseph saying he believes the child is his son. This InfLB text reads :     93.1  After that the druids came out and said to Joseph : “O just and perfect man,” said they, “if you but knew a great arrival is with you, that is, the Son of the King of heaven and earth is being nursed by you. Because he who is with you is known better to us than to you ; for the child who is with you is the God of gods and Lord of lords and Maker of the elements and of angels and of archangels.     93.2  He is the strength of God and the hand of God, He is the right hand of God and the wisdom of God, He is the one who encompasses the elements and surveys the world, He is the death and end and refuge of creation, He is the judge and physician and protection of creation, It is he who will summon and scatter the gods of the Gentiles, It is he who will harrow hell and will weaken the strength and power of the devil, It is he who will blunt the sting of death, It is he who will dissipate the diabolical power of baleful hell with its hateful evils, It is he whom all the tribes and nations of the whole world will serve.

76  Translation of the Latin text edited in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 841, 843.

626 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church He is also the judge and nourishment of the angels, the life of the people of heaven, the protecting breastplate of eternal life without beginning or end, and the crowning helmet of the heavenly city”.77

The Magi Ireland has a very old and rich tradition on the Magi, both in apocryphal texts and biblical exegetical material. The traditional number of the Magi | in the west is three. This number is also 719 traditional in Ireland, where the Magi (called “druids” in Irish) are provided with two distinct sets of names. The “J Compilation” (JAr-JHer) has a long section on the Magi (§§ 87–95), presented not as three but as a whole troop (§ 87 turba uiatorum, JAr ; non mo­dica turba commeantium, JHer). The Compilation text is presented in Irish translation in the Leabhar Breac text (InfLB), where the Compilation text is combined with the traditional number of the Magi and their names. The Irish exegete Sedulius Scottus, writing on the Continent c. 850 in his commentary on Matt 2.2 discusses the number of the Magi, whether (the traditional) three or more, and cites the opening section of the “J Compilation” under the title The Gospel according to the Hebrews, and goes on to conjoin it with the other tradition on the persons and names of three magi.78 The “J Compilation” (and the InfLB) §§ 89–95 treats of the dress of the Magi and dwells on their description of the star and (in § 94) on how they came to understand the prediction of Christ’s birth. Alois Kehl79 has made a detailed study of § 94 of JAr (together with Latin text, German translation, with detailed and philological examination of key phrases). He notes that since §§ 89–95 of the Arundel manuscript agree with no other text of the Magi legend, but show numerous and striking agreements with the Zuqnin Chronicle (a work he considers as a basically non-Christian document, although now extant in a christianised 77  Translation as in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  1, 360. p. 362. 78  Text in Sedulius Scottus. Kommentar zum Evangelium nach Matthäus 1,1– 11,1, ed. by B. Löfstedt, Freiburg, 1989, 66–67 ; reproduced, with English translation, in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 267–69. 79  A. Kehl, “Der Stern der Magier. Zu §  94 des lateinischen Kindheits­ evangeliums der Arundel-Handschrift”, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 18 (1975), pp. 69–80.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

627

form), use should be made of this Chronicle for clarification of the text of our Infancy Gospel. At the end of his study Kehl notes that JAr 94 gives one the impression that it stands at the end of a rich tradition, and has a presentation that is incomprehensible, due to a process of dilution and abbreviation. Through the present Christian and orthodox text we can, nevertheless, catch a glimpse of ideas (astrology, etc.) that were widespread in paganism.80 The Zuqnin Chronicle is an eighth-century Syriac world chronicle preserved in a single manuscript, codex Vaticanus Syriacus 162. A critical edition and examination of the section of this chronicle on the Magi (regarded as an apocryphon called “The Revelation of the Magi”) has recently been made in the PhD dissertation (defended Spring 2008) by Brent Landau at Harvard University, with Professor François Bovon as Dissertation Advisor. | An 720 abstract of the dissertation has been given in the internet.81 The dissertation title is : “The Sages and the Star-Child. An Introduction to the Revelation of the Magi. An Ancient Christian Apocryphon”. Landau gives a critical edition and English translation of the Syriac text. The second chapter compares the Syriac text with the much shorter version of the narrative contained in the Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum, an Arian commentary on the Gospel of Matthew from the fifth century. Landau concludes that the Opus is a witness to a Greek version of the apocryphon, basically equivalent to the received Syriac. He then attempts to trace the prehistory of the text prior to the fifth-century form and argues that the earliest form of the text was a pseudepigraphon, written from the putative perspective of the Magi themselves. This text, which he considers as composed in the later second or third century, was redacted in the third or fourth century to include a third-person account of the Apostle Judas Thomas’s conversion of the Magi. On this we may comment that the questions on this section of the “J Compilation” raised by Kehl may be taken up anew from here. For our present purposes, as illustrative of the text on the Magi I give the opening of the section in the Leabhar Breac Infancy

80  See already the detailed note on InfLB 94 in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 362–64. 81  Online : http.//forbiddengospels.blogspot.com/2008/4/dissertation-abstract-brentlandau.html ; viewed 31 July 2008.

628 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Narrative, where it is headed : “Here begin the Stories of the Druids” :82     87  They were there then for some time longer. As Joseph was then standing in front of the house on a certain day, he saw a large group of people coming towards him directly from the east.     89.1  Then Joseph said to Semion : “Who are those coming towards us, son”, said he. “It seems that they may have come from afar”. Joseph then came towards them and said to Semion : “I think, son”, said he, “that they are practising druidic soothsaying and divining, for they do not take a single step forward without looking up, and they are arguing and discussing amongst themselves. And I think”, said he, “that they are people of a foreign race, come from distant lands, for their appearance, colour and aspect are not similar to those of our people. For they wear bright flowing tunics and purple even-coloured mantles, and they have long dark-red hoods and speckled and gapped shoes. The manner of their aspect is that of a king or leader”. 89.1a  There were, moreover, three outstanding men in front of that group, one of them, a handsome venerable man, bearded, grey, with high temples. Melcisar was his name. It is he who gave the gold to Christ. Another man was bearded, with long brown hair. Balcisar was his name. It is he who gave the incense to Christ. Another, then, was fair without a beard. Hiespar was his name. It is he who gave the myrrh to Christ. These, then, are other names for these kings : Malcus, Patifaxat, Casper. Malcus, then, was Melcisar, Patifaxat was Balcisar, Casper was Hiespar.

| Miracles of Child Jesus : Miracles on Journey to Egypt. 721 Miracle of the Palm Tree

The Leabhar Breac Infancy Narrative §§ 121–132 narrates the journey of the Holy Family and their entourage into Egypt. In § 124 their number is given as twelve and their names as follows : Christ i. Mary ii, Rebecca iii, Ratiel iv, Supsanna v, Sepura vi, Agizabeth vii, Moabitus id est Joseph viii, James of the Knees ix, Semion x, Abion xi, the three sons of Joseph, and one driving-servant with them xii, and an ass. (Nos iii–vii are the five servants of Mary.) During this journey a miracle and another event took place. The sources of those in §§ 121 and 123 remain to be identified.

82 

As in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1, pp. 344, 346.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

629

These are followed by a narrative on the miracle of the palm tree (§§ 126, 128–129) into which is inserted a narrative of animals worshipping the infant Jesus (127). These have similarities with two distinct episodes in Pseudo-Matthew 18–21, but the text does not seem to depend on this latter, as there appears to be no dependence on Pseudo-Matthew in the main body of the InfLB. It is more likely that both depend on popular narratives of the journey into Egypt. The emphasis on the palm tree (corresponding to Pseudo-Matthew 20.1–21.1), by division of the narrative into two parts, may be intentional as is the statement that the angels took the entire tree with them to Paradise. In Pseudo-Matthew the situation is less clear. While only a branch is taken to heaven, Jesus says that the palm thus transferred is prepared for all the saints in the place of delights (Pseudo-Matthew 21.1). The emphasis on this palm in the InfLB is probably due to the back reference to this miracle and episode in the Irish text of the Transitus Mariae (nos. 1–3),83 where Mary is given a palm by her Son, and Christ says to her : “Did you not, on a former occasion, see my miracle at the time when you and Joseph went into Egypt in flight from Herod ?”, after which Christ recounts this miracle in great detail. A final miracle or episode in this journey is that of the wicked robber and his young son (InfLB §§ 131–132). The robber tried to plunder Christ’s family but his son, who had developed a love for Christ, prevented him. The son is identified as Dismus, the good thief of the Crucifixion scene. I here give the texts in question. | A miracle and an event in which the child Jesus comes safe (InfLB 722 121–123) InfLB 121  While Mary and Joseph were on their way they saw a large troop approaching them, seeking Christ to slay him. Mary was seized with a great fear and she said : “Son, what shall we do ?” said she. “Woman”, said he, ‘say it is wheat which you carry”. The troop then came and asked Mary : “What are you carrying ?” said they. “Wheat”, said she. “We will find that out”, said they and one of them looked and found wheaten grain on her back. “This is not a person but wheat”, said they. They passed by thereafter to kill all others. 83  Translation by M. Herbert in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara pp. 118–31, at 119–20.

630 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church     122  For that reason they profess ever since that the body of Christ is made of wheat. It is the custom, moreover, with the Greeks to offer wheaten grain along with a host. Thus was the Son of God saved on that day.     123  On another occasion as they travelled they met another troop of Herod’s people. Mary then asked : “What will we do now, Son ?” said she. Christ answered : “Say that it is I whom you are carrying”, said he. The troop came then. “What are you carrying ?” said they. “The one you seek,” said she. “Be off”, said they, “if it were he, you would not admit it”.

Miracles of the palm tree and the animals worshipping Jesus (InfLB 126–129) InfLB 126  There, great heat and thirst and a sort of hunger seized the holy Mary. Then they saw a very tall palm, which had a lot of fruit on it, standing alone on the top of a mound with a cave beside it. Mary said : “We would like to eat some of the fruit of the palm”, said she, “but it cannot be climbed because of its height”. Joseph said : “A drink of pure pleasant-tasting water would be better, because the water of the vessel has given out. And let us sit under the palm to cool ourselves”, said he.     127  Then there came out from the cave towards them an innumerable host of various animals, that is, lions, panthers, dragons, tigers, frogs, serpents, asps, basilisks, monsters, leopards, vipers, crocodiles, water snakes, and many various unclean beasts of the desert besides. And the Blessed Mary and Joseph were seized by revulsion and great fear of them. But then Christ arose and stood among the many beasts. And all were seized by a sort of terror lest the animals harm the child. Then Christ said : “Have no fear whatsoever”, said he, “because all the beasts came not to harm me, but to honour, worship and bless me, because they know that I am their God, their Maker, and their Creator”. Now all those animals were welcoming God with their tails and their ears as it was possible to understand from them.     128  Thereafter, as Christ sat on the lap of Mary, his mother, he said to the palm : “Bow down a little, palm tree”, said he, ‘so that my family and my mother might eat your fruit”. Thereupon the palm tree lowered its top till it was before Mary, and they ate their fill of its fruit. The palm tree then remained bent in that fashion waiting until he who had told it to bend should tell it to rise.     129  Then Christ said : “Rise, palm”, said he, “So that you may be among the trees of my Father’s paradise and give forth water from your roots”. Angels forthwith took the tree up with them to paradise and streams of clear sweet water then came forth from

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

631

the roots of the tree. And they drank their fill of it and filled their vessels and satisfied their pack animals, for Mary rode an ass, and there were two young oxen carrying provisions for them.

| Miracles on the Entry into Egypt

The InfLB Infancy narrative text goes on to narrate (§§ 133–138) how the journey to Egypt was miraculously shortened by Christ from twelve days to one for the Holy Family, how they entered in Egypt the city of Sotien, and how on entering the temple the false gods fell down before them, and how Affrodosus, king of the city on learning of this bowed down and adored Christ and “the queen” (Mary), professing faith in the visit of the God of heaven and earth, which had made the false gods fall down. This section has a correspondence in Pseudo-Matthew 22–24, where, however, Afrodisius (the form of the word in Pseudo-Matthew) comes to Mary and adores the infant Mary carries in her bosom as (a) lord (Pseudo-Matthew 24.1). The relationship is probably to be explained by dependence of both on early legends from Christian Egypt standing behind both Pseudo-Matthew and InfLB. The InfLB text goes on to narrate a visit of the Holy Family to the city called Cintas (a tradition otherwise unattested), and mentions the many signs and wonders Jesus worked there, which are forbidden to be related. The text also comments that Joseph and Mary supported themselves from what Joseph earned from his craft-work and Mary from her handiwork. The text says they were in Egypt for the seven years that Herod remained alive. The Childhood Deeds of Jesus (Infancy Gospel of Thomas) in Irish tradition We have already spoken above in summary of the work best known as the Infancy Narrative of Thomas, but may be more exactly designated The Childhood Deeds of Jesus. It has been transmitted in four Greek recensions, and also in Ethiopic, Georgian, Syriac and three Latin forms (in an ancient Vienna palimpsest [Lv] ; in the extended form of Pseudo-Matthew [Lm], and in a more recent Latin version [Lt]). We have an early Irish verse adaptation of the work (in 48 quatrains), made about 700. There are considerable variations between the varying texts. The original text of the variant forms of the extant texts and versions is not easily

723

632 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church reconstructed. The work intends to fill in the wonders purportedly worked by Jesus before his appearance in the Temple of which the canonical Gospels say nothing. The author is chiefly interested in narrating the marvellous, and seems to have no ideological stance. For our purpose here it seems sufficient to repeat what has been recently written on the matter in the critical edition of the Irish text, which paid attention to the affiliations of the Irish text within the overall tradition of the | apocryphon, and to the 724 theological characteristics of the Irish texts, especially in matters relating to the person of Christ.84 Affiliation of Irish text At some future date it may be possible to situate more accurately within the larger tradition the Irish poetic version of the very early apocryphal work “The Childhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus”. For the moment it seems difficult to go beyond the more general statement that it belongs to the Latin tradition, and seems in a number of instances to be close to Lm within that tradition. Characteristics of the Irish Verse Account, especially regarding the person of Christ Using and in part reshaping his source, or sources, the Irish author has given us a devotional poem, one in which the image of Jesus as the Son of God, as the gentle one, has influenced the translation, and ensured that the language used was in keeping with this person. Jesus is son of the living God (q. 1), son of the great God (q. 3), and sinless son of Mary (q. 40). His small voice resounded (q. 5), a gentle, endearing, little speech, from the mouth of the faultless Jesus (q. 6). In the Infancy Gospel of Thomas Joseph is on occasion referred to as Jesus’ father. This usage is avoided in the Irish, except on the lips of Jews (q. 4, 13). In q. 3, the Irish seems to have changed an original “father” to “foster-father” ; in q. 11 and 47 the Irish text may have omitted mention of “father.” In the original behind the Irish q. 13 Joseph seems to have been addressed as if Jesus were 84  See McNamara in McNamara et al., Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  1, pp. 448–51.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

633

his son. In the Irish text, as translated here, Jesus is said to be “declared” Joseph’s son. This may be rephrasing in line with Luke 3.23. In q. 34 Jesus says to the Jewish teacher. “You think that Joseph is my father. He is not”. While the general background to this section occurs in Infancy Gospel of Thomas 6.2b–d, the particular point seems proper to the Irish text. The original Infancy Gospel of Thomas is regarded as lacking in good taste, restraint and discretion. Many of these features tended to have been toned down or changed in the course of transmission, with the result that we cannot be sure about the context of the precise Latin translation which the Irish poet used. It would seem that the Irish author aimed at producing an acceptable text by the necessary omissions and transformations. In the tradition standing behind q. 8 Joseph reprimands Jesus for his behaviour. This is omitted in the Irish. In q. 9 we have an instance of strong language | used by Jesus against an offending child, but the Irish 725 seems toned down when compared with other witnesses for this passage. The tradition behind q. 17 says that Joseph, angry with Jesus, took him by the ear and pulled it hard. This is quite transformed in the Irish. Public Life. Letter of Lentulus ; Abgar Legend ; Irish Gospel History Irish apocryphal material from the public life of Jesus has as yet not been fully explored. The Letter of Lentulus The Letter of Lentulus on the personal appearance of Christ 85 was composed in Latin, probably in the thirteenth to fourteenth century. It was translated into Irish in the sixteenth century, and is probably the most recent of Irish translation of the Apocrypha. The Irish translation follows the Latin closely, and for practical purposes we may omit consideration of it here. The Abgar legend That the Abgar Legend, in Rufinus’s translation of Eusebius, and in vernacular Irish and Anglo-Saxon translations of Rufinus, was 85 

See McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, (# 51A), pp. 59–60.

634 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church popular in Ireland (as in Britain) is evidenced by the list of manuscripts that contain it in whole or in part.86 The “Irish Gospel History” In the text known as “The Irish Gospel History” preserved in the Leabhar Breac and other manuscripts, the Abgar material has been inserted in the section on the “Enumeration of the household of Christ”. The next item in this Gospel History is headed “The First Preaching of Christ”, principally with consideration of Christ’s preaching at Nazareth (Luke 4.16–30). The author first considers the wedding feast at Cana, which he takes to have been the wedding feast of John the Beloved Disciple (called John of the Bosom in Irish tradition ; see John 13.25). The text goes on to say that there John slept on Jesus’ bosom and chose virginity (instead of marriage). This story may well be an imaginative Irish creation, without precedent or parallel elsewhere. It may however, have some apocryphal connection, as the Abgar material in the preceding section of the “Gospel History” has. For this reason I include it here. | In the Leabhar Breac this section is headed : “The First Preach- 726 ing of Jesus here” (Leabhar Breac, p. 147b).87 After John the Baptist had been put into prison by Herod, as we recounted before, and after two disciples had been sent from him to tell it to Christ that Herod had put him, namely John, into prison, at that time then Christ was at the bends of the river Jordan, after he had come out of the wilderness and after he had vanquished the devil there in three battles, in covetousness, in chastity, in gluttony.     Afterwards Christ went into Galilee, and he performed his first miracles there manifestly, because so far they had not been manifest.     Since in Canan in Galilee Christ made wine from water, when he with his disciples and Mary with her virgins attended the wedding of John of the Bosom. Because John set about to take a wife in the manner of the Old Covenant, because in the Old Covenant those were cursed who had no children or offspring, ut scriptum est : “Maledictus est qui non seminat in Israhel.” 86  See P. Considine, “Irish Versions of the Abgar Legend”, Celtica 10 (1973), pp. 237–57. 87  Provisional translation by E. Poppe, who is preparing a critical edition of the text.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

635

    There John slept at Christ’s bosom, when the three forms of profit were shown to him, namely, the thirty-fold profit for the married people, the sixty-fold profit for the widows, the hundred-fold profit for the virgins. 88 Therefore John of the Bosom offered his virginity to God after he awoke from his sleep, and he is the first (?) man who offered his virginity to God and to Mary. Therefore Christ later, when he was on the cross, entrusted Mary to John and John to Mary, so that the virgin was guarding the virgin, namely Mary guarding John and John guarding Mary, as it was fulfilled afterwards.     And he is the one who was dearest to Christ of the human race, and Christ, the second John, was dearest to Peter, and therefore Christ gave the headship of the church to Peter, because he thought him desirable, although he was not obeyed entirely.

Apocryphal references in Hiberno-Latin Gospel Commentaries. In his seminal study on what he regards as early Irish biblical commentaries, or such material at least connected with Ireland, Bernhard Bischoff has noted the occurrences of apocryphal references in material relating to the public life of Jesus, references the sources of which do not seem to have been traced.89 He instances a gloss on Matt 9.20 in a commentary on Matthew in MS Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek M.P. th. f. 61. From apocryphal tradition in this work we are given on 9.20 the name of the person with the issue of blood : id est Mariosa nomine, and on 12.42 (“queen of the South”) “Regina”, id est Meroe, austrae (‘south”), id est Aethiopiae. These two names occur again in another Hiberno-Latin commentary on Luke (with the title “Historica investigatio evangelium (!) secundum Lucam” (MS Munich, Clm 6235, fols 49r–65v ; Paris BnF lat. 1841, fol.s136v–159v). Returning to the Würzburg manuscript we have another apocryphal reference at 12.10 on the man (“homo”) with the withered hand : “Homo”, Malchus | nomine et 727 caementarius (“a stone cutter”, “a mason”) fuit.90 Bischoff remarks that since Jerome notes that the profession of this man is given For this theme see C. Harrington, Women in a Celtic Church : Ireland 450–1150, Oxford, 2002, pp. 39–42. 89  See Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”, p. 252(253) ; English translation, “Turning-Points,” p. 125. 90  The text of these glosses from the Würzburg manuscript has been edited by K. Koeberlin, Eine Würzburger Evangelienhandschrift (Mp. th. f. 61 s. VIII), Augsburg 1891, p. 74 (Mt 9.20), p. 86 (Mt 12.42) ; 83 (Mt 12.10). 88 

636 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in the Gospel according to the Hebrews which he had translated (PL 26, 78AB) and since this translation may still have continued to be used by the Irish, the name of Malchus could also have come from there ; but it may also conceivably have come from John 18.10. Judas, and the Story of “the Cock and the Pot” in Irish Tradition91 The Greek Gospel of Nicodemus Not many years ago one item that would qualify for admission under the heading of this essay is “Judas, and the Story of ‘the Cock and the Pot’“. It is found in the so-called Third Recension of the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, but only in the Greek text. It has been translated into English by Montague Rhodes James, who notes that his story of the cock has made its way into Latin and thence into many mediaeval vernacular legends. The Latin copies say that it is found “in the books of the Greeks”.92 In this form of the text it is repentant Judas who believes that Jesus will arise again, and the woman who denies this is his wife. The relevant section of the story in James’s translation runs : 91  On this theme see R. Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites”, pp. 29–63 ; H. Gaidoz, “Le coq cuit qui chante,” Mélusine 6 (1892–1893), cols  25–27. For the theme in the Middle Ages. L. Kretzenbacher, “Der Hahn auf dem Kirchturm. Sinnzeichen, Bibelexegese und Legende”, Rheinisches Jahrbuch für Volkskunde 9 (1958), pp. 194–206 ; E. M. Thompson, “Apocryphal Legends”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 37 (1881), pp. 241–43 ; P. Lehmann, “Judas Ischarioth in der lateinischen Legenden-Überlieferung des Mittelalters”, in Erforschung des Mittelalters, vol.  2, Stuttgart, 1959, pp. 284–85 ; for the theme in Irish tradition. S. J. D. Seymour, “The Cock and the Pot”, The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries 51 (1921), pp. 147–51 ; A. O’Connor, “Mac na hÓighe Slán. A Short Study of the ‘Cock and Pot’ in Irish Folk Tradition”, Sinsear. The Folklore Journal 2 (1980), pp. 34–42 ; A. Parridge, Caoineadh na dTrí Muire. Téama na Páise i bhFilíocht Bhéil na Gaeilge, Dublin, 1983, pp. 62–63, 73–74 ; I. Nagy, “The Roasted Cock Crows. Apocryphal Writings (Acts of Peter, the Ethiopic Book of the Cock, Coptic Fragments, the Gospel of Nicodemus) and Folklore texts”, (internet site, 40 pages ; http.//haldjas.folklore.ee/folklore/vol36/nagy. pdf ; consulted August 2008). 92  James, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 116. French translation of the text by Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites”, p. 34.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

637

| And departing to his house to make a halter of rope to hang himself, he [Judas] found his wife sitting and roasting a cock on a fire of coals or in a pan before eating it : and saith to her : Rise up, wife, and provide me a rope, for I would hang myself, as I deserve. But his wife said to him : Why sayest thou such things ? And Judas saith to her : Know of a truth that I have wickedly betrayed my master Jesus to the evil-doers for Pilate to put him to death : but he will rise again on the third day, and woe unto us ! And his wife said to him : Say not nor think not so : for as well as this cock that is roasting on the fire of coals can crow, just so well shall Jesus rise again, as thou sayest. And immediately at her words that cock spread his wings and crowed thrice. Then was Judas yet more convinced, and straightway made the halter of rope and hanged himself.

Latin Tradition Matters have recently changed with regard to research on this entire topic of Judas and the cock (or other fowl). It is found in a different form in Coptic and Ethiopic tradition, which does not concern us here. It has been shown that the story in the Greek recension is not original, but has been incorporated into it, and from western tradition.93 In western tradition it is found in Latin in the British Library manuscript Royal E. VII.7, fol. 340 (of the fourteenth century),94 here in an altercation between Judas and his mother on Judas’s perverse action and its consequences. Here it is Judas’s mother who professes faith in the resurrection of Jesus, to which the infuriated Judas replies that “the plucked, half-cooked cock in the pot can more easily come out of the pot than he (Jesus) the crucified one arise from the dead. As the unfortunate Judas had said this the half-cooked cock comes to life and immediately bouncing from the pot appears with its beautiful feathers great and small and flies to the roof of the house where it stays the entire day to crow, as it were announcing the resurrection of Christ”.95 The tradition dates at latest from 1243, since trace of it is found in the “Bible of the Seven Ages of the World”, a work of Geoffrey of

See Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites”, pp. 33–38. The text edited in Lehmann, “Judas Ischarioth ”, pp. 284–85 ; text also edited by Thomson, “Apocryphal Legends”, pp. 241–43. 95  French translation in Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites”, p. 36. 93 

94 

728

638 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Paris preserved in the MS Paris, BnF. fr. 1526, dated to that year. As already noted above, Rémi Gounelle has observed that the oldest witnesses of this Latin tradition are of Anglo-Irish origin.96 Irish Literary Tradition The tradition is also found in two medieval Irish texts (both in the Irish vernacular), namely in a collection of items under the general heading of | ”Finding of Christ’s Cross” in the Leabhar Breac 729 (MS, Royal Irish Academy, 23. P. 16 [1230], p. 222b–223a), a manuscript written between 1408 and 1411 and in the Irish poem Críst rocrochadh preserved in the Book of Uí Mhaine (Dublin, Royal Irish Academy D ii 1 [1225]), written between 1360 and 1427. The Leabhar Breac text is particularly close to that of the Latin British Library manuscript Royal E. VII.7.97 An item (p. 222a–222b) under the heading De Iuda et matre eius gives the quarrel between Judas and his mother after the arrest of Jesus and after his crucifixion. Here again it is the mother who professes belief in the resurrection. At the end of her reproach of Judas his mother says : “Now, however”, she asked, “Oh son, my disease, my pestilence, my plague, why was your birth now when you will see the Christ rising from the dead and the prophet of the eternal truth going to Galilee with the apostles as he promised ?” The text continues : “When he saw the mother quarrelling with him, and giving each retort to him as we said, and crying and shouting, in his presence, Judas felt great anger and ire towards his mother”.98 The Irish text then continues under a new heading in Latin : De Gallo, as follows :99

Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites”, p. 37. The texts of Judas and his mother (among additions in the Irish form of the Cross Legends) are omitted in the edition of the Leabhar Breac Cross legends by G. Schirmer, Die Kreuzlegenden im Leabhar Breac, Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung der Doctorwürde, St Gall, 1886. The whole text is edited by G. J. Darling, The Cross Legends of the Leabhar Breac. A Critical Edition, translation, and Commentary, Ann Arbor, MI, 2003. 98  Darling, The Cross Legends, p. 52 (Irish text), p. 131 (English translation). 99  Darling, The Cross Legends, p. 52 (Irish text), pp. 131–32 (English translation). 96  97 

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

639

When then his mother was arguing with him, concerning each thing about them, Judas was angry with her, as we said. Judas saw the fire that was in the house and the cauldron boiling on it and a plumed cock boiling there, a cock after a blow to his head, to his feet, and to his plumage, with his feathers [pulled] from him ; and what was well boiled and the cauldron for boiling around it. He cried out with an angry, proud voice and said to his mother [as follows] : “What is that, the wandering and going astray which is on you with the death of the great man, so [that you say] that be was a prophet and that he would rise from the dead ? I swear and I certify with dense mysteries of the Hebrews that not more easily, not more swiftly, not for the most part will the boiled cock which is in the cauldron there rise from it – [as well as] his weather-beaten head, feet, bowels, and plumage  – [than] Christ will rise from the dead”. When Judas proffered that great oath and the heavy mysteries as we said, it was customary for him actually [to levy] each bitter, foolish attack on his mother. When they were present, it is then that the boiled cock arose from the cauldron, alive, complete to the plumage and claws [p.  223a] ; it struck and went flying to the roof of the house on the side outside ; it was crowing then with an outcry, and it [was] on a pleasant place, as it was, telling of the resurrection or the life.

| The Irish poem Críst rochrochad (“Christ was crucified”) is on 730 Christ, the apostles, the two thieves, and on Mary’s age. The section on the apostles ends with the fate of Judas. In content it is similar to that of the Leabhar Breac, except that Judas’s sister takes the place of his mother, and the event takes place while Christ was on the Cross and after Judas’s betrayal. The relevant verses of the poem are as follows :100     18.  Judas, the traitor, who had not good sense, in his place Matthias was brought. It is he who went to his sister while Christ was on the cruel cross.     19.  He asked a boon truly of the sister after having betrayed the King, that she should boil a fair cock for sinful Judas to consume it.     20.  Thereupon the woman said to him : “Not good is the deed you have done, to betray the King, who shall rise afterwards at the end of three days out of the earth”.

100  Irish text edited and translated by T. Ó Máille, “Christ was crucified”, Ériu 3 (1907), pp. 196–99.

640 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church     21.  ”Jesus will not rise from the earth,” said fierce, wicked Judas, “until the cock which you have killed crows a cry which is not weak”.     22.  The cock which was on the fire, truly and certainly, came across out of the house from beyond until he crowed his three cries.     23.  Judas put a noose round his own neck, and put himself in a hard gibbet. He was the first who went afterwards into hell after its being plundered.

Irish Iconographic Tradition As researchers in the field have noted, this story and symbol of a cock and pot occurs in Irish folklore, literature, poetry and is iconographically represented in wood and on stone throughout Ireland.101 The cock and pot symbol is found with recognised symbols of the passion (sun and moon, cord, scourges, crown of thorns, ladder, spear, hammer nails, etc.) on fifteenth-century tombs, and on those of a later date, in Ireland. This “cock and pot” symbolism, apparently, has no place in the ordinary medieval European scheme of Passion symbols.102 It continued to be used in the same combination in small wooden crucifixes known as “Penal Crosses”, widely distributed throughout Ireland. The symbol seems clearly indicated to express faith in the resurrection – of Christ and apparently also of the faithful. The exact story behind it, with or without inclusion of Judas, cannot be determined from the symbols themselves. For this we have to turn to the literary and folklore tradition. | The “Cock and Pot” in Irish Folklore Tradition

Ireland has a very rich folk tradition with regard to the “Cock and Pot” story. Versions of it have been collected from most areas of Ireland. The central elements of this tradition are the same in all versions. Thirty of these versions have been examined in detail. It is important in these stories that the cock crows as he rises. The crowing is recorded as being in Irish “Mac na hÓighe slán” (“The Son of the Virgin is safe” ; phonetically : “moc na hoey slaun”) in 14 See O’Connor, “Mac na hÓighe Slán”, pp. 34–42, at 34. See A. T. Lucas, Penal Crucifixes, Dublin, 1958, p. 11 ; A. T. Lucas, “’Penal’ Crucifixes”, The Journal of the County Louth Archaeological Society 13/2 (1954), pp. 145–72, at 152. 101 

102 

731

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

641

of the versions considered.103 This crowing reveals the truth of the resurrection to the onlookers, and indeed to the audience. In nine of the accounts it is emphasised that ever since the cock rose from the pot and crowed that it is “Mac na hÓighe slán” rather than “cock-a-doodle-doo” that every cock says since.104 It is interesting that while the ancient sources we have considered above centre on Judas either denying, or as in the Greek text supporting, the possibility of Christ’s resurrection, that this does not exist in any of the thirty accounts from Irish oral tradition. A general outline of the story of the cock and pot in Irish oral tradition is as follows : After the Crucifixion, when Christ was laid in the tomb, there was dissension among those present as to whether or not he would rise, as scripture foretold, in three days.105 Those who argue in this story, whether represented as Judas, Jews, or Roman soldiers etc., claim that Christ could not rise any more than a cock, which they are cooking, could do so. At these words the cock rises from the pot and crows ; the embodiment of resurrection. The most common Irish version of the story concerns a group of two or three Jews who argue about the resurrection. An example from Corca Dhuibhne, Co. Kerry is as follows :106 The Cock. After the Jews had crucified Our Lord on the cross, they were gathered together in the room of their leader and talking about the crucifixion. They were boiling a cock in a pot on the fire. They were afraid that Our Lord would rise, and one of them said : “He will rise again”. “He will not” said the second person, “no more than the little bird that is at the bottom of the cauldron, whose head is with the raven that is at the bottom of the wood”. The little bird that was at the bottom of the cauldron, whose head was with the raven that was at the bottom of the wood, rose. It spread its wing and called on | Mary’s Son. The cock leaped up O’Connor, “Mac na hÓighe Slán”, p. 34. O’Connor, “Mac na hÓighe Slán”, p. 37. 105  On the traditions of the cock coming to life to condemn the Jews after the crucifixion (a)  as a legend originally independent and (b)  as part or a larger multiform Marian cycle see Gounelle, “À propos des volailles cuites”, pp. 39–42. The possible connection of the Irish folk form of the legend with these traditions merits examination. 106  Irish text in O’Connor, “Mac na hOighe Slán”, p. 36. Translation by the present writer. 103 

104 

732

642 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church on the side of the pot, it spread its wing and it said : “The Virgin’s Son is safe”. That is what the cock says when it crows.

The Lord Jesus and the Meaning of creation The Evernew Tongue (In Tenga Bithnua : TBN) Introduction The Evernew Tongue (In Tenga Bithnua) is the name given in Irish tradition to the Apostle Philip. The reason for this seems to derive from the account of his martyrdom (Páis Pilip Apstail, “Passion of the Apostle Philip”) as recounted in Irish tradition.107 Apart from this name and a few other elements, the Irish text of the Passion of Philip represents an Irish translation of the section (Book X) on Philip of the work known as “The Apostolic History of Pseudo-Abdias”,108 probably compiled towards the end of the sixth century.109 The Latin tradition has nothing in common with the Greek Acts of Philip, recently critically edited.110 According to the Irish translation, Hierapolis was the name of the city in which Philip was afterwards crucified ; and they worshipped him as a god. Philip taught them for the space of a year to this effect : how Christ was born of a virgin ; how He was crucified ; and how He ascended into heaven in the sight of His apostles ; how the grace of the Holy Ghost descended on them, and gave them the power of speaking many languages on the day of Pentecost, for they only spoke one language up to that time, viz. Hebrew. “And I”, said Philip, “am one of them ; I was sent to show you these things, to show that the idols whom ye worship are not gods in truth, but speechless, senseless, irrational idols, the vain

107  The Irish text has been edited and translated by R. Atkinson, The Passions and the Homilies from the Leabhar Breac, Dublin, 1887. Irish text, pp. 110–13 ; English translation, pp. 356–58. 108  See Geerard, Clavis Apocryphorum, 158–159 (# 256) ; Acta Iohannis Textus alii — Commentarius Indices (CCSA 2), ed. by E. Junod – J.-D. Kaestli, Turnhout 1983, pp. 750–63. 109  See Junod  – Kaestli, Acta Johannis, p. 755 ; James, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 438. 110  Acta Philippi. Textus, ed. by F. Bovon  – B. Bouvier  – F. Amsler (CCSA 11), Turnhout, 1999 ; Acta Philippi. Commentarius, ed. by F. Amsler (CCSA 12), Turnhout, 1999.

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

643

works of the hands of sinful men, and that their worshippers are real enemies of God”.111 It was afterwards revealed to Philip in a vision that he should go to the bishop of Asia. So he went to Asia, and dwelt in the city Hierapolis. There he brought into contempt and subverted the faith of the Ebionites, who said | that “Christ was not born of a vir- 733 gin” ; but Philip held them up to scorn, and chased away their creed. The text moves on suddenly to narrate the apostle’s death. On the twelfth day before his passion, Philip summoned to him the priests, and deacons, and bishops of the neighbouring cities, and said to them : “My life has but twelve days left. Remember ye the teaching of the Lord, and pray to Him fervently. Fight bravely against your vices and sins. Contemn and despise the old enemy, the devil, with his temptations. Vanquish and crucify your carnal wills by fasting, by prayer and abstinence, by almsgiving of food and clothing to God’s poor and needy. God will fulfil His promises to us if we do all these things. He will give us peace and happiness in the present world, and the kingdom of heaven for our souls after death. God will multiply his marvels in the churches of the world, for these are the prophecies and promises of the Lord to us, if we perform these things according to our ability”.112

The account of Philip’s death follows :113 Then arose the unbelieving crowds and the Jewish priests against Philip, and ordered his tongue to be cut out. This was done ; but none the less did he go on teaching the people. They cut it out again, but that did him no hurt. Seven times was this done, yet he stopped not his teaching all that time. So they ordered him to be stoned ; and he was struck over the face with fists and leaden staves and stones, but no kind of torture took effect on him. Then they ordered him to be crucified, as they could inflict no other death on him. So a certain wicked, merciless man among them came and put a venomous halter around the apostle’s neck ; and finally they crucified him, after many tortures and insults and smitings, in the track of his Master, Jesus. Then was seen a great glory, with a concourse of angels round the cross, when Philip gave up the ghost ; and the angels placed the soul of the apostle in the mansions of heaven’s kingdom, after the victory of martyrdom

111  112  113 

In the translation of Atkinson, The Passions and Homilies, p. 357. In Atkinson, Passions and Homilies, pp. 357–58. In Atkinson, Passions and Homilies, p. 358.

644 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church he had won. Eighty-six years was his age when he departed to the Lord ; and they buried his body in the village of Bethsaida. Hierapolis was the name of the city in which he was crucified.

As already noted, all this with the exception of his continuing to teach despite the fact that his tongue was cut out seven times and his burial at Bethsaida, is basically the account given in PseudoAbdias. The origin of this tradition regarding Philip’s tongue, or of this bye-name being given to him, has not been determined. It may be the tradition regarding his teaching of true doctrine right to his death that gave origin to the writing now known as The Evernew Tongue. The work In Tenga Bithnua must have been popular in Ireland, as it has been transmitted in Irish in three distinct recensions, the first from the ninth or tenth century (First Recension), a second from between 900 and 1200, and a third, a modern form, extant in a number of manuscripts, the oldest of which (now fragmentary) seems to be from the fifteenth century. | The work commences with the opening words of Genesis (in the 734 Old Latin version) : In principio fecit Deus caelum et terram. After an initial introduction on an assembly in the east it tells of a revelation by the Evernew Tongue “from the heights of heaven above the assembly of Mount Zion”. The body of the work is in the form of questions and answers, questions by the wise men of the Hebrews and answers by the Evernew Tongue, sometimes in the text called Philip. There are sections in Latin embedded in the text, particularly in the questions addressed to Philip. There are also a number of unintelligible texts, in what is said to be an angelic language. The present Irish text of the oldest (first) recension is from the tenth, or possibly the ninth, century. It has long been recognized that its origins go back much further. In an early edition of the work Whitley Stokes expressed his belief that it is a version of a lost Latin Apocalypse of Philip.114 Montague Rhodes James agreed with Stokes’s position, asserting : “There was, then, a Latin apocryphon of St. Philip, which we have in this Irish dress, and, it seems, in no other. To trace its relationships and assign to it a place in literature will be worth while, if it can be done”.115 John W. Stokes, “The Evernew Tongue”, Ériu 2 (1905), pp. 96–162, at 96. M. R. James, “Irish Apocrypha”, Journal of Theological Studies 20 (1918–1919), pp. 9–16, at 10. 114 

115 

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

645

Carey, whose critical edition of the work has recently been published, has undertaken to trace these relationships.116 He believes that behind our present text in the first phase stands a composition in which Latin versions of an Egyptian “revelation discourse” and of the Greek Acta Philippi II came together, perhaps in Spain and conceivably in a Priscillianist milieu. In the second phase, these materials were used by an Irish author as the basis of a “hexaemeral-eschatological” treatise, cast within the framework of an Easter vigil homily. That this was written in Latin is suggested by the survival of Latin phrases in the existing text of Tenga Bithnua ; that it was written in the seventh or the early eighth century seems plausible in the light of the sources used, and of the broader intellectual background with which the author was familiar. In due time this would have been translated into Irish, or an Irish language text would have been based on it, to give us the present first recension of the text. As is evident, The Evernew Tongue is a work hard to categorize, one with regard to which opinions will vary. There are arguments for and against classifying it as an apocryphon at all, or as apocalyptic, eschatological, or an eschatological dialogue. Some would look on it as almost a theological treatise. Whatever of these questions, and of the complicated compositional history that may lay behind our present text, it is our present Irish-language text that is important, the one that was written to convey a | message to 735 a particular readership. In this first instance the intended readership may have been the learned. Whatever of this, its reception history (in three recensions) indicates that the readership or audience went far beyond this. Preparation for the revelation (TBN 2–9)117 The work seems to have been produced to convey a message, and that message is the centrality of Christ and the Easter mystery

J. Carey, In Tenga Bithnua. Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  2/1 (CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2010. 117  Paragraphs 2–9 in the translation of M. Herbert, in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara, pp. 109–111. There are detailed comments on these paragraphs and their setting in Western Latin and Irish tradition in John Carey’s recent edition. 116 

646 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church for an understanding of the universe. This seems clear from the opening paragraphs, some of which I give here.     2  Now everything was obscure to the eyes of Adam’s race except for their seeing the motion of the constellations, the moon, sun, and stars, which circulated each day without ever ceasing. They saw, moreover, that the springs and rivers of the world never stopped flowing at any time. They observed the depression on the earth, the debility and sleep afflicting light and crops at the coming of winter. They saw also the revival of the earth with heat and light, flowers and fruit, at the reawakening of summer.     3  Yet they did not know who was responsible for this until there came, as God arranged, the account of the creation of the world, its forms and motion. All of this was obscure until the story was related, until the Evernew Tongue revealed it, speaking from the height of heaven above the assembly of Mount Sion. For the hosts of the eastern world were gathered, those from the mountains of Abian as far as the shores of the Red Sea, and from the Dead Sea as far as the island of Sabarn. This was the number congregated, three thousand four hundred and eighty-five bishops, and fifty-four thousand nine hundred and sixty-nine kings of the world.     6  Thereafter, suddenly, at the end of the eve of Easter, there was heard in the clouds a noise like thunder, or like the crackle of fire. There was a thunderous blast meanwhile, whereby suddenly a solar mass, like a bright sun, was seen in the midst of the tumult. That radiant solar mass revolved around in such a way that eyes could not look on it, for it was seven times brighter than the sun.     9  The Hebrew wise men responded, and said “Let us know your name, your status, and your message.” The Evernew Tongue was heard, speaking in an angelic voice : “Nathire uimbae o lebiae uaun nimbisse tiron tibia ambiase sau fimblia febe ab le febia fuan”, that is,“I was born among the peoples of earth, conceived by procreation of man and woman. My name is Philip the Apostle. The Lord sent me to preach to heathen peoples. Nine times my tongue was cut out of my head by heathens, and nine times I was able to go on preaching again. For this reason I am called the Evernew Tongue by the company of heaven.”

| The Central Role of Christ’s Resurrection118

As noted in the introduction, the revelation to Philip, the Evernew Tongue, was at the Easter Vigil. The work may have originally 118  Paragraphs 11 and 13 in the translation of M. Herbert, in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara, pp. 111–12.

736

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

647

been intended as a homily for the vigil of Easter.119 The centrality of the Easter mystery is clearly expressed in the divine revelation. 11  It is this which has made me come to you, to elucidate to you the wonderful story which the Holy Spirit related through Moses son of Amram concerning the creation of earth and heaven and all visible thereon. For the narrative tells of the making of heaven and earth. Likewise, it concerns the creation of the world brought about by the resurrection of Christ from the dead on this Easter eve. For every substance, every element, and every essence visible in the world were all bound together in the body in which Christ arose, that is, in the body of every human. 13  (= Carey 14) All the world rose with him because the essence of all the elements was in the body which Jesus assumed. For if the Lord had not been crucified on behalf of the race of Adam, and if he had not arisen after death, the whole world and the descendants of Adam would be destroyed when Doomsday came. No creature of sea or earth would be regenerated, but the skies would blaze as far as the third heaven. All but three heavens of the great Heavenly Kingdom would remain unburnt. There would be neither land nor people, alive or dead, in the world, only hell and heaven, if the Lord had not come to redeem them. All would thus perish without restoration.

In his new edition of the apocryphon John Carey comments as follows on paragraph 13 (14 in his enumeration) :120 §  14.  This paragraph, taking up a theme already adumbrated in §  12 (= Máire Herbert’s 11) sets forth one of the most striking doctrines in the text : that the presence of all substances in the human body means that the entire cosmos has been redeemed by Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection. This idea may be seen as providing a unifying theme for T[enga] B[ithnua] as a whole : the text’s concern with cosmology and eschatology considered within the liturgical context of the Easter vigil, makes perfect sense in light of this compelling synthesis. I have been unable to find any close comparanda elsewhere, and the doctrine may well be original to TB or to its primary source. It is interesting however to observe rather similar concepts being formulated by Eriugena in

119  Thus J. Carey, In Tenga Bithnua, p. 236, in his note to paragraph 1 of the text. 120  Carey, In Tenga Bithnua. pp. 258-59.

648 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church his Periphyseon, a work which I take to be roughly contemporary with TB itself.121

| In the beginning was the thought122

Against the background of a long history of reflection on God’s eternity and transcendence, by Augustine and Irish tradition, the Hebrew sages ask a pertinent question on the matter and receive a revelatory answer through Philip, the Evernew Tongue.     16  Responderunt sapientes Ebreorum : “We ask what existed at that time when none of the things mentioned up to now existed ?” The Evernew Tongue answered : “The marvel of all elements existed, that is, God, who is without beginning or end, without sorrow, age or decay. There was not a time or occasion or era when he did not exist. He is neither younger nor older than at first. Nothing was impossible for him to do. He reflected, and had a thought. This thought had no beginning. He contemplated the existence of a more splendid thing whereby his power and his unutterable dignity might be seen, for these did not exist in any other things apart from himself”.     17  Finally, with these thoughts, he immediately created light. The light which he created was the circuit of the heavens with the nine orders of angels. There were seventy lands with six hundred and twenty four sunny dwellings, with melodies and colours in the seven forms of heaven. In a single day he made the circuit of those forms, giving the basis in which the world was made, for it is in the shape of a round circle that God first fashioned the world.

Mystery of Divine wrath and gentle Jesus in the arms of Mary The work ends with the final judgment scene, first noting the wrath of the Risen Saviour at judgment, but going on to contrast this with the gentle Jesus in the arms of Mary. The greatest pains of the damned is really the privation of the vision of God’s face 121  Carey notes that he has examined this question in some detail elsewhere. J. Carey, A Single Ray of Hope. Religious Speculation in Early Ireland, Andover and Aberystwyth, 1999, pp. 75–104. 122  Paragraphs 16–17 in the translation of M. Herbert (see n. 20), in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by Herbert  – McNamara, pp. 112–13. Carey, In Tenga Bithnua, p. 123, has a different rendering of the ending of §  16 (his § 18) : “He thought a thought. That thought had beginning. He thought something. That it would be nobler that his power and glory be seen — that which was inexpressible, that which existed in no other things though he existed himself”.

737

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

649

(§ 103). As is common in Irish texts on speaking of the end time, there is an ending with a description of the joys of heaven, to which believers aspire. I give some of the final paragraphs in the translation of John Carey.123 The text of In Tenga Bithnua ends as it begins, with formulae typical of Irish homilies. To a question from the Hebrew sages (in Latin) as to what time in the day or night was the world made or will be destroyed, and the Lord arose from the dead, the Evernew Tongue answered (among other things) :     §  95.  As for the Lord who arose from the dead on this eve of Easter, his power and his might and his dignity and his deeds and workings in his creation, from the beginning of the world until the end of the Judgment, cannot be told. For even if all the monsters beneath the seas and all the birds in the air and all the cattle and beasts and people upon the earth and all the angels in the heavens and all the demons in hell had begun at the beginning of | the world, they would not have related even a seventh part of the deeds of God before the Judgment.     § 97.  What thing could be more wondrous than the Child to be asleep in the arms of the Virgin, and yet a trembling upon creation and angels ? He has closed his fist around the seven heavens and the earth and hell and the many surrounding seas. The Child asleep in the arms of the Virgin, and yet a trembling upon the angels, and heavens, and the lands with their inhabitants, and the whales in the seas, and upon the dwellers in hell  – for fear of his power, and in hopes of deliverance from vexing [him](?).     § 98.  Such is the beauty and radiance of his face that if all the in hell were to gaze upon the radiance of his face, they would not notice the suffering and punishment and torture of hell.     § 99.  Such is the sanctity of his form, that whoever gazed upon his face would be unable to commit a sin thereafter.     §  103.  Such is the brilliance and brightness of his face, that were it told to every impure soul to whom God has given destruction – [that is,] going into the infernal habitation – in payment for its lust, that would be harder for the souls to bear than any torment : departure from God’s presence and perpetual banishment from beholding his face [would be harder to bear] than all the crosses and many torments of hell.

123  Carey, In Tenga Bithnua, pp. 219-31. The translation reproduced by the kind permission of John Carey.

738

650 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church     § 104.  As the Lord is ineffable, so his kingdom and its blessedness are as ineffable as he is : the sweetness of the songs, the joy of faces, the beauty of the forms, the brightness and fieriness of the host, the purity of the thoughts, the innocence of the souls. A place in which there is heard no voice of anger, nor jealousy nor sorrow nor hardship.     §  105.  Happy, then, is the one who is summoned to that kingdom when the Lord says to them. “Venite benedicti Patris mei, possidete regnum quod vobis paratum est ab origine mundi.” Ubi lumen solis non digetur (sic), nec lunae nec stellarum, sed Dominus lux erit quia ipse est fons luminis. Ubi erit sanitas. Ubi maria (sic) tranquillitas. Ubi pax ingens. Ubi caritas inexpugnabilis. Ubi vita perennis. Ubi seneectus non apparebit. Ubi iocunditas accipitur. Ubi sensus (sic). Ubi paradisus abundans et dulcis. Ubi splendor angelorum. Ubi candor iustitiae. Ubi palma regalis. Ubi flumina aurea. Ubi suavis laudatio angelorum et conventus omnium sanctorum. Ubi Ierusalem caelestis. Ubi nullus dolor nec tristitia post gaudium, sed laetitia sempiterna. Ubi bonum non defuit nec deest nec deerit unquam.     §  106.  What could be more wondrous to someone than that kingdom ? A place where poverty and nakedness and hunger and thirst will not be seen. A place where no desire declarabantur nor need for clothing or food will arise (?), but rather being at the great exalted feast forever in the presence of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. A light of the King who bestows the kingdom, the light of the saints on whom it is bestowed, the light of the kingdom which is bestowed there.     §  107.  May we all reach that kingdom, may we deserve it, may we dwell in it ! In secula seculorum. amen.

Conclusions Conclusion of this essay presents an opportunity for some questions and reflections, particularly with regard to the original intended readership and audience of these texts and their place in the transmission and understanding | of the Christian message in 739 the communities or among the individuals who later used them. With regard to the original purpose of the texts we have drawn on, one can only surmise why they were originally composed. A number of them probably had a corresponding tradition behind the written text. Some were composed to supplement the biblical narrative in a variety of ways and to supply material for the Christian imagination. They could have arisen in one or many of the Christian circles : lay, clerical or monastic. By and large the

    jesus in (early) irish apocryphal gospel traditions

651

circles of origin would appear to have professed the orthodoxy of the “great church”. The texts as known and used in Ireland do not seem to have differed greatly from the original compositions, although in some cases we note in the Irish texts a desire to have the contents more in keeping with accepted doctrinal and devotional positions. The documents we have considered can be taken as sources for Irish faith and devotion. Among the chief points of doctrine and devotion we may note the centrality of the person of Christ, the Son of God, the joy associated with the celebration of his birth and manifestation to the gentiles, the centrality of the Easter mystery and the resurrection of Christ for a proper understanding of creation itself, the perpetual virginity of Mary (including the virgin birth). We may note the redaction of the tradition to make it clear that Joseph was not the father of Jesus. All in all, I believe that that the texts which we classify as “apocrypha” can be sources to be considered in a study of the presentation of the person of Christ in Christian history  – always with due regard to the nature, origin and setting of each one of the texts.

| THE INVERTED EUCHARISTIC FORMULA

573

CONVERSIO CORPORIS CHRISTI IN PANEM ET SANGUINIS IN VINUM : THE EXEGETICAL AND LITURGICAL BACKGROUND IN IRISH USAGE* Introduction In recent years we have witnessed an ever-increasing interest in the beliefs and theology of the early, that is pre-Norman, Irish Church. Much more research in this area will, however, be necessary before any satisfactory synthesis can be attempted in any of the various branches of theological learning. It will be necessary to ascertain as far as possible to what extent Irish theological teaching represented the generally accepted syntheses of the western Church and in what elements it deviated from this. Some branches of early Irish theology are much better documented than others. This would appear to be the case with regard to Eucharistic doctrine, and a monograph on this topic in the pre-Norman Irish Church remains a desideratum. The indications are that such a study would reveal a deep and multifaceted Irish understanding of the mystery of the Eucharist. The aim of this paper is far removed from any such approach to the topic. It limits itself to an examination of one particular Eucharistic formula. The formula in the Leabhar Breac In the early fifteenth-century manuscript known as the Leabhar Breac there are a number of homilies generally regarded as having been composed in the eleventh century.1 One of these, on the institution narrative of the Eucharist (Mt  26. 17–29), | is headed 574 First published in : Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 87 C (1987), pp. 573-593 as an expanded form of a paper read at the 1984 Tionól of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. The author wishes to express his gratitude to the editors and readers of these Proceedings for the many extremely helpful observations and suggestions offered. * 

654 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church “In cena Domini”.2 It is a bilingual homily, with sentences (and sometimes even phrases) alternating between Latin and Irish. In a comment in Latin on Christ’s words, “Accipite et comedite ; hoc est enim corpus meum”, there comes a question containing a most unusual Eucharistic formula : “Quaeritur, quare ista conuersio corporis et sanguinis in panem et uinum facta est ?”3  – a text which must be rendered into English as follows : “The question is posed why this conversion (or change) of the Body and Blood of Christ is made into bread and wine ?”. The most obvious explanation would be to regard the Latin turn of phrase as a simple case of scribal error. Such an explanation could draw support from the supposed Irish translation immediately following, which reads “Cesnaigther, cid ar mo fo gné bairgine 7 fhína d’airithe doberad Ísu sund glanrúin a chuirp fen 7 a fhola di-[a] apstalu”4 (“It is asked why (it is) under the species of bread (or of a loaf) and wine that Jesus gives here the pure mysteries of his own Body and Blood to his apostles”). This solution, however, is rendered improbable by the fact that in another text of the Leabhar Breac, namely, the vernacular Irish “Instruction on the Sacraments”5 from the eleventh or twelfth century (the exact date is a matter of debate), comsod, comhsodh, the Irish rendering of conuersio, conuertere, is used in treating of the Eucharist, both of the change of the Body and Blood of Christ into bread and wine, and in the generally used manner of the change of the elements into the Body and Blood of Christ. The explanation of the unusual phraseology of these Leabhar Breac texts, both in Latin and vernacular Irish, seems to lie in a history of Eucharistic terminology stretching back from the 1  The Passions and Homilies from Leabhar Breac (Todd Lecture Series 2), ed. by R. Atkinson, Dublin, 1887. 2  Atkinson, The Passions ; Irish text, pp.  181–90, Latin, 430–6 ; without English translation. The Irish text, without any intermingling of Latin, is also found in MS Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, fonds celtique et basque no. 1 (a manuscript transcribed by Uilliam Mac an Leagha c.  1500). 3  In facsimile edition of MS, p.  50, col.  1, lines 55–6 ; Atkinson, The Passions, p.  433. 4  In facsimile edition of MS, p.  50, col.  1, lines 56–8 ; Atkinson, The Passions, p.  185. 5  The Irish Nennius from L. na hUidre and Homilies and Legends from L. Breac (Todd Lecture Series 6), ed. by E. Hogan, Dublin, 1895, pp. 16–87.

inverted eucharistic formula

655

twelfth or eleventh century to Hiberno-Latin and vernacular Irish texts of the seventh century or even earlier. A recent study by Jean Rittmueller 6 has demonstrated this probability more clearly, showing that the Leabhar Breac homily “In cena Domini” follows a pattern already well established in seventh-century Hiberno-Latin exegetical texts. To this we may add that these Hiberno-Latin texts must in turn be set within the larger context of the use of such Eucharistic terminology as transfigurare, or transformare, corpus et sanguinem Christi (in panem et uinum) in the western Church in the course of the evolution of Eucharistic doctrine and the refinement of the terminology used to express belief in it. In the pages that follow we shall first of all consider this earlier terminology before coming finally to reconsider the evidence of the Leabhar Breac and of the presentation of earlier texts in the glosses of the twelfth-century Gospels of Máel Brigte. Early Eucharistic formulae, with transfiguratio, transformatio Brief history of research The existence of and the theological problems posed by the Eucharistic formulae we are considering have attracted the attention of liturgiologists from the end of the | first decade of the 575 present century.7 The occurrences and significance of the individ6  J. Rittmueller, “The Gospel Commentary of Máel Brigte Ua Maelruanaig and its Hiberno-Latin Background”, Peritia 2 (1983), pp. 185–214. 7  The chief studies are as follows : G. Morin, “Un commentaire romain sur S. Marc de la première moitié du Ve siècle”, Revue Bénédictine 27 (1910), pp. 352–63 (358 for transfiguratio) ; C. L. Feltoe, “A Study of Some Eucharistic Phrases in the West”, Journal of Theological Studies 11 (1909–10), pp. 575–79 ; M. Rule, “’Transformare’ and ‘Transformatio’“, Journal of Theological Studies 12 (1911), pp. 413–27 ; P. Batiffol, “Transformare”, Bulletin d’ancienne littérature et d’archéologie chrétiennes 1 (1911), pp. 54–55 ; A. Wilmart, “Transfigurare”, Bulletin d’ancienne littérature et d’archéologie 1 (1911), pp. 282–92 (definition of transfigurare at p. 285) ; P. Batiffol, L’Eucharistie. La Présence Réelle et la transsubstantiation (deuxième edition refondue et corrigée), Paris, 1913, pp.  365–70 ; J. Brinktrine, “Die transformatio (transfiguratio) corporis et sanguinis Christi in den alten abendländischen Liturgien”, Theologie und Glaube 8 (1916), pp. 311–18 ; J. Geisselmann, Die Eucharistielehre der Vorscholastik (Forschungen zur Christlichen Literatur- und Dogmengeschichte, XV.

656 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ual Eucharistic formulae and terms such as transformatio, transfiguratio, conuersio and mutatio have been collected and arranged. Their origins, their original meanings and their bearing on the theology of the Eucharist have been discussed. It is interesting that the earliest study of the problem, by Morin in 1910,8 took as its point of departure the meaning of the term transfiguratio in the commentary on Mark’s Gospel (Mk  14.22), where it is used, he notes, not in the usual sense of the change of bread into the Body of Christ but rather of the transformation of this same Body into bread. Bischoff argued in 1954,9 as have many since then, that the work in question was probably composed by an Irishman in the seventh century. Bischoff even believes that he can identify the author in question as a certain Comianus. Wilmart contributed a classic essay on the occurrences and meaning of transfigurare in such Eucharistic contexts in 1911.10 In his view the term, with the Body of Christ as object, meant “giving to the real, but invisBand, 1/3 Heft), Paderborn, 1926 : (pp.  3–143 for the earlier and Carolingian period ; further information in index of persons, things and terms : transfigurare, transformatio, transferre, etc.) ; J. Brinktrine, Das Opfer der Eucharistie. Dogmatische Untersuchungen über das Wesen des Messopfers, Paderborn, 1938 ; C. Zimara, review of J. Brinktrine’s book in Divus Thomas, 17 (1939), 250– 52 ; J. Brinktrine, “Die eucharistische Wandlung. Adduktion oder Reproduktion ?”, Theologie und Glaube (1941), pp. 97–99 ; C. Zimara, “Zu vorscholastischen Anschauungen über die Eucharistie. Eine Erwiderung”, Divus Thomas 19 (1941), pp. 440–46 ; J. Brinktrine, “Interpretation vorscholastischer Texte über die Eucharistie”, Divus Thomas 20 (1942), pp. 278–84, followed by C. ZIMARA, “Ergänzungen”, pp. 284–90 ; R. Falsini, “La ‘transformazione del corpo e del sangue di Cristo’. Antico formula eucaristica nella liturgia e letteratura dal IV al IX secolo”, Studi Francescani, 52 (1955), pp. 307–59 (358 for opinion on origin) ; J. Brinktrine, “Zum Ursprung der Termini transfigurare corpus et sanguinem Christi, transfiguratio corporis et sanguinis Christi”, Römische Quartalschrift für Altertumskunde und für Kirchengeschichte, Freiburg im Breisgau, 54 (1959), pp. 247–49. 8  G. Morin, “Un commentaire…”. 9  B. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), pp. 189–281 ; revised edition in Mittelalterliche Studien. Aufsatze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, vol. I, Stuttgart, 1966, pp. 205–73 ; English translation by C. O’Grady MSC in Biblical studies. The medieval Irish contribution, PIBA, no. 1, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 1976, pp. 74–160. 10  A.Wilmart, “Transfigurare”.

inverted eucharistic formula

657

ible, Body of Christ the aspect or appearance of bread, presenting this Body under the species or figure of bread, or more simply still, making of the bread the figure of the Body”. Various studies followed down to another comprehensive one by Falsini in 1955,11 and a slightly later comment on this by Brinktrine in 1959.12 In these studies little or no attention was paid to the Irish origins or connections of some of the evidence being used. It remained for Jean Rittmueller in 1983 to show the extent to which the formula transfigurare corpus Christi in panem et sanguinem in uinum (or similar formulations) was used in early Hiberno-Latin exegetical and homiletic contexts, and in other studies to indicate the manner in which the Leabhar | Breac homily “In cena Domini” stands 576 squarely within a tradition stretching back to the seventh century.13 The texts in which the formula that interests us occurs fall into three categories : (1)  Latin liturgical texts, (2)  Latin literary (non-liturgical) texts, and (3)  Greek literary texts. Leaving the Irish material aside, the formula is found in texts from the later fourth to the ninth centuries. By reason of the term used, the texts fall into two categories : those with a term derived from figura (transfigurare, transfiguratio, etc.) and those with one coming from forma (transformare, transformatio, etc.). There does not appear to be any difference in meaning in this particular context between these two words. Figura and forma appear to be synonyms. The use of one term rather than the other would appear to depend on the particular tradition. In general, the liturgical texts use derivatives from forma while the literary texts use derivatives from figura. Other terms, e.g. transferre or uertere, do occur, though rarely and not during the earlier period of use of the formula. Latin liturgical texts The formula “transformatio corporis et sanguinis (filii tui Domini nostri Iesu) Christi” occurs in a number of liturgical texts, which I give here in so far as they are known to me (with reference to Klaus Gamber, Codices liturgici latini antiquiores (Freiburg, Schweiz, 1968), the standard work on the subject). R. Falsini, “La ‘transformazione’”. J. Brinktrine, “Zum Ursprung”. 13  Cf. J. Rittmueller, “The Gospel commentary” ; for the homily “In cena Domini”, pp. 213 and 199. 11 

12 

658 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The Mone-Masses no.  VI (Gamber, no.  203) (MS c. 630–40) These Masses take their name from Franz Joseph Mone, who discovered them in MS Karlsruhe, Aug. perg.  CCLIII, and published them in 1850.14 The manuscript in question is a palimpsest in which Jerome’s commentary on Matthew is written in an eighth-century hand over the liturgical text containing the Masses that interest us. This liturgical text was written in Burgundy c. a.d.  630–40. The Masses have genuine Gallican Mass formularies and are classed among the texts of the Missale Gallicanum vetus. In Mone-Mass VI, the Collectio after the Post Sanctus reads thus (Formula 331 of the Missale Gallicanum ; 65 of Mone-Masses) : Deus Abraham, deus Isaac, deus Iacob, deus et pater domini nostri Iesu Christi : tu de caelis tuis propitius affauens hoc sacrificium nostrum indullentissima pietate prosequere. Discendat, domine, plenitudo magistatis, diuinitatis, pietatis, uirtutis, benedictionis [MS : benedictionibus] et gloriae tuae super hunc panem et super hunc calicem et fiat nobis legitima eucharistia in transformatione corporis et sanguinis domini : ut quicumque in cotienscumque ex hoc panem et ex hoc calice libaberimus, sumamus nobis monimentum fidei, sincerem dilectiones, tranquilla spem resurrectionis adque inmortalitatis aeterne in tuo filique tui hac spirito sancto nomine, in conmunione omnium sanctorum, remissionem omnium nostrorum criminum. Credemus, domine, quod haec nobis fessa credulitate poscentibus praestabis : per dominum.15

The Missale Gothicum : Post Secreta of the Mass In circumcisione Domini n. J. Christi The Missale Gothicum (Gamber, no.  210) was published from MS Vatican Reg. | lat.  317 by Leo Cunibert Mohlberg in 1961.16 It 577 belongs to the Gallican liturgy. The manuscript in question was

14  F. J. Mone, Lateinische und griechische Messen aus dem zweiten bis sechsten Jahrhundert, Frankfurt am Main, 1850 (text of Gallican Masses, pp.  15–38) ; republished in L. C. Mohlberg, with L. Eizenhöfer and P. Siffrin, Missale Gallicanum vetus (Cod. Vat. Pal. lat. 493), Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes III, Rome, 1958, pp. 74–91. 15  Mohlberg, Missale Gallicanum, p.  88 (fols  28v, 28r, 15v of MS) ; in PL 138, 863 (other edn, col. 871). 16  L. C. Mohlberg, Missale Gothicum (Vat. Reg. lat. 317) (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes  V), Rome, 1961, pp.  xxiii, xxvi, for date and place of origin.

inverted eucharistic formula

659

written in the last decade of the seventh or the first decade of the eighth century, the date also assigned to the composition of the Missale Gothicum itself (a.d.  690–710), in which St  Leodegar (died 679) is commemorated. The Gallican rite was brought to an end by Charlemagne in 789. The Missale Gothicum originated and was used in Gaul, and more precisely in Burgundy (in Alsace, Gregoriental according to Germain Morin, in Autun according to André Wilmart). In this missal, the Post Secreta of the Mass In circumcisione Domini is as follows (Formula 57) : Haec nos, domine, instituta et praecepta retenentes, suppliciter oramus, uti hoc sacrificium suscipere et benedicere et sanctificare digneris, ut fiat nobis eucharistia legitima in tuo filique tui nomine et spiritus sancti in transformationem corporis ac sanguinis domini dei nostri Iesu Christi unigeniti tui. Per quem omnia creas, creata benedicis, benedicta sanctificas, et sanctificata largiris, deus, qui in trinitate perfecta uiuis et regnas in saecula saeculorum.17

The Missale Gothicum : Post Mysterium of the Mass In cathedra Sancti Petri apostoli In the same Missale Gothicum we have a similar prayer (Formula 154) in the Post Mysterium of the Mass In cathedra Sancti Petri apostoli. It runs : Haec igitur praecepta seruantes sacrosancta munera nostrae salutis offerimus, obsecrantes, ut inmiscere digneris spiritum tuum sanctum super haec solemnia, ut fiat nobis legitima eucaristia in tuo filique tui nomine et spiritus sanctus in transformatione corporis et sanguinis domini nostri Iesu Christi unigeniti tui edentibus nobis uitam aeternam regnumque perpetuum conlatura bibituris ; per ipsum dominum.18

17  Mohlberg, Missale Gothicum, p.  18 ; PL 72, 237B, with note indicating other occurrences of term transformatio in Mass of Cathedra S. Petri, Mass of ordination of priests in Missale Francorum and Missale Gallicanum, and also in Mass of St  Leodegarius of the Missale Gothicum (Mass 65, Post Secreta, PL 72, 304–5 = ed. Mohlberg, p.  18), where, however, the formula is somewhat different. “… Concede nobis … ut descendat his benedictio tua super hunc panem et calicem in transformatione Spiritus tui sancti…”. 18  Mohlberg, Missale Gothicum, p. 45 ; PL 72, 257–58.

660 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The Benedictio prayer in the rite for the ordination of a priest The formula that interests us in this study is found in the Benedictio prayer in a number of Pontificals, in fact in the nine known to us. The exact formulation we are studying is found in most of the known Pontificals of the earlier Middle Ages, but in the later ones is replaced by the newer formulation, “panem et uinum in corpus et sanguinem filii tui transform(are)”. I give the different occurrences here without going in any detail into the question of the ultimate origin of individual Pontificals. (a)  The ordination Benedictio in the Missale Francorum. “Missale Francorum” (Gamber, no.  410) is the name given to the contents of the Vatican MS Reg. lat.  257. (It contains a Mass pro regibus Francorum.) It was written in France in the first half or in the middle of the eighth century. According to some scholars it was composed at or for the church at Poitiers,19 according to others at Corbie, or at least in the Paris–Corbie–Soissons triangle.20 It is related to the Gallican rite and has also certain affiliations with the Irish liturgy, e.g. the Stowe Missal. Gamber classifies it among | the Capuan and Anglo-Saxon Sacramentaries. Its Benedictio for 578 the rite of the ordination of a priest is as follows (fols 33v–36v) : Sanctificationum omnium auctor, cuius uera consegratio, plena benedictio est : tu, domine, super hunc famulum illum quem presbiterii honore dedicamus, manum tuae benedictionis infunde [MS : eum infunde], ut grauitate actuum et censura uiuendi probet se esse seniorem, his institutus disciplinis quas Tito et Thimotheo Paulus exposuit : ut in lege tua die ac nocte, omnipotens, meditans quod elegerit credat, quod crediderit doceat, quod docuerit imitetur ; iustitiam, constantiam, misericordiam, fortitudinem in se ostendat, exemplum probet, admonitionem confirmet : ut purum atque inmaculatum ministerii tui donum custodiat, et per obsequium plebis tuae corpus et sanguinem filii tui inmaculata benedictione [fol. 36r] transformet, et inuiolabili caritate in uirum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi, in die iustitiae

19  Mohlberg, with L. Eizenhöfer and P. Siffrin, Missale Francorum (Cod. Vat. Reg. lat. 257) (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes II), Rome, 1957, pp. xxiv–xxvi, for date and place of origin. 20  See K. Gamber, Codices liturgici latini antiquiores, no. 410 (p. 231).

inverted eucharistic formula

661

aeterni iudicii conscientia pura, fide plena, spiritu sancto plenus persoluat : per dominum.21

(b)  The so-called Sacramentarium Gelasianum (“Codex Vaticanus”) (Gamber, no.  610). This Sacramentary is found in Codex Vaticanus Reginensis latinus 316, and in the disiecta membra of MS Paris, BN lat.  7193, fols  41–56, which once formed part of the Vatican manuscript. The work has been edited from this manuscript by Mohlberg.22 In the MS the work is entitled (Incipit) Liber sacramentorum Romanae Aeclesiae ordinis anni circuli. The manuscript itself was written in the mid or late eighth century, according to Bischoff in the monastery of Chelles in northern France.23 This work came to be attributed to Pope Gelasius (492– 96), even though the pope’s name is not found in the manuscript noted above. The actual place of origin of this so-called Sacramentarium Gelasianum is debated, especially whether in it we have to do with a Roman (or Italian) original into which Gallican elements have been introduced, or a Gallican text with Roman additions.24 The date of the original composition is also in dispute, dates from the fifth to the eighth centuries being assigned to it. Fortunately, the date of the original composition of the Gelasianum does not affect our argument to any great extent, since the formula (Formula 148) in which we are interested is found both in the Codex Vaticanus, here being considered, and in other manuscripts of the Gelasian family which will be examined immediately afterwards. The formula as found in the Codex Vaticanus (fol.  23r–v) is as follows : Sanctificationum omnium auctor, cuius uera consecratio, cuius plena benedictio est : tu, domine, super hos famulos tuos, quos praesbyterii honore dedicamus, manum tuae benedictionis his infunde, ut grauitate actuum et censura uidendi [23v] probent se Mohlberg et al., Missale Francorum, pp. 9-10 ; PL 72, 322–23. Mohlberg, with L.Eizenhöfer and P. Siffrin, Liber sacramentorum Aeclesiae ordinis anni circuli (Cod. Vat. Reg. lat. 316/Paris Bibl. Nat. 7193, 41/56) (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes IV), Rome, 1960. 23  Cf. Mohlberg et al., Liber sacramentorum, p.  xxxv ; C. Vogel, Introduction aux sources de l’histoire du culte chrétien au Moyen Age, Spoleto, 1966, p. 49 ; E. A. Lowe, Codices Latini Antiquiores, VI, Oxford, 1953, pp. xxi–xxii. 24  On this question see C. Vogel, Introduction aux sources, and Mohlberg et al., Liber sacramentorum, pp. xxvii–xxxi. 21 

22 

662 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church esse seniores, his instituti disciplinis quas Tito et Timotheo Paulus exposuit : ut in lege tua die ac nocte, omnipotens, meditantes quod elegerent et credant, quod crediderint doceant, quod docuerint imitentur ; iustitiam, constantiam, misericordiam, fortitudinem in se ostendant et exemplo probent, admonitionem confirment : ut purum adque inmaculatum | ministerii tui donum custodiant, et per obsequium plebis tue corpus et sanguinem filii tui inmaculata benedictione transformentur, et inuiolabile caritate in uirum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi, in die iustitiae aeternae iudicii constantia pura, fide plena, spiritu sancto pleni persoluant : per.25

There are variants in this text which may in part be due to scribal errors. This, however, is hardly the explanation for the presence of transformentur instead of transforment, which is more probably to be explained through unease or unfamiliarity with the forms used, or with the manner in which the doctrine was expressed. That the original of the Gelasianum had transforment, not transformentur, would appear to follow from the next text to be considered. (c)  The Gelasian Sacramentary of Angoulême (Gamber, no. 860). This Sacramentary is preserved in MS Paris, BN lat.  816, a manuscript written in the late eighth or early ninth century26 at some unknown centre, south of the Loire apparently, but later used at Angoulême. It represents a further eighth-century form of the Gelasianum and has the Benedictio formula “Benedictionum omnium auctor  … persolua(n)t”. The section that interests us reads as follows : “… et per obsequium plebis tuae corpus et sanguinem filii tui inmaculata benedictione transformet”.27 (d)  Revision of the Gelasianum in the Sacramentary of Gellone (Gamber, no.  855) (MS Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat.  12048). The Benedictio formula (no.  1209) “Sanctificationum  … persoluant” is found

Mohlberg et al., Liber sacramentorum ; earlier edition by A. Wilson, Sacramentarium Gelasianum Oxford, 1894, p.  24. 26  Le sacramentaire gelasien d’Angoulême (Societé historique et archéologique de la Charante, Angoulême), ed. by P. Cagin, no date but 1918 ; Liber sacramentorum Engolsmensis, ed. by P. Saint-Roch (CCSL 159C), Turnhout, 1987. 27  Formula 2092 ; fol. 150v ; Cagin, Le sacramentaire gelasien, p. 50. 25 

579

inverted eucharistic formula

663

there (fol.  211v).28 The manuscript is from the eighth century (c.  770–80), written for the Church of S. Salvatoris de Gellone. (e)  Revision of the Gelasianum in MS Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Phillips 1667 (Gamber, no. 853). The formula “Sanctificationum … persoluat” is found in fol.  132r.29 (f)  The Gregorian Sacramentary (cf. Gamber, nos. 701–15). The text of the Gregorian Sacramentary as edited by Jean Deshusses, apart from minor variants, is identical with the Gelasian formulary given in (b) above. The relevant section reads as follows : “… ut per obsequium plebis tuae corpus et sanguinem filii tui immaculata benedictione transforment …”. 30 From its presence in this Sacramentary, it does not appear that the particular formulation in question caused any embarrassment to Pope Gregory, who left the earlier text unchanged. As we shall see later, Pope Gregory himself in a Eucharistic context used the term uertere, a term much less felicitous than transformare with regard to the doctrine intended. | (g)  Carolingian Pontifical from the Upper Rhine (Gam- 580 ber, no.  1551). MS Freiburg im Breisgau, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod.  363, is a Pontifical from about the middle of the ninth cen-

28  The Sacramentary has been described and a table of concordances given by P. de Puniet in “Le sacramentaire romain de Gellone”, in Ephemerides Liturgicae 48–51 (new series 8–11) (1934–7), and separately as a book under the same title, in Bibliothèque des Ephemerides Liturgicae  IV, Rome, 1938, pp.  1*–333*. As edited in Ephemerides Liturgicae 51 (N.S.  11) (1937), 124, only the incipit and explicit of the ordination formula (no.  1209) are given. “Sanctificationum … persolvant”. I cannot say what is the exact wording of the section that interests us. An edition of the work has been prepared by S. Deshusses and Dumas ; see C. Vogel, Introduction aux sources, p. 58. 29  See the table of concordances in P. Siffrin, Konkordanztabellen zu den römischen Sakramantarien. II. Liber Sacramentorum Romanae Aeclesiae (Cod. Vatican. Regin. lat. 316). Sacramentarium Gelasianum (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Minor, Subsidia Studiorum 5), Rome, 1959, p.  20. The MS is as yet unedited, and I am unable to say what is the wording of the section that interests us. 30  Le sacramentaire grégorienne. Ses principales formes d’après le plus anciens manuscrits, edition comparative, tome troisième, textes complémentaires divers (Spicilegium Friburgense vol. 28), ed. by J. Dehusses, Fribourg, Switzerland, 1982, p. 219 (Formula no.  4226).

664 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church tury, written probably for a bishop of Basel. 31 This Pontifical has the Benedictio formula (no.  39 in codex) “Deus, sanctificationum omnium auctor … persoluant”, containing the relevant text as follows : “… per obsequium plebis tuae corpus et sanguinem filii tui inmaculata benedictione transforment …”. 32 (h)  The Ambrosian Rite (of the ninth or tenth century). This Rite, as represented by the MS Milan, Biblioteca del Capitolo metropolitano, Cod.  D.  I, 12 (earlier 14) of the ninth or tenth century (Gamber, no.  570), 33 has the Benedictio formula (no.  32) “Deus, sanctificationum omnium auctor  … persolua(n)t”, with the relevant section as follows : “… per obsequium plebis tuae corpus et sanguinem filii tui immaculata benedictione transforme(n)t …”. 34 (i)  Finally, I may mention the Pontifical of Egbert, archbishop of York (a.d.  732–66) (Gamber, no.  1570), preserved in the tenth-century MS Paris, BN lat.  10575, fols 7–172. 35 The section on ordinations is headed Incipit ordo de sacris ordinibus qualiter in Romana Aeclesia presbiteri, diaconi, subdiaconi, uel ceteri ordines clericorum benedicendi sunt. The orders are to be conferred on specified days, “… sicut in Sacramentorum Libro continetur ad Sanctum Petrum, ubi missae celebrantur”. 36 This has the benediction formula (no.  22) “Deus, sanctificationum omnium auctor  … persoluat (uel … persoluant)”, with the relevant section as follows : “… ut per obsequium plebis tuae, corpus et sanguinem filii tui immaculati transformet (uel transforment)”. 37 From this evidence we see that the formula continued in use in liturgical books down to the tenth century. From then onwards 31  M. J. Metzger, Zwei karolingische Pontifikalien vom Oberrhein, Freiburger theologische Studien, Heft 17, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1914. Summary of evidence on date and place of origin, etc., p. 186. 32  Metzger, Zwei karolingische, p.  *15. 33  Pontificale in usum Ecclesiae Mediolanensis necnon Ordines Ambrosiani ex codicibus saecc. IX–XV (Monumenta Veteris Liturgiae Ambrosianae), ed. by M. Magistretti, Milan, 1897. 34  Magistretti, Pontificale, p.  48. 35  The Pontifical of Egbert, Archbishop of York, A.D. 732–766, ed. by W. Greenwell (The Surtees Society vol. 27), Durham, 1853. On this Ponti­ fical see F. Cabrol, “Egbert (Pontifical d’)”, in Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, vol. 4, Paris, 1921, col. 2211-2220. 36  Greenwell, The Pontifical of Egbert, p.  8. 37  Greenwell, The Pontifical of Egbert, p. 23.

inverted eucharistic formula

665

a change can be detected, and the order of the words that concern us within the prayer “Sanctificationum omnium auctor” is inverted as follows : “… per obsequium plebis tuae panem et uinum in corpus et sanguinem filii tui inmaculata benedictione transforme(n)t”. We find this inversion in the Pontifical found in the MS Milan, Biblioteca del Capitolo metropolitano, Cod.  53, of the eleventh century, a copy of a Mainz original, a Pontifical of the Romano-Germanic type of the tenth century. 38 The inversion is also found in the Roman Pontifical of the twelfth century and in the Ordo Romanus as published by Melchior Hittorpius in 1568. 39 From this evidence on the central tradition of the western Church we can now turn to the situation in the Mozarabic liturgy. | The Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum (Gamber, no.  301) : Post 581 Pridie of the Missa in diem S. Christine virginis et martyris

The Mozarabic or Spanish liturgy is preserved in manuscripts of the ninth to the fourteenth centuries. This indicates that the liturgy itself continued after its suppression in 1080. It had its period of greatest flowering between the fifth and the eighth centuries. The liturgy has been edited principally from manuscripts of the tenth and eleventh centuries. The text of the Mass of St  Christina which interests us here reads as follows : Haec igitur praecepta seruantes, sacrosancta munera nostre salutis offerimus : obsecrantes, ut infundere digneris Spiritum tuum sanctum super hec solemnia, ut fiat nobis legitima Eucharistia in tuo filiique tui nomine, et Spiritus Sancti benedicta in transformatione corporis Domini Ihesu Christi Filii tui, edentibus nobis in uitam eternam regnumque perpetuum conlocemur.40 38  On Cod.  53 see M. Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani du Haut Moyen Age. I. Les Manuscrits, Louvain, 1965, pp.  175-76. On the Romano-Germanic Pontifical, see Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani, and C. Vogel, Introduction aux sources, pp.  187–203. For text see Magistretti, Pontificale, p.  48 (in a varia lectio to other Milan text). Magistretti’s analysis of the text is very imperfect ; see Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani, p. 176. 39  Le Pontifical Romain au Moyen Age. Tome I. Le Pontifical Romain au XIIe siècle, ed. by M. Andrieu (Studi e Testi 86), Vatican City, 1938, p.  136 ; M. Hittorpius, De diuinis Catholicae Ecclesiae officiis ac ministeriis …, Cologne, 1568, book I, p. 94. 40  Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum, ed. by M. Ferotin (Monumenta Ecclesiae liturgica, vol. 6), Paris, 1912, p. 379.

666 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church This text is practically identical with that of the Missale Gothicum (no.  iii above) for the feast of the Cathedra Sancti Petri apostoli. The Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum : Post Pridie of the Missa in IV Domenico de quotidiano ; Missa quotidiana III In the same Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum we have two prayers, one (a)  from the Post Pridie of the Missa in IV Domenico de quotidiano, the other (b)  from the Missa quotidiana III, identical apart from the fact that the former reads confirmes where the latter has conformes. The relevant portions of the prayers are as follows : (a)  Vitam nostram … Ob hoc ergo, quesumus famulantes, ut oblationem hanc Spiritus tui Sancti permixione sanctifices, et corporis ac sanguinis Ihesu Christi Filii tui plena transfiguratione [variant : transformatione] confirmes.41 (b)  Missa quotidiana III : as in preceding except ending … et corporis ac sanguinis filii tui Domini nostri plena transfiguratione conformes.42

The Mozarabic Liber Ordinum (Gamber, nos.  390–5), text A The following text occurs in the Post Sanctus of the Missa quam sacerdos in egritudine positus dicere debeat : Vere sanctus, uere benedictus, Dominus noster Ihesus Christus Filius tuus, qui factus est mundi salus et morti exstitit morsus. Per ipsum te petimus, piissime Deus, ut me famulum tuum de infirmitate constrictum ac diuersis tribulationibus constitutum, ueloci respectu letifices, et hoc holocaustum in tui corporis et sanguinis transformatione confirmes atque sanctifices.43

The Mozarabic Liber Ordinum, text B We have in the same Liber Ordinum another Mass very similar to the preceding one, this time for those suffering  – Missa pro tribuFerotin, Liber Mozarabicus, p. 622. Ferotin, Liber Mozarabicus, col. 517 ; also in A. Hänggi – I. Pahl, Prex Eucharistica. Textus e variis liturgiis antiquioribus selecti (Spicilegium Friburgense 12), Fribourg, Switzerland, 1968, p.  500 (in section “Liturgia Hispanica”, ed. J. Spinelli). 43  Liber Ordinum (Monumenta Ecclesiae liturgica), vol. 5, ed. by M. Ferotin, Paris, 1904, col. 281. As with the Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum, most of the formularies of the Liber Ordinum are believed to go back to 400–50 ; see Vogel, Introduction aux sources, p. 26. 41 

42 

inverted eucharistic formula

667

latis. There are two slightly different forms of the ending of this prayer, the first (A) from the Ritual of Silos (Gamber, nos.  392, 395), found in two eleventh-century manuscripts, the second, the Ritual of Toledo, found in manuscripts of the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries. | The relevant portion of A reads : “… Vere sanctus  … et hoc 582 sacrificium in tui corporis et sanguinis transfiguratione confirmes adque sanctifices”.44 The text of B runs : “Vere sanctus  … et hoc sacrificium tibi oblatum in transformatione corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Ihesu Christi confirmes adque sanctifices”.45 The Mozarabic Missale Mixtum (cf. Gamber, nos.  305–14), text 1 In the Post Pridie of the Missa in sancte Christine virginis et martyris we have a text which is almost identical with that for the same Mass in the Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum (no.  v above) : Hec igitur precepta seruantes : sacrosancta munera nostre salutis offerimus : obsecrantes te clementissime omnipotens Deus. ut infundere digneris Spiritum tuum Sanctum super hec libamina : ut fiat nobis legitima Eucharistia : in te Filiique tui nomine ; et Spi­ ritus Sancti benedicta : in transformatione eiusdem corporis Domini nostri Iesu Christi Filii tui edentibus nobis in uitam eternam regnumque perpetuum.46

The Mozarabic Missale Mixtum, text 2 As the final text of this section on the formula in western liturgical tradition we have the prayer Post Pridie of the Mozarabic Missale Mixtum. It is very similar to no.  vi above : “Vitam nostram Domine,  … Ob hoc ergo quesumus famulantes : ut oblationem hanc Spiritus tui permixtione sanctifices : et corporis ac sanguinis Domini nostri Iesu Christi plena transformatione conformes”.47 Ferotin, Liber Ordinum, col. 342, n. 2. Ferotin, Liber Ordinum, col. 342–3. 46  PL 85, 794A. 47  PL 85, 250B. This edition in Migne reproduces the revision by A. Lesley (Missale Mixtum, Rome, 1775 ; re-edited Toledo, 1875) of Missale mixtum secundum regulam b. Isidori dictum mozarabes, ed. by A. Ortiz, Toledo, 1500. (See Vogel, Introduction aux sources, p.  227.) The editor of edition PL 85, 250 (note) would emend transformatione conformes of the text given to “(Et corporis et sanguinis Domini nostri Jesu Christi plenam) transformationem confirmes”. See also Falsini, “La ‘transformazione del corpo’”, pp.  311, 312. 44  45 

668 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Latin literary texts In this section we shall consider the non-liturgical texts outside the Hiberno-Latin tradition in which the terms that interest us occur, i.e. transfigurare, transformare, uertere, transferre, fieri. In the liturgical texts the term almost exclusively used was transformare. In the literary, non-liturgical, texts, on the contrary, this word is found only in a single text (the Verba Seniorum) and compositions dependent on it. The term most commonly used is transfigurare. Transfigurare The earliest occurrence of the term in a Eucharistic context is in St  Ambrose, De incarnatione (4, 23), a work composed  381–82 :48 Etsi credas a Christo ueram carnem esse susceptam, et offeras transfigurandum corpus altaribus non distinguas tamen naturam diuinitatis et corporis et tibi dicitur : “Si recti offeras, non recte diuidas, peccasti”.

The term transfigurandum of this passage is to be rendered as “to be made visible”, “to be given another figure”. Ambrose himself, it should be noted, uses the same term in quite the opposite sense in another work, De fide (4, 10, 124), where he speaks of | the sacred realities (sacramenta) which by the mystery of prayer are 583 transfigured into flesh and blood : “… sacramenta … quae per sacrae orationis mysterium in carnem transfigurantur et sanguinem”.49 The term also appears in the Eucharistic catechesis preserved in the ninth-century MS Vat. Pal. lat.  556 of the Vatican Library. This manuscript, André Wilmart noted, is in an Anglo-Saxon hand of the ninth century and came undoubtedly from Fulda. While many of the pieces it contains are rather recent, that on the Eucharist could nevertheless be from the fifth century and may Given the nature and transmission history of such material, any emendation is hazardous. 48  PL 16, 859. English translation by R. J. Deferrari in Saint Ambrose. Theological and dogmatic works, The Fathers of the Church, A New Translation, vol. 44, Washington, 1963, pp. 277-78. The Italian translation in Tutte le opere di Sant’ Ambrogio, vol. 16, Opere Dogmatiche, trans. and notes, C. Moreschini, Milan, Rome, 1979, p. 388, paraphrases : “ed offri il suo corpo che dev’essere reso visibile sugli altari”. 49  PL 16, 859.

inverted eucharistic formula

669

have been imported from Italy into the circles of St  Boniface.50 The text speaks of “corpus et sanguis Iesu Christi Domini nostri, quae [MS : qui] transfigurauit in panem istum caelestem et calicem uitae aeternae”. The final text to be studied in this section occurs in the work known as Expositio Missae primum in ordine, a composition of the seventh or eighth century and of unknown authorship. There we read :51 Quid enim est quod in panem et uinum Dominus corpus suum transfigurare uoluit ?  … Corpus suum transfigurauit ut quamdiu illud adsumpserimus laeti et firmi maneamus et ipse in nobis…

If the remaining texts are any indication of usage, one must confess that the term transfigurare did not enjoy widespread use in patristic or early medieval Latin literature, at least outside Hiberno-Latin circles. In a later section we shall consider its use in these latter. Transformare This, as we have already seen, was the term generally used in the liturgical texts earlier considered. Its use seems to have been rare in non-liturgical texts. It does occur in a Eucharistic context in the Verba Seniorum, a sixth-century Latin translation and adaptation of the Greek Apophthegmata Patrum made by the Roman deacon Pelagius, who was probably the same person as the pope bearing that name who died in 561. The relevant section (one to which we shall return later) reads :52 “Deus scit humanam naturam, quia non potest vesci carnibus crudis et propterea transformat corpus suum in panem et sanguinem suum in uinum, his qui illud cum fide suscipiunt”. I know of no other occurrence of this word outside of texts manifestly dependent on the Verba Seniorum.53 Vertere We find a similar Eucharistic formulation in a work by Gregory the Great (died 604), where the key-word used is uertere. In 50  Text discovered by A.Wilmart (in fols  20v 22 of MS) and section from which cited published by him in “Transfigurare”, as in note 7, p.  283. 51  PL 138, 1180–81. 52  PL 73, 979. 53  PL 120, 1319. Corp. Christ., Cont. Mediaev., vol.  16 (1969), p.  89, lines 116-17.

670 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church his Homiliae in euangelium I, 14, 1 we read :54 “Bonus pastor pro ouibus suis animam suam posuit, ut in sacramento nostro corpus suum et sanguinem uerteret, et oues quas redemerat, carnis suae alimento satiaret”. In this, as in the liturgical texts already considered, no terminus is given for the change (e.g. into bread and wine). It does not appear that Gregory made extensive use of this particular term in his Eucharistic teaching, as there is no other known occurrence of it in his writings. From evidence to be considered later, however, it seems that his choice of term has had an immense influence on Irish tradition, giving us the | simple form 584 soid (uertere) in the Poems of Blathmac and probably the composite conuertere, conuersio and comshodh in the Leabhar Breac texts. Transferre and fieri Transferre and fieri are terms also used in contexts similar to those just considered. However, since these are found in ninthand tenth-century texts we shall reserve consideration of them until later. 55 Greek literary texts Terms corresponding to the Latin transformare, transfigurare also occur in Greek literary texts, viz. μεταποιεῖν, σωματοποιεῖν.56 These, however, are found only sporadically, and apparently under direct Latin influence. Thus, for instance, in his work Eranistes 2,57 Theodoretus of Cyrus (died 460) translated the text of St  Ambrose considered earlier, using the Greek πρὸς μεταποίησιν to render the Latin transfigurandum. The same word is used in the Greek Apophthegmata Patrum (fifth-century) where it corresponds with the Latin transformare of the Verba Seniorum : “διὰ τοῦτο μετεποίησε τὸ σῶμα (αὐτοῦ) εἰς ἄρτον, καὶ τὸ αἷμα αὐτοῦ εἰς οἶνον”, where the Verba Seniorum has “et propterea transformat corpus suum in panem et sanguinem suum in uinum”. 58 It should be borne in mind, however, that the Greek text in question conPL 76, 1127G. Below, p. 672. 56  See for instance R. Falsini, “La ‘transformazione del corpo’”, as in note 7, pp. 316-17. 57  PG  83, 188. 58  PG  65, 160. 54  55 

inverted eucharistic formula

671

tains matter given as coming from the hermit Daniel. This Daniel was the disciple of Arsenius, a well-educated Roman of senatorial rank (died 440). There is probably a question of direct Latin influence. The second Greek term occurs in Homilies 4, 12 of PseudoMacarius.59 There we read : “… σωματοποιεῖ γὰρ ἑαυτὸν καὶ εἰς βρῶσιν καὶ πόσιν ὁ κύριος” (“the Lord gives himself bodily existence both into bread and into wine”). All the evidence seems to indicate that the expression transfigurare/transformare originated in the western Church, and possibly even in the liturgy or Eucharistic theology of Milan,60 even though some would see an influence from Tertullian.61 The earliest attested term in Milan is transfigurare. With the form transformare, the expression took hold within the Gallican liturgy, and possibly from there penetrated the Roman. The term transformare predominated in liturgical texts, and transfigurare in literary. The variants uertere, and later transferre, fieri, are rare even if significant for individual traditions. Eucharistic formula in post-Patristic texts We have seen that in liturgical texts the formula “transformare corpus et sanguinem (Christi, tuum …)” continued in use in the western Church into the tenth century or so, and later still in the Mozarabic liturgy, where there is also an occasional use of the formula with transfigurare. Outside Hiberno-Latin texts the use of even this latter term is very limited in the earlier period. Among writers from the early Middle Ages, Paschasius Radbertus uses the phrase “transformauit corpus suum in panem et sanguinem suum in uinum” in his major work on the Eucharist (De corpore et sanguine | Domini),62 but only in a passage borrowed from the 585 Verba Seniorum. Hincmar of Reims borrows Gregory’s expression

PG  34, 482. See Falsini, “La ‘transformazione del corpo’”, p. 358. 61  Thus, for instance, J. Brinktrine, “Zum Ursprung …”, pp.  248-49, instancing Advers. Marcion. III, 19 and IV, 20. 62  PL 120, 1319 ; Pascasius Redbertus, De corpore et sanguinbe Domini, ed by B. Paulus (CCCM  16), Turnhout, 1969, p. 89, lines 116-17. 59 

60 

672 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church “ut in sacramento nostro corpus suum et sanguinem uerteret”, using it in De cauendis uitiis et uirtutibus exercendis.63 A new term, transferre, makes its appearance in a work by Haimo of Auxerre (fl. 840–65) and in another by Christianus Druthmar of Stavelot, in both cases replacing transformare in a citation from the Verba Seniorum already noted. In his Homiliae de tempore, Haimo says that in the Eucharist “translata est eadem caro in panem, et idem sanguis in uinum”.64 Similarly Christianus in his Expositio in Matthaeum (composed soon after 864) writes : “transferens spiritaliter corpus in panem et uinum in sanguinem”.65 Although the ninth- or tenth-century collection of homilies known as the Catechesis Celtica is probably of Irish origin, it is worth noting in this context that in it the term fieri is used in a Eucharistic context, namely the institution narrative of Mt  26.26 : ““Benedixit”, id est mistice caro eius panis fieret”.66 The Eucharistic formula “transfigurare (transformare) corpus Christi in panem et sanguinem in uinum” probably originated in an effort to clarify some points of Eucharistic doctrine or to overcome difficulties arising from traditional Christian beliefs. This clearly appears to be the point behind the Eucharistic miracle of the Apophthegmata Patrum and Verba Seniorum narrated by Abba Arsenius concerning an inhabitant of Scetis, of notable life and simple faith who, through his naïvety, was deceived and said : “The bread which we receive is not really the Body of Christ, but a symbol”. Two elders said to him that this was contrary to the faith of the Catholic Church. They believed that the bread itself was the body of Christ and that the cup was his blood, and this in all truth, not as a symbol. The reply was : “As long as I have not been persuaded by the thing itself, I shall not be fully convinced”. In due time at a Eucharistic celebration a little child appeared, PL 125, 914D. PL 118, 363C. 65  PL 106, 1475. A variant reading has panem in corpus (“bread into [his] body”). However, the other, the lectio difficilior, seems preferable, especially since the second part (vinum in sanguinem) has no variant reading. See Falsini, “La transformazione del corpo“, as in note 7, p. 315. 66  Cod. Reginen. Vat., fol.  17v ; in Analecta Reginensia. Extraits des manuscrits latins de la Reine Christine conservés au Vatican, (Studi e Testi 59), ed. by A.Wilmart, Vatican City, 1933, p. 36. 63 

64 

inverted eucharistic formula

673

was killed by an angel and his blood poured into the chalice. When they drew near to receive the sacred elements the old man (who doubted) alone received a morsel of bloody flesh, at which he made his profession of faith : “Lord, I believe that this bread is your flesh, and this chalice your blood”, at which the other two elders used the much-quoted text : “God knows human nature and that man cannot eat raw flesh and that is why he has changed (transformauit) his body into bread and his blood into wine, for those who receive it in faith”.67 Whatever the original intention behind it, the expression was soon to reveal its weaknesses as a vehicle of Eucharistic doctrine. As a stylised formula it continued in the mainstream western liturgical texts into the tenth century, and later in some | Mozara- 586 bic ones. In the newer Pontificals of the tenth century onwards, the formula for the ordination of priests is inverted to give the more acceptable “ut  … panem et uinum in corpus et sanguinem filii tui  … transforme(n)t”.68 The earlier non-liturgical texts seem to have suffered a somewhat similar fate. Thus, for instance, the earlier (and possibly Irish) commentary of Pseudo-Jerome on Mark (In Marc 14. 22) spoke of Christ “transfigurans corpus suum in panem … ; formans sanguinem suum in calicem” (“transfiguring his body into bread ;  … forming his blood into the chalice”). This same text was taken up by the twelfth-century Glossa Ordinaria, but as follows : “figurans corpus suum in pane”69 (figuring

67  Greek original of Apophthegmata Patrum in PG  65, 160 ; Latin text of Verba Seniorum in PL 73, 979. English translation of the Apophthegmata Patrum in The sayings of the Desert Fathers. The alphabetical collection, by B. Ward, London, 1975, pp. 44-45 (revised edition London, 1981). The Verba Seniorum, we may note, or at least the section containing the Eucharistic miracle and its immediate context, appears to have been known in the early Irish Church. Both the miracle and context are found in the ninth-century Cotton MS (BL, MS Cotton Otho E  XIII, fol.  158r–159r ; = PL 73, 978–9 ; cf. also 983) of the Collectio Canonum Hibernensis, a text going beyond the section of the Verba Seniorum borrowed by Paschasius Radbertus, De corpore et sanguine Domini, pp.  88–89. A garbled version of the miracle is found in the glosses of the Máel Brigte Gospels ; see J. Rittmueller, “The Gospel Commentary”, Peritia 2 (1983), pp. 212–13. 68  Cf. V. Leroquais, Les pontificaux manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France, Paris, 1937, pp. lxx, lxxvii ; see also above, pp. 664-65. 69  PL 114, 231C.

674 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church his body [i.e. giving his body a figure] in bread”). The same text is also taken up by Thomas Aquinas in his Catena Aurea, where he introduces it as the mystical sense of the biblical text and modified the formulation somewhat : “HIERONYMUS  … Mystice autem in panem transfigurat Dominus corpus suum, quod est Ecclesia praesens  … formans sanguinem suum in calice uino et aqua commixtum”.70 Against this background, we are now in a better position to examine the Irish evidence, both Latin and vernacular Irish. The formula, with transfiguratio, in early Hiberno-Latin sources Recent studies have shown that much more material of Irish origin or affiliations from the early period of the monastic schools has survived than was formerly believed to be the case. This has been shown in particular by Bischoff in his 1954 seminal study in this area.71 One of his criteria for Irish origins or affiliations was a certain family relationship between the contents of manuscripts, the recurrence of certain terms or phrases.72 To the examples given in this regard by Bischoff it now seems possible to add the predilection for the term transfigurare in Eucharistic contexts. This term occurs in a number of texts which are becoming accepted ever more readily as being of Irish origin or, if not, closely connected with Irish tradition. The texts we are to examine here fall into two categories. The first form a closely knit group, in the form of a homily on the words of the institution of the Eucharist of Matthew’s Gospel (Mt  26. 17–30). A noteworthy feature of the presentation of Eucharistic doctrine in these texts is that it is arranged around five questions, given as follows by Rittmueller in her study of the subject :73 1. whether the offering of bread and wine (in the Eucharist) is figura, historia or sensus ; 70  St Thomas, Catena Aurea. In Marci Evangelium. In Marc. 14. 6 (in Doctoris Angelici Divi Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia, vol. 16, Paris, 1876, p. 632). 71  Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”. 72  Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”, pp. 204-11 (217-22) ; English trans., “Turning-Points”, pp.  83–87. 73  Rittmueller, “The Gospel commentary”, p. 203.

inverted eucharistic formula

675

2. whether it did not suffice that Christ died once for the salvation of mankind ; 3. why the transfiguration (offering, change) is made into bread and wine and not into other things or foods ; 4. why water is mixed with wine in the offering ; 5. why the form of the body is not seen visibly.

The five texts in which this homiletic presentation of Mt 26. 17–30 occurs are : the homily “In cena Domini” of the Leabhar Breac ; the so-called Man glosses on the text of Matthew in the Gospels of Máel Brigte (in MS BL Harley 1802) ; the homily “De | cena 587 Domini” of the Catechesis Celtica ; the commentary on the Matthew pericope of the one-volume biblical commentary commonly known as the “Reference Bible” ; and in the commentary under the title Liber questionum in evangeliis. The Gospels of Máel Brigte were written in Armagh in 1138 ; the Leabhar Breac homily “In cena Domini” is generally assigned to the eleventh century ; the contents of the Catechesis Celtica are from the ninth or tenth century. A date c.  800 is assigned to the Reference Bible, while the Liber questionum in evangeliis probably dates from about 750. The Irish origins of the Gospels of Máel Brigte and of “In cena Domini” are beyond doubt. The arguments in favour of an Irish origin for the Reference Bible and the Catechesis Celtica are very strong, and so too for the Liber questionum in evangeliis. While the homiletic presentation of the Eucharistic doctrine is found in all five of the texts in question, the term that interests us, i.e. transfiguratio, is found only in three, being absent or replaced by another word in the glosses of the Gospels of Máel Brigte and in “In cena Domini”. We shall return to the significance of this later. From her detailed analysis Jean Rittmueller concludes74 that the commentary found in the glosses of the Máel Brigte Gospels (often given under the designation “Man” or such like), the Liber quaestionum in evangeliis, and the homily “De cena Domini” of the Catechesis Celtica possess a common core of exegesis for Mt  26. 17–30, which can be separated from the embellishments, explanations, abbreviations and substitutions of the redactors of these works. She also maintains that the section of the Reference Bible 74 

Rittmueller, “The Gospel commentary”, p. 191.

676 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church on the same verses is closely related to these. The section on the Eucharist of these four versions, when taken together, appears to embody the investigation of a single person, whose name Máel Brigte abbreviates as “Man”, and who may very well have been the seventh-century Irish scholar Manchianus. Ms Rittmueller even gives a stemma of the descent of this tradition of interpretation as she sees it.75 First there is the genuine commentary of St  Jerome on Matthew’s Gospel, on which all the texts depend. Then come the Gospel glosses of Manchianus (mid seventh century). From both of these derives the basic outline of the exegesis of Mt  26. 17–30 behind the extant texts. After the composition of the basic outline, the tradition diverges, one branch giving us the section in the Liber quaestionum in evangeliis (eighth century) and the homily “De cena Domini” (eighth–ninth century ?) of the Catechesis Celtica. The other branch would have given us the section on the Lord’s Supper in the Reference Bible (end of eighth century), the homily “In cena Domini” of the Leabhar Breac (about 1050) and the glosses of the Gospels of Máel Brigte of the BL MS Harley 1802 (written in 1138). The texts that interest us are found in the third and fifth questions of the schema given above. Leaving aside for the moment those two late texts which do not have the term, we now examine the other three. The third question is phrased thus in the homily “De cena Domini” in the Catechesis Celtica :76 “Tertio q(uaeritur cur in) uinum et panem haec transfiguratio facta est et non in alias res [MS. in alius rei] uel escas”. The Liber quaestionum in evangeliis has a practically identical text :77 “Tertio queritur cur in panem et uinum facta est haec transfiguratio”. The chief difference between these two is the inverted form in uinum et panem in “De cena Domini”. The relevant text in the Reference Bible is lengthier | than the others :78 “Nota cur in panem et uinum Dominus suum 588 Rittmueller, “The Gospel commentary”, p. 213. MS Reginen, 49, fol. 18ra ; in Analecta Reginensia. Extraits des manuscrits latins de la Reine Christine au Vatican (Studi e Testi 50), ed. by A. Wilmart, Vatican City, 1933, p. 37. 77  MS Orleans, Bibliothèque municipale 65 (62), p. 244. 78  The Reference Bible, for books other than Genesis, is preserved in two MSS. Munich, Staatsbibliothek Clm 14276  +  14277, and Paris, Bibl. Nat. 75  76 

inverted eucharistic formula

677

corpus et sanguinem transfigurauit. Id est quod de Spiritu Sancto conceptus in illas res [quae] spiritali potentia nobis ministrantur mutaret. Et ideo non in carnem nec in lac uel mel uel piscem suum corpus et sanguinem transfigurauit quia carnaliter et uiuaciter concipiuntur”. The same terminology occurs in the formulation of question 5 and in the answers to it. The substance of the question is why the Body and Blood of Christ are not visible in the Eucharist. In the Liber quaestionum in evangeliis the question is phrased thus : “Quinto quaeritur cur transfiguratur et non uisibiliter”.79 Likewise in “De cena Domini”. “V. quaeritur cur haec transfiguratio in forma corporis uisibiliter non uidetur”.80 The Reference Bible contains the question, together with a lengthy answer :81 Item cur transfiguratur et non uisibiliter corpus et sanguis Domini uidetur ?  … Ideo Christus transfigurauit suum corpus ecclesiae cuius caput Christus est et nos docet iunctus in corpore eius pro se pati debere. Item ideo ante passionem suam transfigurauit corpus ne si post resurrectionem hoc disceretur ab infidelibus quod non potuisset corpus Christi communicare a sanctis in terra et esse in caelo.

This terminology is not confined to this Eucharistic homily in Hiberno-Latin texts. Thus, for instance, in the comment on “Acci­ pite” of Mt  26. 26 we read in “De cena Domini” :82 ““Accipite”. Id est, transfigurationem summite in misterio corporis et sanguinis mei, et aliis praedicate, id est ut accipiant …”. And again, a little later in the same text,83 “accipiens calicem”. In Lucam  II calices dantur [MS : dicunt]  … Id est alter enim comeso agno acceptus ; alter transfigurato corpore in panem assumptus”. The same theme and formulation is found in the Reference Bible in the comment on the pericope of the Book of Joshua on the ceslat. 11561 ; text cited in MS Paris, fol. 155rb ; Clm fol. 239r. 79  MS Orleans (as note 77 above), p. 245. 80  MS Regin. 49, fol. 18ra ; in Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p.  37. 81  Paris MS fol. 155vb ; Clm, fol. 240r. 82  MS Regin. 49, fol. 17v ; in Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 36. 83  MS. Regin.  49, fol.  17vb, expanding the MS abbreviation dnt as dantur ; in Wilmar, Analecta Reginensia, p.  36, who expands in accord with regular usage as dicunt.

678 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church sation of the manna. The comment is in the form of a series of questions and answers as to when the manna was first given to Israel in the wilderness, when it ceased to be given, whether the manna is to be understood spiritually or corporeally, and if corporeally whence it came. In this context, the text cites Ps  77.25 (Vulgate numbering) : “You gave them bread from heaven ; man ate the bread of angels”, and goes on to ask how this can be so, and whether angels eat bread. In words attributed to Augustine, the author of the Reference Bible replies :84 Agustinus dicit : Ideo angelorum dicitur quia angeli ministraue­ runt illud, uel sicut angeli in caelo uerbo Dei pascuntur. Et uerbum caro factum est, et caro in panem transfiguratur ut homo edat ita et panes [read : panem] angelorum homo manducat.

The text of Augustine that the author of the Reference Bible had in mind and that he probably had before him can scarcely have been any other than the text of the Enarratio in Psalm 77 (no. 17), into which he (or the source he was using) read the peculiar formula on the transfiguration of Christ’s body or flesh into bread. There is nothing of this in Augustine’s text :85 | Qui enim  … panem caeli dedit eis ut panem angelorum manducaret homo … ut satiaret incredulos, non est inefficax dare credentibus uerum ipsum de caelo panem quem manna significabat ; qui uere cibus est Angelorum, quos Dei Verbum incorruptibiles incorruptibiliter pascit ; quod ut manducaret homo, caro factum est, et habitauit in nobis.

The term occurs again in a catechetical-type text, possibly of Irish origin, found in a manuscript preserved in the Library of the Cathedral Chapter of Cracow (MS no. 140, formerly 43).86 The text Clm, fol. 77v, 16–21 ; in Paris MS (see note 78 above), fol. 42ra. Latin text of Augustine, Enarr. in Psal. 77. 25 (Enarr. no. 17), in Enarrationes in Psalmos LI-C, ed. by E. Dekkers  – J. Fraipont (CCSL  39), Turnhout, 1956 ; second edition 1990, p. 1080 ; PL 36, 995. 86  The contents of the manuscript have been studied by P. David. “Un receuil de conférences monastiques irlandaises du VIIIe siècle. Notes sur le manuscrit 43 de la bibliothèque du chapitre de Cracovie”, Revue Bénédictine 49 (1937), pp. 62–89. T. L. Amos has found that these sermons and others of the same nature are also found in the MS Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat.  13408, s.  ix ; see T. L. Amos, “The origin and nature of the Carolingian sermon” (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1983), pp. 379–89. 84  85 

589

inverted eucharistic formula

679

in question is a commentary on Matthew’s institution narrative. The relevant section reads :87 Illud uesperum quod dixit Matheus significat finem Veteri Testamenti quia in illi diebus finiuit Vetus et incipiat Nouum, quando cenauit Dominus cum apostolis suis in illa die fecit Pascha Iudeorum et dedit apostolis suis communicare de agno et de calice Ve­teris et in illa hora finiuit Vetus, et postea transfigurauit corpus suum in pane et sanguinem suum in uinum, et dedit discipulis suis communicare de sacrificium Noui et illi inceperat Nouum.

We can now return to the text of the Pseudo-Jerome commentary on Mark 14. 22, which was prominent in the beginning of the modern discussion of transfigurare. As already noted, this work may well have been composed by an Irish scholar. Bernhard Bischoff, who is convinced it was, thinks that he can even name its author, a certain Comianus. The comment on Mark 14. 22 reads :88 “Accepit Jesus panem et benedicens fregit”, transfigurans corpus suum in panem, quod est ecclesia praesens, et accipitur in fide, benedicitur in numero, frangitur in passionibus, datur in exemplis, sumitur in doctrinis : formans sanguinem suum in calicem, uino et aqua mixtum, ut alio purgemur, alio redimamur a poenis.

Finally, we have a text in the work entitled Expositio IV evangeliorum, in the comment on Jn 6.19, 30. This work may have been composed by an Irish scholar of the seventh century. While this is still a debated point, the commentary itself is known to have been used in the early Irish schools. The text which interests us is as follows :89 Jesum ambulantem super mare (Jn  6.19), id est calcantem vitia mundi ; turbas ascendentes in navim quaerentes Jesum (cf. Jn  6. 24) ostendit, ut omnes cum proprio labore requirant Christum. 87  Text in “conference” no.  17 of David’s study (fols.  61v–65r of Cracow Ms ; no. 17 in MS Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat. 13408, fols 57r–59v ; also found in MS Paris, Bibl. Nat. lat.  13768, fols  52r–55v) ; cf. Amos, “The origin”, p.  385. Citation from Cracow MS, fol. 63v ; David, “Un recueil”, p. 80. 88  PL 30, 632A (1846 edition ; 2 nd edition, col.  655) ; in Expositio Evangeii secundum Marcum, ed. by M. Cahill (CCSL 82 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars 2), Turnhout, 1997, p. 62. For the arguments in favour of an Irish origin of this work, see B. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”, pp. 200-02 (215-15) ; English trans., “Turning-Points”, pp. 81-82. 89  PL 30, 580C.

680 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Manu (cf. Jn  6. 31) dicitur apud Hebraeos, unde accepit nomen manna apud Latinos, hoc est panis vivus, sive Corpus Christi transfiguratum mysterio…

There are strong arguments in favour of the Irish origin or connections of most of the works examined in the present section of our study. Continuing research is making this connection with Irish tradition all the clearer. These texts can, then, with great probability be taken as representative of the Hiberno-Latin culture of the early Irish schools and the manner in which this was still being presented in the immediate pre-Norman era. | The features of the tradition that interest us here are the five- 590 fold-question homiletic framework that has come down through centuries to the latest texts considered, and the use of transfigurare and transfiguratio as Eucharistic terminology in the earlier texts but not in the later ones, being either omitted or replaced by the terms conversio (Leabhar Breac) or oblatio (Gospels of Máel Brigte). The formula with soid (= uertere), conuersio, comshod It does not appear that the Latin term transfigurare was translated into the Irish vernacular. The idea connected with the term, however, of the bread and wine being the terminus ad quem of some Eucharistic change is found in an early Irish vernacular text, viz. the Poems of Blathmac, which their editor, Professor James Carney, dates to the mid eighth century, even though some other scholars of Old Irish would place them as much as a century later. Speaking to Mary in a section dealing with Christ the Priest and with the Eucharist, the poet says :90 As corp do maic imman ric dia ttiagar do sacarfaic isa fuil maic indrigh do roadh duinn i bfirfin (quat.  203). (“It is your son’s body that comes to us when one goes to the sacrifice, it is the blood of the son of the king that has been changed (do roadh) for us into pure wine”)

90  The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cu Brettan together with the Irish Gospel of Thomas and a Poem of the Virgin Mary (Irish Texts Society 47), ed. by J. Carney, Dublin, 1964. (I owe this reference to Professor J. Carney himself, who also pointed out that the Irish text should be rendered in this manner, rather than as he himself translated it, i.e. “the pure wine has been transmuted for us into the blood of the Son of the King”.)

inverted eucharistic formula

681

The key term used – roadh, from soid, “changes, turns”, Latin uertere  – is the same as that used by St  Gregory the Great, noted above, in Homiliae in euangelium I, 14, 1 : “The good shepherd laid down his life  … so that in our sacrament he might change his Body and Blood …” (ut … corpus suum et sanguinem uerteret). Direct influence from Gregory’s text on the Irish choice of word is not to be excluded, given the popularity of Gregory’s works and the proven use of his homilies on the Gospels in the seventh-century Old Irish Cambrai Homily.91 The particular section of Gregory’s first homily, including the use of uerteret, was culled by Hincmar of Reims (806–82) in his work De cauendis uitiis et uirtutibus exercendis.92 Beyond this I am not aware of the use of Gregory’s term in a Eucharistic context. Between the ninth and eleventh centuries it appears that the inverted Eucharistic formula continued in use, but came to be expressed both in Latin and Irish through the composite of uertere, soid, i.e. conuersio, comṡodh. We have evidence for both in texts preserved in the Leabhar Breac. For conversio we have the Latin section of the homily “In cena Domini”, the text with which we began this essay : “Quaeritur quare ista conuersio corporis et sanguinis in panem et uinum facta est ?”. The Irish section of this, and other bilingual homilies of the collection to which “In cena Domini” belongs, is dated linguistically to the eleventh century, and the Latin text tends to be assigned the same date.93 | The other Leabhar Breac text to which I refer is one in Irish 591 only, and is generally known as “The Instruction on the Sacraments”, the title given it by its editor Edmund Hogan.94 No detailed linguistic analysis of the piece has been made, and no more precise date assigned to it than the eleventh–twelfth centu91  See P. Ó Néill, “The Background to the Cambrai Homily”, Eriu 32 (1981), pp. 137–47, at 139-40. 92  PL 125, 914D. 93  See F. Mac Donncha, “Medieval Irish Homilies”, in Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, ed. by M. McNamara, PIBA 1, Dublin, 1976, pp. 59–71, at 59, 67-68 ; Mac Donncha, “Dáta Vita Tripartita Sancti Patricii”, Éigse 18 (part 1, 1980), pp. 125–42 ; 19 (part 2, 1983), pp. 354–72 ; earlier, T. Ó. Máille, “Contributions to the History of the Verbs of Existence in Ireland”, Ériu 6 (1911), pp. 1-102, at 1. See also note 107 below. 94  The Irish Nennius, ed. by Hogan.

682 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ry.95 In this text we find the technical term conuersio, in its Irish translation comṡod, comhshodh, used a number of times in relation to the Eucharistic change, both in the expected sense and in the inverted sense of the formula as we find it in “In cena Domini”. We find it with this latter meaning in paragraphs 39 and 40 of Hogan’s edition. 39.  For every miracle God worked from the beginning of the world, it was for an example he did them, to wit (to show) that he who did the other great wonders could convert his Body and Blood (co fetfad comsód a chuirp 7 a fola) into bread and wine.96 40.  He then who works these marvellous conversions (na comṡoti mírbulla sin) (of things) into other bodies to support the perishable world, there need be no great wonder at it, if he should produce a change of his body (comṡod a chuirp) to procure lasting life for us through that perennial food.97

In other texts of the same instruction we have instances of the use of comsod in the other, expected, sense. Thus : 34.  For it is not truly the priest who performs that oblation (in édpairt) at all  … but Jesus himself who works the conversion (comṡod) and blessing of the bread and wine into the true nature of his own Body and Blood…98 35.  … Christ himself changing (oc comsod), and blessing, and consecrating the bread and wine, so that he makes his Body and Blood out of them…99 38.  … that marvellous conversion (comṡod), of the bread and wine into the true Body and the true Blood of Christ…100

This dual use of comṡod, “conversion”, “change”, is in itself not significantly more surprising than St  Ambrose’s similar dual use of transfigurare some seven or eight centuries earlier. What might

95  Thus, for instance, D. Ó Laoghaire, “An spioradáltacht : an naomh­ shacraimint, oilithreachtaí”, in An léann eaglasta in Éirinn 1000–1200, ed. by M. Mac Conmara, Dublin, 1982, pp. 52–69, at 67. 96  Hogan, The Irish Nennius, p. 24. 97  Hogan, The Irish Nennius, p.  24. 98  Hogan, The Irish Nennius, p.  22. 99  Hogan, The Irish Nennius, pp. 22-23. 100  Hogan, The Irish Nennius, p.  24.

inverted eucharistic formula

683

surprise is such a loose usage so late in the history of Eucharistic theology. Another difference between the two is that the term transfigurare can bear the meaning “give an external figure (or form) to”, or, as André Wilmart believes the expression transfigurare corpus Christi in panem is to be understood in this Eucharistic context,101 “donner au corps réel, mais invisible, du Christ l’aspect ou l’apparence du pain, présenter ce corp sous les espèces, sous la figure du pain, et plus simplement encore, faire du pain la figure du corps”. It could be, of course, that in the Irish context conuersio and comsod were understood in like manner, “to change into the form of (bread and wine)”. | Returning to the Latin texts of the Leabhar Breac homily “In 592 cena Domini” and the Latin glosses of the Gospels of Máel Brigte, it seems clear that behind their different terms in question 3 of the five-question homily schema there stands the seventh-century term transfiguratio. This appears undeniable from a comparison of “In cena Domini” and the glosses of the Máel Brigte gospels with the formula as found in the Liber quaestionum in euangeliis and the homily “De cena Domini” of the Catechesis Celtica. Liber quaestionum in euangeliis : Tertio queritur cur in panem et uinum facta est haec transfiguratio (“De cena Domini” adds : et non in alias res uel escas).102 “In cena Domini” : Quaeritur quae ista conuersio corporis et sanguinis Christi in panem et uinum facta est ?103 Máel Brigte glosses : Tertio quaeritur quare in panem 7 uinum facta est oblatio et non in alias res uel in escas ?104

The term conuersio of “In cena Domini” may well have replaced the earlier transfiguratio in the Hiberno-Latin transmission before the eleventh century. The term oblatio of the glosses of the Máel Brigte Gospels seems to be even more difficult to explain than the conuersio of “In cena Domini”, although it too may have a

Wilmart, “transfigurare”, p. 285. The Catechesis Celtica in MS Regin. 49, fol. 18ra ; in Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 37 ; MS Orleans, Bibl. Municipale 65 (62), p. 244. 103  Leabhar Breac facsimile edn, p.  50, col.  1, lines 55–6 ; Atkinson, The Passions, p.  185. 104  MS BL Harley 1802, fol. 54r. 101 

102 

684 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church somewhat similar prehistory, albeit unrecorded. There is also a distinct possibility that it represents a later change of terms, due to dissatisfaction with some earlier word, such as transfiguratio, and possibly even conuersio itself. We seem to have evidence of a certain embarrassment with the Latin term conuersio on the part of the Irish translator of “In cena Domini”. This is evidenced by the Irish translation of the Latin “Quaeritur quare ista conuersio corporis et sanguinis in panem et uinum facta est ?”,105 which is as follows : “Cesnaigther, cid ar mo fo gné bairgine 7 fhína d”airithe doberad Ísu sund glanrúin a chuirp fén 7 a fhola di-[a] apstalu”,106 i.e. “It is asked why (is it) under the species of bread (or of a loaf) and wine that Jesus gives here the pure mysteries of his own Body and Blood to his apostles”. The fact that the translator has seen fit not to render conuersio but rather to replace it by the more common and the more acceptable Eucharistic terminology, “under the species of bread and wine”, leads one to believe that in this particular instance we are in the presence of two varying traditions, the one older (with the term conuersio) and the other of a newer stamp. This leads us to the question of whether in this particular homily we should distinguish between the authorship of the Irish and the Latin sections of the homily. Much work yet remains to be done on this point before a conclusion can be reached. Treating of the group of homilies, or homiliarium, to which “In cena Domini” belongs, Dr  Frederic Mac Donncha expressed as his belief that the Latin texts of the homilies were written or compiled in Ireland, and are the work of | their translator.107 If this is so for “In cena Domini”, 593 Atkinson, The Passions. Leabhar Breac facs. edition, p.  50, lines 56–8 ; Atkinson, The Passions, p. 185. See also end of note 107 below. 107  Cf. F. Mac Donncha, “Medieval Irish Homilies”, p. 59, who (pp. 67-68) would identify the author of the Homiliarium as Maelisu O Brollachain, otherwise known as a poet, who died in 1086. He was of the community of Armagh, but died at Lismore. According to M. Ní Bhrolcháin a comparison of Maelisu’s genuine works (especially the poem Ocht n-eric), from the points of view of content and style, with the Homiliarium strengthens Mac Donncha’s contention ; cf M. Ní Bhrolcháin, Maol Íosa Ó Brolcháin, Maynooth, 1986, pp.  17, 29–33, 94–96 ; Ní Bhrolcháin., “Maol Íosa Ó Brolcháin. An assessment”, Seanchas Ardmhacha 12 (1986), pp. 43–68, esp.  61–6 (summary, p.  66). The arguments hold only with regard to the author of the Irish text 105 

106 

inverted eucharistic formula

685

the difference of terminology can only be explained by dependence for the Latin part on an older tradition or terminology. “In cena Domini” and the glosses of the Gospels of Máel Brigte point to an interest in Eucharistic theology and terminology in Ireland during the eleventh and twelfth centuries. An episode recounted by St  Bernard in his Life of St Malachy108 is in keeping with this. This Life (written in 1149) speaks of a monk of the monastery of Lismore who in St  Bernard’s opinion denied the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.109 The monk’s views were a cause of concern to St  Malachy who spoke to him on the matter on different occasions. The monk died at peace with the Church between 1140 and 1148  – shortly after the Gospels of Máel Brigte were written in Armagh. Since the text known as the Riagail Echtguis110 lays great stress on the Real Presence in the Eucharist and on the necessity of belief in this doctrine, some scholars are of the opinion that the work may actually have been directed against the ideas of the monk of Lismore.111 The date of composition of the Riagail Echtguis, however, has not been more accurately of the Homiliarium. Whether the same person was responsible for the Latin section of the work should be treated as a separate question. Ní Bhrolcháin (pp.  69-70) instances cases where the Irish of the sermons does not translate the Latin text. 108  S. Bernardus, Vita S. Malachiae, cap.  26, no.  57 ; S. Bernardi Opera, vol.  III. Tractatus et opuscula, ed. by J. Leclercq  – H. M. Rochais, Rome, 1963 ; Vita Sancti Malachiae, with historical notes by Albericus (Aubrey) Gwynn, S. I., pp.  295–378, at pp.  360-61 ; English trans., Bernard of Clairvaux. The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman, translated and annotated by R. T. Meyer (Cistercian Fathers series no.  10), Kalamazoo, MI, 1978, pp. 71-72. 109  Meyer, Bernard of Clairvaux, p. 143, note 164, thinks that the unnamed cleric may have been a follower of Berengarius who was condemned in 1050 and retracted in 1079. 110  In “Poems from Brussels MS 5100–4”, ed. by A. G. van Hamel, Revue Celtique 37 (1917–19), pp. 345–9 (without translation) ; translation by G. Murphy, “Eleventh- or Twelfth-Century Irish Doctrine Concerning the Real Presence”, in Medieval studies presented to Aubrey Gwynn, S. J., ed. by J. A. Watt et al., Dublin, 1961, pp.  19–28, trans.  21–8. We may note that the term comhsudh (“conversion”, “change”) occurs only once in the poem, in q.  15 (van Hamel, p.  346 ; Murphy, p.  22), fairly evidently (in view of the entire tenor of the poem) referring to the change of the elements into the Body and Blood of Christ, although this is not explicitly stated. 111  See Murphy, “Eleventh- or Twelfth-Century”, p. 20.

686 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church determined than the eleventh or twelfth century.112 This uncertainty, coupled with our lack of precise information on interest in Eucharistic theology in Ireland during those centuries, indicates the need for caution in our judgement on such matters. From the evidence already available to us, we have strong indications that a certain development in Eucharistic theology and terminology was actually taking place by the end of the eleventh century  – before the time of St  Bernard, St  Malachy and the monk of Lismore. When more of the texts have been published and examined we may be in a better position to evaluate texts already known to us.

112  Note title of Murphy’s essay (note 110 above). The language of the poem is certainly not earlier than the eleventh and not later than the twelfth century, conforming on the whole to the eleventh century (p. 20).

| APOCALYPTIC AND ESCHATOLOGICAL TEXTS IN IRISH LITERATURE : ORIENTAL CONNECTIONS ?* Ιntroduction Montague Rhodes James opens an essay on Irish Apocrypha in 19191 with the words : “The Transmission of apocryphal writings, otherwise unknown, in the Irish vernacular would be a proper subject for a small monograph. That I cannot attempt ; but I should like to put on record a contribution to it”. In this essay James studies the two Irish writings, the Evernew Tongue and the Vision of Adomnán, with an examination of a Karlsruhe fragment of the description of the seven heavens. The two texts studied by James in this essay belong to the subject proper of this present paper, namely, apocalyptic and eschatological literature. This branch of learning would be a proper subject for a rather large monograph. And such a volume is now in the process of being prepared. In conjunction with AELAC (Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne) the Publications Committee of the Irish Biblical Association is involved in the preparation of critical editions of the New Testament Apocrypha as known in Irish tradition. The volumes will be published by Brepols, in the Series Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum. Work has already been completed on the first volume, Irish Infancy Narratives, which after rather intense research over ten years or so was published in the spring of 2001. The second volume in the series is to contain Irish apocalyptic and eschatological texts. For this volume it will be necessary to define what is meant by the terms apocalyptic and eschatological in this context. It will *  First published in : Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage  : The Middle East and Celtic Realms, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 2003, pp. 75-97. 1  M. R. James, “Irish Apocrypha”, Journal of Theological Studies 20 (1919), pp. 9–16.

75

688 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church also be required that reasons be given why each of the items we wish to include should be so regarded. What constitutes an apocryphon, an apocryphal writing, would normally also require definition in collections of New Testament apocrypha. Does it require that the non-canonical work be attributed to some New Testament or biblical personage and furthermore have been composed by a given time, say the fourth century at the latest ? Some publishing houses follow such a principle for inclusion of a work in their collections of New Testament Apocrypha. Not so AELAC, which works on a different understanding of Christian apocryphal literature. | Terminology with regard to apocalyptic literature has changed 76 and developed over recent decades. The designation derives from the Revelation (Apocalypse) of John, which opens with the words : “The revelation (apokalypsis) of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place ; and he made (it) known by sending through his servant John who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, (even) all that he saw” (Rev 1.1–2). The revelation comes from God through Jesus Christ and/or through an angel. This is the essential element of an apocalypse : revelation from God through an intermediary, generally about things that are to happen soon. This holds in the first instance for the Revelation of John. Part of the biblical book of Daniel is very similar to the Revelation of John, but is not called a revelation, an apocalypse. Much non-canonical Jewish literature is also similar, for instance the Enochic literature. The substantive “apocalyptic” has been coined by scholars to designate this genre of Jewish literature. The world of ideas in which this genre originated and developed is described as apocalypticism. That there is an apocalypse in the New Testament is evident from the Revelation of John. Because of the genre other sections of the New Testament are referred to as apocalypses (for instance Mark 13 and parallels ; portions of 1 and 2 Thessalonians). The situation becomes more complicated with regard to Early Christian literature. Some New Testament apocrypha can clearly be designated as apocalypses or belonging to apocalyptic literature, and bear, or are given, the title “apocalypse” (Revelation). With regard to other such writings, for instance the Shepherd of Hermas, it is doubtful, and debated, whether they can be classed as belonging

oriental connections ?

689

to apocalyptic.2 In recent usage the terms apocalypse, apocalyptic, apocalypticism have been expanded to include writings of the patristic, medieval and modern periods. 3 With regard to what may be included in a volume under the heading “apocalyptic” we may safely follow the guide given by Professor Adela Yarbro Collins concerning the biblical evidence. She writes :4 Two kinds of apocalyptic themes appear in biblical literature. One type is intrinsic to the genre “apocalypse,” whose themes include the idea of revelation and narratives about the reception of revelation through dreams, visions, hearing voices, or taking journeys to heaven and other normally inaccessible places. They also include the idea of the fulfillment of history, for example, in a final, universal, peaceful, prosperous human community or in the destruction of the world and a new creation, including the resurrection of the dead. The other type is less closely related to the genre | ”apocalypse,” but includes themes that cohere with the first group, such as the combat myth and the Antichrist.

Among points made in modern writing on the subject two may be mentioned. One is that the continuum between early Christian apocalypses and those of the medieval period should not be lost sight of. In the words of James H. Charlesworth : “From the late fourth century until the tenth century, there is a continuum of activity that either produced new apocalypses or so thoroughly reworked earlier traditions or documents that they are now seen as new compilations”. 5 Charlesworth himself lists eight non-canonical works composed between the first and second centuries which may be considered apocalypses (among them the Apocalypse of Paul), and thirteen from the period of the fourth–fifth to the tenth centuries (among which are the Apocalypse of Thomas, 1 Revelation 2  See C. Osiek, The Shepherd of Hermas. A Commentary, Minneapolis, 1999, pp. 10–12. 3  See B. McGinn, Apocalypticism in the Western Tradition (Variorum Collected Studies Series), Aldershot, 1994 ; B. McGinn, Visions of the End. Apocalyptic Tradition in the Middle Ages, New York-Chichester, 1979 ; 1998 reprint. 4  Adela Yarbro Collins, “Apocalyptic Themes in Biblical Literature”, Interpretation 53 (1999), pp. 117–30, at 117. 5  J. H. Charlesworth, with J. R. Mueller, The New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha : a Guide to Publications, with Excursuses on Apocalypses (ATLA Bibliography Series 17) ; Metuchen, N.J. and London, 1987, p. 36.

77

690 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of John [the Apocryphal Apocalypse of John]) and the Questions of Ezra). Even though some of these (for instance the Questions of Ezra) are not precisely apocalypses, they are included because they evolve out of apocalypses.6 Most of the texts to be examined under the heading of “apocalyptic and eschatological” have been listed, together with summary examination, by the present writer in The Apocrypha in the Irish Church.7 The Irish texts date from the tenth to the fifteenth century, with some of them copied in manuscripts as late as the nineteenth century. Two points regarding methodology need to be borne in mind with regard to these Irish texts. The first concerns the date of translation into Irish of Latin texts and the date the original reached Ireland. Irish texts composed in the tenth century or later, or translated into Irish at those dates, may well be dependent on earlier originals or translated from Latin texts no longer extant. The presence of Latin sentences or passages in some of these texts indicates that this was so. The central Irish texts of the Irish Infancy Narrative, already referred to, represent translations made into Middle Irish or Early Modern Irish of the twelfth to the early fifteenth century. There is, however, clear evidence that as regards content the form of the apocryphal Infancy Narrative they carry is no later than the year 800. The same may hold for other apocryphal items of an apocalyptic nature as well. However, in this particular area creativity is a noted feature in the transmission of these works, and we have also to reckon with the possibility of later Irish texts, dependent on, but not direct translations of, earlier originals. These are factors to be reckoned with in our study of the material. | Another matter to be borne in mind (and one of particular 78 interest in the context of the Conference, the papers of which are now being published) is the assertion often made that certain of these Irish texts represent (or are translations of) oriental originals otherwise unknown. The truth or the likelihood of any such assumption must be examined with regard to each individual Charlesworth, New Testament Apocrypha, p. 37. M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975 ; reprint with corrections 1984 ; hereafter cited as McNamara, The Apocrypha. 6 

7 

oriental connections ?

691

text. This is also true for presumed dependence on known Jewish or early Christian apocrypha, such as the Book of Enoch or the Visio Pauli. The evidence for the use of the Latin text of such a book in early Ireland has to be examined. If dependence there be, this might well be on traditions preserved in the book in question but transmitted also elsewhere, dependence on a similar work, or on traditions ultimately deriving from a particular eastern book, but through later developed forms of the tradition. The question of dependence of this nature must be examined on a case by case basis. The Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees The Book of Enoch Occasionally the opinion is expressed that a particular Irish text, or tradition, is dependent on the Book of Enoch or even uses the Book of Enoch, or in a more general way that the Enochic tradition has considerably influenced Irish tradition.8 A desideratum in this field is the evidence for or against the availability of a Latin translation of the book. The Book of Enoch was most probably composed in Aramaic. It was translated into Greek. The bestknown translation in modern times was the Ethiopic, first taken to Europe from Ethiopia in the eighteenth century by James Bruce.91 What appears to be a Latin translation of Enoch 106.1–18 was identified by M. R. James in 1893 in a ninth-century manuscript written in Brittany, now in the British Library manuscript BL Royal 5.E.XIII, fol. 79v.80r. James published the text that same year.10 In his 1906 edition of the Ethiopic Book of Enoch R. H. Charles takes notes of James’s work and comments that “this [BL] MS. seems to point to a Latin translation of Enoch, and 8  See the reference to John Carey’s remark in P. S. Alexander’s essay “Enoch in Millennial Perspectiove. On the Counter-cultural biography of an Apocalyptic Hero” in Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage : The Middle East and Celtic Realms, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 2003, pp. 1-19, at 14, note 24, on “some fascinating references to Enoch in Irish liyterature”. 9  See M. McNamara, in Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage, p. ix. 10  M. R. James, Apocrypha Anecdota (Texts and Studies, II, 3), Cambridge, 1893, pp. 146–150.

692 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church shows no sign of being an excerpt from a collection of excerpts”.11 Charles takes up the question again in 1913 in volume 2 of The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English.12 He reproduces the Latin text opposite his translation of the Ethiopic.13 In his introduction to the text Charles notes that the Latin fragment constitutes | a very imperfect reproduction of 106.1–18, 79 but goes on to repeat his earlier statements that the BL manuscript seems to point to a Latin translation of Enoch, and shows no signs of being an excerpt from a collection of excerpts.14 In his edition of the Qumran Aramaic fragments of Enoch15 Józef Tadeusz Milik takes up the question of the Latin text published by James, which he describes as containing a summary of Enoch 106.1–18. In his view this text does not seem to be derived from a Latin translation, complete or incomplete, of the books of Enoch. He notes that “[t]he extract from the Book of Enoch is followed … by three other passages, and … all four alike refer to great sins of great sinners and their great punishments. … We have here probably some extracts from a chronicle or from a collection of Exempla or of Testimonia”.16 In conclusion he says that there is no irrefutable evidence for the existence of a Latin version of the Enochic writings. Nevertheless, he continues, the books of Enoch were well known indirectly in the Christian West, and traces of them are found both in patristic and medieval literature and in iconography.17 The Latin text of the British Library manuscript immediately following on that which interests us has been edited by Pierre Petitmengin.18 Petitmengin notes19 that this 11  R. H. Charles, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic Series, part II), Oxford, 1906, pp. 219–222. 12  The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, vol. 2. Pseudepigrapha, ed. by R. H. Charles, Oxford, 1913 ; reprint 1963. 13  Charles, Pseudepigrapha, pp. 278–79. 14  Charles, Pseudepigrapha, p. 167. 15  J. T. Milik, The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments from Qumran Cave 4, Oxford, 1976, pp. 80–81 (with edition of text). 16  Milik, The Books of Enoch, pp. 80–81. 17  Milik, The Books of Enoch, p. 81. 18  P. Petitmengin, “La compilation ‘De uindictis magnis magnorum peccatorum’” in Philologia Sacra. Festschrift H. J. Frede & W. Thiele, II, ed. by R. Gryson, Freiburg, 1993, pp. 622–38, with reference for an overview of the

oriental connections ?

693

Latin text is far removed from the Ethiopian, and it is not at all clear that there is question of an extract from a translation of the full work. Given this evidence one can only agree with Milik that it is far from clear that there ever was a Latin translation of the Book of Enoch. It remains to be determined to what extent Western tradition was (indirectly) influenced by Enochic tradition, and through which channels this influence was effected. The Book of Jubilees A Latin translation of about one fourth of the Book of Jubilees (under the name Lepte Genesis), which has 50 chapters has survived (Jubilees chapters 13,10–21 ; 15,20–49,22). The Latin translation was made in the mid-fifth century, and the surviving Latin text was written in the sixth century. It has been preserved in MS Milan, Ambrosiana C 73 inf. (sixth cent.), which came from the Scriptorium of Bobbio, a monastery founded in 612 by the Irish monk Columbanus (died 614) and which retained links with Ireland.20 We cannot say if this work was known in Ireland, but it possibly was. In an essay in 1954 B. Bischoff noted that it is cited twice in for MS Amb. M. 79 sup. | (eleventh century), with glosses from 80 Theodore’s school of Canterbury.21 These glosses have since been edited by Bernhard Bischoff and Michael Lapidge.22 In the work problems to R. Mellinkoff, “Cain’s Monstrous progeny in Beowulf. Part I, Noachic Tradition”, Anglo-Saxon England 8 (1979), pp. 143–162, at 160. 19  Petitmengin, “La compilation”, p. 623, note 7. 20  Incipit and explicit of the MS : F. Stegmüller, Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aevi 1, Madrid, (1940, MCMXL, but 1950), #  77,3. Edition of text in M. A. Ceriani, Monumenta Sacra et Profana I, 1, Milan, 1861, pp. 15–54 ; H. Rönsch, Das Buch der Jubiläen oder Die Kleine Genesis, Leipzig, 1874, reprint, Amsterdam, 1970, pp. 10–94 ; R. H. Charles, The Ethiopic Version of the Hebrew Book of Jubilees, Oxford, 1895. 21  B. Bischoff, “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), pp. 189–281, at 193 ; reproduced in revised form in B. Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturegeschichte I, vol.  1, Stuttgart, 1966, pp. 205– 273, at 209 ; English translation by C. O’Grady in “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution (PIBA 1), ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 1976, pp. 73–160, at 77. 22  Biblical Commentaries from the Canterbury School of Theodore and Hadrian (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England 10), ed. by B. Bischoff  – M. Lapidge, Cambridge, 1994.

694 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church known as the first commentary on the Pentateuch (Pent 1, item 44) commenting on Gen 3.8 the commentator says that according to Chrysostom Adam was created at the third hour, sinned at the sixth hour and was cast out of paradise at the ninth hour.23 The Canterbury commentator goes on to say that other commentators say that Adam spent seven years less forty days in Paradise “as it says in Little Genesis” (ut in Leptigeneseos dicit). For this information we may refer to Jubilees 3,9 and 15. Again on Gen 4.23, on the words of Lamech “I have slain a man” (Pent 1, item 54), the commentator refers to Leptigeneseos by name, remarking that many commentators, as Little Genesis (ut in Leptigeneseos dixit), say that the man killed was Cain.24 The reference may be to Jubilees 4,31–33, which speaks of the death of Cain, but by the stones of a falling house rather than by Lamech. From the evidence of the glosses it is clear to the editors that the text of the Book of Jubilees was known in some form to the Canterbury Commentator ;25 but it is impossible to say whether it was with the Greek or Latin translation that the Commentator was familiar.26 This Latin manuscript pre-dates the foundation of the monastery of Bobbio. The provenance of this Latin translation of Jubilees is evidence of an interest in apocryphal texts in the monastery of Bobbio. It is possible that the Library of Bobbio had many more apocryphal works. The Visio Sancti Pauli in Ireland and related texts The only early apocryphal apocalyptic text of which we have clear evidence of its use in Ireland is the Visio Pauli. The original Greek Apocalypse of Paul (first | edition, so to speak) was composed in 81 Egypt, and in the third century if not slightly earlier. A copy of the early Greek edition was brought to Asia Minor from which an

Bischoff – Lapidge, Biblical Commentaries, pp. 310–311, with commentary, pp. 444–45. The editors have failed to find the precise text in Chrysostom’s writings. It may be from Severin of Gabala or some other work, such as the Syriac The Book of the Cave of Treasures. 24  Bischoff – Lapidge, Biblical Commentaries, pp. 314–315 ; commentary, 446. 25  Bischoff  – Lapidge, Biblical Commentaries, p. 200. 26  Bischoff ‒Lapidge, Biblical Commentaries, p. 445. 23 

oriental connections ?

695

expanded text was made in the early fifth century. The Western tradition of the work descends from a late Latin translation of the Greek in its second edition.27 The best witness to the second edition of the Greek text is the fuller Latin version, extant in a manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris (Nouv. acq. lat. 1631 ; ninth century). The Latin translation must have been made soon after the Greek original. It was used in the Regula Magistri, written in Italy, south-east of Rome c. 500–525. It was also known to Benedict of Nursia (c. 480–c. 550), and in France by Caesarius of Arles (c. 470–550). The Visio was extremely influential in the West. In the words of Theodore Silverstein, the Visio became “one of the chief formative elements in the developments of the later legends of Heaven and Hell which culminated in the Divina Commedia of Dante”.28 It is known to have influenced the Vision of St Patrick’s Purgatory, and also the Vision of Adomnán, the Visio Tnugdali, and probably other Irish texts besides. The Visio Pauli is a lengthy work, with fifty-one chapters, which are generally grouped in seven sections according to subject matter. An indication of its popularity in the Latin West is that together with the long versions eleven recensions (or redactions as they are generally referred to) are known, in which much of the material of the long versions is omitted. Apart from the distinctive Redaction VI, of which two ninth-century manuscripts are known, and Redaction XI, extant in one ninth/tenth-century manuscript, the earliest manuscripts of the redactions are from the eleventh century. With regard to its transmission in Ireland it would be desirable to ascertain what evidence there is for its use there from earlier times, and also whether the full recension was known.29 Answers to such questions remain for future research. In 27  See Th. Silverstein  – A. Hilhorst, Apocalypse of Paul. A New Critical Edition of Three Long Latin Versions (Cahiers d’Orientalisme 21), Geneva, 1997, pp. 11–12. 28  Th. Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli. The History of the Apocalypse in Latin together with Nine Texts (Studies and Documents 4), London. 1935, 3. See also P. Dinzelbacher, “Die Verbreitung der apokryphen ‘Visio S. Pauli’ im mittelalterlichen Europa”, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 27 (1992), pp. 77–90. On the Visio see also McNamara, The Apocrypha, #  91 (pp. 105–06). 29  There is evidence that the long Latin version was known in England to Aldhelm (late seventh century) and to Aelfric (c.  1000) ; see C. D. Wright, The Irish Tradition in Old English Literature (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-

696 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the meantime we can only survey the evidence with regard to the text of the Visio itself and the compositions apparently dependent on it. Recension IV and Irish translation of the Visio Pauli Two Irish translations of the Visio Pauli are known in manuscripts in the Royal Irish Academy (24 P 25 [475 ; known as Leabhar Chloinne Suibhne] and 23 O 48 [476 ; Liber Flavus Fergusiorum]). The former text is headed : “The Vision of Paul | (Aisling Po[il]). 82 The Vision of Paul concerning the pains of Hell. Visio Pauli de penis inferni per De[i] licentiam”. Despite minor differences, both texts seem to represent the same recension. And this is Redaction IV of the Latin recensions, which recounts Paul’s vision of Hell and the respite granted to the damned on Sunday through Paul’s petition and that of the archangel Michael. It corresponds to chapters 31–44 of the long text. 30 Silverstein notes that Redaction IV was the version which was most frequently translated into the vernaculars and through which the Visio Pauli chiefly left its mark on the general body of vision literature of the Middle Ages. 31 He also notes that there is evidence for a special currency in England, and perhaps even for its origins there. 32 Rudolf Willard is of the opinion that this Redaction must have been accomplished in the British Isles under Celtic influence, and that it was surely through insular channels that certain of the interpretations peculiar to this redaction became incorporated into the vision. 33 Saxon England), Cambridge, 1993, p. 108. We can thus presume that it was known also in Ireland. 30  For recension IV and the Irish texts see McNamara, The Apocrypha #  91A (pp.  106–07) ; Silverstein. Visio Sancti Pauli, pp. 52–56 ; English translation of the Leabhar Chloinne Suibhne text by M. Herbert, in M. Herbert  – M. McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, Edinburgh, 1989. (hereafter cited as Irish Biblical Apocrypha), pp. 132–36 (# 25). 31  Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli, p. 52. 32  Th. Silverstein, “The Vision of Saint Paul. New Links and Patterns in the Western Tradition”, Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraires du moyen âge 34 (1959), pp. 199–248, at 212. 33  R. Willard, “The Latin Texts of the Three Utterances of the Soul”, Speculum 12 (1937), pp.147–66. 157. See also Wright, The Irish Tradition, p.109.

oriental connections ?

697

Irish tradition and Redaction VI of the Visio Pauli Redaction VI of the Visio Pauli is represented by the two codices Vatican Library, Codex Palatinus Latinus 216 (fol. 126v) of the ninth–tenth century and Codex 682 of St Gall, Stiftsbibliothek (pp. 193–204), of the ninth century. 34 This redaction represents a complete rewriting of the Visio. As Silverstein notes, not only has it interpolations that are easily isolated from the older materials, but the original incidents themselves are in general merely starting-points from elaborations which entirely change their appearances and meaning. 35 In the opinion of the same scholar, some light may be shed on many of the important passages by occasional reference to the Apocalypse of Peter, and more remarkably, to descriptions of Hell in a group of early Irish revelations, for instance the Visions of Laisrén and Adomnán, the Voyage of Uí Chorra and the Celtic version of the Transitus Mariae. After his study of the various interpolations of Redaction VI in the light of this literature 36 Silverstein concludes that the similarities between the Irish Visions and this recension are both numerous and obvious, even though their significance is a matter for conjecture. Silverstein’s position is that the relationship is not direct on either side ; rather are the Irish texts and Redaction VI independent debtors to a third work no longer extant. 37 | Silverstein’s observations on Redaction VI have been noted 83 and endorsed by Charles D. Wright and David Dumville. 38 Dumville has examined its influence on Fís Adamnáin and concludes that Redaction VI “was composed, if not in Ireland, at any rate in an Irish continental centre retaining the closest links with the home culture”. 39 Irish tradition and Redaction XI of the Visio Pauli In 1988 Mary E. Dwyer published a further abbreviated recension of the Visio Pauli now recognised as Redaction XI, identified in Published by Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli, pp. 215–18. Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli, p. 82. 36  Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli, pp. 82–89. 37  Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli, pp. 89–90. 38  C. D. Wright, The Irish Tradition, 110 ; D. Dumville, “Towards an Interpretation of Fís Adamnán”, Studia Celtica 12/13 (1977–78), pp. 62–77. 39  Dumville, “Towards an Interpretation”, p. 70. 34  35 

698 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the ninth-century Vatican Codex Palatinus latinus 220 (fols. 56r– 60r). This redaction, she notes, consists of extracts from a Long Latin 1 version of the Visio Pauli and interpolated material. It is notable for two major reasons at least : (1) it is the only medieval Latin redaction to make substantial use of the first visit to Paradise, redaction VI making only very brief use of this at the beginning, and the other redactions not using it at all ; (2) some of its modifications and interpolated material may be connected to significant modifications and interpolations in the later medieval Latin reductions, the most notable of the interpolations being the sinners hanging from the fiery trees.40 Dwyer ends her essay noting that “Redaction XI and Redaction VI stand apart from the main body of the medieval Latin redactions. They are unique in their connection to the Long Latin version, and their authors exercise much more freedom in their use of the Long Latin original. Both are extant in manuscripts of the ninth century, and both have Irish or Anglo-Saxon connections”.41 Charles D. Wright has argued for an insular, probably Irish, origin of Redaction XI.42 Wright notes that the Vatican manuscript carrying this manuscript has other material regarded as Hiberno-Latin or connected with Irish tradition, for instance the homilies In nomine Dei summi edited by Robert E. McNally, the interpolated text of the Apocalypse of Thomas, an apocryphon known in Ireland and translated in Anglo-Saxon England. He also believes that Recension XI has certain linguistic features which are consistent with an Irish origin. In his view, however, the most compelling internal evidence for an Irish connection is the quotation of verses 4–6 of the Te Deum according to the peculiar Irish textual tradition of this hymn. The cumulative weight of the evidence, in Wright’s opinion, suggests that Redaction XI was compiled by an Irish monk or nun on the Continent.43

40  M. E. Dwyer, “An Unstudied Redaction of the Visio Pauli”, Manuscripta 32 (1988), pp. 121–138, at 121. 41  Dwyer, “An Unstudied Redaction”, p. 136. 42  C. D. Wright, “Some Evidence for the Irish Origin of Redaction XI of the Visio Pauli”, Manuscripta 34 (1990), pp. 33–44 ; also Wright, The Irish Tradition, pp. 111–13. 43  Wright, The Irish Tradition, pp. 111–13.

oriental connections ?

699

A peculiar Irish text of the Visio Pauli In a number of manuscripts we have a peculiar Irish text of what appears to be the Visio Pauli.44 The text begins with the remark that once while in Smyrna | Paul asked to have a vision 84 of the pains of Hell. While he was at prayer, however, a youth came to him asking him to confirm the faith of a man who was at the point of death. The text goes on to narrate “the manner wherein the soul departs from the body – as St Bernard, one of the arch-doctors of the Trinity, says”. After this there follows a dialogue between the soul and the body. We then return to Paul’s original request. An Angel, called Michael, took Paul to the brink of a valley and showed him Hell and the various kinds of damned punished there in different ways : the haughty and proud ; the adulterous ; the greedy and the envious ; the gluttonous ; those who give themselves to anger, to disobedience and to despair ; the slothful, those who remain away from Mass, from sermons and the service of God. Finally, there is a brief description of Paul’s vision of heaven. The text is obviously dependent on the Vision of Paul, even though no exact Latin original of it has as yet been found. This particular piece may be composite, with influences from the Irish texts on the “Bringing Forth of the Soul” and other related apocrypha as well. Heaven, Paradise, the Land of Promise in the Visio Pauli and Irish tradition Chapters 19–30 of the Visio Pauli recount Paul’s vision of Paradise. This is followed (chs 31–34) by the apostle’s visit to Hell (chs 31–44), which is immediately followed by an account of Paul’s second vision of Paradise (chs 45–51). The Paradise on this second visit is the Paradise of Genesis 2–3, and quite different from that of the first visit. Since the geography of the heavenly realms and the terminology used may help in the study of later Irish visions and journeys (otherworld and others) I here treat of them in some detail.

44  For manuscripts, edition and translation see McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 108–09 (# 91C).

700 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The angel takes Paul into the third heaven and sets him at the door of a gate through which the righteous enter (ch.  19). When Paul entered within the gate of paradise he met Enoch and Elias. Paradise here seems to be identified with heaven, the third heaven, or located within it. The angel then brought Paul down from the third heaven, and led him into the second heaven, and again led him to the firmament and from the firmament he led him to the gates of heaven. The text goes on to say that the beginning of the foundation thereof was upon the river that waters the earth. To his question as to the identity of the river of water, the angel replied that it was the ocean (ch.  21). The text goes on to say (with Paul as speaker) :45 And suddenly I went out of heaven, and I understood that it is the light of heaven which lightens all the earth. For the land there is seven times brighter than silver. And I said, “Lord, what is this place ?” And he said to me, “This is the land of promise [terra repromissionis]. Have you never heard what is written : Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth | [terram] ? [Mt 5.4]. The souls of the just, when they have gone out of the body, are dismissed to this place for a while.” And I said to the angel, “Then this land will be manifested before the time ?” The angel answered and said to me, “When Christ, whom you preach, shall come to reign, then, by the sentence of God, the first earth will be dissolved (Apoc 20.4–6 ; 21.1) and this land of promise will then be revealed, and it will be like dew or cloud, and then the Lord Jesus Christ, the King Eternal, will be manifested and will come with all his saints to dwell in it, and he will reign over them a thousand years (Apoc 20.4–6), and they will eat of the good things which I shall now show you.”

The description of this land of promise follows immediately in chapter 22 :46 And I looked around upon that land, and I saw a river flowing with milk and honey, and there were trees planted by the bank of that river, full of fruit ; moreover, each single tree bore twelve fruits in the year, having various and diverse fruits ; and I saw the created things which are in that place and all the work of God, and I saw there palms of twenty cubits, but others of ten cubits ; 45  In the translation of J. K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1993, pp. 628–29. 46  Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 629.

85

oriental connections ?

701

and that land was seven times brighter than silver. And there were trees full of fruits from the roots to the highest branches, of ten thousand fruits of palms upon ten thousand fruits. The grapevines had ten thousand plants. Moreover in the single vines there were ten thousand bunches and in each of these a thousand single grapes ; moreover these single trees bore a thousand fruits. And I said to the angel, “Why does each tree bear a thousand fruits ?” The angel answered and said to me, “Because the Lord God gives an abounding profusion of gifts to the worthy and because they of their own will afflicted themselves when they were placed in the world doing all things on account of his holy name.” And again I said to the angel, “Sir, are these the only promises which the Most Holy God makes ?” And he answered and said to me, “No ! There are seven times greater than these. But I say to you that when the just go out of the body they shall see the promises and the good things which God has prepared for them. Till then, they shall sigh and lament, saying, “Have we uttered any word from our mouth to grieve our neighbour even on one day ?” I asked and said again, “Are these alone the promises of God ?” And the angel answered and said to me, “These whom you now see are the souls of the married and those who kept the chastity of their nuptials, controlling themselves. But to the virgins and those who hunger and thirst after righteousness and those who afflicted themselves for the sake of the name of God, God will give seven times greater than these, which I shall now show you.”

| After this Paul is taken to be shown the City of Christ (22, 86 end–30). It is worthy of note that in the Visio, ch. 21, the thousand year reign of Christ of Apoc 20.4–6 is understood in the literal, not in a spiritual sense as had been the tradition from Tyconius (c. 400) onwards. The passage on the Land of Promise may be of significance for Irish ecclesiastical learning in two ways. First of all it may have influenced both terminology (terra repromissionis ; Tír Tairngiri) and concepts in the Irish Voyage literature. The clearest example would appear to be the Navigatio Brendani (ch. 1), where Bernóc is said to have found the Delightful Island (insulam … nomine deliciosam) and Saint Barrind says he was encouraged as follows : “Father, embark in the boat and let us sail westwards to the island which is called the Promised Land of the Saints (ad insulam quae dicitur terra repromissionis sanctorum) which God will give to

702 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church those who come after us at the end of time”.47 Later he is told that here, in this island, “it is always day, without blinding darkness. Our Lord Jesus Christ is the light of this island” (see Apoc 21.23). Later in the Navigatio Barrind encourages his brothers with the words : “You are living undoubtedly at the gate of Paradise. Near here is an island which is called the Promised Land of the Saints (terra repromissionis sanctorum) where night does not fall nor day end”.48 The influence of the Visio Pauli may explain the rather odd quest in time of an island, the Promised Land, which will be given to the saints only at the end of time. This is not the place to explore this particular point further. This avenue of approach through the Visio Pauli, however, may throw light on the quest of the Promised Land, Tír Tairngiri, in the Navigatio Brendani and in some of the other Irish voyages. Another matter on which the Visio Pauli may shed some light is the geography of the location of the just in Irish visions, such as the Vision of Adomnán and the Visio Tnugdali.49 The bringing forth of the soul in Irish literature In Visio Pauli 13 Paul addresses his accompanying angel as follows : “I would see the souls of the righteous and the sinners as they depart out of the world”. His request is granted (chs 13–18). In Irish literature there is a homily on the bringing forth of the soul, which, while not a translation of any part of the Visio Pauli, seems to have been influenced by it.50 | Dialogue between the soul and body

The “Debate of the Body and the Soul” is a work which was as widely used in Europe during the Middle Ages and later as was 47  Navigatio Sancti Brendani Abbatis from Early Latin Manuscripts (Publications in Mediaeval Studies The University of Notre Dame 16), ed. by Ed. C. Selmer, 1959, p. 5 ; English translation by J. J. O’Meara, The Voyage of Saint Brendan. Journey to the Promised Land, Dublin, 1976, p. 4. 48  Selmer, Navigatio, p. 7 ; trans. J. J. O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 5. 49  For the problems with regard to the Vision of Adamnán see M. McNamara, “Some Aspects of Early Irish Medieval Eschatology”, in Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, pp. 42–75, at 71–73. 50  For the manuscripts, editions and translations of the homily, see McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 109–10 (# 91E).

87

oriental connections ?

703

the Visio Pauli. Texts of the Dialogue or Debate have survived in Latin, in Irish, in Welsh, and in a number of other European vernaculars. The substance of the debate is about a hermit who saw in a dream the corpse of a sinner who had just died. In the ensuing debate the body and soul make mutual accusations on the sins committed while they were united in one person on earth. Many traditions, both eastern (including Egyptian) and western have gone into the formation of this work, of which several different forms are known. While it is not Paul who had the vision of the debate of the soul with the body, the Visio Pauli has, however, influenced the work.51 The Irish tradition on Antichrist (Irish Antichrist legend) and the apocryphal Apocalypse of John (Fragment of) An Irish text of an Apocalypse of John In the manuscript known as the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (RIA 23.O.48 [MS. 476]), written c. 1437–1438, we have two texts concerned with John the Beloved Disciple. A colophon describes the work as “The Life of John the Beloved Disciple” (literally “of John of the Breast”, i.e. John who reclined on Jesus’ breast at the Last Supper).52 The colophon also tells us that this Life of John was translated from Latin into Irish by Augustine Mac Raighin, most probably the Canon regular of St Augustine of that name who died in 1405. Source analysis reveals that ultimately the work depends on the Acts of John by Pseudo-Melitus or Pseudo-Abdias and on a tradition on John’s death (or sleep) found already in St Augustine. For some of the episodes, curiously enough, the source is material attested elsewhere only in the Acts of John as found in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, no. 850. 51  For the manuscripts, editions and translations of the Irish texts of the work, and for bibliographical references, see McNamara, The Apocrypha, 110–13 (#  91F). The oldest Welsh version of the work has been edited, with English translation, by J. E. Caerwyn Williams, “’Aighneas and Chuirp leis an Anam’. An Leagan is Luaithe sa Bhreatnais”, in Cothú an Dúchais. Aisti in omós don Athair Diarmuid Ó Laoghaire S.J., ed. by M. Mac Conmara and É. Ní Thiarnaigh, Dublin, 1997, pp. 218–27. 52  For manuscript, edition and studies see McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 95–98 (#  83) ; English translation by M. Herbert in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, pp. 95–96.

704 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The beginning of text 2 is lost. This text contains two items apparently drawn from some apocryphal apocalypse of John, the Beloved Disciple. The first of these speaks of the descent of Antichrist on Mount Garganus (in Apulia, Southern Italy, in the reign of Pope Gelasius I, 492–496) to harm and attack the Christians. Michael is said to have killed the dragon. We are then given a description of Michael’s appearance, followed by the manner in which | he killed Antichrist. This ends with the words : “And that 88 is the evil strange tale of Antichrist up to the present, as God confirmed to me, said John, the eloquent Beloved Disciple”.53 The text goes on to say that “The world will have three years of peace”. After that there will be great silence over the whole universe for forty days and forty nights. “Then the signs of Doomsday will appear, on the fifteen days before the Judgement”. After these have come, four angels from the four cardinal points will call on the dead to arise. “Then the beautiful pure souls of heaven and many evil souls from hell will go jointly with their bodies from the earthly graves in which they were buried to the judgement of Doomsday”. The text ends in a similar manner as the first : “And that is a brief account of the end of this bad world, as was narrated to me by the creator, the good Lord, said John the beloved apostle”.54 The exact apocryphal Apocalypse of John from which these texts are drawn has yet to be identified. They can be compared with the Apocryphal Apocalypse of John published by Constantin Tischendorf.55 This work is often dated to the fifth century, but may be considerably earlier. It has been little studied.56 It speaks of Antichrist, who will rule the earth for three years, of univer-

Herbert in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, p. 95. Herbert in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, p. 96. 55  C. Tischendorf, Apocalypses apocryphae, Leipzig, 1866 ; reprint Hildesheim 1966, pp. 70–93, found in Armenian, Arabic and Old Slavonic translations (Clavis Apocryphorum Novi Testamenti, ed. by M. Geerard, Turnhout, Brepols, 1992), #  331 ; cf. Gli Apocrifii del Nuovo Testamenti. III, Lettere e Apocalissi, ed. by M. Erbetta, Casale Monferrato, 1969, pp. 409–414 ; English translation by A. Walker, in Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, and Revelations (Ante-Nicene Christian Library 16), Edinburgh, 1870, pp. 493–505. 56  See comments on it by A. Yarbro Collins, Early Christian Apocalypticism. Genre and Social Setting (Semeia 36), Decatur, GA, 1986, pp. 76–77. 53 

54 

oriental connections ?

705

sal death, resurrection, judgement, punishments and rewards.57 A noticeable difference, however, is that the Irish fragment contains no description of Antichrist, while the other apocryphal apocalypse of John does. There the appearance of Antichrist is given as follows :58 The appearance of his face is dusky (or : gloomy) ; the hairs of his head are sharp, like darts ; his eyebrows like a wild beast’s ; his right eye like the star which rises in the morning, and the other like a lion’s ; his mouth about one cubit ; his teeth span long ; his fingers like scythes ; the print of his feet of two spans ; and on his face is an inscription : Antichrist.

The Irish Antichrist tradition and its antecedents In the introduction to his edition of a text on “The Conception and Characteristics of Antichrist” from the fourteenth-century Book of Uí Maine, Brian Ó Cuív | notes that Antichrist is referred 89 to briefly in several Old and Middle Irish verse texts, and that Antichrist features more prominently in a number of Irish prose texts, which he lists : “Dá Brón Flatha Nime”, homilies on Saint Michael in the Leabhar Breac, a life of St John the Evangelist [examined immediately above], a life of St Maighneann, an Irish saint of the seventh century, a text headed Sgél Ainnte Crisd (“The Story of Antichrist”) in the Book of Lismore, and an extended version of this which is found in manuscripts dating from the eighteenth century.59 Ó Cuív goes on to note that in so far as the Irish text he edits is intelligible the Antichrist story given there has the following elements : (1) Antichrist is the son of his own sister who conceives him when her father, a bishop in Jerusalem, lies with her on the Friday before Easter at the instigation of the devil ; (2) in appearance Antichrist has a flat face with one eye ; (3) he 57  On the (Apocryphal) Revelation of John, see J. H. Charlesworth  – J. R. Mueller, The NT Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. A Guide to Publi­ cations, with Excursuses on Apocalypses (ALTA Bibliography Series 17), Metuchen, N.J. and London, 1987, pp. 36–37, and 57. 58  English translation by Walker, in Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations, pp. 493–505, at 494. 59  B. Ó Cuív, “Two Items from Irish Apocryphal Tradition”, Celtica 10 (1973), pp. 87–113. 87–88. See also McNamara, The Apocrypha, p. 139 (#  104J).

706 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church has miraculous powers : he can make gold out of grass and anise ( ?) [rendering of Irish word uncertain] and wine out of water, he can cause disease and can cure the sick, he can create a moon, sun and elements ( ?), he can do anything that Christ did on earth except restore people to life ; (4) he has a thousand fair women in his company. Ó Cuív goes on to note that comparison with other Irish texts shows several correspondences. In this he is quite correct. There is a rather distinctive Irish tradition on Antichrist, comprising the elements noted by Ó Cuív. The sources have also been listed by him, although we note that the “Fragment of an Apocalypse of John” (part of a life of John) has little specific on Antichrist. It is important that we situate this Irish tradition as far as possible within the history of the Antichrist legend. We are fortunate in that this theme has been the subject of intense research, particularly in recent years.60 Bernard McGinn has traced the development of the tradition from the beginnings, down through patristic, early and later medieval times to our own day. In his study of the figure of Antichrist in the period of development (a.d. 100–500) McGinn devotes a section to Antichrist’s physical appearance. For him the second important theme of this period (whose earliest written evidence comes from the third century) is that of the Antichrist physiognomies, the physical description of his unusual appearance. These are Eastern, rather than Western ; indeed, McGinn notes, it is curious that they had so little effect on Latin Antichrist beliefs. It is possible that those texts had Jewish roots, but it is also clear that fascination with how physical features reveal character was widespread in the ancient world.61 The Antichrist physiognomies | currently known to us are 90 found in texts that are not critically edited and that are difficult to date. Almost every important apocalyptic revealer (Elijah, 60  See in particular B. McGinn, “Portraying the Antichrist in the Middle Ages”, in Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages, ed. by W. Verbeke – D. Verhelst – W. Welkernhuysen (Mediaevalia Lovaniensia 1,15), Leuven, 1988, esp. pp. 3–13 ; McGinn, Antichrist. Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil, New York, 2000. See also J. Maasynbaerde Ford, “The Physical Features of the Antichrist”, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 14 (1996), pp. 23–41. 61  McGinn, The Antichrist, p. 68.

oriental connections ?

707

Ezra, Daniel, John, and even the Sibyl) was eventually credited with providing a physical description of Antichrist, as the chart McGinn gives detailing fourteen examples shows. Of these fourteen most are eastern, two are Latin, two Irish (Leabhar Breac, Book of Lismore).62 The classical text on Antichrist in the West comes from around 950, in De ortu et tempore Antichristi of Adso, later abbot of Montier-en-Der. The Irish tradition does not belong to this. It is independent of it. As McGinn writes :63 Antichrist physiognomies accompanied by unusual legendary accretions belonged to the Eastern imagination at this time [950–1000]. Yet they became prevalent in one place in Western Europe  – Ireland, at least from the tenth century on. The native imagination, coupled with Irish predilection for apocryphal literature suspect in other parts of Latin Christendom, seems to have had much to do with this unexpected turn of events.

McGinn then draws attention to a tenth century Latin text edited by Bernhard Bischoff, with what Bischoff believes to be the oldest text on Antichrist in the West.64 The text, now in Avranches, Bibliothèque municipale as MS 108, was from the 12th century at the latest, in the famous monastery of Mont St. Michel (Brittany) and Bischoff believes the legend originated there. Bischoff notes that this description of the Antichrist should be compared with a Latin-Irish text given in translation by Georges Dottin in the introduction of his edition of “The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven”, of which there is an almost identical description in the Book of Lismore.65 There are some Latin phrases retained in the Irish text, an indication that the work is translated from Latin. The Latin text published by Bischoff has many irregular Latin forms which make understanding and translation difficult. The general sense, however, is clear. The text begins by reference Charts in McGinn, The Antichrist, p. 72–73. McGinn, The Antichrist, pp. 97–98. 64  See B. Bischoff, “Vom Ende der Welt und vom Antichrist (I) ; Fragment einer Jenseitsvision (II) (Zehntes Jahrhundert)”, Anecdota Novissima. Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 80–84 ; 82 for Latin text cited. 65  G. Dottin, “Les deux Chagrins du royaume du Ciel”, Revue Celtique 21 (1900), pp. 349–87. 353–536, from MS Royal Irish Academy 23 N  15 (490). 62 

63 

708 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church to the phoenix, destroyed by fire from heaven. The fire is extinguished by rain from Africa. The text then continues in Latin, already given in the translation of Bernard McGinn, in an earlier essay (page 473 above) 66. In the Book of Lismore text the description of the features of Antichrist is as follows :67 The Lord said that he [Antichrist] would be born on Bethlehem, of a harlot of the tribe of Daniel, that he would be reared in Carbuban (sic) and that he would live in the city called Besasta. His body will be six hundred lengths high, and forty in width, He will have a single eye protruding from his forehead, with a flat-surfaced face, and a mouth extending as far as his chest. He will have no upper teeth, nor will he have knees, and the soles of his feet will be rounded like a cart-wheel. He will have fearsome black hair, and three fiery vapours from his nose and mouth which will rise in the air like flames of fire.

With McGinn’s study and Bischoff’s new text a beginning has been made for a further exploration of the Irish Antichrist tradition with its possible early and eastern origins. | The Apocalypse of Thomas and the Irish signs before 92 doomsday tradition

The Apocalypse of Thomas The Apocalypse of Thomas is extant in two versions, a longer and a shorter one. The shorter is regarded as the older and the original ; the longer has an interpolated passage.68 Latin is regarded as the McGinn, The Antichrist, p. 98. In the translation of M. Herbert, in Herbert – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, p. 149. 68  See McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 119–121 (# 96). The manuscript evidence is as follows : Long version : Munich, Clm 4585 (from Benediktbeuern) (ninth century), fols  66v–67v ; Verona, Library of the Chapter 1 ; Vatican, Palatinus latinus 220 ; Old English Version. Vercelli Anglo-Saxon MS (ninth century). Shorter version : Vienna, Codex Vindebonensis Palatinus 16 (formerly Bobiensis), fol.  67rv (fifth century) ; Munich, Clm 4563, fol.  40rv ; (eleventh century). Edition of shorter recension : B. Bihlmeyer, “Un texte non interpolé de l’Apocalypse de Thomas”, Revue Bénédictine 28 (1911), pp. 270–82. Probable citation in homilies, believed to be Irish, or with Irish affiliations : D. De Bruyne, “Fragments retrouvés d’Apocryphes Priscillianistes”, Revue Bénédictine 24 (1907), pp. 318–35 ; B. Bihlmeyer, “Un texte non interpolé”, 66  67 

oriental connections ?

709

language of the original, and is assigned a 5th century date. It narrates the events (signs) to take place on the seven days before the end of the world. The signs are assigned to each of the seven days, and to a particular hour on that day. The number of days recalls the seven seals of the Apocalypse of John, by which work the Apocalypse of Thomas is influenced. “And at the eighth hour of the seventh day there will be voices in the four corners of heaven (cf. Rev 7.1). All the air will be set in motion and filled with holy angels. These will make war among themselves for the whole day (cf. Rev 12.7). In that day the elect will be delivered by the holy angels from the destruction of the world (cf. Rev 7.13 ; Mt 24.31 ; Mk 13.27). Then all men will see that the hour of their destruction is come near. These are the signs of the seventh day. And when the seven days are finished, on the eighth day at the sixth hour there will be a gentle and pleasant voice in heaven from the east. Then that angel who has power over the holy angels will be made manifest. And there will go forth with him all the angels sitting on my Father’s chariots of clouds, rejoicing and flying around in the air under heaven, to deliver the elect who believed in me ; and they | will rejoice that the destruction of the world has come. 93 The words of the Saviour to Thomas about the end of this world are finished”.69 There is an Anglo-Saxon translation of the Apocalypse of Thomas in the ninth-century Codex Vercelli (no. xv). It tends to follow the longer recension. It names the days : first day Monday, and so pp. 278–79. Studies : See Clavis apocryphorum Novi Testamenti, ed. by M. Geerard, Turnhout, 1992, #  326 ; D. A. Thomason, “Thomas, Apocalypse of”, Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. by D. N. Freedman, vol. 6, New York, 1992, p. 534 ; M. R. James, “Revelatio Thomae”, Journal of Theological Studies 11 (1910), pp. 288–92 ; James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1924, pp. 555–562 ; English translation of A (Verona, Munich 4585), pp. 556–59 ; English translation of B (Munich 4563 and Vienna. Short Version). pp. 559–562 ; A. Dos Santos Otero, “The Apocalypse of Thomas” in New Testament Apocrypha, vol.  2, ed. by E. Hennecke  – W. Schneemelcher ; English translation by R. McL., Wilson, Philadelphia, 1965, pp. 798–803 (fullest treatment) ; Erbetta, Gli apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento, pp. 390–95 ; Stegmüller, Repertorium, I and VIII, #  280 ; J. H. Charlesworth  – J. R. Mueller, The New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. A Guide to Publications, with Excursuses on Apocalypses, #  93,1–23 (pp.  372–74). 69  De Santos Otero. The Apocalypse of Thomas, pp. 802–03.

710 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church on. This would give the seventh day as Sunday, and the final day as Monday. At the ending the Anglo-Saxon version differs from the Latin : at the request of the Virgin, Michael and Peter, sinners have their sins forgiven, but there is a final sentence as in Mt 25 : Venite benedicti and Discedite maledicti. There are indications that there has been earlier revision of the Latin text and that it has undergone a Priscillianist and Manichaean revision.70 With regard to the early knowledge of the Apocalypse of Thomas in Ireland we may surmise that its presence in England (where it was translated into Old English) makes it likely that it was known in Ireland as well. We may also note that one of the manuscripts of the longer, interpolated, recension (Vatican, Palatinus latinus 220) also carries the text of Redaction XI of the Visio Pauli (a work with probable Insular or Irish connections, even of Irish origin) as well as the set of homilies In nomine Dei summi, taken by some scholars as connected with Ireland. The Apocalypse of Thomas, of the tradition it carries, clearly has influenced the Irish Saltair na Rann (“Psalter of the Quatrains”) and the Irish tradition on the Signs of Doomsday. It has become obvious that little progress in this matter can be made without a fuller survey of the manuscript material (Latin and vernacular) and critical editions of all the relevant texts. We are fortunate that this work has now been taken in hand by Charles D. Wright, the Department of English, University of Illinois, Urbana. His current researches in this field came to my attention after completion of this essay, and he has very kindly put at my disposal a copy of a major study of his on the subject : “The Apocalypse of Thomas : Some new Latin texts and their Significance for the Old English Versions”.71 In this essay he exam70  De Santos Otero, The Apocalypse of Thomas, p. 799 : “in favour [of association with Manichaean and Priscillianist currents of thought] there is … some parallel places in Priscillianist writings”, with reference to De Bruyne [Revue Bénédictine 24, 1907, pp. 318–35] and Bihlmeyer [Revue Bénédictine 28, 1911, p. 279]. 71  C. D. Wright, “The Apocalypse of Thomas. Some new Latin texts and their Significance for the Old English Versions”, Apocryphal Texts and Traditions, ed. by K. Powell  – D. G. Scraggs, Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2003, pp. 27–64.

oriental connections ?

711

ines the known Latin texts of the “Non-Interpolated” Version (2 MSS), of the “Interpolated” Version (3 MSS) and draws attention to five new texts of an abbreviated version (of which one was already known). In an appendix he edits six new Latin texts of The Apocalypse of Thomas, one with the interpolated version, and five with the abbreviated text. The abbreviated versions have only the list of signs. He notes that the new texts he describes further underscore | how The Apocalypse of Thomas was subject to redac- 94 tion, interpolation and abbreviation, and remarks that it is hardly possible to reconstruct an original or archetypal text from the surviving witnesses, or even to edit critically just three primary recensions (non-interpolated, interpolated, abbreviated versions).72 He cites approvingly the words of Thomas D. Hill in this regard : “texts such as … the Apocalypse of Thomas did not circulate in a single authorized version, and … an edition of a single version … would misrepresent the way in which most medieval readers had access to [it]”.73 This most recent research should prove immensely helpful in the study of the Irish tradition on the Signs of Doomsday, to which we now turn. The Irish tradition on the signs before doomsday Christian interest in the signs before the end is very natural. After Jesus had predicted the destruction of the Temple, on the Mount of Olives, opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked Jesus privately : “Tell us when will this be and what will be the sign that all these things are about to be accomplished ?” (Mk 13.4 ; parallel in Mt 24.3 : “Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the signs of your coming and of the end of the age ?”). There was an especial interest in the signs of the end in the West, as witnessed to by texts in Latin, in Old English Homilies, in Old French, Middle High German, Medieval Dutch, Irish and Welsh. The vernacular Irish evidence on the subject is particularly rich.74 From the eleventh century or so the number of signs is generally given as fifteen. The classical work on the subject is that of Wright, “The Apocalypse of Thomas”, p. 46. T. D. Hill, in the introduction to Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture. Volume One. Abbo of Fleury, Abbo of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, and Acta Sanctorum, ed. by F. M. Biggs et al., Kalamazoo, 2001, p. xxii. 74  See McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 128–38 (# 104). 72  73 

712 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church William W. Heist, The Fifteen Signs Before Doomsday,75 working on the earlier studies of the Irish scholar St John D. Seymour. Heist has sought to identify the origins and affiliations of the present Latin and vernacular texts. He gives the diagram given in a preceding chapter (page 476 above]) as one possible explanation of the formation of the tradition and of the interrelationships of the various texts carrying the legend.76 |

For him the primary sources are the Apocalypse of Thomas, an unknown source, the Irish Antichrist legend and the Irish text The Evernew Tongue. The Apocalypse of Thomas would have directly influenced the Old English homilies, some of the Welsh texts, among them Yrymes Detbrawt (or in its normalised spelling Armes Dydd Brawd, “Prophecy of the Day of Judgment”). It is the view of Heist that the Irish Saltair na Rann (composed 988) would have been influenced by the Apocalypse of Thomas and the Unknown Source. Saltair na Rann itself, with the Irish Antichrist text and the Evernew Tongue, would have given rise to a composition which Heist calls the “Irish XV Signs”, which in turn would have given rise to the Latin, Irish, to Old French and Welsh Fifteen Signs traditions. At the end of his work, having stressed the importance of the Irish Saltair na Rann strophes as the primary source of the Fifteen Signs, with the Evernew Tongue serving as the most important secondary source, Heist grants that we cannot quite exclude the possibility that the legend had been already formed when the Saltair na Rann was composed and that the latter borrowed from the legend as well as from the Apocalypse of Thomas, upon which it is primarily based.77 Heist’s work on the Fifteen Signs has been extremely influential. His viewpoint, however, is not without some problems. An 75  W. W. Heist, The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, East Lansing, MI, 1952 ; see also C. Gerhardt  – N. F. Palmer, .xu. signa ante iudicium. Studien und Texte zur Überlieferungsgeschichte eines eschatologischen Themas, Trier, 1986, (preprint). 76  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 99. 77  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 193.

95

oriental connections ?

713

initial difficulty with his position is that he places (as indeed he must) the text with the Fifteen Signs of the Collectanea Bedae at the very end of the process, dependent on the “Irish XV Signs”, and on Latin A and Latin B. The Collectanea, although demonstrably | not from Bede, has generally been regarded as an early 96 work, probably from the eighth century. This, too, is the opinion of the editors of the recent critical edition of the Collectanea Martha Bayless and Michael Lapidge.78 They divide the work into 388 items, with “De quindecim signis” as items 356–371. The editors believe it would be possible to think of the Collectanea as broadly tripartite. Part 1 : nos. 1–304 ; part II : nos. 305–379 ; part III : nos. 380–388. As a hypothesis for the origin of part I they give the following : An Irish scholar (8th cent.) began collecting dicta of various sorts, mainly connected with biblical wisdom, in Ireland, moved to England (possibly Glastonbury, Northumbria) and to the Continent. At some (later ?) point a second compiler, possibly inspired by the nature of some of the materials in Part I, appended a sequence of items which have as their common ground an interest in numerology. [De duodecim lapidibus (305–16) ; De duodecim luminaribus ecclesiae (317–29) ; De septem donis spiritus sanci (330–37) ; De septem ordinibus (338–47) ; De septem uestimentis ecclesiasticis (348– 355) ; De quindecim signis (356–71) ; De quatuor lignis crucis Domini (372) ; De septem peccatis (374) ; De sex aetatibus (377–78)  …] With the exception of the two brief treatises on ecclesiastical orders and vestments (nos.  338–47 ; 348–55), nearly all the items for Part II show the same patterns of affiliation as we saw in Part I, namely, with Ireland, England and Irish communities on the Continent, especially in Austria and Bavaria. Hypotheses similar to those advanced for Part I might best explain the assemblage of materials in Part II ….79

Further difficulties with regard to Heist’s plan come from the recognition that the Fifteen Signs tradition exists also in Armenian literature. Working from the Armenian tradition, Michael E. Stone in 1981 published Signs of the Judgement, Onomastica Sacra

78  Collectanea Pseudo-Bedae (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae 14), ed. by M. Bayless – M. Lapidge, Dublin, 1998. 79  M. Lapidge, in “The Origin of the Collectanea”, in Bayless – Lapidge, Collectanea Pseudo-Bedae, pp. 8–10.

714 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church and The Generations from Adam.80 In his study of the Signs before Judgment he noted the Irish tradition and the position of W. W. Heist on the presumed (tenth-century) Irish origin of the Fifteen Signs tradition. He remarks that the Fifteen Signs tradition is also present in Armenian literature, and notes that this may conceivably indicate, in spite of Heist’s analysis, that an earlier stage of this text should be posited.81 Stone returned to the question again in a paper which he read at the International Dublin Conference on “The Aramaic Bible. Targums in their Historical Context”.82 He draws attention once | again to the complexity of the ques- 97 tion and the importance of the Armenian tradition and the manner in which it parallels the Irish. He notes the Irish, Armenian and Jewish (Hebrew text) traditions on the Fifteen Signs before Doomsday. It is not demonstrable that the Armenian version goes back to a Latin text ; nothing in it indicates this (nor, however, does anything in it indicate the contrary). He wonders whether Heist has traced the document back to its very origins ; it may still incorporate older Jewish material. He continues : This complexity serves to alert us to the fact that the channels of communication between the Eastern traditions, including the Greek, and the Western traditions, including the Irish, are very convoluted, certainly as far as the transmission of pseudepigraphical materials is concerned. If indeed the Signs of Judgment is an Irish composition, dependent on the oriental Apocalypse of Thomas, a work not preserved in Ireland nor (apparently) known on the Continent, then it moved back to the East at some point, embellished with an attribution to a Jewish source, and was translated into Armenian. 83

The conclusion from the foregoing seems to be that the time is ripe for a reconsideration of the formation of the tradition on the signs before doomsday, in particular on the Fifteen Signs tradition M. E. Stone, Signs of the Judgement, Onomastica Sacra and The Generations from Adam (Armenian Texts and Studies 3), Prennsylvania, 1981. 81  Stone, Signs of Judgement, pp. 4–5. 82  M. Stone, “Jewish Tradition, the Pseudepigrapha and the Christian West”, in The Aramaic Bible. Targums in their Historical Setting, ed. by D. R. G. Beattie ‒M. J. McNamara (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 166), Sheffield, 1994, pp. 431–49. 83  Stone, “Jewish Tradition”, p. 434. 80 

oriental connections ?

715

in Ireland. A prior requirement here will be the critical edition of each of the Irish texts, and related Latin witnesses (for instance the so-called Priscillianist fragments) accompanied by the study of their individual sources, and of the interrelationships between them. Concluding remarks In keeping with the overall theme of the conference, in this essay I have confined myself principally to consideration of the Irish apocalyptic and eschatological texts which appear to be related to known apocryphal writings such as the Visio Pauli, the Antichrist and the apocryphal Apocalypse of John, and the Apocalypse of Thomas. Consideration of some major Irish texts which can be reckoned as apocalyptic or eschatological has been omitted, such as The Evernew Tongue, the Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven. And there are others besides. Those considered, however, would seem to indicate that this branch of Irish tradition has drawn from the heritage which had its roots in the Middle East. Future research may define more sharply how close the links of Ireland with the ancient Near East really are.

| SOME ASPECTS OF EARLY MEDIEVAL IRISH ESCHATOLOGY1 Some introductory reflections Eschatology is that part of systematic theology which deals with the final destiny both of the individual soul and of mankind in general. It has to do with the last things : death, judgment, hell, heaven, the intermediate stage (purgatory), limbo and with questions related to these. A study of Irish eschatology would require a listing and an analysis of the sources available for this subject, an examination of the date to be assigned to each, the identification of its sources, and a study of how much it depends on earlier doctrine and on what it has specific to the subject. Each document should be studied with an awareness of the larger picture of Christian eschatology and the variety in eschatological doctrine from biblical through patristic times. Many of the Irish Latin and vernacular sources have been known and examined for some time (for instance the Vision Literature). To these we must now add the rich Latin heritage in medieval commentary and homiletic material which is gradually becoming recognised as of Irish origin or with close Irish connections. Following the order of the four last things, the study of Irish eschatology would treat of such texts as :2 The Bringing forth of the Soul (AIC #102) ; The Seven Journeys of the Soul (IBA ##28, 28A) ; The Antichrist Tradition (AIC #104J) ; Dá Brón Flatha Nime ; “The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven” (Enoch and Elijah) ; The Signs before Doomsday (AIC ##104, 104A–104I) ; First published in : Ireland and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, pp. 42-75. 2  AIC : M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975 (corrected reprint, 1984) ; IBA. M. Herbert  – M. McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected texts in translation, Edinburgh, 1989. 1 

42

718 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Tidings of Doomsday (AIC #106) ; A Poem on the Day of Judgment (AIC #105) ; Tidings of the Resurrection (AIC #107) ; The terrors of Hell ; The Joys of Heaven ; The Seven Heavens (AIC #108) ; The Question of Purgatory.

| Earlier writings on the subject The earliest pertinent work on this topic in the present century is that of Charles Stuart Boswell on the Vision of Adomnán,3 in which he treats of the seer, gives a translation of the Fís Adamnáin, and has sections on the classical tradition, the oriental tradition, the Fís Adamnáin and later developments. Some time later the theme of the eschatology of the early Irish Church was discussed in an essay by St John D. Seymour,4 in which he deals with the sources : Imrama, voyage tales, visions, homilies, moral treatises, lives of saints, and the like, and treats of the topics hell, the division of souls, the fire of doom and purgatory. Later he covered part of the same topic in his work on Irish visions of the other-world.5 The most detailed examination of the subject has been The Eschatological Doctrines of the Early Irish Church by Brian O’Dwyer Grogan. After an introduction on the state of scholarship, sources and methodology, he treats of the history of the period 450–1150 (ch. 2), of virtues and vices (ch. 3), death (ch. 4), the body (ch. 5), hell (ch. 6), heaven (ch. 7), purgatory (ch. 8), division of souls at judgment (ch. 9), the spirit world (ch. 10), Doomsday and its signs (ch. 11). In a later study,6 after an overview of early Irish escha3  C. S. Boswell, An Irish Precursor of Dante. A Study on the Vision of Heaven and Hell ascribed to the Eighth-century Irish Saint Adamnán, with Translation of the Irish Text, London, 1908. 4  St.  J. D. Seymour, “The Eschatology of the Early Irish Church”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 14 (1923), pp.  179–211. 5  St.  J. D. Seymour, Irish Visions of the Other-World. A Contribution to the Study of Mediaeval Visions, London, 1930 (Introduction ; early visions and vision-fragments ; the Imrama ; the Vision of Adamnán ; the Vision of Tundal ; a study of the vision of Tundal ; the Vision of the Knight Owen). 6  B. Grogan, “Eschatological Teaching in the Early Irish Church” (doctoral dissertation, Fordham University 1972, unpublished) ; Grogan, in Bib-

43

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

719

tology, he treats of the problem of purgatory, of texts in which the concept of purgatory is covered by the term infernum/iffern, and of the Requiem Offertory Domine Jesu Christe, and offers a solution to the “doubtful theology” of the Domine.7 | Biblical origins Since the biblical evidence, in its diversity and unity, stands behind all later Christian articulation of eschatology it will not be amiss to treat, even if briefly, of the essentials of the biblical evidence, from the very beginnings. Early Hebrew Belief in the otherworld existence8 Hebrew man was believed to be composed of flesh and nephesh (Gen 2.7). A third component (not entirely distinct from nephesh) lical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution (PIBA No.  1), ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 1976, pp. 46–58. Space does not permit treatment in this paper of the question of purgatory in Irish eschatology. The overall question of the development of belief in Purgatory has been treated in detail by J. Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory (trans. by A. Goldhammer), London, 1984. [French original, La naissance du purgatoire, Paris, 1981]. In his section on the earlier Middle Ages he treats of the Hiberno-Latin Ps.-Isidore, Liber de ordine creatu­ rarum. He has a special chapter on “Purgatory between Sicily and Ireland”, considering Marcus’s Visio Tnugdali as “a vision on an Other World without Purgatory”, followed by a section on “Discovery [of Purgatory] in Ireland”, “Saint Patrick’s Purgatory”. There is also specific treatment of the doctrine in Irish sources in the works of St. John D. Seymour and B. Grogan. 7  More recently (in December 1994), the West of Ireland Theology Research Association, in conjunction with the Department of Irish, University College, Galway, held a colloquium in Irish on the topic “Na Críocha Déanacha, The Last Things”, with papers on Old Testament eschatology by M. Maher, on the theme in the Voyage Literature, by D. Ó hAodha, on the Voyage of Bran ; in Old- and Middle-Irish sermons by G. Mac Eoin ; in the Fís Adamnáin by S. Ó. Briain. The papers of Maher, Mac Eoin and Ó Briain were published in Diagacht Theology. Bulletin of the Western Theology Research Association, No. 2, 1997. 8  On this question see H. H. Rowley, “Death and Beyond”, in : The Faith of Israel. Aspects of Old Testament Thought, London, 1956, pp.  150–176 (earlier in : Church Quarterly 23 (1955), p.  116-32) ; A. Heidel, “Death and the Afterlife” = ch.  3 of Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels, Chicago, 1946, pp.  137–223 ; W. Brueggemann, “Death, Theology of”, in Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Supplement, Nashville, 1976, pp.  219–22 ; T. J. Lewis, “Dead, Abode of”, in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol.  2, New York, 1992, pp. 101–05.

44

720 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church was also there, namely spirit, ruaḥ (Eccl 11.7 ; Ps 104.29–30). Nephesh was an animating principle. So, too, was ruaḥ. The ruaḥ given by God to all living beings, not just to humans, returned at death to the God who gave it. It was not regarded as surviving after death. Existence after death, Sheol Existence of the person in some form after death existed in early Israel, as in the surrounding nations. In Israel as in Canaanite literature the shades of the dead were known as Rephaim. The term rp’um in Ugaritic texts (13th cent. BC) denotes the ancestral spirits of the royal family (and perhaps other associated heroic figures). In Phoenician texts the rp’m means “shades of the dead” (in general). In Hebrew the term Rephaim (rp’ym) denotes shades of the dead (sometimes of royal dead) : Ps 88.10(11) ; Job 26.5 ; Prov 2.18 ; 9.18 ; 21.16 ; Isa 14.9 ; 26.14 ; 26.19. Biblical Description of the Abode of the Dead The abode of the dead is variously designated in the Bible. It is called earth (Ex 15.12 ; Nm 16.32 ; Ps 71.20 ; Jon 2.6 ; Ezk 31.34, etc.), pit, corruption (Job 33.18 ; Pss 16.10 ; 30.9 ; Isa 38.17 ; 51.14 ; Jon 2.6) ; pit (bor), Pss 28.1 ; 88.14, etc., the hidden place (Job 40.12, 13 etc.), the Broad Domain, the Depths, Ruin, Silence, House. It is also called Abaddon or Place of Destruction, Dust, Land of Descent, the Land of the Hungry One, of the shepherd, of the King of Terrors. Most of these appellations are also found in Ugaritic literature. Sheol of the Hebrews was a dark, dusty, watery or miry place (Job 10.20–21), the realm of silence (Pss 94.17 ; 115.17). Early Biblical Evidence on Abode of the Dead incomplete The biblical information on this otherworld existence of humans must be regarded as incomplete and fragmentary, and should not be taken as representing the whole of | Hebrew belief on the sub- 45 ject. The evidence is at times contradictory, the individual statements representing aspects of a fuller picture. Thus the dead are said to dwell in silence (Pss 94.17 ; 115.17), in the land of forgetfulness (Ps 88.13 ; Eccl 9.5 ; Job 14.21). They do not praise the Lord or give thanks. There is no remembrance of Yahweh in Sheol (Ps 6.6). Yet Ps 139.8 affirms that God is in Sheol as much as in

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

721

heaven. The dead are said to know nothing (Eccl 9.5). There is no knowledge or wisdom in Sheol (Eccl 9.10). On the other hand necromancy, consultation of the dead, was practised in Israel (2 Kings 21.6 ; Isa 8.19) even though forbidden by religious law (Lv 19.31 ; 20.6, 27 ; Dt 18.1). The most notable case is King Saul’s visit to the witch of Endor, who at his request raised up the dead Samuel (I Sam 28.3–19), whose shade is described as being like an ’elohim, a divine being. Such Israelite beliefs and practices are paralleled by those of Mesopotamia. Towards belief in an after-life We may have evidence of an incipient belief in a happy after-life, for at least some righteous, in Ps 49.15(16) and Ps 73.24, where the verb “take”, laqaḥ, “the Lord will take me”, may mean not just saving from premature death, but to take to union with himself at or after death. Incipient belief in resurrection of the body It is not clear when belief in a resurrection of the body first came to be affirmed in Israel. It is scarcely present in Ezk 37.1–14, where the resurrection seems to be metaphorical, that is, the restoration the nation. It is less clear whether Isa 26.14–19 is to be understood metaphorically as containing an early belief in individual bodily resurrection. The first clear mention of bodily resurrection in the Bible is in Daniel 12.1–3 (c. 167–164 BC), with reference to the resurrection of (some) of the just of Israel’s dead. II Macc 12.39–45 (with reference to Judas Maccabee, c. 166– 160 BC) makes clear reference to belief in bodily resurrection and the value of sacrifice and of prayers for the dead. Although later used in the developing doctrine of Purgatory, the text does not say when the prayers would have their effect, whether in an intermediate period or at the general resurrection (Day of Doom). Jewish belief in an afterlife and in the resurrection of the body became more common among Jews (Sadducees excepted) from c.  150 BC onwards. This development may have been facilitated by the introduction of Greek ideas, with the concept of psychê, “soul”, an element in the human person which survives death. In the Book of Wisdom 3.1–9 we find belief in the immortality of the soul, without inclusion of belief in, the resurrection of the body.

722 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church In New Testament times among the Jews belief in the afterlife was common, possibly with different shades of understanding. Thus we find reference to happiness immediately after death (“in the bosom of Abraham” Lk 16.22 ; “this day you will be with me in Paradise,” Lk 23.43). The Pharisees stressed resurrection on the Last Day. In general the Jewish apocalyptic, eschatological, framework of general resurrection, | judgment and eternal reward or punishment 46 seems to have been taken over by Christianity (see Mt 25.31,46). The Fourth Gospel (John) has a “realised eschatology”, in the sense that by their attitude to Christ’s word mortals here and now already pass judgment on themselves : “Who believes in me is not judged ; who does not believe is already judged” (Jn 3.17 ; this would become an important text for Gregory the Great’s synthesis). John, however, also knows of a judgment on the last day (Jn 12.48). In the New Testament writings little reference is made to the intermediate state between death and judgment ; cf. Rev 6.9 : the souls of those slain for Christ, under the altar in heaven, ask how long before their blood would be avenged ; Rev 20.4 : these same slain come to life and reign with Christ for a thousand years. In I Cor 15 Paul discusses questions regarding the resurrection of Christ and of Christians : “But some will ask, ‘How are the dead to be raised ? With what kind of body do they come ?’“ I Cor 15.35. “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Neither does corruption inherit incorruption” 15.50 ; “What is sown is a natural (animal) body ; it is raised as a spiritual body”, 15.44. These are texts that will exercise the minds of Christian theologians of later centuries. In I Cor 3.13–15 Paul, speaking of a divine visitation on a future “Day”, says : “Each one’s work will become manifest ; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each has done. If the work which any one has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If any one’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire”. The exact meaning of what Paul had in mind is not quite clear. In later reflection his words would be used as referring to otherworld cleansing by fire.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

723

The patristic heritage 9 A study of Irish eschatology, in its earlier or medieval stages, needs to pay particular attention to the rich patristic tradition that stands behind it. In the matter of patristic teaching, almost as much as with regard to the Bible, the constant development of the tradition must be borne in mind, and with this the unconscious reading into patristic texts of points of doctrine which are really later developments, rather than the explicit teaching of a particular Father. This is particularly true with regard to the two great and influential Fathers, Augustine and Pope Gregory. In this essay all I intend to do is to note some patristic views which can be presumed to stand behind Irish tradition and Irish reflection on eschatological matters. Origen (died 253–254) Some points from Origen’s eschatological doctrine of interest to our present study are his teaching on the nature of the risen body, his views on the interim stage, and on | the nature and duration 47 of punishment after death. Origen’s positions on these matters are important both because of the influence they later exercised and of the strong reaction to them. It is unclear whether or not Origen sees the glorified body as an integral part of the final human fulfilment, or simply as a penultimate stage. In Rufinus’s favourable translation of Origen’s De principiis there is provision for some kind of body, however “spiritual” in quality, as a necessary part of the human person. Translations of his works by opponents of his, however, present him as teaching that all bodily existence will eventually pass away.10 A controversial aspect of Origen’s eschatology, and one in which Origen’s own thought is not altogether clear, is that of the nature and duration of punishment after death. The traditional view then was that this punishment was eternal. To this understanding Origen raised objections. He professes himself unsure about the meaning of the biblical texts in question and on the nature of biblical and traditional assertions on the matter. In his view it is not 9  For this section see in particular B. E. Daley, The Hope of the Early Church. A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology, Cambridge, 1991. 10  Daley, The Hope, p.  54.

724 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church clear whether those who are “bound and cast into outer darkness” will remain there forever or will some day be released. He seems to take the term “eternal” (aiônios) of the traditional formulation to mean “of long duration” rather than in the sense of “unending”. He was aware that the issue of the eternity of punishment was a sensitive one because of the importance of “eternal fire” as a deterrent for Christian moral behaviour. While granting this, he notes that “all torments of a good God are designed for the benefits of those who endure them” (Hom in Ezk 3). This medicinal, corrective, character of punishment has been concealed from those who are still “little ones” with regard to their spiritual age (Hom. in Ezek 3), but should be recognised as medicinal, nonetheless, to avoid presenting a picture of a cruel and judging God.11 Behind this teaching of Origen stood the conviction that ultimately all human souls will be saved, and will be united to God forever in contemplation. Origen’s views predominated in the East until the Council of Nicaea (325). Afterwards he had both admirers and critics. Jerome was at first an admirer, but in 394 turned violently against Origen and against John, the Origenist bishop of Jerusalem. The controversy flared up again in Palestine in the sixth century, and was carried to Constantinople by monks from Jerusalem. Councils of Constantinople in 543 and 553 condemned Origenism. What savoured of a moderately Origenist conception of the resurrection was later put forward by Eutychius, patriarch of Constantinople (died 582), while Gregory (then a deacon) was Papal representative there. Gregory engaged in a public debate with him and persuaded the Emperor Tiberius II to have Eutychius’s pamphlet burned. Gregory himself, in his Moralia in Iob, tells us of this debate. | Jerome (342–420) In 394 Jerome turned decidely anti-Origenist. His most detailed discussion on the qualities of the risen body are given in a lengthy section of his treatise To Pammachius against John of Jerusalem, written in 397. Here as part of an exceptionally strong attack on John, the Origenist bishop of Jerusalem, Jerome gives a detailed 11 

Daley, The Hope, p. 57.

48

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

725

refutation of what he considers to be the Origenist position. This Jerome repeats in his later letter (no. 108) to Eustochium on Paula (§§ 23–26), her mother, written after Paula’s death in 404. In the matter of explaining the punishment of sinners after death Jerome does not take up an anti-Origenist stance, nor does 394 appear to mark a turning-point in his beliefs on the matter. In some passages of his early writings he regards punishment as the anguish of a guilty conscience rather than as something inflicted from outside. Together with such statements, particularly in his later works, Jerome more frequently stresses the external punishments that await the devil and the enemies of Christ. However, he continued to affirm throughout his life that at least all those who believe in Christ will ultimately be received, by God’s mercy, into heaven.12 At the end of his Commentary on Isaiah, written between 408 and 410, after presenting once again, as the plausible position of “some people”, the theory that the traditional images of hell are really metaphors for the sufferings of the human conscience, and after giving the scriptural underpinnings for the hope of “some” that all punishment for sin will eventually end, Jerome himself concludes : “We should leave this to the knowledge of God alone, who holds in his scales not only mercy but punishments, and who knows whom he should judge, and in what way, and for how long. Let us only say, as befits our human fragility, ‘Lord, do not reproach me in your anger ; do not destroy me in your rage’ [Ps 6.1]. And as we believe that the devil and all apostates and impious sinners, who say in their heart, ‘There is no God’, will undergo eternal punishments, so we think that those who are sinners – even impious ones – and yet Christians will have their works tried and purged in fire, but will receive from the judge a moderate sentence, mingled with mercy” (on Isa 66.24). Daley comments that this is Jerome at his most generous, and perhaps at his most profound. While not part of Jerome’s own eschatological teaching, I may note here Jerome’s incidental mention in his letter (Epist. 72,2) to Vitalis the priest in 398 of the birth shortly before of Siamese or conjoined twins at Lydda. Jerome does so in the course of discus12 

Daley, The Hope, pp.  103-04.

726 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church sion of the marvels wrought by God as recounted in Scripture. Jerome’s letter entered the public domain, and its evidence presented a theological problem of which Augustine treats in his work Enchiridion (§ 87). Augustine (354–430) It is commonly agreed that the theologian who has most influenced the development of Latin eschatology, as indeed all Latin theology, was Augustine of Hippo.13 In most | of its details Augus- 49 tine’s teaching on the matter is thoroughly traditional. Augustine’s presentation of the subject, the questions he discusses, and his emphases derive from his meditation on the scripture, his preaching and his pastoral concerns. His reflections on the Bible are presented in his commentaries and sermons. All in all as a theologian he is a man of his age, in dialogue with the culture and problems of the late fourth and earlier fifth centuries. This is particularly true in the doctrine of the bodily resurrection. This was a matter of curiosity and ridicule for the learned pagans of the day, as is expressed very clearly by Augustine himself (De Civ. Dei 22,12). Augustine took these questions very seriously, and in the process has sketched out a concrete picture of what he imagined the resurrection to be. This is found especially in three passages : Sermo 242–43 (from 408–09) ; Enchiridion 23,84–93 (423–24) and De Civitate Dei 22,12–21 (A.D. 426). This Augustinian synthesis or teaching on the matter exercised great influence on Thomas Aquinas and later Latin scholasticism.14 It also influenced Irish syntheses on the subject from the eighth century onwards, as we shall see below. In regard to the doctrine that will later be formulated as purgatorial fire (ignis purgatorius) and purgatory, we do not find this in Augustine in the terms later to be used. However, throughout his life Augustine remained convinced that the souls of some of the dead, who are condemned to be punished immediately after death because of their sins, will be released from their punishment before God’s sentence of judgment is passed, either because, in their suffering, they have been “purged” of their attachment to

13  14 

Daley, The Hope, pp.  131–50. Daley, The Hope, p.  144.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

727

self, or because they have been helped to win God’s forgiveness by the prayers of their fellow Christians.15 With regard to Augustine’s teaching on rewards and punishments during the intermediate period before the resurrection and in the final state after the resurrection and general judgment, Brian E. Daley notes16 that Augustine defers the truly eschatological fate of the individual until the end of time itself, and makes it simultaneous with the collective judgment and the transformation of the whole community of rational creatures. While teaching that there is reward and punishment for souls immediately after death, nevertheless, “Augustine insists that the rewards and punishments experienced now by the souls of the dead are only a hint of their full eternal destinies, a dream of the reality that will come when their bodies have been raised (Serm. 328.6.5 [405/11] ; cf. Ep 159.4 [c. 414]). Even martyrs now in glory, though incomparably happier than we are, possess only “a small part of the promise, a consolation as they wait” (Serm. 280.5). “But when the resurrection occurs”, Augustine promises, “then the joy of the good will be greater, and the torments of the wicked worse, as they are tortured [or rewarded] along with their bodies” (Tract. in Evangelium Ioannis 49.10 [413]). In a few passages Augustine suggests that the souls of all the just immediately experience the transforming joy of God’s presence. … | However, Augustine never 50 speaks of this beatitude before the resurrection in terms of vision, or of the “angelic” activity of intuitive contemplation and ceaseless praise – the terms in which he describes the eternal state of the risen saints.”17 Daley, The Hope, pp. 138-39. Daley, The Hope, pp.  137-38. 17  Daley, The Hope, p.  249, refers in note 20 to E. Lamirande, L’Église céleste selon saint Augustin, Paris, 1963, p. 204, who differs on this point from D. J. Leahy’s apologetic attempts, in Saint Augustine on Eternal Life, London 1939, pp. 104–118, to bring Augustine’s theology into conformity with medieval Catholic teaching on the enjoyment of the beatific vision by the just after death. On p. 142 Daley, The Hope, adds :“Augustine was convinced, as I have already said, that the rewards of the good and the punishments of the wicked after death are only a partial anticipation of what they will be when body and soul are eternally united at the end of history” (cf. De civitate Dei 13. 19 [417/18]). So the souls of the departed just “look forward with patient longing for the resurrection of their bodies” (De civitate Dei 13.20), and are hindered 15  16 

728 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Julianus Pomerius18 and Caesarius of Arles In a study of the influences at work in the process that has given us the extant works on Irish eschatology, we should not forget that these may be traced in lesser known writers as well as the commonly known Great Fathers of the Church. It is useful to be aware of the diversity of opinion among the Fathers in eschatological teaching. I here note the writings of two of these earlier authors, Pomerius and Caesarius of Arles. Practically nothing is known about the life of Pomerius, an African rhetor who emigrated to Gaul in the late fifth century, where he became a priest and was widely admired as teacher and writer. For a brief period in 497 he had as student Caesarius, later bishop of Arles. His only extant work, On the Contemplative Life (in three books), shows a strong influence of Augustine in thought and style. In this work Pomerius describes the ideal of the contemplative and active lives. His distinction between the active and the contemplative life is founded on states of soul : that of the soul seeking perfection (the active life) and that of the soul possessing and enjoying it (the contemplative life). He begins his discussion of the contemplative life with a series of chapters on eternal beatitude and on the risen body (I,1–7), since contemplation which essentially consists in seeing God, will only be realised fully in eternity as the reward of the just (I,1.1). Although we can see God “in part” (I Cor 13.9) by meditative prayer and by a lived faith (I,6) Scripture makes it clear that the real vision of God is reserved, even for the pure in heart, for the future life (I,7). His Christian anthropology on the continuity of contemplation here from enjoying the full vision of God by their natural appetite for managing the body (De Genesi ad Litteram 12.35.68 [c.  414]). 18  On Julianus Pomerius see Daley, The Hope, pp. 205–07 ; M. J. Sulzer, “Pomerius”, New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol.  11, New York, 1967, p.  544-45 ; A. C. Prendergast, The Latinity of the De vita contemplativa (Patristic Studies 55), Washington, 1938 ; English translation of De vita contemplativa, by M. J. Sulzer, in Ancient Christian Writers, vol.  4, Washington, 1947 ; M. L. W. Laistner, “The Influence during the Middle Ages of ‘De vita contemplativa’ and its Surviving Manuscripts”, in Miscellanea Giovanni Mercati pt. 2, (Studi e testi 122), Vatican City, 1946, pp.  344–58 ; reproduced in Laistner, The Intellectual Heritage of the Early Middle Ages. Selected Essays, Ithaca, N, 1957, pp. 40-56.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

729

and hereafter is in the tradition of Clement of Alexandria and Origen. In many other themes both in thought and terminology he is in the tradition of Augustine, and was instrumental in extending his influence. His De vita contemplativa was renowned in the Middle Ages and widely disseminated. From the middle of the eighth to the late ninth century its authority all | but rivalled that of the 51 leading Latin Fathers. Boniface quoted from it in 747 ; it is mentioned some decades later by Chrodegang Bishop of Metz, and it is quoted in several Church Councils of the ninth century. Almost a hundred MSS of the work are known, of diverse provenance, and dating from the eighth to the fifteenth centuries. In their risen bodies and in eternal life the saints will have their natural qualities, once corrupted by sin, restored and will enjoy full bliss : id est intellectus sine errore, memoria sine oblivione, cogitatio sine pervagatione, caritas sine simulatione, sensus sine offensione, incoluminitas sine debilitate, salus sine dolore, vita sine morte, facilitas sine impedimento, saturitas sine fastidio, et tota sanitas sine morbo  … (De vita con.  I.4.2 ; PL 59, 422AB). “Understanding without error ; memory without forgetfulness ; thought without wandering ; charity without pretence ; sensation without sin ; soundness without weakness ; happiness without sorrow ; life without death ; facility without hindrance ; abundance without satiety ; and well-being in every respect without disease” (De Vita,trans. Sulzer, p.  22).

Already in an earlier account of the quality of the future life (I, 2) he wrote : Ergo futura vita brevitur beate sempiterna, et sempiterne beata, ubi est certa securitas, secura tranquillitas, tranquilla jucunditas, felix aeternitas, aeterna felicitas ; ubi est amor perfectus, timor nullus, dies aeternus, alacer motus, et unus omnium spiritus de contemplatione Dei sui… (PL 59, 420A). “The future life, then, is believed to be happily everlasting and everlastingly happy, where there is true security, secure tranquillity, tranquil happiness, happy eternity, eternal happiness ; where there is perfect love, no fear, everlasting day, a blissful freedom of movement, and one spirit in all secure in the contemplation of their God…” (trans. Sulzer, p.  19).

What interests us here is Caesarius’s teaching on the interim state. The Latin theologians at the Council of Ferrara (1437)

730 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church tried to support their arguments for the Western medieval doctrine of Purgatory with excerpts from the sermons of Caesarius. Brian E. Daley, following Jacques Le Goff,19 does not believe this can be found there. In a few homilies in the corpus of sermons (Serm. 206 ; 167 ; 179), with an apparent allusion to I Cor 3.11–15, Caesarius refers to a “purgative, purgatorius ignis, in which the less serious sins will be removed on the day of judgment. Daley notes that in all three of these sermons dealing with purgative punishment, Caesarius emphasised that it will affect both body and soul, and he identifies it with the process of judgment : there is no trace in his writings of the idea that such purgation will be accomplished in the “interim” between death and resurrection, nor does he show any particular interest in the fate of souls before the final judgment.20 | Gregory the Great Gregory’s teaching was highly influential in the development of medieval eschatology. Writers on the matter note that Gregory’s own reflections on the after-life are homely, restrained and traditional.21 While at Constaninople as papal representative he entered into a disputation with Eutychius, bishop of the city, on the nature of the risen body. This was shortly before Eutychius’s death in 582. Gregory reports this in his Moralia in Iob, where he speaks at length on the resurrection of the body. With regard to the after-life he stresses that the souls of the just go immediately to be with Christ in bliss at their death (Dialogi 4.26.1-2), even though their happiness will be all the greater when they are united with their bodies at the resurrection.22 Both the just in heaven and the damned in hell are “gathered into bundles” to experience their reward or punishment with those of similar deserts, since both joy and pain are enhanced by companionship. Although both the just and the damned will be able to see each other, at least in the time before the resurrection, and will experience still greater joy or pain as a result (Hom. in Ev.  2,40,8 ; 19  Daley, The Hope, p. 207–9 ; Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory, pp. 85–87, French original pp. 118–121. 20  Daley, The Hope, p.  209. 21  Daley, The Hope, p.  213-14. 22  Daley, The Hope, pp. 213-14.

52

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

731

PL 76, 1308D–1309B), only the inhabitants of heaven know what is happening on earth, because in contemplating God they know all things (Mor. in Iob 12,21,26 ; CCSL 143A, 644f.). With regard to the subject of a “cleansing fire” purgatorius ignis for lesser sins after death, Gregory expresses caution as Augustine did. Scripture tells us, he notes, that some sins can be forgiven “in the world to come”, consequently “we must believe in a cleansing fire before the judgment for certain minor faults – unnecessary talk or laughter, for example, or excessive concern for this world’s goods” (Dial. 4,41,3–4). He is uncertain, however, whether the purgation referred to by Paul in I Cor 3.12–15 is achieved in the “fire of suffering we experience in this life”, or “the cleansing fire of the world to come” (Dial. 4,41,3f.). He seems hesitant to speak of a third “place” for temporary, purgative, suffering after death. Nevertheless, he strenuously defends the usefulness of offering Masses for the souls of the dead, as bringing about pardon for their sins (Dial. 4,57), and his anecdote about the dead monk Justus, who is released from “the torments of fire” after the Eucharist has been offered for him for thirty consecutive days (Dial. 4,57,14–15) suggests he is thinking of this temporary purgation as having a distinctive venue of its own. The later Western notion of Purgatory, as well as the custom of offering “Gregorian Masses” for the recently deceased, drew much of its inspiration from this passage.23 | Late eighth century Irish synthesis : the Reference Bible “The Reference Bible” in the two manuscripts that preserve the New Testament section (Munich Clm 41277 ; Paris BN lat. 11561) is entitled Pauca problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis. The

23  Daley, The Hope, p.  214 ; Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory, pp.  88–95, who says (pp. 88-89). “To the doctrine of Purgatory Gregory the Great made three important contributions. In the Moralia in Iob he gives further details concerning the geography of the hereafter. In the Dialogi, along with the observations on doctrine, he describes souls expiating their sins before the Last Judgment. Finally, although his story of the Gothic king Theodoric, who is carried off to Hell, makes no mention of a specific place called ‘Purgatory’, it was later regarded as a very early clue to Purgatory’s earthly location”.

53

732 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church original composition dates from the later eighth century.24 Both manuscripts of the entire work are from the ninth century ; the Munich MS the beginning of the ninth century ; the Paris one, the middle or second half of the ninth century. The work is also preserved in excerpts, with a similar title. Two MSS of this excerpt form are known : Paris BN lat. 614A, second half of ninth century, or ninth-tenth century and Salisbury Cathedral MS 115, written in Salisbury Scriptorium by Group 2 scribes c. 1100–1125. This latter manuscript presents evidence of the use of the excerpted version in medieval England. There is very scant treatment of Mark’s Gospel in the Reference Bible : four folios in all (Paris MS fols 156r–169v), and within this just one folio for the entire Gospel up to the crucifixion, the remainder in good part on the differences between Mark’s gospel and the others on the time of the crucifixion and on the visit of the women to the tomb. In this brief treatment the text has a rather lengthy section on the general resurrection at the Last Day, in which it relies heavily on Augustine and Gregory the Great. It is an early form of a synthesis on the subject which we shall find in later Irish texts. Regarding the resurrection of Christ it has (Paris MS, fols 158ra–159ra) : X. Nota quod multum prophetatum est hoc miraculum resurrectionis Domini. Dauid dicit ex persona Patris : Exsurge gloria mea (Ps 56.9), reliqua. Item ex persona Christi : Propter miseriam inopum et (fol.  158rb) pauperum nunc exsurgam (Ps 11.6). Item ex persona ecclesiae : Exsurgat Deus et dissipentur (Ps 67.2). Item ex persona inferum : Exsurge, quare obdormis Domine ? (Ps 43.23). Item. Exsurge Domine non confortetur homo (Ps 9.20). Item. Caro mea requiescet in spe (Ps 15.9). Item. Caro eius non uidebit corruptionem (cf. Ps 15.10 ; Acts 2.31). Item : Omnis caro uidebit salutare Dei (Lk 3.6 ; cf. Isa 52.10). Item Iob dicit : Circumdabo [with r interlineated above final o] pellem meam et in carne mea uidebo Dominum (Job 19.26) … (fol.  158va)  … Nota quod nata est nobis uita in natiuitate Christi et lauati sumus a peccato Adae in baptismum eius, et renouata est See the contents of both the Old and the New Testaments in M. McNamara, “Plan and Source Analysis of Das Bibelwerk. Old Testament”, and J. F. T. Kelly, “Das Bibelwerk. Organisation and Quellenanalyse of the New Testament section”, in Ireland and Christendom, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1987, respectively pp. 84–112, 113–23. 24 

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

733

nobis sapientia in doctrina eius, et omnes caeci et claudi et leprosi sanati sunt per praesentiam carnis eius in mundo et soluti sumus a catenis peccati Adae per ligationem eius a Iuda et Iudaeis, et moritur nobis omnis (MS -nes, corr. to -nis) mors in morte eius, et clausus (MS clusus, corr. to et clausus) est infernus et regnum apertum est in sepulchrum eius, et resurgent omnes in iudicio per resurrectionem eius et ascendunt ad regnum patris per ascensionem eius. | ORIGINES DICIT :25 Utrum in loco cineris an in loco ossuum resurgent homines ? Id est, in loco ossuum, ut Ezechihel dicit : Ossa arida audite uerbum Domini (Ezk 37.4). His enim ostenditur quod unumquodque ad iuncturam suam prophetante eo succrescere neruos et carnes et postea cutem extensam. Inde spiritum a .iiii. uentis terrae in ea inflantem.26 Item : Utrum ex loco capitis an ex loco aliorum omnium ossuum resurgent homines quia aliquando separatur caput a membris ? Hoc est : ex loco capitis quia omnia membra secuntur caput. CESSARIUS DICIT : In qua aetate resurgent homines ? In .xxx. anno sicut Dominus noster in .xxx. annorum aetate passus est et re­ surrexit de sepulchro. Ita et nos iusti et peccatores in .xxx. annorum resurgimus ad iudicium, reliqua. ISIDORUS DICIT : Pascha ideo caelebratur quod eo die agno occisso in Aegypto, populus inde transiuit… Ideo non eodem die mensis sit semper in circulo anni quomodo Domini natiuitas propter dominicam diem resurrectionis. Iudei dies mensis nouorum et lunam obseruant .xiiii. nos diem dominicum ut nostra festiuitas a festo Iudaeorum. AUGUSTINUS DICIT :27 Informatus abortiuus quis non procliuius perire (MS : per ira) arbitretur sicut semina quae concepta non fuerint. 28 Sed quis negare audeat etsi adfirmare non audeat (MS : audiat) resurrectionem ut quicquid formae defuit adinpleatur et instaurabitur. Qui uero accipit uitam in utero, Deus scit utrum resurgit an non. Non bimembres (MS : bimembris) resurgunt, non caeci, non claudi reliqua. Sicut29 (MS : sed) restauratur metallum per liquationem in igne uel funditur (MS : fundetur) in massam per manus artificis et rursum intiger sine rubigine et crimine formosum redditur, ita Deus artifex totum corpus restaura-

25  Paris, BN lat.  614A and Salisbury (fol.  40v) have : INT(ERROGATIO). ORIG(ENES). Utrum in loco… 26  Paris 614A, Salisbury : a quatuor venti flantem. Augustinus : Abortum … See next note. 27  Paris 614A, Sal. (…uenti flantem.) Augustinus. Abortum qui non est formatum uelociter perit. Si quis negare audeat et si adfirmare non audeat resurrectionem quicquid formae defuit adimpleatur et instautabitur qui uero accepit uitam in utero Deus scit utrum resurget an non. 28  Augustine, Enchiridion, chapter 85 ; cf. De civitate Dei 22,13. 29  Cf. Augustine, Enchiridion, chapter 89.

54

734 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church bit sine crimine nec capilli ad capillos redeunt (MS : reddiunt) nec ungues ad ungues et non superfluum habebit et nihil deerit. Et caro et sanguis non possidebunt regnum Dei (I Cor 15.50), id est, corruptio incorruptionem possidebit (cf. I Cor 15.50 ; Vulg. : neque corruptio incorruptelam). HIERONIMUS DICIT :30 Non commedimus post resurrectionem sicut Christus fauum mellis | uel piscem assum uel panem edit post resurrectionem. Ille enim edit non ut uis faucibus originis mella promitteret sed ut ueram resurrectionem carnis dubitantibus probaret. Sicut Lazarus quatriduanus mortuus suscitatus cito comedit non quod famis ei fuisset apud inferos sed ut dificultas operis dubitationem fidei firmaret. GREGORIUS DICIT de resurrectione. : Christus resurgens a mortuis et mors reliqua (cf. Rom 6.8). Item Iob : Scio quod Redemptor meus uiuit et in nouissimo die de terra resurrecturus sum (Job 19.25). Item : In conspectu eius procedunt qui descendunt in terra (cf. Ps 21.30). Item propheta dicit : Emitte spiritum tuum et renouabis faciem terrae (Ps 103.30). Item : Exsurge Domine in requiem tuam, tu et arca sanctificationis tuae (Ps 131.8). Item : Nolite mirari hoc quod uenit hora in qua omnes qui in monumento sunt audient uocem eius et procedent qui bona fecerunt in resurrectionem uitae (Jn 5.28–29). Paulus dicit : Cre­ dimus quod Iesus Christus mortuus est et resurrexit ita Deus eos qui dormierunt per Iesum adducet cum illo (I Thess 4.13–15). Cur homo non resurgere creditur cum alia elementa resurgunt cotidie ?31 Sol enim moritur in nocte et in die resurgit. Sic et luna renouatur. Stelle uero mane occidunt, uespere resurgunt. Flores in aestiuo tempore resurgunt, in hieme cadunt. De resurrectione alii interrogat : Cum carnem hominis lupus edit, lupum leo deuorat, leo moriens ad puluerem redit, cum puluis ille suscitatur, quomodo caro hominis a lupi et leonis carne diuiditur ? Quibus respondims : O homo, si credis quod in utero matris spuma sanguinis fuisti, ibi quippe ex patris et matris semine et paruus et liquidus humor eras, dic, rogo, si nosti 30  Paris 614A, Salisbury : (resurget an non ; see note 26 above). INT(ERROGATIO). Manducabimus post resurrectionem an non, cum Christus edit post resurrectionem ? HIERONIMUS : Non comedimus post resurrectionem sicut Christo fauum mellis ; ille edit non ut tuis faucibus mella promitteret sed ( ?) ut ueram resurrectionem dubitantibus probaret. De resurrectione alii interrogant. cum carnem hominis lupum edit, lupum leo deuorat, leo moriens ad puluerem rediit, cum puluis ille suscitatur, quomodo caro hominis a lupo et leone carne diuiditur. Quibus respondimus. O homo, si credis quod in utero matris spuma sanguinis fuisti, ibi ex patre et matre semine et paruus liquidus humor eras, dic rogo si nosti, qualiter ille humor in ossibus perdurauitet in carnibus et in neruis et in unguibus. AMBROSIUS : Quid opus est paruuli qui habent parentes Christianos baptizantur ? 31  Cf. Gregory, Moralia 14, 70.

55

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

735

qualiter ille humor in ossibus perdurauit et in carnibus et in neruis et unguibus et cute reliqua. Si autem tanta ex uno semine per speciem distincta sunt, quid mirum si in illa resurrectione mortuorum carnem hominis distinquere ualet a carne bestiarum ut unus idemque puluis et non resurgat in quantum puluis lupi et leonis. Et tamen regurgat in quantum est puluis hominis. ITEM GREGORIUS DICIT : Christus solam mortem carnis pro nobis suscepit ut nos uiuificaret qui in morte spiritus et carnis tenebamur… (fol.  159vb)… AMBROSIUS DICIT : Quid opus est ut paruuli qui habent parentes Christianos ut iterum per baptismum renascantur, quanto magis is qui in utero matris est quando mater baptizatur nisi quia habent peccata Adae nisi baptizantur, ut Christus dicit : Nisi quis renatus fuerit, reliqua (Jn 3.5). Ille in resurrectione Christianorum erit.

Eschatology of the Catechesis Celtica (tenth century) (Irish) The Catechesis Celtica is the name given to the collection of items (mainly catechetical homilies) in the manuscript of the Vatican Library Reg. lat. 49. About one-third of this | work was published 56 by André Wilmart in 1933. 32 Wilmart regarded the work as of “Celtic” origin, but of Breton or Welsh provenance (preferably the former) rather than Irish. Shortly afterwards Paul Grosjean pointed out Irish characteristics of the collection. 33 His work was continued by others. 34 Reg. lat. 49 is in Caroline minuscule of the tenth century. It was, however, probably written in Ireland. 35 The work has strong Irish affiliations, with some of the items very close to Irish vernacular and Hiberno-Latin tradition. Other items, however, seem to have nonIrish affiliations, or at least are without proven Irish connexions. Among items at first sight without Irish affiliations are some with a theological or philosophical approach different from what 32  Analecta Reginensia. extraits des manuscrits latins de la Reine Christine au Vatican (Studi e Testi 50), ed. by A. Wilmart, Vatican City, 1933, pp. 29–112. 33  P. Grosjean, “A propos du manuscrit 49 de la Reine Christine”, Analecta Bollandiana 54 (1936), pp.  113–36. 34  D. Ó Laoghaire, “Irish Elements in the Catechesis Celtica”, in Ireland and Christendom, pp.  146–164 ; M. McNamara, “The Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp.  291–334 ; McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica (MS Vat. Reg. Lat. 49)”, Sacris Erudiri 34 (1994), pp.  185–237. 35  On the place of writing see McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 197-98.

736 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church we usually find in vernacular Irish or Hiberno-Latin texts. 36 Among these are three items, in which new or variant expositions of texts are introduced with the words Iterata sententia, not found elsewhere in this collection. 37 These may yet prove to be Irish in origin or affiliations. The citizens of heaven At the end of a long section on the birth of Christ (fol. 49vb), 38 one which seems very much in the Irish tradition, we have a passage on the second coming of Christ, which may also be taken as representing Irish tradition. It contains a listing of the damned and of the elect. The first group is the damned, to be thrown out from the Lord’s face into hell : gentiles et magi et heretici, peccatores et fornicatores, adulteri et scelerati, mentaces et periuri, auari et contentiosi, arrogantes et superbi. On the other hand stand : Sancti autem et iusti et uirgines et mar(tires) et humiles et mansueti et casti et penitentes et largi, coniugales quoque rationabiles39 et ueraces et mundum non diligentes, et omnes sancti. The first part of this text on the two comings of Christ (down to et omnes angeli cum eo) occurs again in another item of the Catechesis Celtica on the second coming of Christ (fols 50ra27–51ra12),40 but with a different continuation, which we shall consider below (page 745). We have another listing of the elect in another item of the Catechesis Celtica. This is a homily or catechesis on Jn 14.1–2. Non turbetur cor uestrum. Credite. In domu Patris | mei multae sunt man- 57 siones (fols 43v–45).41 This is a rather long exposition, and one of the three items (i.e. nos. 34–36) where variant expositions are introduced by the words iterata sententia, a phrase which is a feature proper to these three pieces. In the interpretation there is a On this see McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, esp. pp. 191–93. These are items no. 34–36 in McNamara’s enumeration. 38  Analecta Reginensia, ed. by Wilmart, p. 106. See McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 231–32 (no.  47). 39  Taking rationabilis as from rationabilis no.  4 ; see A. Blaise, Dictionnaire latin-français des auteurs chrétiens, Turnhout, 1954, p.  697 : “spirituel, mystique”. 40  McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 233-34 (no. 51). 41  Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia p. 65–71. It is item no. 36 in McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 222–24. 36  37 

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

737

text from Augustine (In Iohannem) and another from Cassiodorus. A number of passages from the Apocalypse are used, but the biblical text of these is not the Vulgate : it points rather to Spain or Southern Gaul. The sources for the comments on the Apocalypse have not been identified. Although there are no clear affiliations for this text, we feel justified in using it here. It may represent a Hiberno-Latin homiletic tradition otherwise unknown. And if not of Irish origin, even if written in Ireland, it may represent a new form of writing imported from abroad, which could have influenced later Irish writers in the vernacular or in Latin. The exposition is on Christ’s words of consolation to the apostles : “In my Father’s house there are many mansions”. The interpreter understands “house” of the text as referring sometimes to the universality of creatures, but may also mean the Church or the saintly soul. Then, as a variant interpretation, iterata sententia, the commentator says it is specially suited to denote heaven. He then lists the mansions in heaven : IX ordines angelorum … uirgines (as John, Paul the Apostle, Mary the mother of the Lord and innumerable others) ; martirum exercitus apud Christum, qui pro humano genere martirium perpetrauit ;… ubi penitentium chorus … cum LX mercedibus … ; Ubi coniugati fideles … cum XXX mercedibus ; … Ubi humiles… mansueti, patientes, pauperes, obedientes, misericordes. In the text cited occasional reference is made to the rewards, mercedes, of the elect. The text proceeds to discuss the diversity of rewards or mercedes without the presence of any envy : between martires and uirgines (C mercedes for each), between qui penitentiam egerunt (LX mercedes) and coniugati. The text goes on to say that scripture scholars ask how one single soul could receive and see these innumerable and ineffable rewards (Scripturae autem periti interrogant quomodo una anima has innumerabiles et ineffabiles mercedes capere uel uidere poterit). If we could only know who these scripturae periti were, we might have a good idea as the the place of origin of the piece. Fourfold division of souls : boni ualde ; boni non ualde ; mali ualde, mali non ualde42 In fols 50–51 of the Catechesis Celtica we have a passage on the second coming of Christ, following on the text of Mt 19.16–30. 42 

On these groups see Seymour, “Irish Visions”, pp. 191–97.

738 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church The second coming will be in majesty, as foretold in prophecy (citing Ps 96.3 ; 49.3 and Isa 13.9 following the LXX text, not the Vulgate). The text of Mt has Celtic/Irish readings. It speaks of the last judgment as follows :43 IIII familiae quae ascri(bentur) in iudicio. Duae familiae ex eis non uenient in iudicio, id est boni ualde et mali ualde. Sedebunt enim impii statim cum diabolo, | sicut sedebunt iusti et perfecti cum Christo. Aliae duo familiae uenient ante iudicem, idest boni non ualde et mali non ualde. Et iudicabit illas, atque illis dicetur : ITE et VENITE. Resurget impius ut damnaetur, iustus ut iudicet. Timendum est iudicium…

The fourfold division of souls and the designation of these as boni ualde, boni non ualde ; mali ualde, mali non ualde are both widespread in medieval Irish writing on eschatology. We have a fourfold division in the Vision of Tnugdal (A.D. 1149), even if only two have explicit designations, i.e. mali non ualde (XV) and the boni non ualde (XVI). The grouping and terminology are already found in the (Irish) Liber de numeris,44 (probably composed in the late eighth century) even though there the grouping is given under the number three (numbered below as III). The first occurrence is on the division of faith : Tribus tamen principalibus modis spes recta esse intelligitur, id est in ualde bonis et in ualde malis et in his qui nec ualde boni nec ualde mali (III.11). And again with regard to the last judgment in III.18 : Tres turmae in iudicio erunt : id est ualde boni, id est angeli Dei et sancti ; ualde mali, id est daemones et impii ; nec ualde boni nec ualde mali. Et hi tales per ignem purgabuntur. The terminology for each of these four groups seems ultimately to be based on Augustine’s Enchiridion 110, where Augustine is dealing with the question of the benefit to the souls of the dead from the sacraments and alms of their living friends. “When, then, sacrifices, either of the altar or of alms are offered on behalf of all the baptized dead, they are thank-offerings for the very good (pro valde bonis), they are propitiatory offerings for the not very bad (pro non valde malis), and in the case of the very bad (pro valde malis), even though they do not assist the dead, they are a species Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 110. R. E. McNally, Der irische Liber de numeris, Munich, 1957, pp.  54-55, with reference to other texts. 43 

44 

58

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

739

of consolation for the living”. Terminology apart, however, the content of what is said on these four groups seems clearly to depend on Gregory, Moralia in Iob 26,27,50 (PL 75,378–79). Gregory, commenting on Sed non saluat impios, et iudicium pauperibus tribuit, Job 36.6, writes : Reproborum alii judicantur, alii non judicantur. – Duae quippe sunt partes, electorum scilicet, atque reproborum. Sed bini ordines eisdem singulis partibus continentur. Alii namque judicantur et pereunt, alii non judicantur et pereunt. Alii judicantur et regnant, alii non judicantur et regnant… (§ 50).  There are in truth two classes, namely, of the Elect and the reprobate. But two ranks are comprised in each of these classes. For some are judged and perish ; others are not judged and perish. Some are judged and reign ; others are not judged and reign. They are judged and perish, to whom it is said in our Lord’s declaration, “I hungered, and you gave me not to eat ; I thirsted, and you gave me not to drink…”. To whom it is before said, “Depart from me, you cursed…”. But others are not judged in the last judgment, and yet perish. Of whom the Prophet says, “The | ungodly do not rise again in the judgment”. And of whom the Lord declares, “But he that believes not is judged already”. And of whom Paul says, “They who have sinned without the Law, shall perish without the Law”. Therefore even all unbelievers rise again, but to torment and not to judgment. For their case is not then examined ; because they come into the presence of their strict Judge, with the condemnation already of their own unbelief. For those, who retain their profession of faith, but have not works in accordance with it, are convicted of sin, in order to their perishing. But they who have not enjoyed even the sacraments of faith, do not hear the reproof of the Judge at that last ordeal ; for, condemned already by the darkness of their own unbelief, they do not deserve to be condemned by the open reproof of him, whom they have despised. (§  51).  But of the class of the Elect, some are judged and reign. As those, who wipe away with their own tears the stains of their life, who, atoning their former misdeeds by their subsequent conduct, conceal from the eyes of their Judge, with the cloak of alms deeds, whatever unlawfulness they may have ever committed. To whom  … the Judge says at his coming : “I hungered, and ye gave me to eat. Come, ye blessed.…” But others are not judged and yet reign ; as those, who surpass even the precepts of the Law in the perfection of their virtues ; because they are by no means satisfied with fulfilling that which the Divine Law enjoins on all, but with surpassing eagerness desire to perform more than they would

59

740 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church learn from general precepts. To whom it is said by the voice of the Lord : “Ye have left all and have followed me … you shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Mt 19.28).  … These, therefore, are not judged in the last judgment, and yet reign, because they come as judges together with their creator.45

Gregory’s text adduces scriptural evidence (for the greater part not reproduced above) for the various statements on those who are to arise and not arise on the Day of Judgment. The piece, in fact, seems built around certain scripture texts and is an attempt to synthesise biblical texts on these points. The principal texts are as follows : They shall be judged and perish, those to whom it is said : “Depart…” (Mt 25.42,43 ; 25.41). They shall not be judged and perish, as in Ps 1.5 (“The wicked shall not arise in judgment”), and Jn 3.18 (“The one who does not believe is already judged”) ; also Rm 2.12. For the elect (Moralia par. 51), some shall be judged and reign, as in Mt 25.35 (“I was hungry…”) and 25.34 (“Come…”). Others shall not be judged and reign, qui etiam praecepta legis perfectione virtutum transcendunt, e.g. those who have left all, who shall sit and judge (Mt 19.28 ; also Isa 3.14 ; Prov 31.23). | It seems clear that Irish eschatology is in the tradition of that 60 of Pope Gregory’s Moralia. An indication as to how consciously this text of Gregory’s work became the basis for medieval homiletic reflection can be seen in the Cracow Catechesis no. 13 (MS Cracow, Cathedral Chapter 43 ; now 140 Kp, from c. A.D. 800, Verona or environs), also found in other texts, principally Karlsruhe, Aug. CXCVI (9th century), as chapter 15. This catechesis is a homily or exposition on Mt 25.31. Cum uenerit Filius hominis in maiestate sua et omnes angeli cum eo, tunc sedebit super sedem maiestatis sue. It goes on to speak of the coming in majesty, as foretold in prophecy (Pss 49.3 ; 96.2–3 cited). In the exposition of Matthew’s text it cites from Jerome’s commentary by name. It then goes on to say : Gregorius dicit in Moralibus Iob  : In quattuor partis (thus MS) diuident homines in die iudicii. Prima pars apostoli et similes eorum qui non iudicantur, sed illis iudices erunt, sicut dixit Domi-

45  The translation of Gregory’s text is taken from The Morals on the Book of Job by S. Gregory the Great (A Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, vol. 3), Oxford, 1847, pp. 171–73.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

741

nus de illi : Sedebitis et uos super sedes duodecim iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel. Secunda pars bonorum communis iusti, qui iudicabuntur sed in regnum ibunt. Tertia pars malorum impii, qui non crediderunt Deum de quibus dicit in psalmo : Ideo non resurgunt impii in iudicio (Ps 1.5), quia non iudicabuntur sed tollentur ne uideant gloriam Dei. Quarta pars peccatoris de quibus : neque peccatores in consilio iustorum.

On the five dwelling places of souls before judgment (Reg. lat. fols 49vb– 50ra) This is the second of three pieces on separate topics which come one after the other. The piece preceding it is on “Baeemoth” (Behemoth), that following on Almsgiving. This item is headed : V loca in quibus fiunt animae usque ad diem iudicii. It is related to the earlier piece on the four groups of souls, but differs in that, while two are said not to be for judgment (the apostles, etc. in the kingdom of heaven, primus locus ; and the unbelievers in “the chief hell”, infernus principalis, in III locus), it makes explicit mention of the coming to judgment only of one group (the patriarchs, prophets and martyrs in the Paradise of Adam, secundus locus). It also differs in that it has five dwelling places for these souls, not four. The fourth and fifth places (locus lucis, locus caliginis) may well be for the boni non ualde and the mali non ualde. The final paragraph speaks of the possibility of redemption for the two groups in the final two places, locus lucis and locus caliginis. Where these are located is said to be uncertain. It is clear that at the time of composition, souls of the departed were all believed to be in places, some of them known (the kingdom of heaven, the Paradise of Adam under the Caucasus mountains), some of the locations unknown (the two final places). This seems to be an interesting text in the evolving theology and geography of the dwelling places of souls. (fol.  50r).  Primus locus est qui uocatur regnum celorum in quo fiunt animae apostolorum et sanctorum dilectissimorum quibus non est ad iudicium peruenire, quia custodierunt omnia mandata Dei, qui liberi ad aeclesias ac reliquias eorum ad adiuuationem possunt peruenire. | Secundus locus est qui est paradisus Adae in quo fiunt animae patri- 61 archarum et profetarum et martirum, et ad iudicium perueniunt quia iudicari necesse est quique paradiso custoditur, id est muro igneo ; et iste paradisus tertia pars mundi connumeratur, aut sub montibus Caucasi consistit isti paradisus.

742 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church III locus est qui est infernus principalis in quo fiunt animae peccatorum gentilium, id est impiorum, qui numquam crediderunt mandata Dei ; et ad iudicium non perueniunt, quia nil boni fecerunt. IIII locus est lucis in quo fiunt animae peccatorum in quibus minima peccata uidentur. V locus est caliginis qui est tenebrosus in quo fit medius gradus peccatorum. His suspensis in suis peccatis uidentur impii ; et redemi possunt qui in loco lucis et caliginis consistunt, et incertum habetur ubi habitant.

Text on “V Inferni” (fol. 20r) This short piece seems to be an excerpt.46 No source or affiliation has been identified for it. Part of the original text may be lost, since nothing is said of the third (mors) or the fifth kind of hell, i.e. pena. V inferni sunt : I. dolor ; I : senectus. III : mors, IIII : sepulcrum, V. pena. Dolor comparatur inferno, quia si habuisset homo omnes substantias quibus homines in hoc mundo uti solent, letus fieri non potest, ut dicit filius Serac : Non est census super censum salutis corporis (Si 30.16). II. Senectus assimilatur inferno, quando V sensus in exitum exeunt. Nam oculi caliginant, aures sordescunt, gustus non bene discernit, odoratus uitiatur, tactus rigescit ; sed et dentes denudantur, lingua balbutiat, pectus licoribus grauatur, pedes tremore et tumore tumescunt, manus ad opus debilitantur, canities floret, et corpus omne infirmatur, sed sensus diminuitur. Sepulcrum etiam infernus est : ubi terra terrae redditur, cibi cadauer uermibus exhauritur ; ubi limo caro miscetur ; ubi aures et os et oculi III impletionibus replentur : primo cruore, II uermibus, III humo ; ubi ossa arida redatis (MS ; redactis) pulueri carnibus remanent.

The pains of Hell and the joys of Heaven In the Catechesis Celtica (fols 19v–20r) at the end of a catechesis on Gen 1.1–26 (fols 18va–20ra) 47 we have another description of the pains of hell and of the joys of heaven. The lengthy text is headed Hoc ad solemnitatem paschae conuenit, and is clearly intended for 46  Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p.  44 ; McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, p.  209 (no. 21). 47  Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, pp.  39–44 ; see McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 208-09.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

743

the Easter liturgy. This entire item stands very much within the Irish tradition. The work of six days is regarded as having been by means of six divisions, “as Augustine said”. The reference to Augustine has not been identified. Nor indeed has the Augustine, who may have been an Irish writer. In the fifth division the earth produced animals, creeping things of the earth and the beasts. Finally, man was created | in the image and likeness of God. As 62 the text says : “Now, the image consists in the holiness and the eternity of the soul, as Gregory says in the book on the choirs of heaven in libro de gradibus caeli.” This book, too, is unknown, although in another Hiberno-Latin text it is ascribed to Augustine. It, too, may be of Irish origin. The text has much to say on the dignity of man. God gave “the royal hall of the world” aulam regiam mundi with all it contains to man. This royal hall fell with Adam, and would be restored for us by Christ. This new hall would be the Church of the New Testament. In this new hall he created heaven, that is men of the contemplative life, and earth, that is men of the active life.48 The human person is called a microcosm. He is God’s royal hall, and will be God’s house if he makes himself holy, God’s temple, holy to God, because God dwells only in what is holy, as it is said (cf. Wis 1.5) :“The holy spirit flees from what is contrived”.49 Whoever wishes to become the house of God must place six guards to guard himself. These are given as : daily thought of death ; strong faith in God from a pure heart ; sorrow for past sins ; perfect (good) work ; perfect fear of the Lord ; good self control. The person who neglects these six guards has his house occupied by the devil. Such people will be thrown into the deep pit of hell, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, fire that is not extinguished, and snow without ceasing, where there will be no lack of beasts or worms, where the enemy, the devil, will be seen, where sighing and weeping will be heard, where there is no smell but that of stench, where only bitterness is tasted, where there is light that gives no light lux sine luce, where death will be asked for but not given. On the contrary, the wicked and the sinners will be eternal, in eternal pain, with the eternal demon. Those, however, who will have been watchful 48  49 

Latin text Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 41, line 99. Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 43, lines 155–57.

744 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church and prudent concerning the guard, placing the aforementioned six guards to guard them will be holy temples of God, built on the exalted foundation of faith, and afterwards they will be raised up on the sublime mountain of the heavenly kingdom, where there will be life without end, joy without sorrow, youth without old age, health without pain, light without darkness ubi erit uita sine fine, letitia sine tristitia, iuuentus sine senectute, sanitas sine dolore, lux sine tenebris ; where enemy will not be seen and there will be heard only the spiritual song of praise of Our Lord Jesus Christ ; where only the sweetest of odours will be smelled ; where only sweetness will be tasted ; where eternal rewards will be given to the saints for ever, with God everlasting for ever and ever.50 The seven joys not found in this world In the Catechesis Celtica (fol. 20va), as the fifth in a collection of six excerpts (of which that on the V inferna given above is no. 1), we have a piece on “The seven things not found in this world” (but are part of heavenly bliss).51 The piece is well attested in Irish tradition : Ps.-Bede, Collectanea (PL 94, 545D), Ps.-Isidore, Liber de numeris VII, 18 | (cf. McNally, p. 116), in the Leabhar Breac 63 in Latin at the end of the homily on the Epiphany :52 Iusti autem ibunt in uitam eternam ; ubi iuuentus sine senectute, uita sine morte, Christus cum patriarchis, Christus cum martiribus et cum uirginibus. The Catechesis Celtica text reads : VII sunt quae homo in hoc mundo habere non potest, si rex fuisset totius mundi : uita sine morte, iuuentus sine senectute, letitia sine tristitia, pax sine discordia, lux sine tenebris, sanitas sine dolore, regnum sine commotatione. Et haec omnia inueniuntur in regno celorum. Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 43. Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p.  46, item no.  25 in McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, p. 210. 52  The Passions and Homilies from the Leabhar Breac, ed. by R. Atkinson, Dublin 1887, p.  240. Part of this sevenfold list is found in other texts, thus in a pseudo-Augustinian sermon, no. 250 (PL 39, 2210, line 7) : ubi est satietas sine fame, ubi est lux sine tenebris, juventus sine senectute, requies sine labore, a sermon possibly dependent on Caesarius of Arles, cf. G. Morin, CCSL 104, p.  983 ; see also Clavis Patristica Pseudepigraphorum Medii Aevi, vol.  1. Opera Homuletica 1A, CCSL, ed. by I. Machielsen, Turnhout, 1990, no.  1035, line 4 : Ubi est lux sine tenebris et vita sine morte, ubi est laetitia eterna et gaudium sine fine, ubi majora et meliora bona spiritualia. 50  51 

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

745

The two comings of Christ, the first in humility, the second in glory At the end of a series of texts on the birth of Christ (fols 30v– 31v ; 48–49v), already considered above (page 736), there is a passage contrasting the two comings of Christ, the first in humility, the second in majesty. This text begins with the first appearance at Christmas (fol. 49v),53 and goes on to his second coming, one to be feared. In a text already cited above (page 736) it tells of the judgment, listing those consigned to hell’s fires, and the elect who are to enjoy the bliss of heaven. The same topic is the subject of an entire item later in the Catechesis Celtica (fols 50ra–51ra).54 Primus aduentus in humilitate fuit et mansuetudine. … Secundus autem aduentus eius in maiestate fulgebit … Cauendum est nobis … Et tunc ueniet Dominus in maiestate sua et omnes angeli cum eo, et congregabuntur omnes per potestatem regis, ut profaeta dicit : Omnes gentes quascumque fecisti uenient et orabunt coram te, Domine (Ps 85.9). Et audient omnes uiui et mortui qui fuerunt et sunt et erunt tubam archangeli resuscitantis. Et in illo die nihil ualebit angelus uel homo uel rex nisi Deus solus, et separabit peccatores ab iustis, sicut plumbum ab argento, zesania a tritico, et congregabit triticum in horrea, paleas autem comburet igni inextingibili. In triplici forma uidebitur. pulcer ut luna, id est iustis ; electus ut sol,  ; terribilis ut gladius, id est impiis (fol.  50va).

Next there follows immediately the text on the four groups (here in Irish fashion called familiae) to appear at the judgment scene. This has already been cited above (page 738). The text then continues (fol. 50vb6) : | Timendum est iudicium. Etiam iusti timent. Timuit Paulus, dicens : Horrendum est in manus domini omnipotentis incedere (Heb 10.31). Timuit Dauid, dicens : Si iniquitates obseruaueris, Domine, quis sustinebit ? (Ps 129.3). Et iterum : Domine, ne in furore tuo arguas me (Ps 6.2 ; 37.2). Timuit Iob, dicens : columnae caeli contremescunt et pauent ad nutum eius (Job 26.11). Quid ergo faciunt tabulae, id est homines, quando tremescunt columnae, id est angelicae uirtutes ? Quid uirgula deserti patitur cum cedrus paradisi concutitur ? 53  Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p.  106 ; McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 231-32 (no. 47). 54  Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, pp.  108–111 ; McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 233-34 (no. 51).

64

746 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Vae illis super quos effundet Dominus omne iudicium suum in illo die, dicens : Ite (Mt 25.41). Vae illis qui separabuntur ab angelis et archangelis et omnibus sanctis et Deo semet ipso dicente : Ite […text missing…] et tremore dicente Domino : Maledicti ! Vae illi homini qui expectat hunc diem cum malo merito, si prius ei non eueniat dies confessionis peccatorum suorum antequam exierit de corpore suo. Vae illis quibus dicet Dominus : Ite in ignem aeternum qui praeparatus est diabolo et familiae eius (cf. Mt 25.41), ubi erit fletus et stridor dentium (cf. Mt 22.13), ubi uermes non moriuntur, ubi ignis sine extinctu (cf. Isa 66.24), ubi labor sine requie, ubi tristitia sine letitia, ubi tenebrae sine luce, ubi dolor sine fine. Non sic erit sanctis et iustis. Beati illa quos uocauerit Dominus primo, dicens : Venite ! Beati, quos benedicet Dominus coram tribus familis caeli et terrae et inferni, dicens : Benedicti ! Beati quibus dicet : Possidete regnum quod uobis paratum est ab origine mundi (cf. Mt 25.34). Longo tempore praeparatur uobis ista cena, quam nec oculus uidit, id est nullus defunctus sanctorum uidit, nec uidebit usque ad iudicium.

The tenor of the entire text is Irish, and it continues with the following ending, very much in Irish tradition (fol.  50vb) : Beati quibus dabitur altum rus angelorum sine curis, ubi est dies sine nocte, tranquillitas sine uento, gaudium sine fine, ubi sunt VII quae nullus in hoc mundo habere potest, etiamsi fuisset rex totius mundi : uita sine morte, iuuentus sine senectine, 55 letitia sine tristitia, pax sine discordia, lux sine tenebris, sanitas sine dolore, regnum sine commotatione. Beati qui habitant cum Abel et Enoc et Noe, cum Abraham et Isac et Iacob, cum Moise et Aaron et Iesu filio Nun, cum XII profaetis, cum XII apostolis, cum omnibus sanctis ab initio mundi usque in finem, cum IX ordinibus angelorum, cum Patre et Filio et Spi­ ritu Sancto, in pace et laetitia, in puritate et in iuuentute, sine fame et nuditate, cum abundantia omnis boni sine ullo malo, circa regem iuuenem, largum, pulcrum aeternum. | Rogamus Deum omnipotentem ut mereamur possidere illam beatitudinem in saecula saeculorum. Amen.

Reflection on the vanity of earthly riches ; on the joys and rewards of heaven In the Catechesis Celtica (fols 39rb–40va)56 we have a lengthy reflection on Mt 6.33 : Querite primum regnum Dei et iustitiam eius, et

55  senectine ; thus MS reading, for senectute of earlier Catechesis Celtica (fol. 20v) and Leabhar Breac texts (no. vi above). Wilmart, Analecta Reginensia, p. 111 emends to senectute. 56  McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 217-18 (no. 32).

65

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

747

haec omnia praestabuntur uobis. This catechetical piece illustrates its message principally by Scripture citations, several of the texts including the word querite. Without direct quotation, there seems to be a strong influence from Ecclesiastes, in texts given as coming from sapiens. The author in some other passages has a philosophical approach to the subject. The exact sources he uses in these texts, however, remain to be determined. He remains close to his theme on the deceitfulness of riches, and on God being one’s true treasure. Nam cum diligimus Dominum, in ipso omnia reperimus. Vnus est qui queritur, sed in quo omnia continentur ; et quamuis in hoc saeculo longeuitas desideretur, certum est quod habeat finem. Inde sapiens dixit : Non est quod conparetur aeternitati, quoniam non habet finem. Omne finitum infinito conparari non potest. Quis computaret preteritos annos quos iam non tenebat cum aliquando peruenisset ad finem ? (fol.  39vb16–22).

Human existence passes by swiftly. We should rather seek our eternal dwelling-place. Nam ita erit sanctis regni celestis habitatio perpetua. Ibi enim non expectatur senectus nec dolor timetur nec erit finis. … Haec itaque habitatio querenda est nobis, ubi est aeternitas uestrae habitationis (fol.  39vb26).

He goes on to describe the eternal feast, with its choice foods and wines, and the heavenly music (fols 39vb33–40ra28) : Quamuis item in hoc saeculo epulae et dulces dapes desiderentur, magnus labor est earum operatio, et dolorem aliquando incutiunt ; et quamuis multum amentur, habent fastidium. Non ita erit sanctorum refectio in caelis. Non enim ipsi laborabunt ad operandum. Non sacietas fastidium ipsis prestabit, sed sicut angeli satiabuntur, sicut scriptum est : Panem caeli dedit eis (Jn 6.31)  … Mirabilis est autem illa refectio ubi nullum tedium, nulla satietas est : sed quanto quis plus hauserit, tanto amplius dulcia perquirit, sicut scriptum est : Quam magna multitudo dulcedinis tuae, Domine ! (Ps 30.20). Haec refectio nobis querenda est cum terrena relinquenda. Licet item diues in terra multas habuerit opes et sapores, numquam potuerit de eis capere nisi prandium unius uiri. Animarum autem in caelis refectio non sic erit ; nam una anima, C uel CC animis eo amplius, secundum suum meritum capere et uidere potuerit mercedes. Quamuis item uinum et potus bonus in terra desiderentur, quia ea biberit | postea sitiet. Non sic erit potus caelestis quem sanctis Dominus dabit de quo dixit.

66

748 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church qui sitit, ueniat ad me et bibat. Qui enim eum biberit numquam sitiet, sicut ad Samaritanem saluator dixit. Qui biberit ex aqua quam ego dabo ei, non sitiet in aeternum (Jn 4.13). Ideo, Iohannes in Apocalipsis dicit : Qui sedet in throno proteget eos. Non esurient neque sitient amplius (Rev 7.15). Haec itaque saturatio nobis querenda est, sicut nos Deus ad ipsam uocauit dicens. Venite, manducate de meis panibus, et bibite uinum quod miscui uobis (cf. Prov 9.5). Item, etiam si in terra dulces et sonorae desiderentur musae, hoc est citharistarum et auium cantus et alarum multarum, paruo tempore dilectant aures ; postquam enim cessauerint non memorantur nec reficiunt. Aliquando autem fastidium habent, sicut prouerbium est, etiam citharista modulus cessat. Non ita est XXIIII seniorum et animalium IIII pennatorum carmen perpetuum quod numquam cessabit, de quo dictum est in Apoc.

The text goes on to cite the relevant texts of the Apocalypse on the heavenly chant and on the joy of the elect, in comparison with which all earthly joy is seen as worthless. It is joy unending (fol.  40rb27) : Cum enim ad istam beatitudinem praeuenerimus, nulla erit tristitia, nullus timor, nulla mors. Cessante enim omni iniquitate, omni miseria, omni merore, totum innocentia, totum letitia, totum felicitas, totum possidebit caritas.

The texts ends with a hope and a prayer (fol. 40va) : De qua gloria Dauid dixit : Satiabor cum aparuerit gloria tua (Ps 16.15) quia gloriam possidebimus, Deo donante, qui cum Patre uiuit et regnat in secula seculorum.

Reflection on John’s vision of eternal reward The Catechesis Celtica (fols 43vb–45rb)57 has a long reflection on Christ’s words that there are many mansions in his Father’s house. We have already treated of this text above (in pages 736-37), and of the problems arising regarding its Irish origin or affiliations. We have also considered its listing of the angels and saints in heaven. In the section which interests us here the author first justifies his understanding of domus of Christ’s words as meaning heaven : Iterata sententia. In domu Patris mei, et reliqua. Haec domus specialiter caelo conuenit. 57 

McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, pp. 222–24 (no. 36).

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

749

After this he goes on immediately to comment on the words mansiones multae. These for him indicate the angels and the saints in heaven. In this he differs from Augustine in his homily (Tractatus 67 on Jn 14.1–3) who understands mansiones as heavenly rewards. Our author’s listing of the angels and saints has been given above (pages 736-37). | Having completed his listing of these groups of angels and 67 saints, he immediately goes on to speak of the difference in reward enjoyed by the different groups and individuals, without there being any jealousy or envy between them because of this. In this the author depends on Augustine’sTractatus on this text of John,58 with occasional direct citation. It is linked with the earlier part of this item (with explicit reference to his earlier listing of the saints), with material not in Augustine. Next the author moves on to consider the vision of the blessed in the Apocalypse of John, and from the biblical text is led to give glosses, the sources of which have not been identified. All this Catechesis Celtica material seems to merit detailed study in the interests of a fuller understanding of the Irish tradition regarding the otherworld. Tenth century Irish synthesis : Scéla na Esérgi The text Scéla na Esérge is found only in the manuscript LU 34a24–37b20, where it is an interpolation by the scribe known as H. The dating of H’s writing has been a subject for differing opinions.59 Stokes in his edition of the text dates it to the turn of the twelfth century.60 Professor Gearóid Mac Eoin now believes that the composition itself may be assigned to the tenth century.61 Very little study of the text or of its sources has been done since it was first edited. In Stokes’s opinion : “Next to the Vision

Augustine, Tractatus 67 in Iohannem 14.1–3. Lebor na hUidre. Book of the Dun Cow, ed. by R. I. Best  – O. Bergin, Dublin, 1929, pp.  82–88. See Seymour, “Irish Visions of the Otherworld” (above note 5), p.  121. 60  W. Stokes, “Tidings of the Resurrection”, Revue Celtique 25 (1904), pp. 232–59, at 232. 61  G. Mac Eoin in personal communication with the present writer, December 1994. 58  59 

750 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church of Adamnán … and the Tidings of Doomsday [this] tractate is the most important document now existing for the study of the eschatology of the medieval Gaels”62 . His words were repeated almost verbatim by James Kenney a quarter of a century later.63 Forty-six years after Kenney’s work the text was listed among Irish Apocrypha by Martin McNamara.64 As to sources for the piece, Stokes wrote that he was too unfamiliar with patristic and medieval eschatology to point them out with confidence. He notes, however, that the Irish writer seems to translate from a nameless person whom he calls “the author” (in t-augtar) in § 14, the “authority” (augtaras) in § 33 ; “the sage” (in t-ecnaid) in §§ 30, 36, 37. The Irish writer quotes, or refers to, the Bible in §§ 2, 8, 10, 16, 27, 28. Augustine is expressly mentioned, Stokes notes, in § 12, and De Civitate Dei is drawn upon in § 11. The refutation by St Gregory (Stokes adds with a question mark : Nazianzenus) of the heretical opinion of Eutyches § 10, Stokes has not traced. | The sources for most of the Irish text can, in fact, be traced.65 68 The two principal ones are St Augustine, mainly the De Civitate Dei, also, to a lesser degree, the Enchiridion, and the Moralia in Iob of Pope Gregory the Great. There are a few passages for which no source has as yet been traced, notably one in § 23 of Stokes’s edition on what the general resurrection is not. It is not clear whether the Irish author is directly using Augustine and Gregory or is drawing on some work in which both these Fathers of the Church are used. This work may be that of the person referred to as “the author” in t-augtar, as the “authority” augtaras, as “the sage” in t-ecnaid. This piece Scéla na Esérgi is not in the form of a homily or vision, but is rather a theological treatise, heavily dependent on the theological synthesis on the resurrection that was being put together from the early Middle Ages onwards. Stokes, “Tidings”, p.  232. Kenney, Sources, p. 738. 64  M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975, p.  141 (§  107). 65  For source identification of each of the paragraphs of the work see M. McNamara, “Patristic background to medieval Irish exegetical texts, Appendix”, in Scriptural interpretation in the Fathers. Letter and Spirit (Proceedings of the Second Patristic Conference, June 1993), ed. by T. Finan  – V. Twomey, Dublin, 1995, pp. 276–81. 62 

63 

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

751

The questions dealt with are those which exercised the enquiring minds of Augustine’s and Gregory’s day, and the answers given are basically the answers of these two Fathers. There is emphasis on the corporeality of the risen body, the problems of the restitution of excess hair, or the nails, the problems posed (for belief) by aborted foetuses, by Siamese twins citing Augustine, Enchiridion 87.66 Despite its heavy reliance on Augustine and Gregory, and the extent of the information it gives on so many details, the author himself seems to stand back from his sources, and expresses a note of caution on our uncertainty on many issues. He writes : “So then this is probably what we should believe in the case : that the completeness of the whole human body is to be renewed in the resurrection, so that the soul united to it in that wise may receive whatever it deserves of punishment or rewards for their ill deserts or their good deserts”. This leads on to the recognition of legitimate doubt in the paragraph that follows (§ 16) : “For precaution then, and for avoidance of presumption, that is, of affirming what is not lawful to affirm, but what should properly remain in doubt, this variety of opinion exists. For though some of the mysteries of the resurrection are certain and manifest – for, according to the teaching of the apostle and the rest of the Scripture, the Resurrection itself is sure to come – yet others are uncertain and obscure. So that it is more prudent and wiser that they should be hoped for and supposed than that they should be boldly affirmed”. No precise source has been identified, but see Augustine, Enchiridion 87 : “That the bodies of all the dead shall rise again is certain beyond doubt”. After this the author goes on to treat of the resurrection of woman as women : there will be no lust in the risen bodies ; the risen bodies will be palpable (§§ 19–20), with reference to Gregory’s debate on the matter with Eutychius, bishop of Constantinople (as recounted in Gregory’s Moralia in Job 14,72–74 (on Job 19.26) ; it will be spiritual. | The Irish writer treats of the complete 69 joy of the blessed after the resurrection ; also of the resurrection of the impious ; then on the two resurrections (as in Augustine, De civ. Dei 20,6). In a passage (§ 33) with reference to his “author66 

See above pp. 725-26.

752 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ity”, but otherwise for the greater part as yet unidentified, he tells his reader what the general resurrection is not. “Now the general resurrection which shall be beyond the Day of Judgment is not the same as the resurrection which in the authority isind augtaras is called Praestrigia, that is, an apparitional resurrection, like the pythonism esergi fuathaigthi, amal in pitóndacht. Nor is it the same as the resurrection called Revolutio, that is, the transmigration of souls in various bodies tathcor na hanma i corpaib ecsamlaib, after the example of transmigrated persons iar ndesmirecht na tathcorthe. Nor the resurrection called Metaformatio, that is, transfiguration after the examples of the werewolves tarmchrutad, iar ndesmirecht na conricht. Nor is it the same as Subductio, that is subduction, as in the case of the prematurely dead fothudchestu .i. amal bite lucht in remeca. Nor is the resurrection called suscitatio, that is, the awakening of the dead by a miracle toduscud, after the example of Lazarus.” For Revolutio (and Pythagorianism) the text is probably ultimately dependent on Augustine, De civitate Dei, 22,12,1. The entire piece probably represents a long development from various sources on the matter. In conclusion we may say that Scéla na Esérgi is a form of theological treatise on the resurrection of the body, built up over the centuries, in continuation of what had already begun in the Irish Reference Bible (c. 800). It does not appear to have too much originality, and should scarcely be taken as entirely representative of Irish thinking on the matter, even in the tenth century. The evidence of the Catechesis Celtica shows us another side of tenth-century Irish reflection on the afterlife. The Vision Literature, as represented by Fís Adomnáin and the Vision of Tnugdal, of the eleventh and twelfth centuries indicates that by the eleventh century Irish reflection was moving away from formal treatises to reflection in a more congenial medium, that of the Vision. An eleventh century piece : Scéla Laí Brátha (Tidings of Doomsday) Scéla Laí Brátha is found only in LU 31b34–34a20,67 directly preceding Scéla na Esérgi and similarly in the hand of the reviser H. 67 

Edited by Best – Bergin, Lebor na hUidre, pp. 77–81 (text only).

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

753

No precise date can be assigned to this Irish piece. Stokes has called it “Early-Middle-Irish”.68 Frederic Mac Donncha believes it is one of a set of eleventh-century homilies, possibly composed by Mael Iosa Ó Brolcháin (died 1086).69 As Gearóid Mac Eoin clearly | shows, the work depends directly on the poetic composition Sal- 70 tair na Rann, generally taken to have been composed in 987. This argues for an eleventh-century date for the piece.70 The text is in the form of a homily. First we have the exordium (§§ 1–7), with an indication of the divine author (§ 3) and the human author (§ 4).71 Next (§§ 5–7 ; 9–11) comes the biblical text to serve as the basis of the reflection (Mt 24.30 ; 25.32–46). In §§ 8 and 12 we have enumerations : the six kinds of mercy “by which the heavenly kingdom is bought” shown by the righteous to Christ (in hunger and thirst ; in need of hospitality or without raiment ; in sickness and captivity), and their opposites through which hell is attained. Next (§§ 13–14) comes a question and answer : “It is asked in the holy scripture when it is that the Lord will come to the judgment of Doom, and how he will come, and wherefore he will come”(§ 13). The answer is given (§ 14) with citations (or rather paraphrases of text) from Ps 49.3 and 49.5. After this (§§ 15–18) comes a description of the four groups, cethri budni, into which the human race will be divided on the day of Doom, the first two to be assigned to hell, the other two to eternal bliss in heaven. One in each group (the mali non ualde and the boni non ualde) will first be judged ; the other two (mali ualde and the boni ualde) will go to their destiny without being judged. At the end of the description of the fourth group (the boni ualde, not named) something seems to have been lost in the text, which passes to a description of hell (§§ 19–22). This is followed by a description of heaven (§§ 23–25), and the ending (peroratio) (§ 26). 68  W. S[tokes], “Tidings of Doomsday. An Early Middle-Irish Homily”, Revue Celtique 4 (1880), p.  479. See also D. N. Dumville, “Scéla lái Brátha and the Collation of Leabhar na hUidre”, Éigse 16 (1975–76), pp.  24–28. 69  F. Mac Donncha, “Medieval Irish Homilies”, in McNamara, Biblical Studies, pp.  59–71. 70  See G. Mac Eoin, “Observations on Some Middle-Irish Homilies”, in Ireland and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, pp. 195-211, at 201-03. 71  On this see Mac Donncha, “Medieval Irish Homilies”, pp. 61–63.

754 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church While the work from the literary point of view is dependent on Saltair na Rann, the central section, including the four groups, shows that it is clearly in the Irish tradition as represented by the Catechesis Celtica, a tradition that can be traced back to Gregory the Great. Comparison of the Irish text with that of Gregory, given above in extenso in pages 737-41, when treating of the fourfold division of souls in the Catechesis Celtica, puts this beyond doubt. In Scéla Laí Brátha, at the beginning of the section on Hell, the text says on the lost (§ 19) : “And they shall separate from the delight of this world which they loved, and from the faces of Heaven’s household ocus fri-gnúsib muintire nime, that is, of the Angels and of the Saints and of the Righteous, after they have been a thousand years in the fire of Doom. For that is the length of Doomsday as the commentators of the holy canon declare mar innisit trachtaireda na canoini nóimi”. An identification of the commentators in question might help identify some of the writer’s sources for this part of his work. While the canonical text commented on by these expositors is not indicated, presumably, it has to do with the mille anni of Rev 20.2–7. And one of the outstanding problems with regard to study of the Catechesis Celtica is precisely the identification of the sources for comments on this particular biblical book. | Theological background to the Vision of Adomnán (elev- 71 enth century) The Fís Adomnáin survives complete in four vellum manuscripts, Lebor na hUidre, Leabhar Breac, Liber Flavus Fergusiorum, Paris, BN, MS. celt. et basque 1.72 72  LU 27a1–33b33. On Fís Adomnáin see earlier literature in McNamara, Apocrypha, § 100, p. 126. J. J. Colwell, “Fís Adamnán. A comparative study, with introduction, text, and commentary based on the version of Lebor na hUidre” (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh 1952) ; new English translation by M. Herbert, in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, §  26, p.  137–148, notes p.  188-89. See also D. N. Dumville, “Towards an Interpretation of Fís Adamnáin”, Studia Celtica  12–13 (1977–78), p. 62–77 ; Boswell ; J. Stevenson, “Ascent through the Heavens, from Egypt to Ireland”, Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies 5 (Summer 1983), p. 21–35.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

755

It is presented as a vision of the pains of hell and of the joys of heaven shown to the soul of Adomnán (died 704), when it was taken by an angel in a journey through hell and heaven. After the journey had ended the angel’s voice commanded Adomnán’s soul to go back to the same body from which it had emerged, so that in assemblies and gatherings, and at meetings of layfolk and clerics, Adomnán might relate the rewards of heaven and the pains of hell, as the accompanying angel had revealed to him (§ 40). Thus, while the work is in the vision genre, the purpose of its composition was homiletic. With regard to date, it has been assigned by its language to the tenth (Myles Dillon) or the eleventh (Whitley Stokes) century. Gearóid Mac Eoin shows that it makes use of Saltair na Rann (composed in 987), indicating a very late tenth-century or an eleventh-century origin. The connection with Adomnán, ninth abbot of Iona, seems to be regarded as fortuitous, a mere pseudonym taken by the author for his own purposes. However, there may have been a special reason for the association of the vision with Adomnán. The author may have been from a community of Columba. Adomnán’s preaching after his vision is said (§ 41) to have continued what he taught at the great assembly of the men of Ireland (at the Synod of Birr in 697) when the Law of Adomnán (Cáin Adomnáin) was promulgated. The date of this Law (697) was also the centenary of Columcille’s death (597), and one may ask whether there was any connection between the two. One may also ask whether the vision of Adomnán might not be dated to 997, very soon indeed after the generally accepted date for the composition of Saltair na Rann. Gearóid Mac Eoin has advanced arguments in favour of Airbertach Mac Coisse’s authorship of the work.73 We have other poems by Airbertach which can be assigned to the year 982.74 According to the Annals of Inisfallen he was taken captive by the Norsemen of Waterford in 990 and rescued by Brian Boru at Inis Cathaig. But we know neither the precise place where Fís Adomnáin was composed (at Clonmacnois ?), much less the name of the author, nor how soon after 73  G. Mac Eoin, “The Date and Authorship of Saltair na Rann”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 28 (1960), pp.  51–67. 74  Kenney, Sources, p. 682, no. 545.

756 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the original composition he could have procured a copy of Saltair na Rann. The Fís gives the exact day of the journey and heavenly vision (the Feast of John the Baptist, June 24 ; a date also given for the Second Vision of Adomnán), and we can presume that this had some special significance – as yet unkown to us. | For studies on this work we may recall Dumville’s observa- 72 tion75 that a general lack of comparative material for the vision of heaven must hamper research for the section of the Fís on heaven, for descriptions of hell were much more popular and commonplace in the Middle Ages. In particular, there seem to be no precise points of contact between the description of heaven in the long texts of Visio Pauli (§§ 19–30) and that in the Fís Adomnáin. Adomnán’s Kingdom of Heaven (§§ 3–14), he goes on to note, appears to comprise three parts : (i) tír na naeb, whose inhabitants will join those of (ii) the region of the heavenly host, or the City of God, after Doomsday ; (iii) the region described in § 14 where souls who are admitted to the city only after judgment find a restless habitation on heights and hilltops and in marshy places but where they are none the less tended by their guardian angels and where they are apparently safe from pain. Dumville further notes76 that the author of the Fís has undoubtedly combined a number of sources with very different backgrounds of eschatological thought, but that he has done so in a way which (pace Seymour) has reconciled the differences almost to vanishing point. While much of this is true, some of the sources he used can be identified. It is recognised that the author uses the seven heavens apocryphon, and the versions of Visio Pauli as sources. Together with this, he also uses the Irish apocryphal texts, “The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven” and the Irish recension of Transitus Mariae. The author is also believed to be dependent on the purgatorial theories of Gregory the Great, although in this regard it may be wise to distinguish what in this field represents Gregory’s own views, and what is a later elaboration of them. It still remains unclear whether the author of Fís Adomnáin was aware of the division of souls into the four classes 75  76 

Dumville, “Towards an Interpretation “, p. 75. Dumville, “Towards an Interpretation”, p. 77.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

757

found in other Irish sources (boni valde ; boni non valde ; mali valde ; mali non valde), and the other Irish lists of the just noted above. Perhaps some such traditions may stand behind passages like the following :77 (§  6).  There is a splendid kingdom facing them to the south-east, with a golden porch to the south of it, separated from them by a crystal screen. It is through this that they see the forms and movements of the heavenly host. However, there is neither screen nor shade between the people of heaven and the saints. Rather, they are visible and present opposite them always. There is a fiery circle surrounding the land, yet all pass in and out without its harming them. The twelve apostles and the Virgin Mary are in a special group beside the powerful Lord. Patriarchs, prophets, and the disciples of Jesus are near the apostles. There are other virgins on Mary’s side, with a short distance between them. There are infants and children around them in every direction, and the songs of the heavenly birds make music for them. Radiant bands of guardian angels of the souls continually serve and minister among those companies in the presence of the king. |… (§  8).  Though great and wonderful the splendour and brightness in the Land of the Saints, as we have related, a thousand times greater is the splendour of the Plain of the Heavenly Host, by the throne of the Lord himself.… (§  12).  Thus is the city on which the royal seat, surrounded by seven multicoloured walls of glass… (§  13).  The inhabitants of that city are a mild, very gentle and kindly people, without deficiency in any virtue. For none ever reach and inhabit it except holy virgins and pilgrims zealous of God. It is difficult to discover how its order and arrangement was brought about, for none of them has his back or side towards another. Thus the ineffable power of the Lord has ordered them face to face in their ranks and circles of equal height, round about the royal throne in splendour and delight, with all their faces turned towards God.

Much remains to be studied with regard to the author’s sources and traditions. Future research might do well to pay attention to the fuller exegetical and theological background, to the visions of heaven in the commentary literature in particular. Thus, for 77  Translation by M. Herbert, in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, pp. 138-40.

73

758 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church instance, the author says (§§ 6–8) that those in “the Land of the Saints”, tír na naeb, are separated by a crystal screen from the “Plain of the Heavenly Host” (with the throne of the Lord), and will remain there (granted in great glory) until Doomsday, when they will be rearranged and look “on the countenance of God with neither screen nor shadow between them through all eternity” (§ 7). Is he here speaking from a particular theological position, for instance saying that it is only after the final judgment the just will have the direct beatific vision of God ? This, apparently, was the view of Augustine of Hippo (see above pages 726-27). The Vision of Tnugdal (Tundal) (A.D. 1149) The Vision of Tnugdal Visio Tnugdali was written in Ratisbon (Regensburg) in 1149 by a Frater Marcus, a monk of some unspecified Religious Order. It purports to be the Latin transcription of an oral account by one Tnugdal, a soldier from Cashel in Munster, who while on a visit to Cork fell into a trance, remaining as if dead for three days. He was taken by an angel through the Other World and was shown, and in part experienced, the sufferings of the wicked and the imperfect as well as the rewards of the just.78 | It is beyond doubt that the work is Irish in its geographical set- 74 ting and its historical references, its division of souls into named classes (mali non valde ; boni non valde explicitly, chaps. 14–15), and others (very bad, very good) by reason of their positioning in the otherworld.79 A question arises, however, as to whether the work represents a real vision in Cork by the soldier Tnugdal or an independent composition by Brother Marcus in Ratisbon. 78  Visio Tnugdali. Lateinisch und Altdeutsch, ed. by A. Wagner, Erlangen, 1882 ; Kenney, Sources, pp.  741-42 ; C. Carozzi, “Structure et fonction de la Vision de Tnugdal”, in Faire croire. Modalités de la diffusion et de la réception des messages religieux du XIIe au XIVe siècle (Collection de l’École Française de Rome 51), ed. by A. Vauchez, Paris, 1981, pp. 223–34 ; The Vision of Tnugdal, trans. from the Latin by J.-M. Picard, with an introduction by Y. de Pontfarcy, Dublin, 1989. 79  de Pontfarcy, The Vision of Tnugdal, pp.  59-60, finds a sixfold division : 1.  the very bad in inferior hell ; 2.  the bad in superior hell ; 3.  the mali non valde outside the wall of the campus laetitiae ; 4.  the boni non valde in the campus laetitiae ; 5. the good within the wall of silver ; 6. the very good within the wall of gold or within the wall of precious stones.

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

759

A further question arises as to whether Marcus is representing twelfth-century Irish eschatology on the points in question or is reacting to certain German theological positions on these points. With regard to the first question it is worth recalling that on Marcus’s arrival at Ratisbon, that city had its visionary, in the person of Hildegard of Bingen (1098–1179), abbess of the Benedictine community of Diessenberg from 1136. Between 1147 and 1152 she moved her communuity to Rupertsberg, near Bingen (close to Mainz). When Marcus arrived at Ratisbon in 1149 she was completing her work Scivias (probably an abbreviation for scias vias ; dictated by her between 1141 and 1151), which contained twenty-six visions. In 1148, at the Synod of Treves, presided over by Pope Eugenius III, and in the presence of St Bernard, Hildegard’s gift of vision had been recognised and she had been encouraged to make her visions known.80 This may have had an influence on Marcus. On the other hand, however, visions of the after-life were part of his Irish heritage. Another contemporary literary figure, one with close connections with the Irish monastery at Ratisbon, was Honorius Augustodunensis (1080 ?–1158 ?). Caudel Carozzi81 advanced the view that the Visio Tnugdali was intended by Marcus to support the (older) eschatological views of Hugh of St Victor of Paris, of William of Saint Thierry and of Bernard against those of Honorius Augustodunensis, who under the influence of John Scottus Eriugena, tended to take a more spiritual view of the nature of the soul and of the punishments and joys of the otherworld.82 While this remains a possibility, I do not believe that Carozzi has quite proved the point with regard to Marcus’s Visio Tnugdali. Signs before Doomsday In an earlier work I have given a summary of work done up to the year 1972 on the Signs before Doomsday, especially on the Fifteen Signs tradition.83 After study of the material, William W.

de Pontfarcy, The Vision of Tnugdal, p.  17. Carozzi, “Structure”. 82  On Honorius’s view on the matter see also Le Goff, The Birth of Purgatory, pp.  136–38. 83  McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 128–139, # 104. 80  81 

760 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Heist 84 put forward the view that the legend of the Fifteen Signs as | found in England and on the continent seems dependent on, 75 and to have originated in, the material found in the additional strophes of Saltair na Rann. These strophes, he believes, constitute a critical text in the study of the origin and development of the legend of the Fifteen Signs before Doomsday.85 They are certainly the key to the study of the legend, and are probably its actual original. The earliest clear trace of it, he says, appears here, and nothing in the legend points beyond these strophes, to any other source, except to the recognised main source of Saltair na Rann, the Apocalypse of Thomas. A little later, however,86 he writes that “the development of this legend suggests the possibility that much curious medieval lore, like the Fifteen Signs, might turn out to be a genuine survival of primitive Christian tradition. And if this is so, it suggests that no country is more likely than Ireland to have been the preserver and transmitter of that lore, as she was of primitive methods of ecclesiastical organization, of calculating the date of Easter, and of even making the tonsure.” It may well be that the Fifteen Signs legend can be traced back beyond Saltair na Rann and Ireland. Michael Stone 87 has brought to our attention that a Fifteen Signs tradition exists in Armenian literature, where (as in Europe) they are attributed to a Jewish source – unless the Armenian texts depend on a Latin source, which in turn might have originated in Irish tradition. In any event, as Stone notes,88 the complexity serves to alert us to the fact that the channels of communication between the eastern traditions, including the Greek, and the western traditions, including the Irish, are very convoluted, certainly as far as the transmission of pseudepigraphical materials is concerned. Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 99. Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p.  193. 86  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 200-01. 87  M. E. Stone, Signs of the Judgment, Onomastica Sacra and the Generations of Adam (University of Pennsylvania Armenian Texts and Studies 3), University of Pennsylvania, 1981 ; Stone, “Jewish Tradition, the Pseudepigrapha and the Christian West”, in The Aramaic Bible. Targums in their Historical Context, ed. by D. R. G. Beattie – M. J. McNamara, Sheffield, 1994, p. 431–49, at 432–35. 88  Stone, “Jewish Tradition”, p. 434. 84  85 

some aspects of early medieval irish eschatology

761

Postscript 2014 A revised form of this essay has been prepared as an introduction to the eschatological texts for the forthcoming volume of Apocrypha Hiberniae, II, 2-3, Apocalyptica et Eschatologica. The most complete and authoritative treatment of the eschatological beliefs and teachings of the early and medieval Irish Church is that of Charles D. Wright : “Next-To-Last Things : The Interim State of Souls in Early Irish Literature”, in The End and Beyond : Medieval Irish Eschatology, ed. by J. Carey, Emma Nic Cárthaigh and C. Ó Dochartaigh, Aberystwyth, 2014, pages 309-96. He examines conceptions of the interim state in early Irish literature, focusing on imaginative representations in vernacular texts, but with some attention to Hiberno-Latin literature and with special consideration of the Christian-Latin sources that informed vernacular Irish authors’ understanding of the interim state. Given the uncertainty and diverse speculation about the interim state in early Christian sources, we should not expect to find in early medieval Irish sources a consistent or necessarily even a coherent representation, or for that matter a clear chronological development of the literature regarded as Hiberno-Latin. He studies Liber de ordine creaturarum, the “Reference Bible”, the Collectio Canonum Hibernensium and the Catechesis Celtica. He then turns to the Irish vernacular texts : “Interim Islands” (the Voyage literature, including the Navigatio Sancti Brendani)¸ the Tenga Bithnua, the Dialogue of the Body and the Soul, the Seven Journeys of the Soul, the Two Deaths and the Vision of Laisrén. His final text is the Fís Adomnáin. He notes St John D. Seymour’s view that in its current form the Fís is an awkward conflation of two originally distinct visions, which he designated Adomnán I and Adomnán II, whose eschatology he regarded as fundamentally incompatible. He notes that, against this, David Dumville has defended the integrity of the text and the coherence of its eschatology. While conceding that the author of Fís Adomnáin drew on multiple and diverse traditions, Dumville argues that “he has done so in a way which (pace Seymour) has reconciled the differences almost to a vanishing point”. Wright is more sympathetic to Dumville’s approach than to Seymour’s, yet it seems to him that even if Fís Adomnáin is the work of a single author, he was content to allow several irreconcilable, though arguably complemen-

762 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church tary, conceptions of the interim state to exist. After a detailed examination of the Fís Wright concludes : “Fís Adomnáin, in short, accommodates almost the full range of interim state conceptions that coexisted in the early Middle Ages. It is a narrative Summa of the interim state, but one whose author did not see it as his task to resolve the alternatives dialectically”. A final section treats of The Interim State, ‘Purgatory’, and ‘Penance’”. Towards the end he remarks : “If early Irish narratives are inconsistent in their representation of the interim state, they are consistent in dramatising the imperative of repentance in this life as the criterion that determines one’s place in the next, often qualifying post-mortem divisions of souls based on relative degrees of goodness or badness with an absolute distinction between confessed and unconfessed sins, and sometimes allowing for a category of sins that have been confessed but not fully expiated.”

| THE IRISH LEGEND OF ANTICHRIST*

Introduction I am very grateful to Professor Florentino García Martínez and the editors of this volume in honour of Anthony Hilhorst for the kind invitation to contribute an essay. This I consider a great honour indeed. The wide range of Anthony’s interests, learning and expertise will be evident from the variety of papers here brought together. My contribution will be on one of these areas of interest, namely New Testament apocrypha, to which Dr Hilhorst has made such lasting contribution, not least by his edition of texts of the Apocalypse of Paul (Visio Pauli). I chose to write on an item of Irish New Testament apocrypha. Over the past four decades or so interest has been growing in Irish biblical apocrypha, especially in those dealing with New Testament themes. In conjunction with AELAC (Association pour l”Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne) the Irish Biblical Association is attending to the critical edition of Irish New Testament apocrypha. The first volume, with Irish Infancy Narratives, has already appeared. In this we have two independent Irish texts which contain an infancy narrative closely related to the Latin Infancy Gospels published by Montague Rhodes James in 1927. While the Irish vernacular translations can be dated to the twelfth century or so, the Latin form of the narrative they contain must have reached Ireland before the year 800. The second volume in the series will carry Irish apocryphal texts of an apocalyptic and eschatological nature. It should contain about twenty-eight distinct items. One of these is the Irish Antichrist legend. Part of the task of critical editions of these texts will be to identify as far as possible the sources of the individual items *  First published in : Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome. Studies in Ancient Intercultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 82), ed. by F. García Martínez ‒ G. P. Luttikhuizen, Leiden, 2003, pp. 201-219.

201

764 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church and to situate them within the larger context of western and eastern tradition. The Antichrist tradition has been growing since biblical times. The oldest work known to us on this developing Antichrist legend is to | be found in the commentary on Daniel by Hippolytus, a 202 presbyter in Rome (died c. 236), who in this work refers to an earlier writing of his own On Antichrist. About 399 Jerome composed a work on “Antichrist in the Book of Daniel” which he later inserted into his commentary on the book of Daniel (composed probably in 407). Among the Latin texts that treat of Antichrist from the first millennium we may also mention the sermon on the end of the world transmitted under the name of Ephrem (and occasionally under that of Isidore), Scarpsum de dictis S. Efrem prope fine mundi et consummatione saeculi et conturbatione gentium (PLS 4, 608), which may have been composed between the fifth and seventh centuries, although some opt for an earlier and fourth century date of composition. In the west the best known writings on Antichrist date from the tenth century and some centuries later. The classic work here is De ortu et tempore Antichristi by the monk Adso (between 949 and 954), later abbot of Montier-en-Der.1 Adso’s work was highly influential and occasioned a whole series of similar writings on the subject between the tenth and the twelfth century. It is not easy to say how original Adso’s work was. It was probably a compilation which consigned to writing some of the views current on the subject at his time ; other current forms of the legend Adso probably rejected, some of which would resurface in one or other of the adaptations of his work. It is likely that during the first millennium and in the later Middle Ages many more forms of the legend circulated than are registered in the better known writings on the subject. This is a point to be borne in mind in an examination of the Irish material. In his edition of a poem on “The Conception and Characteristics of Antichrist” (a composition hard to date but which in general has the appearance of a very late Middle Irish composition [c. 1200 ?]) Brian Ó Cuív has listed practically all the vernacular Irish 1  Adso Dervensis, De Ortu et tempore Antichristi, necnon et tractatus qui ab eo dependunt, ed. by D. Verhelst (CCCM 45), Turnhout, 1976.

the irish legend of antichrist

765

texts with descriptions of, or reference to, Antichrist.2 We have six such in verse compositions and seven in prose compositions. Ó Cuív also notes that there is a certain unity of presentation in these texts. In so far as the Irish text he edits is intelligible, he remarks, the Antichrist | story given there has the following 203 elements : (1) Antichrist is the son of his own sister who conceives him when her father, a bishop in Jerusalem, lies with her on the Friday before Easter at the Instigation of the devil (§§ 16-19) ; (2) in appearance Antichrist has a face with one eye (§ 20) ; (3) he has miraculous powers : he can make gold out of grass and anise ( ?) and wine out of water ; he can cause disease and cure the sick, he can create a moon, sun and elements ( ?), he can do anything that Christ did on earth except restore people to life (§§ 21-26) ; he has a thousand fair women in his company. Ó Cuiv also notes that comparison with other other texts of the list he has given shows several correspondences. In our study of the subject we shall follow Ó Cuív’s list of vernacular texts, adding information from Latin compositions as required, however, following chronological order as far as possible. The Texts The Poems of Blathmac (A.D. 750) Blathmac, writing about 750, ends his two poems in honour of the Virgin Mary, with mention of the crucifixion of Christ and the death of those who shed, or will shed, their blood for him. The final martyrdom is that of Elias and Enoch. The final verse (quatrain 259) is on the slaying of Antichrist by Michael :3 (258) Since Abel’s blood went beneath the sod until the martyrdom of Elias and Enoch (co martraí Elí Enóch)  – it is by your son, sun of women, that the blood of every saint will be avenged. (259) It is Michael, your son’s warrior, who will take a smiting sword to the body of impious Anti-Christ who shall be born of a great sin. 2  B. Ó Cuív, “Two Items from Apocryphal Tradition”, Celtica 10 (1973), pp. 87-113, at 88. 3  The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan together with The Irish Gospel of Thomas and A Poem on the Virgin Mary (Irish Texts Society 47), ed. by J. Carney, Dublin, 1964, pp. 86-88.

766 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (Is he Michél, míl do maic, /gébas claideb comairt/ do chorp Antchríst nád etal, /génathar do mórphecath.)

Even from this brief poetic text we can gather that Blathmac knew of a rather developed Antichrist legend, a legend that he draws on rather than give in any detail. He must have known the tradition of the advent of Elias and Enoch, their slaying by Antichrist and the slaying of Antichrist by Michael. Very significantly, Balthmac’s | Antichrist tradition also contained the element of his 204 birth “from a great sin”. This seems proper to the Irish form of the legend, as we shall see in consideration of the next item and in some of those that follow. The Hiberno-Latin Liber de Numeris (ca. A.D. 750) This composition is extant in a number of manuscripts. Indications point to the area of Salzburg, and the later eighth century, as the place and date of composition. The work is as yet unpublished, but the late Robert E. McNally has made a transcript of it. McNally has made a detailed examination of its contents,4 and considered the work as emanating from Hiberno-Latin circles of the Irish monk and bishop Virgilius of Salzburg. A critical edition is in preparation. The author arranges his subject according to numbers. The number four has him consider the four beasts of the Book of Daniel, in the examination of which he inserts the section on Antichrist. McNally has been able to identify the sources of (or parallels to) many of the items. The belief than Antichrist is to come on earth as a mortal and from the tribe of Dan was widespread. The belief that his birth would be the result of an unnatural union was also known ; thus Pseudo-Ephrem (PLS 4, 608) : Ex semine viri et ex immunda turpissima virgine, malo spiritu …. The Liber de numeris text, however, presents the union as incest : Pater in filia propria peccans maledictus infantem maledicta in sua filia et nefando facit. Such a presentation of the birth of Antichrist, McNally noted, occurs nowhere else. 5 We now know that it is a specific feature of the Irish Antichrist tradition which 4  R. E. McNally, Der irische Liber de numeris. Eine Quellenanalyse des pseudo-isidorischen Liber de numeris (Doctoral Dissertation Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität zu München), Munich, 1957. 5  “Diese Auffassung von der Geburt des Antichrist kommt sonst nirgends vor” (McNally, Der irische Liber de numeris, p. 90).

the irish legend of antichrist

767

was, it would appear, already known by Blathmac. I here give the relevant section of this text, and the entire entry on Antichrist in a footnote.6 | Before the judgement he (i.e. Antichrist) will be set loose for 205 a short while so that he may come and dishonestly and illicitly assume flesh, to test the saints and deceive his own, and so that with his own and the impious he may perish all the worse later. From the tribe of Dan he, cruel flesh, takes flesh, and a father sinning in his own daughter makes a cursed child. … so that his (i.e. Antichrist’s) father appears as his grandfather and his mother as his sister.

Ante iudicium tamen breviter solvitur, ut veniat et carnem inhoneste et inlicite suscipiat. ut sanctos probat et suos decipiat. et cum suis et impiis postea peius pereat. De tribu autem Dan caro crudilis carnem sumit. et pater in filia propria pecans male 6  The full text on Antichrist in the Liber de Numeris (according to an unpublished transcript made by R. E. McNally) reads : Antechristus itaque quis est aut unde est ? De qua gente oritur et nascitur ? Quomodo nasciturus et regnaturus et interfectus moriturus ? A quo interficitur, et in quo loco peribit interfectus ? Haec omnia breviter dicamus, quia ad alia festinamus. Antecristus ergo est qui in principio Lucifer dicebatur et quasi signaculum Dei vivi videbatur. In tali gloria superbae aegit. Superbiendo in perditionem cecidit. quem Deus de caelo deiecit. Ille deiectus in terrram primum hominem seduxit. Et in mundo usque adventum Christi crudeliter regnavit, cui Dominus infernum praeparavit, quem Dominus. crucem sustenans, superavit. Et inferna penetrans draconem tortuosum tenuit et prostravit. Tunc ibi leo leonem ligavit. Ibi ligatus ardet, et sine fine ardebit. Ante iudicium tamen breviter solvitur, ut veniat et carnem inhoneste et inlicite suscipiat. ut sanctos probat et suos decipiat, et cum suis et impiis postea peius pereat. De tribu autem Dan caro crudilis carnem sumit, et pater in filia propria pecans male dictum infantem maledicta in sua filia et nefanda facit, ita tamen ut pater eius avus esse videatur, et mater eius soror eius esse intellegatur. Tunc crescit draco crudilis. Christianis regnat autem sex mensibus et tribus annis. Ideo ergo antechristus nominatur, quia ante adventum Christi ad iudicium ille venire et multos seducere non dubitatur, quia quando tunc finis proximat, anticristus ipse ab omni gente impia impios multos congregat, et contra Enoc et Heliam, qui tunc sunt sancti Dei principes pugnat. Talis pugna crudelis et terribilis erit ut nullatenus antea ei pugna alia aequalis fuit. In illo ergo horribili et crudeli certamine Enoc et Helias, milites Christi, coronam martirii tenebunt et postea cum omnibus sanctis in caelo coram Deo gloriosae gaudebunt. Tunc Mihahel, milis maximus, terribiliter supervenit, et in monte Oliveti durissimum draconem gladio igneo interficit in illo loco, ubi Christus ascendit in caelis.

768 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church dictum infantem maledicta in sua filia et nefanda facit, ita tamen ut pater eius avus esse videatur, et mater eius soror eius esse intellegatur.

The Martyrology of Oengus Céile Dé (ca. 800) In this text Michael’s victory over Antichrist is foretold by Oengus Céile Dé : “At the fight with the multitudinous Dragon by Michael the strong, victorious, the whitesided hostful soldier will slay wrathful Antichrist” (Ancrist).7 Poem on St Michael by Maél Ísu ua Brolcháin (died 1086) This has a mere reference to Antichrist. In this poem Michael is referred to as “the slayer of Antichrist” (marbaid Ainchrist).8 | The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven (Dá Brón Ftatha Nime 206 [eleventh century])

The opening words of this Irish apocryphal writing inform us that the Two Sorrows in heaven are Elias and Enoch. The writing presents them as being in Paradise where Elias preaches repentance to the souls of the just. He tells of the judgement to come. At the end of the text we are told that Elias and Enoch await their return to earth, and martyrdom. This leads to a description of Antichrist. I give this ending here (in the translation of Máire Herbert).9 8 Now this Elijah and Enoch, of whom we have been speaking, await their slaying and martyrdom in fulfillment of the prophecy of the Lord, uttered through the mouth of the prophet : Quis est homo qui uiuit et non uidebit mortem ? “Who has tasted of life who will not taste death ?” At the end of the world they will oppose Antichrist, who will be put to the sword by them. A demon in human form is this Antichrist, in the guise of one who comes to spread faith. A bishop will beget him on his daughter on a Friday. It is said that there is no miracle performed by Christ on earth 7  Félire of Oengus for September 29 ; Félire Óengusso Céli Dé The Martyrology of Oengus the Culdee (Henry Bradshaw Society 29), ed. by W. Stokes, London, 1905, p. 197. 8  The poem has been edited with English translation by C. Plummer, Irish Litanies (Henry Bradshaw Society 62), London, 1925, pp. 88-89. 9  G. Dottin, “Les deux chagrins du royaume du ciel”, Revue Celtique 21 (1900), pp. 349-87, at 385-87 ; English translation by Máire Herbert in M. Herbert  – M. McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, Edinburgh, 1989, pp. 19-21, at 21.

the irish legend of antichrist

769

that he will not perform, except for the raising of the dead. However, he will be full of lust and falsehood. He will be thirty-three and a half years old, the same age as that of Christ. The inversion of his writing-tablet in front of him is a sign by which he will be recognized. He will put to the sword everyone who does not believe in him, for he will declare himself to be the son of God, one who was foretold by prophets. It is Michael who will descend from the heavens to crush him, and it is he who will set upon him with the sword. And, finally, there are the two sorrows of the kingdom of heaven, Elijah and Enoch, in their earthly bodies among the angels of heaven, awaiting their encounter with Antichrist.

Leabhar Breac Homily (eleventh-twelfth century ?) In a homily on the archangels, particularly Michael, for the Feast of St Michael, in the Leabhar Breac, one of the five victories attributed to Michael is that “he will fight against Antichrist (fri hAncrist) on Mount Sion in the end of the world, and will gain the victory and triumph over him”.10 | Leabhar Breac Homily (eleventh-twelfth century ?)

At the end of another Leabhar Breac homily on St Michael and his victory over the beast on Mount Garganus, a full legend on Antichrist is given. It is as follows :11 Be it known to you that Michael will come again to the help of the human race. For a man named Antichrist shall be born in the end of the world, his mother being his own sister. There is a grey protuberance in the exact middle of his forehead, in the centre of which is the one eye in his head ; he has one eyebrow, which stretches from one ear to the other, beneath his eye ; his whole body is one flat surface, as are also his feet. He pulls trees up from the roots, thrusts them upside down into the ground, and puts leaves and fruit on the roots and bottoms of the trees. He will make gold and silver out of the manure and dung of horses and camels, and from every useless thing besides ; and he will sow disbelief throughout the world. Water will not drown him, nor fire burn him, nor iron touch him. Now Eli and Enoch are still alive in paradise : great jealousy shall seize them, so that they will come 10  In The Passions and the Homilies from the Leabhar Breac, ed. by R. Atkinson Dublin, 1887 ; Irish text, lines 6274-75, p. 216 ; English translation, p. 453. 11  In The Passions and Homilies, ed. by R. Atkinson, lines 7268-7289 (p. 244) ; translation pp. 477-478.

207

770 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church to battle with Antichrist ; but they shall have no success, for they will be slain. Then Michael will come from heaven, with his red, fiery sword in his hand, and he will slay Antichrist. Thus he will get rid of that plague. After that the day of judgment shall draw nigh. Michael will blow his trumpet, so that all will rise from their graves. The Judge will come to judge the human race ; He will put the accursed children on His left into everlasting fire ; but the holy and righteous children. i.e. the folk of charity and mercy, He will place on His right, to go to the kingdom of God, to partake of the feast prepared for them from the beginning of the world, in the unity of the almighty Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Prose and Verse Tract on the Canonical Hours (eleventh-twelfth century) In both prose and verse texts on the canonical hours, Elias takes part in the conflict with Antichrist : At none Elias will come to fight against Antichrist (fri hAncrist).12 Late Middle Irish Poem on the Conception and Characteristics of Antichrist (twelfth century ?) | This poem has been published by Brian Ó Cuiv.13 He notes that 208 there is nothing in the language of the poem, which in general has the appearance of a very late Middle Irish composition [c. 1200 ?], to determine its date exactly.14 The composition first (in quatrains 1-15) describes four kinds of conception “whereby through which the will of God who is powerful here on earth, bright-formed offspring are produced”. With these the conception of Antichrist is contrasted : “It is not through any of these conceptions that Antichrist is formed, but through … (mar charas, meaning of words in context uncertain), since it is his fit covenant” (quatrain 16). A description of Antichrist’s conception, characteristics and powers follows. It is in the Irish tradition. I cite the relevant section in B. Ó Cuív’s translation. 17. A bishop in Jerusalem, great evil does he contemplate, it is from this that he begets the male child on Friday with his daughter. 12  Text edited by R. Best, “The Lebar Brecc Tractate on the Canonical Hours”, in Miscellany Presented to Kuno Meyer, ed. by O. Bergin  – C. Marstrander, Halle, 1912, pp. 142-166, at 144, 150. 13  B. Ó Cuív, “Two Items from Apocryphal Tradition”, Celtica 10 (1973), pp. 87-113, at 87-102. 14  Ó Cuív, “Two Items”, p. 91.

the irish legend of antichrist

771

18. On the Friday before Easter he performs the wicked deed : lying shamefully with his daughter between the altar and the wall. 19. Through Lucifer’s wicked inspiration comes the furious assaulting of a body  – long are his course and his time before death to take each one (of us) on an evil path. 20. His face is as one level unbroken (lit. “unblemished”) surface, there is a single eye [protruding] out of his forehead ; these are the signs of his hard body ... evil at every time. 21. He will, if he wishes, make gold out of the green grass [and] out of anise ; the vilest water which is dispensed by you [he will make] into intoxicating wine for his people. 22. Everyone who will firmly believe in him will obtain [the torment of] hell ; everyone who will not believe in him will be welcomed by the angels. 23. He causes disease to every healthy person, he cures every ill person, to each misshapen one he gives whatever form he chooses. 24. He makes the moon, he makes the sun, he makes the elements without good intent, through hardness on earth he occasions the eyes to be continually giving warning of him ( ?). 25. The floodtide of the great sea is lacking from one time of day to the next  – it is abnormal  – the testimony of the sea  – joyful appearance  – he does not let go from him in many shapes. 26. Everything that fair Christ did while He was on earth Antichrist does without difficulty except raise people from the dead. 27. A thousand beautiful women – it is true – Antichrist has in his company, … (ends imperfect).

| Poem on the end of the World ascribed to Colum Cille

In the early sixteenth-century MS Bodleian Laud Misc. 615 we have a selection of poems associated with Colum Cille. One of these is on the end of the world.15 The ending is on Antichrist, even though he is not named. The text breaks off in the middle of a quatrain, with a space left after the last half-quatrain. I reproduce Ó Cuív’s translation (which he himself describes as tentative). A macu will come to the world with great strength, a powerful cunning man ; a sister of his own will be his mother.

The poem beginning : Do fil aimser laithe mbratha, ed. by K. Meyer in “Mitteilungen aus irischen Handschriften. Ein altirisches Gedicht über das Ende der Welt. Aus Laud 615, SS. 132-4”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 8 (1911), pp. 195-96 (text only). Text of relevant section, with translation, in B. Ó Cuív, “Two Items”, p. 90. 15 

209

772 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church A daughter will conceive him by her own father like a serpent ; very beastlike ( ?) will be the son who will be born in the city. His teeth will form one surface  – certain according to my tidings  – a host behind ramparts ( ?) ; his slender feet will have six toes according to the mysteries. A sour resolute man, a scourge from hell, what I say is true, a black hard deceiver with a grey bush protruding from his brow. He makes (recte will make) gold from biestings of the plain, what is more gloomy ?

A Poem attributed to Bécán Bec mac Dé (not much later than 1150) In a poem of prophecies attributed to Bécán mac Dé Antichrist is associated with the end of the world : “After that the signs of Antichrist (airde Anticrist) will come over there towards the end of the world”.16 Fragment of an Apocalypse of John in A Life of John, the Beloved Disciple in the Liber Flavus Fergusiorum (translated from the Latin ca. 1400) This fragment of an apocalypse occurs in a composite Irish text containing episodes from the Life of John, the Beloved Disciple. It is headed : Beatha Eoin Bruinne, “The Life of John the Beloved Disciple” (literally “of John of the Breast”). The beginning of text is lost. It contains two distinct texts on the life of John and this fragment of | what appears to be an apocalypse of John. The com- 210 posite text was translated from the Latin into Irish by Uighisdin Mac Raighin (of the Canons Regular of St Augustine), who died in 1405. The source of one of the sections on the Life of John is the Latin text of Pseudo-Abdias (or Pseudo-Mellitus), of another a text attested only in a very old Greek witness of the Acta of John preserved in a fourth-century Oxyrhynchus Papyrus.17 The sources behind the text that interests us have not been identified. We may note that the piece mentions Antichrist only in relation to his descent on Mount Garganus (in the fourth century), even though the context seems to require an end of time reference. 16  E. Knott, “A Poem of Prophecies”, Ériu 18 (1958), pp. 55-84, at 72, § 68. Knott considered that the poem could not be dated to much later than 1150. 17  See M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975, pp. 95-98.

the irish legend of antichrist

773

Since a description of the Archangel Michael is given, one would also expect a description of Antichrist. The original of this fragment may have contained more on Antichrist. It is worth noting that the text on Antichrist and on the end of the world are both explicitly indicated as having been received by John in revelations from God, i.e. as apocalypses. I give the text here in the translation of Máire Herbert.18 Then Christ sent the divine helper, the splendid holy angel Michael to fight against arrogant Antichrist as he had fought against Lucifer. And Antichrist came in the form of a dragon to the summit of Mount Garganus to harm and attack the Christians. But Michael killed the dragon, and as a result, God and Michael were greatly glorified in heaven and on earth. 3 This is the manner of Michael’s appearance as he comes to fight Antichrist. He is radiant, fair of countenance, red-cheeked, with gentle steady long-lashed eyes, with eloquent red lips, and a white throat. He is shining with zeal, light-footed, angry, furious, aggressive, with his beautiful four wings spread around him, with a protecting sharp-edged splendid sharp ornamented slender sword firmly in his strong hand, to smite Antichrist in a manner befitting a noble angelic heavenly personage. 4 With harshness, deep anger, bravery and strength, with swiftness and severity, strongly, fearlessly and terribly, he strikes Antichrist on the crown of the head, halving him on the spot in two splendid broad halves from the top of his head down to the ground. And that is the evil strange tale of Antichrist up to the present, as God confirmed to me”, said John, the eloquent Beloved Disciple. 5 The world will have three years of peace.

| 6 And after all that, there will be a great silence throughout the whole universe, so that neither the sound of the sea, nor the roar of the wave, nor the cry of the wind, nor bird-song, nor the sound of any created thing in the whole world will be heard for forty days and forty nights. Then the signs of Doomsday will appear, on the fifteen days before the Judgement. 7 After these have come, four angels rise up from the four cardinal points of the world, and they call out loudly and impressively : “Arise ! Arise ! Arise ! Arise !”.

18 

Herbert, in Herbert – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, pp. 95-96.

211

774 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 8 Then the beautiful pure souls of heaven and the many evil souls from hell will go jointly with their bodies from the earthly graves in which they were buried to the judgement of Doomsday. 9 “And that is a brief account of the end of this bad world, as was narrated to me by the Creator, the good Lord”, said John, the eloquent Beloved Disciple.

A Life of St Maighneann, an Irish saint of the seventh century (in fifteenth century MS) The Irish Life of St Magniu or Maignenn of Kilmainham, Dublin, ends with a brief summary of the Irish Antichrist legend. This text itself is not strictly a life of the saint, but rather a homiletic collection of his sayings on matters of discipline, eschatology and such like, chiefly provoked by questions from other saints visited by him on a “devotional round” which he made. The MS containing it (British Library Egerton 91) is by Uilliam Mac an Lega, fifteenth century. The final item in this homiletic collection is on Antichrist ; the text ends imperfectly (fol. 51b), the greater part of the page being left blank for its continuation.19 I give the text in O’Grady’s rendering, including his explanatory glosses, within square brackets. (The “Rowing Wheel” referred to is the machine constructed by Simon Magus and the Irish druid, Mog Ruith.) The text reads :20 | Magnenn said : “Knowest thou, Mochutu, at what time comes the roth ramhach [“the Rowing Wheel”] prognosticating the Perverter’s advent in Ireland ?” “Thus Antichrist shall come : as one that 19  The text has been edited and translated by S. O’Grady, Silva Gadelica (I-XXXI). A Collection of Tales in Irish with Extracts illustrating Persons and Places. (I) Irish Text, London and Edinburgh, 1892 ; reprint, Dublin. 1935, pp. 37-49, at 48-49 (introduction to text p. vii) ; English translation of ending in Silva Gadelica II, p. 49. See also R. Flower, Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts in the British Library [formerly British Museum], Dublin, 1992 ; original London, 1927, p. 438, 446-447. 20  Silva Gadelica. II, ed. by O’Grady, pp. 35-49, at 49. The Irish text reads. In fetarais a Mignenn ar Mochuta cuin [tic in] roth rámhach ac tarrngaire in tsáebaigteoir indErinn. is amlaid tic Anticríst. fer trén glicc aimglicc .i. aimglicc fri dia ocus glic fri dénum a aimlesa féin .ocus deirbshiur dó féin a máthair ocus ingen doghní /49/ rena hathair é .ocus aenclár a édan uile ocus sé meoir ar cach coiss dó .ocus is amlaid bíos ina breithem diandub ocus tomm gléliath ina édan. ocus doghní ór do cach mitain ocus tódúiscid mairb .ocus ní bí trócaire ina aimsir sin no co tic Elí ocus Enócc.

212

the irish legend of antichrist

775

is mighty and wise, yet foolish : foolish namely towards God, but wise to work out his own proper detriment ; one whose mother (for he is a daughter’s progeny of his father) is a sister of his own ; one whose entire face is but one flat surface, and he having one each foot six toes ; and the manner of him is besides that he is a judge violent and black [i.e. pitiless and unjust] having in his forehead a light grey tuft ; out of all metals he makes gold [i.e. transmutes them] and raises up the dead. In whose time mercy shall not be until that Eli come and Enoch …”

A Text headed ‘sgél Ainnte Crisd” (“The Story of Antichrist”), in the Book of Lismore The Book of Lismore is a work written in the latter part of the fifteenth century. The Antichrist legend it contains has been edited and translated by Douglas Hyde ;21 it has been translated anew by Máire Herbert,22 whose text is here reproduced. 1 The Lord said that Antichrist would be the devil who would come in human form, and that he would perform great signs among the people. He would say that he was the true son of God, the one who had always been prophesied, and that no one should presume to assert that Christ had come before him to succour the human race. John the Evangelist said to Jesus : “O Lord, in what manner will that man appear ? We should have a written description, so that he may be recognized by his evil deeds, so that, thus recognized, allegiance would not be given him”. 2 The Lord said that he would be born in Bethlehem, of a harlot of the tribe of Daniel, that he would be reared in the Carbuban (sic), and that he would live in the city called Besasta. His body will be six hundred lengths high, and forty in width. He will have a single eye protruding from his forehead, with a flat-surfaced face, and a mouth extending as far as his chest. He will have no upper teeth, nor will | he have knees, and the soles of his feet will be rounded like a cart-wheel. He will have fearsome black hair, and three fiery vapours from his nose and mouth which will rise in the air like flames of fire.

D. Hyde, “A Medieval Account of Antichrist”, in Medieval Studies in Memory of Gertrude Schoepperle Loomis, ed. by R. S. Loomis, Paris, New York, 1927, pp. 391-398. 22  Herbert, in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, pp. 14950. See also W. W.Heist, The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, East Lasing, 1952, p. 64. 21 

213

776 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 3 Nobody in the world will be able to hide himself from him. With red-hot iron he will brand a mark on the forehead of every person who believes in him, and no one in the world can ever conceal that mark even till Doomsday. He will kill all who will not believe in him, and these will be among God’s elect. He will raise the dead in imitation of Christ, with sinners being the ones who are raised thus. He will tear trees up by the roots, setting the roots uppermost, and causing the fruit to come up through the roots, by the powers of the devil. 4 In that man’s time, rivers will turn and face up heights. Father will kill son, and son father. Kinsman will kill kinsman, and there will be neither faith nor honour at that time. Churches will be destroyed, and priests will flee, unmindful of the relics of the saints who had preceded them, or of the churches where the saints had dwelt. The women serving in church will be without modesty, flaunting their shame and nakedness. 5 On the day of the birth of Antichrist, there will be someone dead in every house throughout the four comers of the world. Later on, the two prophets now in Paradise, Elijah and Enoch, will come to do battle with him. They will fight together for three hundred and forty days, and thereafter he will slay them both in the Plati, that is, in the palace of the city of Jerusalem. They will lie dead for three and a half days, during which time nobody will dare to bury them for fear of Antichrist. Then, at midday, they will arise in the presence of all. And an angel will descend from heaven, and will say to them : “O Elijah and Enoch, enter into eternal life from henceforth”. And they will ascend then in the sight of all the people. 6 Then there will be an earthquake and terrible fiery thunder upon the hosts. Everyone in the company of Antichrist will be burnt and killed by the power of God. Thereafter, to save the people, almighty God will send the archangel Michael, carrying a naked sword. He will slay Antichrist with a single blow, splitting him in two halves from the crown of his head down to the ground. Michael did not deliver that blow simply to destroy Antichrist, but to return the world to a better state. Then every pagan, Jew, and foreigner will convert to the Catholic faith. Only three and a half years will remain after that until the Day of Judgement.

Expanded version of the Legend with Latin phrases in two eighteenth century Manuscripts (RIA 23 N 15 ; NLI G 411) Texts bearing on Antichrist and with the Antichrist legend were still being copied in Irish manuscripts in the eighteenth and nineteenth | centuries. We have one example in the manuscript 23 N 214

the irish legend of antichrist

777

15 (490) of the Royal Irish Academy. This manuscript with miscellaneous material was written by the scribe Micheál Mac Peadair Uí Longáin. It has an item on the coming of the Last Judgment, given as a response to a query of John the Evangelist concerning the end of the world. This appears to end incomplete with the phrase : “... At that time Enoch the son of Methusalem will go forth in his human body from the places of the great light of Paradise to encounter the Antichrist”. After this sentence Micheál Óg Ó Longáin, the scribe’s son, has appended a text on Antichrist, under the heading Sgél Ainntecrisd”, “the Story of Antechrist”. This is followed by the colophon : “It is now 50 years since my father wrote the beginning of this story of Antechrist, and it is now in the year 1816 that I myself have finished it in Cork, having drawn it from an old vellum book (seinleabhar meamruim) that was written 900 years ago”. Gerard Murphy was of the opinion that while the tract on the last judgment (of Micheál Mac Peadair Uí Longáin), though mainly concerned with Antichrist, is very different from the Book of Lismore, there can be little doubt that the “ancient vellum book” from which Micheál Óg copied was the Book of Lismore.23 If Micheál Óg’s text is a copy of Lismore, some explanation is required for the Latin phrases embedded in the Irish, indicating, it would appear, translation from a Latin original. The interrelationships of these Irish Antichrist texts is a matter to be 23  G. Murphy in his description of MS 23 N 15 in Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts of the Royal Irish Academy, fascicle XI, Dublin, p. 1358. For a mor­ leabhar meamruim in Ó Longáin MSS see M. Ní Úrdail, The Scribe in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Ireland : Motivations and Milieu, Münster, 2000, pp. 163-167 = Book of Lismore or Leabhar Uí Chruimín. Does not mention or discuss Sgel Ainntechrisd. See also review of the book by P. Ó Macháin in Eigse 33 (2002), pp. 232-37, at 235. There is another copy of this text, including Micheál Óg’s colophon, in the nineteenth-century Royal Irish Academy MS 23 B 25 (500), written by Uilliam Mac Dhómhnuil Uí Dhuinnin, Co. Cork. Brian Ó Cuív (“Two Items”, p. 88, n. 13) says that the oldest manuscript with this form of the text that he has seen is National Library of Ireland G 441, written by Henri Ó Muircheartaigh in 1724. There are some inaccuracies in this description : the MS in question is G 411 (pp. 61-71 ; not 441), a manuscript written by Henri Mac (not Ó) Muircheartaigh, this section of it in 1724. The scribe may have been from Co. Meath. (I wish to thank Pádraig Ó Macháin of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies and Elizabeth Kirwin of the National Library of Ireland for their help in tracing the exact reference to this item.

778 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church considered by future study. In the present state of research what seems indicated is that they be presented in translation. The text of MS 23 N 15 has not been edited, but a French translation has been published by George Dottin in the introduction to | his edi- 215 tion of the Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven.24 The relevant section of his rendering is reproduced here. L’Antechrist .i. diabolus faciet magna prodigia in populo et alors il y aura un seigneur malheureusement fort, très horrible et le regne et la règIe de l’Antechrist seront comme une herse sur le monde et il ferait des signes contraires, extrêmement merveilleux chez les peuples, et il dirait qu’il est le fils chéri de Dieu et que c’est lui qui est dans la prophétie universelle et personne n’osera dire que Ie Christ est venu délivrer la race humaine. Alors Jean demanda au Seigneur quelle sorte de forme ou d’apparence il aura, ou à quoi il ressemblera pour qu‘on le reconnaisse, dans l’espoir qu’ensuite nous ne croirons pas en lui. Dixit Dominus : de muliere meritrici nascetur .i. le Seigneur a dit que ce serait d’une courtisane de race juive qu’il naîtrait et que ce serait à Babylone qu’il serait mis au monde et que ce serait dans cette ville-là qu’il demeurerait. C’est lui le père des quatre personnages les plus mauvais qui naquirent jamais .i.e. Cain, Jerosopilat, Simon Magus. L’Antechrist sera le grand bannisseur des justes et le destructeur des chrétiens et le proclamateur de 1’incrédulité, et le négateur de l’humanité, et Ie fils chéri du diable et malheur à qui vivra dans Ie temps de cette naissancc maudite, c’est-à-dire de l’Antechrist. ... Sexcentum cubitos in longitudinem corporis sui. Ainsi sera cet homme-là : six cents toises la hauteur de son corps et quarante toises la largeur ; et il est grand, effroyable, hideux. One chevalure douce, lisse, sombre, épaisse sur sa tete. Oculum unum in fronte ejus. Il aura un oeil dans la tête et un masque noir diabolique sur lui, et des sourcils louables, mouchetés comme une crinière. One seule oreille dans sa tête ; et le grand oeil qu’il aura sera rapide, brillant. Et fumus de naribus. Et de la fumée de feu sinistre, puante, sortira des narines de son nez et des flammes de feu de l’unique oreille qui est dans sa tête noire et horrible ; une seule surface plane forte, diaboliquc, de couleur horrible dans sa mâchoire ; pas de dents il la mâchoire supérieure ; une côte haute et grande, étonnante, dans son sein. Deux côtes larges et grandes dans son côté gauche. Nec genua habebit, et il n’aura pas de genoux ; les plantes de ses pieds seront aussi unies et aussi rondes que des roues de charrette. Il aura une 24  G. Dottin, “Les deux chagrins du royaume de ciel”, Revue Celtique 21 (1900), pp. 349-87, at 353-56.

the irish legend of antichrist

779

chevelure noire effrayante et il ne souffrirait pas que personne au monde se cachât à lui et à quiconque croira en lui il mettra sur le front un signe avec un fer rouge et personne au monde ne pourra cacher ce signe jusqu’au jour du Jugement et quiconque ne croira pas en lui il le tuera et ce sera d’après Ie choix de Dieu. Jean l’evangéliste dit qu’il n’est pas Ie diable lui-meme, mais Ie fils chéri du diable après son accomplissemeut désormais.

| Sources and development of the Irish Legend

There are at least three questions which merit examination with regard to the Irish legend of Antichrist. One is its source, whether it can be traced to a known apocryphal text. In three of the texts presented above (the Liber Flavus text, the text of the Book of Lismore and the related text of the Royal Irish Academy manuscript) the “Strange story of Antichrist” is said to have been revealed to John (John the Evangelist, John the Beloved Disciple). In the last two texts John requests of the Lord a description of Antichrist so that he could be recognised. A natural source for this and other elements of the Irish Antichrist legend might be the apocryphal Apocalypse of John. In this work John is told of the coming of the denier, who is called Antichrist. In the heavenly reply to the seer’s question, “Lord, reveal to me what he is like”, the appearance of Antichrist is given as follows :25 The appearance of his face is dusky (or : gloomy) ; the hairs of his head are sharp, like darts ; his eyebrows like a wild beast’s ; his right eye like the star which rises in the morning, and the other like a lion’s ; his mouth about one cubit ; his teeth span long ; his fingers like scythes ; the print of his feet of two spans ; and on his face is an inscription. Antichrist.

A text of this apocryphal work has been published by Constantin Tischendorf.26 The composition is often dated to the fifth century,

25  English translation by A. Walker, in Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations (Ante-Nicene Christian Library vol. 16), Edinburgh, 1870, pp. 493505. 494. 26  C. Tischendorf, Apocalypses apocryphae, Leipzig, 1866 ; reprint Hildesheim, 1966, p. 70-93, found in Armenian, Arabic and Old Slavonic translations ; English translation by Walker, in Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations, pp. 493-505

216

780 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church but may be considerably earlier. It has been little studied.27 The present state of research scarcely permits us to draw any conclusions as to its connection with the origins of the Irish Antichrist legend. There may well have been many such apocryphal apocalypses attributed to John, author of the canonical book of this name. The earliest Irish (eighth century) texts speak of the immoral, even incestuous, origins of Antichrist, a feature retained right through the following eleven hundred years. Another feature of the Irish texts is the treatment of the physical features of Antichrist, the Antichrist physiognomy. In this, 217 and in other aspects of the Antichrist legend we are fortunate that the entire subject has been the subject of intense research, particularly in recent years.28 Bernard McGinn has traced the development of the tradition from the beginnings, down through patristic, early and later medieval times to our own day. In his study of the figure of Antichrist in the period of development (A.D. 100-500) McGinn devotes a section to Antichrist’s physical appearance. For him the second important theme of this period (whose earliest written evidence comes from the third century) is that of the Antichrist physiognomies, the physical descriptions of his unusual appearance. These are Eastern, rather than Western ; indeed, McGinn notes, it is curious that they had so little effect on Latin Antichrist beliefs. It is possible that those texts had Jewish roots, but it is also clear that fascination with how physical

27  See comments on it by A. Yarbro Collins, Early Christian Apocalypticism. Genre and Social Setting (Semeia 36), Decatur, GA, 1986, pp. 76-77. 28  See in particular B. McGinn, “Portraying the Antichrist in the Middle Ages”, in Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages (Mediaevalia Lovaniensia 1,15), ed. by W. Verbeke  – D. Verhelst  – W. Welkernhuysen, Leuven, 1988, esp. pp. 3-13 ; B. McGinn, Antichrist. Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil, New York, 2000. See also J. Maasynbaerde Ford, “The Physical Features of the Antichrist”, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 14 (1996), pp. 23-41. From the earlier works on the subject we may note W. Bousset, Der Antichrist in der Überlieferung des Judentums, des Neuen Testament und in der alten Kirche. Ein Beitrag zur Auslegung der Apokalypse, Göttingen, 1895 ; English translation by A. H. Keane under the title The Antichrist Legend. A Chapter in Christian and Jewish Folklore, London, 1896 ; H. D. Rauh, Das Bild des Antichrist im Mittelalter. Von Tyconius zum Deutschen Symbolisnus (Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters, N.F. 90), Münster, 1973.

the irish legend of antichrist

781

features reveal character was widespread in the ancient world.29 The Antichrist physiognomies currently known to us are found in texts that are not critically edited and that are difficult to date. Almost every important apocalyptic revealer (Elijah, Ezra, Daniel, John, and even the Sibyl) was eventually credited with providing a physical description of Antichrist, as the chart McGinn gives detailing fourteen examples show. Of these fourteen most are eastern, two are Latin, two Irish (Leabhar Breac, Book of Lismore). 30 The classical text on Antichrist in the West comes from around 950, in De ortu et tempore Antichristi of Adso, later abbot of Montier-en-Der. The Irish tradition does not belong to this. It is independent of it. As McGinn writes :31 | Antichrist physiognomies accompanied by unusual legendary accretions belonged to the Eastern imagination at this time [9501000]. Yet they became prevalent in one place in western Europe –- Ireland, at least from the tenth century on. The native imagination, coupled with Irish predilection for apocryphal literature suspect in other parts of Latin Christendom, seems to have had much to do with this unexpected turn of events.

McGinn then draws attention to a tenth century Latin text edited by Bernhard Bischoff, containing what Bischoff believes to be the oldest text on Antichrist in the West. 32 The text, now in Avranches, Bibliothèque municipale as MS 108, was from the twelfth century at the latest, in the famous monastery of Mont St. Michel (Brittany) and Bischoff believes the legend originated there. Bischoff notes that this description of the Antichrist should be compared with a Latin-Irish text given in translation by Georges Dottin in the introduction of his edition of “The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven”, of which there is an almost identical description in the Book of Lismore. 33 There are some Latin phrases retained McGinn, The Antichrist, p. 68. Charts in McGinn, The Antichrist, pp. 72-73. 31  McGinn, The Antichrist, pp. 97-98. 32  See B. Bischoff, “Vom Ende der Welt und vom Antichrist (I) ; Fragment einer Jenseitsvision (II) (Zehntes Jahrhundert), Anecdota Novissima. Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 80-84 ; 82 for Latin text cited. 33  G. Dottin, “Les deux Chagrins du royaume du Ciel”, pp. 349-87, at 353-56, from MS Royal Irish Academy 23 N 15 (490). 29  30 

218

782 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in the Irish text, an indication that the work is translated from Latin. The Latin text published by Bischoff has many irregular Latin from which makes understanding and translation difficult. The general sense, however, is clear. The text begins by reference to the phoenix, destroyed by fire from heaven. The fire is extinguished by rain from Afric. The text continues, as given above in an earlier essay (page 473, in Latin, with the translation of Bernard McGinn :34 Conclusion In this essay I have given the relevant texts and outlined the state of research on the Irish Antichrist legend as best I can. The time now seems ripe for a thorough examination of this material, through critical editions of all the Irish texts, accompanied by an attempt to situate these in the general history of the Antichrist legend, at the same time tracing developments within the Irish tradition itself over the eleven hundred years between the earliest (c. 750) and latest texts. Postscript 2014 This essay has been revised to serve as an introduction to the critical edition by Caoimhín Breatnach of the texts mentioned in items on pages 775-79 above for inclusion in the series Apocrypha Hiberniae II,2, material now with the AELAC Editorial Board. A distinct advance in the study of this tradition has been made by Charles D. Wright, who has discovered Latin texts (from England) of this Antichrist tradition, and which are believed to represent the original of the Irish texts. Wright’s critical edition of these Latin texts is published in this same volume of the Apocrypha Hiberniae, with cross references between the Irish and Latin texts.

34 

McGinn, The Antichrist, p. 98.

| THE (FIFTEEN) SIGNS BEFORE DOOMSDAY

IN IRISH TRADITION* It is an honour and pleasure for me to be invited to contribute to this Festschrift in honour of Dr Marek Starowieyski who has contributed so much to the study of New Testament apocrypha and has translated the New Testament apocryphal gospels into Polish. As A. De Santos Otero has brought to the attention of the scholarly world, Old Slavonic has a rich tradition in apocryphal writings. The same is true of Irish tradition. Currently, in conjunction with the AELAC (Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne) an Irish Editorial Board is preparing a critical edition of all the New Testament Apocrypha, in a subseries Apocrypha Hiberniae of Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum. The first volume has already appeared : Apocrypha Hiberniae. Vol. I : Evangelia Infantiae (Brepols 2001). The second volume in the series is in the process of completion : Apocrypha Hiberniae. Vol. 2. Apocalyptica et Eschatologica. One section of this volume will be devoted to the (XV) Signs before Doomsday. I give an overview of the question here, much of which must be regarded as “work in progress”.

On the Mount of Olives the apostles asked Jesus privately what would be the sign of his coming and the close of the age (Mt 24.3). Jesus replies in an apocalyptic eschatological discourse, with mention of a variety of woes and wonders, leading to the “sign of the Son of Man” (24.30), coming on the clouds of heaven to gather his elect from the four winds of heaven (24.31). Predictions of an end, and signs preceding it, were already part of the Old Testament message, and are found also in the New, especially in the revelation of John. It is natural that interest in signs predicting the end should continue down through Church history, leading to new compositions *  First published in : Miscellanea Patristica Reverendissimo domino Marco Starowieyski septuagenario professori illustrissimo viro amplissimo ac doctissimo oblata (Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne XX/2), ed. by K. Bardski  – M. Starowieyski, Wydawn. Archidiecezji Warszawskiej, Warsaw, 2007, pp. 223-254.

223

784 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church and the recasting of older ones. Early interest signs of the end can be seen in the Greek acrostic translated in Augustine’s City of God (book 18, chapter 23), a text, however, which was to play no major role in later development of the Signs before Doomsday tradition. The Apocalypse of Thomas There may have been various texts with signs before Doomsday in the west, which ultimately gave rise to a work known as the Apocalypse of Thomas. This is probably the book “called the Revelation of Thomas” in the so-called Decretum Gelasianum (probably sixth century) and condemned as apocryphal. Due to publications made in the early twentieth century, an apocryphal work known as the Apocalypse of Thomas is now known in two forms, a longer “interpolated” version published from a Munich manuscript by Friedrich Wilhelm | in 1907,1 and a “non-interpolated” version 224 published by Pius Bihlmeyer from another Munich manuscript in 1911.2 The primitive apocalypse would appear to have been a brief address of Christ to Thomas on what is to come to pass before the end of this world, before Christ’s elect depart out of this world. The longer text has a historico-prophetical introduction, referring enigmatically to events of the first half of the fifth century, which is generally regarded as an interpolation. Both texts give a list of the seven signs that are to occur before the end of the world, or signs during each of the seven days before the end, although Wilhelm’s longer version ends imperfectly after the sixth day. The non-interpolated version says that on the eighth day, “when the seven days are passed by, there shall be a sweet and tender voice from the east” and the angels will come to deliver the elect who have believed in Christ. Since these earlier publications a further fragment of the “non-interpolated” version has been identified, and three witnesses of the “interpolated” version. Charles D.

1  F. Wilhelm, Deutsche Legenden und Legendare, Leipzig. 1907, pp. 40*42* (from MS Munich, Clm 4585 ; ninth century). 2  P. Bihlmeyer, “Un texte non interpolé de l’Apocalypse de Thomas”, Revue Bédédictine 28 (1911), pp. 270-82 (from Munich, Clm 4563, of the eleventh-twelfth century).

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 785

Wright has also identified six versions of abbreviated versions of this apocalypse, which give only the list of signs. 3 The earliest locus of dissemination of the Apocalypse of Thomas seems to have been Italy, and it was probably composed there, possibly in the fifth century. Our two earliest witnesses (representing both the interpolated and non-interpolated recensions) are Italian. One of them (now Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale, lat. 2 [earlier Vienna 2], 5th century) was palimpsested in Bobbio in the eighth century. Wright has noted Insular (British and Irish) links in the transmission history of the Latin texts. One of the interpolated texts is found in MS Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica, Pal. lat. 220 (9 th cent.). fols 48v-53r, a manuscript which contains other texts regarded as Hiberno-Latin.4 The Apocalypse of Thomas was early known in England and four Old English versions of it are known, two at least with the interpolated version.5 After his study of the Latin and English and Irish vernacular evidence, Wright notes that the new texts he has described further underscore how The Apocalypse of Thomas was subject to redaction, interpolations and abbreviation and that it hardly possible to reconstruct an original or archetypal text from the surviving witnesses, or even critically to edit just three primary recensions. He goes on to remark that as Thomas D. Hill has pointed out in his introduction to Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture, “texts such as … the Apocalypse of Thomas did not circulate in a single authorized version … and edition of a single version … would misrepresent the way in which most medieval readers had access to [it]”.6 Wright is of the opinion that an appropriate model for an edition of Thomas 3  See C. D. Wright, “The Apocalypse of Thomas. Some New Latin Texts and their Significance for the Old English Versions”, in Apocryphal Texts and Traditions in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. by K. Powell – D. Scragg (Publications of the Manchester Centre for Anglo-Saxon Studies), Woodbridge, 2003, pp. 27-64. 4  See Wright, “The Apocalypse”, pp. 40-41 ; Wright, The Irish Tradition in Old English Literature (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England 6), Cambridge, 1993, p. 111. 5  See Wright, “The Apocalypse”, pp. 41-46. 6  See Wright, “The Apocalypse”, p. 46, citing T.D. Hill, Sources of AngloSaxon literary Culture. Volume One. Abbo of Fleury, Abbo of Saint Gern­maindes-Pres and Acta Sanctorum, ed. by F. M. Biggs et al., Kalamazoo, MI, 2001, p. xxii.

786 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church is the recent edition of Long Latin versions of the Apocalypse of Paul by Theodore Silverstein and Anthony Hilhorst, who print all the sur|viving texts of three variant recensions in facing page, 225 parallel-column format.7 In his view this holds in particular for the Old English versions : “If we want to clarify the interrelations of the Latin and Old English versions, we need a new edition of this kind – in effect, a synoptic Apocalypse of Thomas”.8 This view might profitably be borne in mind for the editions of the Irish texts of Thomas, or the (Fifteen) Signs of Doomsday as well. The texts of the Latin Apocalypse of Thomas, we may note, speak of the seven days before Doom, and of an eighth day of Judgment, of reward and punishment. The reconciliation of these numbers and the identification of the days with days of the week presented problems and confusion to the Anglo-Saxon tradition. It does not appear that this was the case in Irish tradition. With Irish, and Latin tradition (if not general Christian tradition in general), the general resurrection of the Dead was to take place on Sunday (as all major events in salvation history were in Irish tradition believed to have taken place). The general judgment, Doomsday, would be on the day following, on Monday. This belief seems to have been central to Irish tradition from an early period. In Irish the term lúan (Monday ; dies lunae), is very frequent in phrases meaning “Doomsday”, “Day of Judgment”, based on the belief that the world would come to an end on a Sunday.9 The original phrase may have been lúan brátha, or its equivalent, “Monday of Judgment”. Lá an Lúain¸ “the Day of Monday” is also an Irish name of Doomsday, even in modern Irish.10 The (Fifteen) Signs before Doomsday At a given time in the development of the Latin tradition, and of the western tradition in general, with regard to the Signs before 7  Apocalypse of Paul. A New Critical Edition of Three Long Latin Versions, ed. by Th. Silverstein – A. Hilhorst (Cahiers d”Orientalisme 21), Geneva, 1997. 8  Wright, “The Apocalypse”, p. 47. 9  See s.v. “lúan” in Dictionary of the Irish Language, col. 224, 3-15, with reference to RC (Revue Celtique) 13, 122 ; Vitae Sanctorum Hiberniae ii, 198 note. 10  See s.v. “lá” in Dictionary of the Irish Language, col. 9, 84-85.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 787

Doomsday interest passed from the seven days or seven signs before Doomsday to the Fifteen Signs or Days before Doom. How precisely the tradition came to be made, and the direct influence of the seven-day sign and sequence on the later fifteen-day system remains to be determined. The Fifteen Day system is represented by four traditions (which can be reduced to two), all rather closely related, namely, (1) the Pseudo-Bedan ; (2) that of Peter Comestor (d. c. 1179), in his Historia scholastica. Historia evangelica (completed about 1173) chapter 141 (PL 198, 1611) ; (3) that of Peter Damian (died 1072, in his “signa praecedentia iudicii diem ex S. Hieronymi sententia”, being chapter IV of his work De Novissimis et Antichristo ; PL 145, 840) ; (4) that of Thomas Aquinas (c. 1250, in his Commentarium in quartum librum Sententiarum magistri Petri Lombardi, distinct. 48, quaest. 1, art. 4).11 The use of the tradition by Peter Damian shows that it was well established by the eleventh century, and was known through a written text believed to be the work of Jerome. Damian inserts the list of signs into his theological treatise. The same is true of Thomas Aquinas, who in his commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard is discussing the question whether certain signs will precede the coming of the Lord to judgment. For Aquinas, against such a belief stand texts such as I Thess 5.3 (sudden destruction will come [at the end | 226 time]) and I Thess 5.2 (the Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night). In favour of the belief we have Lk 21.25 : “There will be signs in the sun, the moon and the stars”, to which text Aquinas adds : “Furthermore, Jerome gives fifteen signs which precede judgment”, at which point he lists them in brief. It is recognised that Aquinas depends on Peter Damian.12 For this reason, and because Aquinas’s learned work did not influence popular tradition, his list may be ignored. Peter Comestor also accepted the signs as a work of Jerome. He inserts the list into his account of the Gospel teaching on the end time, from the death of Antichrist to Christ’s second coming. While Comestor has a more concise expression of the signs than Pseudo-Bede, it is recognised that his 11  Summa Theologica XII, ed. by Fratres Praedicatores, Rome 1906, p. 162 ; earlier in Doctoris Angelici Thomae Aquinatis … Opera Omnia, ed. by S.E. Freté, vol. 11 ; Paris. 1874, p. 441. 12  See W.W. Heist, The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, East Lansing, MI, 1952, p. 27.

788 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church signs tradition depends on Pseudo-Bede’s text, into which, however, he has introduced changes.13 He omits Pseudo-Bede’s third day, with the result that he has moved all the subsequent signs back one day, and has to supply a final fifteenth day sign to make up for his omission. Furthermore, the Comestor group regularly reverses the order of signs 12 and 13 of Pseudo-Bede. Comestor’s work has been very influential, and for this reason is to be borne in mind (with the differences noted) in any study of the affiliations of vernacular texts. The best known and most influential of these is that of the Pseudo-Bedan Collectanea. The Collectanea, a collection of various pieces in diverse subjects, was published among the works of Bede by Johann Herwagen the younger in Basel in 1563.14 No manuscript of the Collectanea is known and the date of the work in general, and of individual items of its component parts, is occasionally a matter of debate. The work is clearly not by Bede. In the most recent edition of the Collectanea by Martha Bayless and Michael Lapidge the composition is understood to be in three parts, with a total of 388 items (De quindecim signis being items no. 356-71) : part 1, nos 1-304 ; part II, nos 305-379 ; part III, nos 380-388. Michael Lapidge attends to the origin of the Collectanea. Part I is taken as a unit, probably begun early in the eighth century as a notebook by an Irish scholar who began collecting dicta of various sorts, mostly concerned with biblical wisdom and recording them in no particular order. The work of collection would have begun in Ireland, from where the scholar passed to Britain and later to the Continent, completing his collection in an Irish community of expatriates in Austria or Bavaria. The items in Part II (nos 305-379) have an interest in numerology, and this section is possibly inspired by the nature of some of the material in Part I. In his view hypotheses similar to those advanced for Part I might best explain the assemblage of materials in Part II ; in this case, however, a date after c. 820 needs to be posited to accommodate the incorporation of two brief treatises which draw on the Liber See Heist, The Fifteen Signs, pp. 25-26. Opera Bedae Venerablis presbyteri Anglosaxonis. 8 vols in 4 (Basel, 1563), vol. 3, 647-674 ; reprinted on various occasions : in PL 94, 539-562 ; critical edition, Collectanea Pseudo-Bedae (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae 14), ed. by M. Bayless  – M .Lapidge, Dublin, 1998. 13  14 

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 789

officialis of Amalarius of Metz – always assuming, of course, that their inclusion was the work of the original compiler of Part II, and not a later interpolator. With regard to our item on the Fifteen Signs Michael Lapidge notes that it is a text which circulated separately in manuscript, although no surviving manuscript is earlier than the twelfth century. He notes its affinities with various Irish texts, including the Tenga Bithnua and Saltair na Rann, remarking that there is nothing to preclude Irish origin (or indeed an eighth-century origin), but nothing as yet to confirm it.15 | All four Latin texts say that the signs have been found by 227 Jerome in a Jewish text, in annalibus Hebraeorum. While the Collectanea text has only the list of fifteen signs, without other context, in the other three Latin texts they are set in a theological context of the Last Things (De novissimis). The Fifteen Signs give the tokens before Doom generally in the order of one (or first day) to fifteen (or fifteenth day), by which is meant the first (or first day) of the fifteen day period before Doom. In some texts (as in the Irish Airdena) the enumeration begins with fifteen (or the fifteenth day). Irish Origin of the Fifteen Signs Tradition ? The Fifteen Signs tradition, in one form or another, was very popular in the Latin and vernacular texts of the Middle Ages. The question arises as to how the tradition originated, and what is its relation to the Apocalypse of Thomas and the Seven Day set of signs. William W. Heist has investigated the question in depth and believes that it originated in Ireland and Irish tradition.16 According to Heist, in his monograph The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, the legend of the Fifteen Signs as found in England and on the Continent seems to depend on, and to originate in, the material found in the additional strophes of Saltair na Rann. In the conclusion to his book he writes. :17 I have tried here to show that the additional strophes, CLIIICLXII, of the Saltair na Rann constitute a crucial text in the study of the origin and development of the legend of the Fifteen 15  16  17 

Lapidge, in Collectanea, ed. by Bayless  – Lapidge, p. 9. Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 193 Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 193.

790 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Signs before Doomsday. They are certainly the key to the study of the legend, and they are probably its actual original. For if the origin of the legend remains somewhat uncertain, it is only in the sense that we cannot prove beyond cavil that the immediate source from which it is developed was the matter in these additional strophes. The earliest clear trace of it appears here and nothing in the legend points beyond these strophes to any earlier source, except to the recognized main source of Saltair na Rann, the Apocalypse of Thomas. But no other form of the Apocalypse of Thomas can dispute with Saltair na Rann the position of probable source of our legend. So it is stating the case very moderately to say that it seems most likely that these strophes are the primary source of the Fifteen Signs, with The Evernew Tongue serving as the most important secondary source, even though we cannot quite exclude the possibility that the legend had been already formed when the Saltair na Rann was composed and that the latter borrowed from the legend as well as from the Apocalypse of Thomas, upon which it is primarily based.

On the assumption that Saltair na Rann is the main source of the fifteen-day legend, Heist18 gives the diagram given in a preceding chapter (page 176 above) as one possible explanation of the formation of the tradition and of the interrelationships of the various texts carrying the legend. In that diagram the “Irish Antichrist” is the medieval Irish legend found in a number of Irish texts. Not all the forms of the legend of the Fifteen Signs indicated in this diagram have extant texts to represent them. Some are forms whose existence is postulated to explain points of agreement and difference in the affiliated texts of the legend ; thus for instance the “Irish XV Signs”. “Ava” in the diagram is the type of the legend found in the poem attributed to the twelfth-century German poetess Ava ; Yrmes Detbrawt (Armes Dydd Brawd, “Proph|ecy on the Day of Judgment”) and 228 Gwynn gwarandaw are Welsh forms of the legend. This type is given together with those found in Peter Damien, Pseudo-Bede and Peter Comestor—three Latin texts which carry three different types of the legend, types, however, which are closely related to one another. It will be for current research to test the value of Heist’s position in the light of a new examination of the evidence.

18 

Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 99.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 791

Armenian Tradition A significant new element has been added to the discussion by Michael Stone who has published and studied two Armenian language texts with Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, preserved in Jerusalem, texts written in 1741 CE (text I) and 1669 CE (text II).19 The first of these texts, and the older in form, is introduced with the words : “And other doctors say “We have read in the books of the Jews that there are going to be fifteen signs on fifteen days before the Judgment”.20 These fifteen signs of the Armenian texts I and II are precisely those of Latin tradition of Pseudo-Bede (B) and Comestor (C). Stone gives them in a chart as follows :21

19  M. Stone, Signs of Judgement, Onomastica Sacra and the Generations from Adam (University of Pennsylvania Armenian Texts and Studies 3), University of Pennsylvania, 1981, pp. 1-57 ; also Stone, “Jewish Tradition, the Pseudepigrapha and the Christian West”, in The Aramaic Bible. Targums in their Historical Setting, edited by D. R. G. Beattie  – M. J. McNamara (JSOTSup 166), Sheffield, 1994, pp. 431-49, at 432-35. 20  Stone, Signs, p. 23. 21  Stone, Signs, pp. 9-11.

VI

Trees and all plants drip bloody dew and wither up

Fish and whales upon sand perish, cry out, smell

Rocks smite one another

Mountains and rocks smite one another with a terrible noise and are destroyed

All buildings destroyed

Plants and shoots drip bloody dew

IV

V

Whales upon water cry out to heaven

III

Sea dries up to the depths of dry land and water not seen

Flood of 40 cubits, like a wall to show that God can destroy the earth

II

Armenian

Sea dries up to the depths, scarcely seen

I

II

I

Day

Comestor

Latin

Sea and waters burn

Plants and trees give bloody dew Buildings destroyed

VII All buildings destroyed VIII Rocks fight one another, are divided into three parts and each smites the other

Marine beast upon seas cry out to heaven

VI Al plants and trees give bloody dew

V Waters burn to west (see Armenian VII)

IV Fish and maritime beasts upon water cry out. meaning known only to God

III They will be in balance as originally

Sea descends so as to be just seen

Flood of 40 cubits like a wall Sea descends to depths whose summit is scarcely seen

Bede

792 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church

XV Heavens and earth burn

XIV New heavens and new earth

XV

New heavens and new earth

Heavens and earth burn

All men die

XIII

XIV

Stars appear to fall from heaven

Dead fall out of graves

XII

Dead go out of graves

XI

Men [lacuna]

Levelling of mountains and valleys

IX

Men in caverns come forth, are mad, unable to talk to each other

General earthquake

VIII

X

Sea and earth are burned with fire (see B V)

VII

XV Heavens and earth burn up to the end of hell

XIV All men die so as to rise with the dead

New heavens and new earth

Heaven and earth burn

All men die so as to rise with the dead

Stars fall

Stars and signs fall from heaven XIII Bones of dead gathered and rise up to graves (see rel. XI)

Bones of dead rise and stand on graves

(See XIII below)

Men come forth from caves, go as mad, unable to talk to one another

Levelling of earth

X All hills and valleys become plain XI Men come forth from caverns, run as mad, unable to reply to one another

General earthquake

IX Earthquake unparalleled since creation

Rocks smite one another

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 793

794 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Stone is aware of Heist’s position, but puts questions and has his reservations. Stone writes :22 Armenian I and both Latin versions are attributed to a Jewish original. ... Both Latin texts state that the work is found in annalibus Hebraeorum which shows a tradition identical with Armenian.     If, however, the thesis of Heist as to the derivation of this text from a body of material combining tenth century old Irish writings and forms of the Latin version of the Apocalypse of Thomas is correct, then the origins of the attribution to Jerome as well as the Annales Hebraeorum remain puzzling, as he oberves. This mention of the Annales Hebraeorum may explain the attribution to the famous Hebraist  – Jerome, but why the work, if it was composed in Ireland in the eleventh century, should be given a fictitious Jewish source is obscure.     | The question of the original language of the Armenian version remains without solution. It is improbable that Armenian is original, although the framework of II was composed in Armenian. Whether its original was Latin or Greek or another language cannot be determined on any objective grounds that could be discerned by the present writer. Heist’s theories would demand an eleventh century date at the earliest, and presumably a Latin Vorlage.     Although it thus seems likely that the document is of Christian origin, it remains notable that the text itself contains no clearly Christian elements, nor is any of the portents listed necessarily drawn from the New Testament. Admittedly, some of them are paralleled in later Christian sources alone but granted the highly conservative, traditional nature of these signs, indeed of much of what is contained in the literature of these and related topics, as well as the possibility or even probability of mutual influence, it will readily be conceded that the Christian character of a single sign or of the pattern of concurrence of a number of signs must be very distinctive indeed to serve as sole and conclusive proof of a Christian origin. Mere occurrence in a Christian apocalypse is not enough.     The discovery of an Armenian version which has undergone certain textual development in that language may serve to open up the issue of origins once more. It could, of course, be a translation from Latin, depending ultimately on Old Irish sources. Perhaps, however, the filiation suggested by Heist should take clearer account of the possible origins of a list of fifteen signs in older 22  Stone, Signs, pp. 13-15, with reference to Heist, The Fifteen Signs, pp. 201-02 for the final paragraph.

231

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 795 writings, parallel to his suggested Irish source documents. This would not be out of keeping with the unique role of Ireland in preserving ancient texts little known elsewhere in Europe.

Signs of Doomsday in Irish Tradition 23 After consideration of the Signs of Doomsday in western Latin Church we can now turn to Irish tradition, examining the texts roughly in chronological order. The Signs in the Poems of Blathmac It is generally accepted that the Irish poems of Blathmac were composed about the year 750.24 In the first poem the poet calls on Mary to come to him so that he may keen with her very dear one (Jesus). In the course of 149 quatrains Blathmac laments Jesus’ sufferings in the company of Mary. In his second poem (quatrains 150-259) Blathmac again meditates on Jesus’ saving mission and Mary’s participation in it, beginning with the annunciation by the angel Gabriel, through his public life to victory over the devil at his resurrection, his post-resurrection appearances, his ascension, his lordship of creation. This takes the poet in quatrain 230 to begin his reflections on the prophecies of Christ in the Old Testament, beginning with the prophecy of Balaam on Mary’s son, the great star of dignity to arise from Jacob. This leads Blathmac on to speak of the Old Testament prophecies of Christ, and to enumerate the seven (or eight ?) things prophesied of Christ, a theme common in Irish, as in early Christian, tradition. The list varies slightly with the sources. That in the Scúaib | Crábaid, 232 “The Broom of Devotion”, probably from the eighth century and roughly contemporary with Blathmac, is as follows ; his birth, baptism, crucifixion, burial, resurrection, ascension, coming of the last judgment. Blathmac’s text reads :25

See M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975 ; corrected edition 1984, pp. 128-39, # 104. 24  The poems of Blathmac have been edited in The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan together with the Irish Gospel of Thomas and a Poem on the Virgin Mary, ed. by J. Carney (Irish Texts Society 47), Dublin, 1964. 25  Irish text with English translation by Carney, The Poems of Blathmac, pp. 78-81. 23 

796 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 232. It is the kingdom of your strong son that the chief prophets have prophesied ; though each speaks in his own way the intention of their prophecies is the same. 233. It is of your son (though you may correct him !) that great laws have been prophesied ; all this has been fulfilled save the act of his [second] coming. 234. His holy begetting, birth from clay, his undergoing the law of circumcision, his baptism ; he is not unbloody (lit. white) before going to cross and burial. 235. His high renowned Resurrection, thereafter his Ascension, his coming to pass judgement (alas !) on the living and the dead.

The final prophecy on Christ’s coming to pass judgment, leads the poet on to speak of the signs before Doomsday (quatrains 236-42), to judgment for the individual crimes, the slaughter of Enoch and Elias by Antichrist, ending with Michael’s slaying of the Antichrist. The signs in Blathmac do not conform to any of the known groups. However, given that for the things prophesied of Christ Blathmac seems to have drawn on a current list, it is also quite possible that he knew of a list of the signs before Doomsday, even if not quite any of those known to us. The early date of such a text, when the tradition was probably only in the process of formation, might explain the differences. I give here the signs before Doomsday of quatrians 236-42 in the edition and translation of James Carney.26 236. Alas the coming of hardship  – it will utterly crush the great elements. Earth and sky will be ablaze ; the smile will be wiped from the face of the seas. 237. This will be a severe shaking ; the form of the elements will perish ; ocean, sea, and pool will be dry, the beautiful stars will fall from heaven. (cf. Bede 12) 238. The mountain will be as high as the hollow ; there will be great complaint ; the world will be a level expanse so that a single apple might roll across it. (cf. Bede 1-3) 239. Before your noble unblemished son the angel will sound a good trumpet ; there will arise at the sounding every dead one who has been in human shape. (cf. Bede 14) 240. It is by your son—enduring deed ! – that many thousands will be struck down into the great fire before the Lord passes judgement on the deeds of all. (cf. Bede 15)

26 

Carney, The Poems of Blathmac¸ pp. 80-83.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 797 241. Though there be fought (?) a war that will destroy hues  – it will be the end of all war ; the ignoble demon host will be defeated with their black perverse lord. 242. The impious (pitiful will be the occasion !) who have submitted to Leviathan will suffer burning and slaying ; it will be woe to the followers of the Devil !

| This gives the following list : Alas the coming of hardship  – i. it will utterly crush the great elements. ii. Earth and sky will be ablaze (cf. Ps.-Bede 5) ; the smile will be wiped from the face of the seas ; iii. This will be a severe shaking ; the form of the elements will perish ; iv. ocean, sea, and pool will be dry the beautiful stars will fall from heaven (cf. Ps.-Bede 12) v. The mountain will be as high as the hollow (cf. Ps.-Bede 3) ; vi. there will be great complaint ; vii. the world will be a level expanse so that a single apple might roll across it (cf. Ps.- Bede 1-3) ; viii. Before your noble unblemished son the angel will sound a good trumpet ; there will arise at the sounding every dead one who has been in human shape (cf. Ps.- Bede 14) ; ix. It is by your son—enduring deed !  – that many thousand ;s will be struck down into the great fire before the Lord passes judgement on the deeds of all (cf. Ps.- Bede 15).

Signs of Doomsday in Karlsruhe (Priscillianist ?) Collection (eighth century ?) We may have evidence for the presence in Ireland of some form of the Apocalypse of Thomas in the eighth century from a text in the Karlsruhe manuscript Aug CCLIV, fol. 153. This manuscript was written at the end of the eighth or the beginning of the ninth century, probably in northern Italy. The codex is a composite one of three distinct manuscripts. The opening section (fols 153-213) of the third of these was published by Donatien De Bruyne in 1907, who regarded it as fragments of Priscillianist apocrypha,27 a position generally rejected. The text published by De Bruyne has six items, the third of which is a sermon attributed to Saint 27  D. De Bruyne, “Fragments retrouvés d’apocryphes priscillianistes”, Revue Bénédictine 24 (1907), pp. 318-35 (with introduction and discussion) ; the Latin texts reproduced in PLS 2, 1503-1522.

233

798 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Augustine, beginning : Fratres karissimi, qui in Xpisto deum colentes, which has some parallels with the Apocalypse of Thomas. Montague Rhodes James regarded the contents of the texts published by De Bruyne as Irish, and his position has generally been accepted, but without any detailed examination of the question.28 A critical edition of this entire text, with an examination of questions relating to it, is called for. A point that may be made here is that some, if not all, the pieces brought together in the Karlsruhe manuscript may have originally circulated as independent units. This is true of the text that interests us, with passages from the Apocalypse of Thomas. Charles Wright has found that a piece almost identical with the third item published by De Bruyne has been transmitted independently in two other manuscripts, namely Pal. lat. 220 (siglum P) and Pal. lat. 212 (siglum V). P (Pal. lat. 220, fols 48v-53r) was written in Anglo-Saxon script in the Middle or Upper Rhine regions in the early ninth century, and |was at 234 Lorsch by the tenth century.29 It has a copy of the interpolated text of the Apocalypse of Thomas (not connected with Ireland), and a number of items believed to be Irish or related to Irish tradition, for instance the sole copy of what is regarded as Redaction XI of the Visio Pauli, a series of homilies beginning In nomine Dei summi¸ edited by Robert McNally who regarded them as Irish, 30 a recension of the Hiberno-Latin text, Dies Domenica, and immediately preceding this an enumerative motif encountered in several Hiberno-Latin compilations. 31 Pal. lat. 220 has also a commentary on the Athanasian Creed, within which one finds a text which overlaps with the second part of De Bruyne’s item no. 3 from the Karlsruhe manuscript. This text has not been published. I give it 28  M. R. James, “Irish Apocrypha”, Journal of Theological Studies 20 (1919), pp. 9-16, at 14-16. 29  See B. Bischoff, “Lorsch im Spiegel seiner Handschriften”, in Die Reichsabtei Lorsch. Festschrift zum Gedenken an ihre Stiftung 764, ed. by F. Knöpp, 2 vols., Darmstadt, 1973-77, II, pp. 7-128, at 49 and 108-09. See also C. D. Wright, The Irish Tradition in Old English Literature (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England), Cambridge, 1993, p. 111. See also Wright, “Apocryphal Texts”, p. 40. 30  R. E. McNally, “’In Nomine Dei Summi’. Seven Hiberno-Latin Sermons”, Traditio 35 (1979), pp. 121-43. See also Wright, “Apocryphal Texts”, p. 40. 31  See Wright, The Irish Tradition, p. 111.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 799

below as an appendix in the edition of Charles D. Wright, who has collated it with Karlsruhe Aug. 254 (K), ed. De Bruyne, p. 325, and with MS Pal. lat. 212 (V). In his edition of the interpolated text of the Apocalypse of Thomas Bihlmeyer noted the parallels between Thomas and the Karlsruhe texts published by De Bruyne. 32 He gives the following chart which seems to make clear that some text or texts of Thomas was known in the circles from which the Karlsruhe text emanated (which is recognised by a number of scholars as Ireland). APOCRYPHE PRISCILLIANISTE

APOCALYPSE DE THOMAS

(ed. D. De Bruyne, lines 44-64) Fratres karissimi, in postremo uidebitis multa mala in seculo prefines aduenient, servi dei b l a p s p h e m a bu nt u r, i n iq u it a s unusquisque proximo suo operatur, totus mundus in maligno positus in mendacio in fornicatione in omnibus malis et persecutionibus, anathema uirginitatis denutabitur, e c c le s ie deseren t u r, u e r i t a s n o n agetu r, p a x n o n erit, d i s c ipl i n a per ibit , bella exercentur in illis diebus.

Audi Thomas, quae oportet fieri in nouissimis temporibus erunt famis ... bl a s phe m iu m , in iqu it as , nequitia ... unusquisque quod ille placeant hoc loquantur et sacerdotes mei inter se pacem non habebunt ... erit t u rbat io magna in omni populo, interitus, d o m u s d o m i n i e r i t in d e s e r t i s et altaria eorum abominabuntur, ut aranea intexant in eis ... l a e t i t i a p er i it , et g a u d i u m recedit, in illis diebus m a l u m abundav it ... uer it a s n o n erit, auaritia habundauit ...

Uae h i s qui nu p t i a s f a c i e n t q uon - Uae i l l i s q u i n u p t i a s f a c i u n t  : i a m a u t gladio a u t fame aut ad fame et n e c e s s i t at e filius gene c a t i p i u i t a t e filios g e n e r a bunt. r a nt .(Texte interpole de Clm. 4585 d’apres Wilhelm [Deutsche Legenden und Legendare]) | P r i m a d i e sabbato nix et grando ueniet super omnem terram cum t o n i t r u a magna t e r r i b i l i t u b e et mor tui resurgent ; a l ia dioe mare siccabitur, t e r t i a d i o e aper i e t u r c e l u m et a s c i n d e t u r ab o r i e nt e u s q u e in occidente. Tunc fugient p e c c a t o r i b u s dicentes montibus et collibus : cadent super nos et op e r iet no s et non habebunt refrigerio nisi in ore inferni

32 

... pr i ma d ie ... nu b e s s a n g u i n a ... t o n i t r u a magna (voyez le texte publié ligne 12 ss.) ... p o r t a e c e l i a p e r i e n t u r ( l . 19) ... s c i n d e b i t u r f i r ma ment u m cel i ab or ient e u s q u e ad o c c i d e n t e m (l. 40 s.) ... omnes h o m i n e s f u g e b u n t in mo nu ment is ... et dicent, utinam t e r r a ap e r i r et se et d e g l u t i r e t nos (1. 44 ss.) ... Tu n c me u i d e b u n t desuper uenientem ... c u m

P. Bihlmeyer, “Un texte non interpolé”, pp. 270-82 ; the chart on p. 279.

800 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church d e g l u t t i n e n t u r nos. Tunc exe r citus angelor um u i d e b i t u r c u m c h r i s t o et omnes sancti et omnes iustis et erunt in letitia oeterna sine f i n e in consortio patriarcharum et in me d io c h o r i a n g e l o r u m et in iugi l e t i t i a prophetarum et consed i o cum o m n i u m s a n c t o r u m in secula seculorum sine fine in l e t i t i a magna.

u i r t u t e et s a n c t o r u m a n g e l o r u m (l. 4 8 ss.) ... tunc et in aera tollent u r ... et ibunt mecum g a u d e n t e s in celis ... tune erit illis m a g n u m g a u d i u m coram patre meo et c o r a m a n g e l i s sanctis (l. 68 ss.)...

Signs of Doomsday in Saltair na Rann (c. 1000) Saltair na Rann (“The Psalter of the Quatrains”) is a poetical composition of 162 cantos or poems. The original work had only 150, a fact which has given the work its name. From internal evidence it has been generally assumed that the work was composed A.D. 988. The subject matter of the Saltair is sacred history from creation onwards, based on scripture, but mainly on the apocryphal Adam and Eve tradition for the creation narrative. The additional poems (Cantos 151-162) after canto 150 express repentance and ignorance of God and treat of the signs and events which are to occur during the nine days before Doomsday. The entire Irish text, without translation, has been edited by Whitley Stokes. 33 The Irish text of cantos 153-162 on the signs before Doomsday, with English translation, are given by William W. Heist. 34 Heist devotes chapter 4 of his work to a study of the chief early groups of the signs tradition. Towards the end of this, 35 and immediately before the diagram (pedigree as he calls it) indicating one of the possible lines of development, he sums up the findings of chapter 4 in nine points, which mainly concern the place of Saltair na Rann in the development of the tradition : 1) Saltair na Rann is derived, in its basic structure, from the seven-days list of signs before Doom in the Apocalypse of Paul ; 2). It contains almost all the fifteen signs, five very distinctive ones of them being grouped in the order of the earliest datable form of the legend [=Pseudo-Bede] in strophe CLVI. 3). It is the earliest known 33  Saltair na Rann, ed. by W. Stokes (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Medieval and Modern Series, I,iii), Oxford, 1883. 34  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, pp. 2-21. 35  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 98.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 801

text of any part of the Fifteen Signs. 4). It is so closely related in detail and wording to the Airdena inna Cóic Lá ria mBráth that either the corresponding parts must be descended from a common Irish ancestor or one must descend from the other. 5). The Airdena or an ancestor of it has also borrowed some material from The Evernew Tongue. 6). The Damien (in Heist’s orthography), Pseudo-Bede, Ava and Comstor types of the legend resemble the Airdena fairly closely, though they are much simplified. The earliest of these, the Damien | type, is also the closest to the Airdena 236 in content. 7). The Old French version is quite different from all other versions, though it is closest to the Airdena ; but in several details it agrees more closely with Saltair na Rann (and in lesser degree with other forms of the Apocalypse of Thomas). It also has borrowed at least one detail from an Irish version of the legend of Antichrist. 8). The Welsh Arwyddion eyn Dydd Brawd (Gwynn gwarandaw) has the days numbered backwards like the Airdena, and resembles the Irish piece in some other details. 9). The Middle English The Debate between the Body and the Soul is a seven signs type, ultimately derived from the Apocalypse of Thomas. But most of the signs are more like those of the fifteen-day legend than the other seven-day forms, and, as in fifteen-day forms, there is usually only one sign on each day. Heist has arrived at definite positions on a variety of questions and texts. It remains for the research currently in progress to re-evaluate these in the light of a new edition of the texts. The section of Saltair na Rann with the Signs of Doomsday is being critically edited by Caitríona Ó Dochartaigh for the volume Apocrypha Hiberniae 2. The Signs of Doomsday in the Catechesis Celtica (tenth century) Catechesis Celtica is the name given to the contents of the Vatican Library codex Reg. 49. It is a tenth century manuscript, most probably written in Brittany. Its contents are religious, with homilies and other items. It has much material of Irish origin or with strong Irish affiliations. 36

36  On the Catechesis Celtica and its Irish affiliations see M. McNamara, “The Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp. 291334 ; McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica (MS Vat.

802 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church One of the items it contains (fol. 52v) is a text on signs for the seven days before Doomsday. Charles Wright has shown that it is one of six abbreviated texts of the Apocalypse of Thomas. 37 Within this group its closest affiliation is with an abbreviated text of the same apocryphon preserved in the manuscript Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hatton 26, written in England in the thirteenth century. This manuscript has some items with Irish affiliations. While not certain, it is probable that the abbreviated text of Thomas of the Catechesis Celtica represents Irish tradition. The Vatican codex Reg. 49 and the Oxford text are the only Latin texts of Thomas from England or Ireland. In the Catechesis Celtica text the signs are followed by a passage on eternal rewards and punishments, very much in the tradition of Irish eschatological teaching. 38 While it is possible that this ending was added to the signs on the Continent, it would seem more probable that the entire unit, with the seven-day set of signs, circulated in Ireland. I here give the text with the Signs before Doomsday (from MS Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. lat. 49, fol. 52v) and the retribution that follow on the general judgment. 39 | De diebus VII ante diem iudicii

    Primo die primum signum iudicii, mormur magnum, erit in caelo. Hora tertia diei erit uox magna in firmamento caeli, nube magna sanguinea descendente ab aquilone ; et tonitrua magna erunt, et fulgora fortia sequentur illam nubem, et cooperient nubes caelum. Et erit pluuia sanguinis super terram.     Secunda die erit uox magna in firmamento caeli, et mouebitur terra de celo suo, et pars aperietur in firmamento caeli ab oriente.

Reg. lat. 49)”, Sacris Erudiri 34 (1994), pp. 185-237 ; J. Rittmueller, “MS Vat. Reg. 49 Reviewed”, Sacris Erudiri 33 (1992-1993), pp. 259-305. 37  C.W. Wright, “Apocryphal Texts”, pp. 37-40, 55-62. 38  See McNamara, “Sources and Affiliations”, p. 234, with reference to p. 233, with an earlier text on eternal joys in the same manuscript. 39  With this ending see the ending on a homily on the Second Coming in the same MS Reg. lat. 49, fol. 51r (cited in McNamara, “Sources and Affiiations”, p. 233). Beati quibus dabitur altum rus angelorum sine curis, ubi est dies sine nocte, tranquillitas sine uento, gaudium sine fine, ubi sunt VIII quae nullus in hoc mundo habere potest, etiamsi fuisset rex totius mundi. uita sine morte, iuuentus sine senectute, letitia sine tristitia, pax sine discordia, lux sine tenebris, sanitas sine dolore, regnum sine commotatione…

237

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 803 Et potestates magne eructabunt per partes caeli, et cooperient totum caelum.     Tertia diei hora II erit in caelo signum igneum et solfureum, et abissi terram rigabunt. De IIII angulis mundi primum celum plicabitur ut liber et non apparebit continuo ut putei abissi obscurabuntur usque ad horam X. Tunc dicent omnes angelici populi : Appropinqua nobis, Domine, ne pereamus.     Quarto die hora prima maria et terrae aquilonis orientia loquntur, et abissi mubebunt. Tunc commouebuntur uniuersae uirtutes terrae et motus in illa die erit, et cadent idola gentium et omnia facta terrae.     Quinta die hora V subito erunt tonitrua magna in caelis. Ortus solis et ortus lunae rapietur. Erunt tenebrae magnae usque ad uesperum. Et stelle auertuntur a ministeriis suis. In ista die omnes gentes odient seculum et condemnabunt uitam saeculi huius.     Sexta die hora VI diei scindetur caelum in firmamento ab oriente parte usque ad occidentem. Erunt angeli prospicientes de caelis. Tunc fugient in montibus et abscondent se ante uirtutem angelorum dicentes : Aperiet se terra et deglutiet nos. Sunt et alia quae numquam facta sunt ex quo celum creatum est.     Septimo die hora II IIII angulos saeculi simul totum caelum plicabitur. Iniqui angeli facientes bellum inter se tota diae et angeli sancti pernecabunt eos propter electos meos. Post haec hora VI erit uox tenera, suauis, quando dicet Pater sanctis et iustis : Venite, benedicti Patris mei, possidete regnum quod uobis paratum ab mundi. Aspera uox erit, quando dicet impiis et peccatoribus : Ite, maledicti, in ignem aeternum. In ista die iudicii, sicut Petrus ait : Erit dies unus tamquam mille anni et mille anni tamquam dies unus. Mille erit dies unus impiis et peccatoribus. Sanctis autem et iustis mille anni quasi dies unus erunt.     Vae autem illi homini, qui expectat hunc diem cum malo merito, si prius ei non eueniat dies confessionis peccatorum suorum ante exierit de corpore suo, quia omnis peccator tunc moritur primo uiuens in peccato. Quandiu fit in peccato, moritur et in sepulcro et in inferno perpetuo.     Vae semper homicidiis et periuris et idolatriae seruientibus et adulteris et furibus et maledicis et falsis testibus, et rapina inmerito repientibus ! Hi autem omnes, qui iniqua agunt, ibunt in suplicium aeternum, ubi est fletus et stridor dentium, ubi tenebrae sine lucae, ubi fumus et frigus, ubi sempiterna maledictio.     Non sic erit iustis et perfectis in omnibus mandatis Dei bene operantibus. Ibunt in uitam aeternam in regno spendido, in letitia sempiterna sine tristitia, iuuentus sine senectute, | lux sine tenebris. Nullum malum aduenit. Nullum bonum abierit, sicut

238

804 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church apostolus dicit : Quod oculus non uidit, nec auris audiuit, nec in cor hominis ascendit, quae praeparauit Deus diligentibus se. Et tunc uidebimus eum sicuti est. Videbimus regem iuuenem et aeternum et regnum aeternum. Videbimus Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum.

The Signs of Doomsday in the Early Recension of the Evernew Tongue (tenth, ninth, eighth century ?)40 As we can see from the diagram given above, William W. Heist believes that in the formation of the Fifteen Signs tradition together with Saltair na Rann the Evernew Tongue served as a most important secondary source. In Tenga Bithnua, “The Evernew Tongue”, is a name given in Irish tradition to Philip the Apostle, arising from a tradition that at his martyrdom his tongue was cut out seven times (in the Irish Passion of Philip ; nine time according to In Tenga Bithnua itself) by his torturers, but he did not cease preaching. The Irish work under this name is preserved in three recensions, the first and most important in the Book of Lismore.41 In the work, in response to questions addressed to him, the Evernew Tongue gives information on a great variety of subjects, such as the creation of the universe, especially about the seven heavens, the seas, wells, rivers, precious stones and trees of the earth, the sun and stars, birds, beasts and men. The two final questions concern the end time, the answer to the second last containing the signs before Doomsday. Some of the questions, and other portions of the text, are in Latin. Many questions have arisen as to the nature of this work and the sources used, and a variety of answers given. As Máire Herbert has stated in the notes to her translation of part of the text in 1989 : “Much painstaking literary and source analysis is required before any really informed judgement can be passed on this interesting composition”.42 This work has now been very competently edited by John Carey, in a volume in the series Apocrypha

40  See McNamara, The Apocrypha, p. 132, # 104A ; critical edition by J. Carey, In Tenga Bithnua. Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol.  2/1 (CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2010. 41  Edited by W. Stokes, “The Evernew Tongue”, Ériu 2 (1905), pp. 96-162. 42  In M. Herbert – M. McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, Edinburgh, 1989, p. 183.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 805

Hiberniae 2, published by Brepols Publishers in the series Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum. Hitherto the original composition was generally assigned a date in the tenth century. His examination of the language of the first recension has made John Carey feel convinced that the original text was considerably older than has hitherto been held, belonging at the latest to the ninth and perhaps even to the eighth century. For a fuller understanding of the Fifteen Signs tradition in Ireland I believe it permitted to reproduce here the full text of the Signs before Doomsday of this recension, and (with his kind permission) in the translation of John Carey. The text reads as follows : (§91). Interrogaverunt sapientes Ebreorum : “Indica nobis de die iudicii, et quomodo destruetur mundus, et quo tempore destruetur.” The Ever-new Tongue answered : “It is not pleasant”, said he, “even to be reminded of the Judgment concerning which you ask. Trembling and fear come upon even the angels | of heaven when it is remembered and brought to mind. For it is cause for much trembling and fear : (i) the three hundred and sixty-five eruptions ( ?) from the mountains of fire, bursting upon the lands before the face of the great King whose power will destroy the world. (ii) The tottering and breaking of the seven heavens as they bend down upon [the] lands. (iii) The rising and the tumult of the four fiery winds from the cardinal points of heaven, with roaring and the coming of thunder and lightning from every quarter. (iv) The thundering of the 3,375 stars as they fall from heaven. (v) The moon turning the colour of blood. (vi) The sun quenching its light. (vii) The hosts of heaven will be so numerous on that day that no mortal will be able to see them all, or to reckon their number, but only God. (viii) The woods and mountains dissolving ( ?) in a fiery blast from every side. (ix) The crying out of the beasts, and of all the animals of the land. (x) The raining down ( ?) of fire in every land. (xi) The flocks of birds in the air crying out because of the streams of fire. (xii) The bellowing of the whales and the fish in the seas because of the ebbing away of the salt seas and the heat of the fire. (xiii) The descent of the nine orders of heaven, and the crying and singing of the souls as they come to take their bodies from the earth.

239

806 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (xiv) The wailing and outcry of the sinners as they plead for mercy from the Lord whom they have afflicted ; and it will be a “cry into the void” for them, and “repentance too late”. (xv) The outcry of those in hell, as the souls are vomited up to the assembly, so that judgment may be passed upon each one according to its deserts. (xvi) The smiting together of the seven heavens as they dissolve in the winds of fire. (xvii) The shaking of the earth as it is knocked backwards and upside down. (xviii) The wailing and outcry of the demons and the souls of the sinners, as hell closes over them forever.”

The next, and final question, in the Evernew Tongue is on the precise time, in daytime or nightime, in which the world was created or will be destroyed and (in which) the Lord rose from the dead. It indicates that the signs before Doomsday were considered with the pattern of the overall endtime : §93. Interrogaverunt sapientes Ebreorum : ”Quo tempore die vel nocte mundus factus est vel distruetur. et Dominus surrexit a mortuis ?”

With regard to sources for the Signs texts of Tenga Bithnua Carey first records earlier research on the matter. St. John Seymour compared “the crying and singing of the souls as they come to take their bodies from the earth” (lines 20-21 ; sign xiii) with the uox magna | uttered by souls reclaiming their bodies in the Apoc- 240 alypse of Thomas ; 43 but William W. Heist denied that this resemblance was sufficient evidence that the former had indeed drawn from the latter. Heist preferred to assume that TB’s lost source had belonged to the same “general body of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic” as the Apocalypse of Thomas, and to see any similarities between the texts as being explicable on this basis : “in the present state of the evidence, there seems to be little more to say of the relations of the Evernew Tongue to earlier works”.44

Carey, In Tenga Bithnua, p. 384, with reference to Seymour, “The Signs of Doomsday in the Saltair na Rann”, PRIA 36 (1923), pp. 154-63, at 162 ; text in Bihlmeyer, “Un texte non interpollé”, p. 273, lines 52-57. 44  Carey, In Tenga Bithnua, p. 384, with reference to Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 65. He refers to the Collectanea of Pseudo-Bede, ed. by M. Nayless – M. Lapidge, p. 30. 43 

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 807

Carey then gives his own assessment. When account is taken of the readings of the second recension as well as the first (in the Book of Lismore), however, close parallels to the Apocalypse of Thomas can be found in items (ii), (xiii), (xvi) and (xvii) : given that the Apocalypse’s influence may be discernible in § 66.16-17 of the first recension [that is, “the mountain of fire which was formed from the fire of Judgment” ; cf. Apoc. Thom., Bihlmeyer 1911, p. 273], the case for a significant connection seems persuasive ; (iii-vi) appear to derive from Revelation 6.12-13 ; 7.1. (i) and (ix-xii) resemble items in the tract De quindecim signis : one copy of this tract is preserved in the pseudo-Bedan Collectanea, a miscellany which has been tentatively assigned to an insular milieu ; (ix-xii), however, are closest not to the Collectanea version but to that used by the eleventh-century Italian scholar Peter Damian : the latter, or one of its sources, must therefore have been available to the author of TB. The Signs of Doomsday in the Second Recension of the Evernew Tongue (twelfth century : middle or second half)45 A second recension of the Tenga Bithnua is known from four manuscripts. It has been edited by Úna Nic Énri and Gearóid Mac Niocaill,46 who from a study of the language believe that a date for the work in the middle or second half of the twelfth century would be acceptable. The overall relation of this second to the first recension does not concern us here. There is, however, a significant difference in the Signs before Doomsday. I give the relevant text of this second recension here in the translation of John Carey (with his consent) : [§91. The wise men of the Hebrews said. “Tell us”, said they, “tidings of the Day of Judgment. How is the world dissolved throughout the land, and at what time is it destroyed ?” [§92. The apostle said : “Indeed, those tidings are not pleasant for you. For when the angels of heaven give thought to them, there is trembling and fear upon them on their account :

See McNamara, Apocrypha, p. 136, # 104F. Ú. Nic Énri  – G. Mac Niocaill, “The Second Recension of the Evernew Tongue”, Celtica 9 (1971), pp. 1-59 ; In Tenga Bithnua, ed. by Carey, pp. 208, 210, 212, 214. 45 

46 

808 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (i) “the tremblings and fear of the three hundred and seventy-five mountains, bursting before the face of the great high powerful King, (ii) “Breaking and trembling seizing the whole world. | (iii) “The seven heavens will bend down from the southern corner of heaven, so that the bright radiance of the angels and the sunny dwelling of the royal house will be plainly visible to the earth. (iv) “The rising of the four fiery winds from the four corners of the world, (v) “The tumult and loud clashing of the 1,305 stars as they fall from heaven, and the moon turning the colour of blood, and the sun confined in the blackness of coal and [deprived] of its light. (vi) “So great will be that peril that there will not be a bright angel whose appearance will not change, save only the countenance of God. (vii) “The burning and falling of the woods and mountains at the blast of the fiery sea, and the crying out of the beasts at the heat of the fire of the purgatory of the animals of the earth, and the screaming of the flocks of birds in the air because of the streams of fire, and the bellowing of the whales of the sea because of the great heat of the fire ebbing around them. (viii) “The singing together of the nine orders of heaven, and the crying of the souls as they come to take the bodies in which they did good deeds and bad deeds. Woeful then will be the cry of the sinners as they plead for mercy from the Lord after their offence and on account of having gone against his will. It will be a cry without [receiving] mercy, and it will be repentance without atonement, and it will be peril without end”. [§93. The wise men of the Hebrews asked : “Is it in the day or in the night that the world was made ; or when will it be dissolved, or in what hour did God arise from the dead ?”]

The Signs before Doomsday in a Poem “Garbh éirghidh iodhna an bhrátha”, attributed to Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh (died 1224)47 Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh was trained in bardic learning and also in subjects taught in monastic schools, some of which still existed. He is chiefly noted as a religious poet. A large number of poems (more that 160), mostly religious in nature, have been attributed to him.

47 

McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 135-136, # 104E.

241

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 809

The poem on the Fifteen Signs is very closely related to the Pseudo-Bede type.48 According to Heist “most of the variations from the Pseudo-Bede type in Ó Dalaigh’s poem are presumably due to the difficulties of the metrical requirements of his verse”.49 The poem, in fact, may conceivably be descended directly from Pseudo-Bede, but is, however, probably independent of the Pseudo-Bede text.50 Heist, in fact, can use the evidence of Pseudo-Bede to corroborate the order of the signs found in RIA, MS. 23.D.3 (one of the MSS used by McKenna), against that of the majority of the MSS, followed | by McKenna in his critical edition.51 This close relationship, 242 we may add, is possibly an additional indication of the Irish origin of Pseudo-Bede. It will be for the current research to examine the statements made by Heist. Ó Dalaigh’s poem has 38 verses. The first 22 of these are on the fifteen signs ; of the remaining verses, 23-34 are on the judgment. Quatrains 35-36 are on the order of the blessed in heaven : married couples, maids [thus McKenna ; ogha –read “virgins” ?] and widows are above around the Lord, enjoying the same life as the angels (cf. Mark 12.25 etc.). Christ’s mother is there in her own body – presupposing belief in the bodily Assumption of Mary. Those there who die young are considered blessed (# 37 ; cf. Wisdom of Solomon 4.10-14). The poem ends with a somewhat mysterious quatrain : “To Peter Pope of Rome come mighty throngs ; every man (cách ; every one) shall find him as a golden palace adorned” Quatrain 17 in McKenna’s edition gives the content of the sign for the twelfth day, with explicit mention of the day in question (unlike for all other days). Quatrains 18-19A of McKenna’s edition, with no apparent connection with the context, seem out of place. It is for the editor of the new edition to determine whether they are interpolations. The sources of the entire poem seem relatively clear. For the first part (qq. 1-22) it is the pseudo-Bede text ; for the judgment

48  Edited with English translation by L. McKenna, “The Signs of Judgment”, in The Irish Monthly 55 (1927), pp. 260-64. 49  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p.136. 50  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, pp. 136, 106, 199. 51  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, pp. 137-39.

810 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church scene (qq 23-33 Mt 24.b3-35 ; 25.b1-46) ; for 35-36 possibly Irish eschatology texts. I give the final section here, in McKenna’s translation, with source indication for some of the text : 22. On the fifteenth day : the earth shall blaze as tinder : next day shall come the judgment which shall make all men ( ?) 23. God shall send His good Son on Monday to judge the world ; God’s Monday-meeting to judge the dead shall be a dread fierce struggle. 24. Christ will utter—dread strait— the great reproach to us ; the Creator will tell us of His being spurned by us in churlishness. 52 52  The following verses depend ultimately on Mt 25.44 ; 25.42 ; 25.41, but probably more immediately on catechetical developments on the text of Matthew. For the judgment scene we may compare the roughly contemporary (twelfth century) Scéla lái brátha (“The Tidings of Doomsday”), §§ 5-12, edited by W. S[tokes], “Tidings of Doomsday. An Early-Middle-Irish Homily”, Revue celtique 4 (1880), pp. 245-57, §§ 5-12, at 246-49 : “When the Son of God and Man in one Person shall come with honour and with glory, and all his angels along with him, then will he sit on his throne and on the station of his glory) and all the human beings will be collected there in his presence, and he will make their division and their separation thereafter. He will set in order, forsooth, his Saints and his Righteous ones on his right hand ; but the sinful and the unrighteous he will set in order on his left. It is then that the King will say to those that are on his right, ‘Come ye, oh blessed ones, possess my Father’s kingdom that hath been prepared for you from the beginning of the world ! For I was in hunger and ye gave me food. I was in thirst and ye gave me drink ; I was in need of a guesthouse and ye gave me hospitality ; I was without raiment and ye gave me raiment. I was in sickness and ye came to watch me. I was in captivity and ye came to loose me and to help me’. It is then that the Righteous will give this answer to the Lord. ‘Oh Lord’, say they, ‘when saw we thee in hunger or in thirst and gave thee food and drink ? when saw we thee in need of a guesthouse or without raiment, and gave thee hospitality and raiment ? or when saw we thee in sickness or captivity and came to get tidings of thee and to loose thee ?’ This then is the answer that the Lord will give to the Righteous. ‘Every time’, saith he, ‘that ye have done good for the poor in my name, it is for me ye have done it’. Those then are the six kinds of mercy by which the heavenly kingdom is bought. They are the six glassen doors through the which comes the light of eternal life into the Church. Those are the six steps whereby the Saints and

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 811 | 25. “When did we spurn Thee ?”

we cry out in sorrow “to Thee had we seen Thee. O Lord, we would have given the kine of our possession”. 26. “I was the beggar in thy door-way In thirst and hunger, Not getting price of bit or sup While you were in comfort. 27. “I was every poor man, the woman in rags ; every beggar naked and destitute —they spoke the truth—was I. 28. “Ye folk who left me thus, depart to Devil’s home, and experience, as befits you, the place ye have deserved”. 29. Great then shall be the noise of weeping from Devil’s castaways ; sad the groans of the anguished folk as devils take them away. 30. Woe to the body cast into the abyss in the dread abode of Hell ; it is not possible to describe what the folk of that fort endure,

the Righteous ascend to Heaven. Then shall the Lord give also unto them that are on his left hand this bitter, awful answer, to wit, to the folk that have not fulfilled his will and his command, and it is this that he shall say to them, casting them into hell. ‘Depart from me, oh cursed ones, and go ye into the everlasting fire that hath been prepared for the Devil and his evil household. For I was in hunger and in thirst and ye gave me not food or drink. I was in need of a guest. house and raiment and ye gave me not hospitality or raiment. I was in sickness and captivity and ye came not to get tidings of me or to loose me’. It is then that the impious ones shall give this answer to the Lord. ‘Oh Lord’, say they, ‘when saw we (thee) in hunger, or in thirst, or in need of a guest-house, or without raiment, or in sickness, or in captivity, and rendered not attendance nor lowly service unto thee ?’ It is then the Lord will give an answer to them. ‘Every time’, saith he, ‘that ye have not done good for the poor in my name, it is for me ye have not done it’. Those then are the six chief things through the which hell is attained. Thereafter then the unjust shall be hurled headlong into hell’s pain and into the everlasting punishment, but the Saints and the Righteous shall go into the life everlasting to inhabit heaven along with God and his angels for ever and ever”.

243

812 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church | 31. Alas O Lord for him who deserves

to be driven from Heaven woe to him who parts—may we never part— from that lofty fair palace. 32. Christ Who holds sway shall say “Ye folk who abandoned Me not, come in the strength of my blessing with me into everlasting life.” 33. “He who abandoned feast in my honour,” says the King of Heaven, ‘shall get a better banquet-house without ceasing or end,” 34. Bright shining-faced angels shall open the doors to them ; “twould be hard to distinguish the bright sun from the splendour of each angel’s face. 35. Married couples, maids [ógha, translate : “virgins” ?], widows are above around the Lord in Heaven in three holy ranks enjoying the same life as the angels. 36. Christ’s mother in her own body shall be seen by all in Heaven ; Heaven’s King on His throne shall be seen on Mary’s left. 37. Short the life of those whom death takes from youth before their sins for the world was not long dear to them ; “tis a danger to those to whom it is granted. 38. To Peter Pope of Rome come mighty throngs ; every man shall find him as a golden palace adorned.

The Signs in the Poem “Airdena an Brátha” (date : not before 1100)53 The text headed Airdena inna Cóic Lá nDéc ria mBráth (“The Signs of the Fifteen Days before Doom”), edited by Whitley

53 

See McNamara, The Apocrypha, # 104C, pp. 133-34.

244

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 813

Stokes from the Book of Lismore,54 is one of the best- | known Irish 245 texts with the fifteen signs before Doomsday. Its position within the Fifteen Signs tradition, and place in the development of this tradition, have been examined by St. John D. Seymour55 and William W. Heist.56 These recognise the affiliations with the specific Damian form of the legend. Heist also notes the differences from Damian in some instances and agreements at times with Pseudo-Bede. Much of Heist’s examination is taken up with comparisons of Airdena with Saltair na Rann, and the differences in the individual signs from Damian and comparison with the signs in other forms of the tradition, especially Pseudo-Bede. In his view, if we take the Airdena to be a quite primitive form of the legend we can successfully account for the relationships between the Damian and Pseudo-Bede types of the legend, as previous explanations have failed to do.57 It will be for a new evaluation of the Airdena to evaluate Heist’s views and assess the position of this text in the overall development of the legend of the Fifteen Signs. Here I make some basic observations, which need to be taken into consideration. Airdena is a prose text, with fifty-three paragraphs in Stokes’s edition. Nineteen of those are devoted to the fifteen signs before Doom, the signs being numbered from the fifteenth day before Doom to the day before Doom, in this differing from the general order found in the texts of the tradition. The signs or events for some days are briefly described ; the description of the signs for other days is quite lengthy, in this differing markedly from the Damian text. The order is also not always that of Damian. While the heading (Airdena, “signs”, “tokens”) speaks of the signs before Doomsday, more than half of the text (paragraphs 23 to 53) goes beyond the signs and speaks of judgment, eternal rewards and punishments. The sources used by this section require examination. The source for paragraphs 37-45 and 47-48 is demonstrably the Elucidarium of Honorius Augustodunensis 54  Stokes, “The Fifteen Tokens of Doomsday”, Revue Celtique 28 (1907), pp. 308-26. 55  St. John D. Seymour, “The Signs of Doomsday in the Saltair na Rann” in PRIA 36 (1923), pp. 154-63, at 161. 56  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, pp. 72-91. 57  Heist, The Fifteen Signs, p. 90.

814 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (floruit early 12 th century). We know very little of the person who names himself in his writings as Honorius Augustodunensis, and what we do know is derived principally from his writings. He was very much under the influence of Anselm of Canterbury and also of Scotus Eriugena whose writings he was instrumental in popularising. He seems to have lived for some time in England and had relations with Canterbury, and apparently also with Worcester. 58 Most of his work, however, seems to have been in Southern Germany and Austria. He had relationships with Regensburg and the Irish monastery of St James there, and with one of its abbots, the Irishman Christianus. Opinion is divided about Honorius’s country of origin, whether France, Germany, England or even Ireland. Honorius may have been a pen-name, rather than his real name. His first writing, the Elucidiarium already referred to, was written about 1095, his latest known one from around 1135. The sources for the remaining paragraphs of the second part of Airdena (23-36 ; 49-53) may be compared with certain texts of Irish eschatology. The bearing of the identification of sources for the second part of Airdena needs to be evaluated in any study of the work’s bearing on the history of the Fifteen Signs legend. It | will be for lit- 246 erary scholars to determine the date of the Irish text, whether the language of the work is of the same nature and date throughout. The precise literary relationship of Airdena to Saltair na Rann also needs examination. I here give the second part of the poem (§§ 19-53), after the Signs proper, in Stokes’s translation, with some indication of its sources : §19. This is the token of the day before Doom [no. 15 of he other texts], to wit, the pure King of Glory, the only Son of the King of heaven and earth and hell, with a countless multitude of angels and archangels, to wit, the nine ranks of heaven, in His company will go, on that day to the summit of Mount Zion to judge their deeds, both good and evil, for Adam’s impure children. §20. This is the semblance in number of the household of heaven in the company of the Creator on that day, to wit, stars of heaven,

58  For Honorius, see M. Mac Conmara, An Léann Eaglasta in Éirinn 10001200, Dublin, 1982, pp. 47, 49.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 815 and sand of sea, and grass on earth. Such is the greatness of the power and strength of the angels, that in the space of only a single day seven of them would sweep away the whole world from sunrise to sunset. §21. More awful and mightier than thunder are their voices, so that then, there is sent a proclamation, from the Creator to the human race, to wit, Michael the Archangel ; and all human beings will then hear Michael’s proclamation from the Creator, summoning them to that great assembly. So then all the dead will arise out of the earth, to wit, first, the apostles will arise, and the prophets and the confessors, the martyrs and the saints and the righteous ; and thereafter the virgins and penitents ; and, lastly, baptized infants. §22. No one on that day will be younger or older than another, for the whole human race will arise at the age of thirty years, that is, the age at which Adam was created, and the age which Jesus had attained when He was baptized. 59 §23. Oh, foul will be the resurrection of the sinners on that day ! A great and vast army of Adam’s race will be proceeding distressfully through the seas of heavy, fiery, perilous ( ?) storm, and through the vast unendurable waves of the red flame which is in the four parts of the world, to the meeting of the justly-judging, mighty Overking, unto Mount Zion.

59  Resurrection at the age of thirty years would have been a common belief. We may compare a text in the more or less contemporary (eleventh century) Scéla na hEsérgi (The Story of the Resurrection) ; edited with English translation by W. Stokes, in “Tidings of the Resurrection”, Revue Celtique 25 (1904), pp. 232-59, at 239) : “8. It is then asked, since all human beings will arise out of death, in what age or form will their resurrection be ? And the apostle deals with that question when he says. ‘All men’, quoth the apostle, ‘will arise out of death in the likeness of the age and form of Christ’. Three years and thirty were completed by Christ, and in the likeness of that age He arose out of death. At the age of Christ, then, the apostle says that all men will arise, but not in His size, that is, not equal in bulk to His body, for it is not certain that all the bodies of the Resurrection will be of equal size. Christ, however, will abide for ever, without addition or diminution, in the form and in the bulk in which He appeared to His apostles after (His) resurrection ; and it is therefore that all men will arise at the same age, to wit, at the age of thirty. Howbeit, they will have in their bodies varying size and unequal bulk, in accordance with the likeness and the nature of the times and the countries in which they have been born”.

816 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church §24. Oh then the household of heaven and earth and hell will gather into that meeting, and then the King of Glory will arise with His final Cross on his shoulder in the presence of them all ; and thus He will arise, with all His red Body around Him, with the traces of the stabs and wounds of His Passion upon Him, so that all the deep, incurable gashes, and the great tortures which they themselves inflicted upon Him, may be manifested to the Jews.

| §25. Then Christ will sit down with his twelve Apostles around 247 Him. Oh then will be the great, conspicuous end, to wit, the Monday of Doomsday, the day of destruction and vengeance for the sinners, and the day of respect and great honour for the righteous. §26. That day there will be a sad and manifest cry from the rabble of the world at being cast, bound and cruelly fettered, into the awful death of Hell, into the unfriendly hands of their foe, the Devil, tortured continually, and with Hell shut upon them for ever and ever. §27. Then the saints and the righteous will be diligently and always praising their Creator, they being cheerful and glad after gaining victory and triumph from the Devil. §28. Oh the whole human race is arranged in four assemblies, there in presence of Christ, to wit, the good and the very good, the bad and the very bad.60 60  The division into four groups for the judgment is a feature of Medieval Irish eschatology. See Catechesis Celtica, ed. by M. McNamara, “Some Aspects”, pp. 57-58. “IIII familiae quae ascri(bentur) in iudicio. Duae familiae ex eis non ueniunt in iudicio, id est boni ualde et mali ualde. Sedebunt enim impii statim cum diabolo, sicut sedebunt iusti et perfecti cum Christo. Aliae duo familiae ueniunt ante iudicium, id est boni non ualde et mali non ualde. Et iudicabit illos atque illis dicetur. ITE et UENITE. Resurget impius ut damnetur, iustus ut iudicet. Timendum est iudicium”. This is found in greater detail in the Irish text Scéla lái brátha (Tidings of Doomsday), §§ 15-18 ; ed. by W. Stokes, in “Tidings of Doomsday”, Revue Celtique 4 (1880), pp. 245-57, at 250-53 (dots represent small illegible sections of the Irish text). “15. It is certain, then, that there will be made four troops of the human race on the Day of Doom. Now a troop of them shall be brought to judgment and shall go after their doom to pain and punishment. It is to them the Lord shall make the awful answer in banishing them from him. ‘Depart from me, oh cursed, into the everlasting fire that has been prepared for the Devil and for his evil household. It is these that do not fulfil by deed the good which they promise by lips. This is the name of that folk in the scripture, mali non valde, that is, bad, not greatly bad. 16. Another troop of then will not be brought to judgment, but to Hell they will go at once, without adjudication at all then, and

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 817 §29. Oh sad it is that the provision of the ready, ever-decisive judgments which are then delivered will not be upright, pleasant, righteous, discreet, gentle, patient, loving, abstinent, fasting, humble, penitent !

| §30. Oh, on one side then will be cast the envious and the 248

false-judging, the quarrelsome and the incestuous, the harlots and the satirists and the buffoons, the heretics and the marauders, the robbers and the jealous, the liars, the noisy, the lampooners, the she-lampooners, the haughty ; the gluttonous, the angry, the homicidal, the parricides, the deceivers, and all other evil ones. §31. Those, then, are cast to the demons, to inhabit Hell for ever and ever. And that folk is swept out of the world, for they themselves have forsaken the reward of heaven and the sight of their holy and mighty Father ; and they will be a thousand years in the eternal fire of Doom, for that is the length and period of the Day of Judgment.

they will be tortured thereafter through ages of ages without God’s mercy to help them, for they do not put term, or law, or rule on committing their sins and the vices here, but every evil which is greatest they could to outrage God and men, it is this that they do. This is the name of that troop, mali valde, that is, what is worst of the human race. 17. Another troop of them will be brought to judgment, and they will go after their judgment unto reward. These are they that here make earnest repentance through grief of heart, and amend their former evils through virtues and fair deeds, and then they give alms of food and of raiment to the poor in honour of the Lord, and these hide the sins they have before committed, and the Lord remembers not for them there the evils they did here. It is to these that the Lord will say on Doomsday, calling them to Him unto heaven. ‘Come now, O Blessed, to inhabit the heavenly kingdom !’ This, then, is the name of that troop in the holy scripture boni non valde, that is, ‘good who are not greatly good’. 18. Another troop of them, however, will not be brought to judgment, but unto heaven and all golden rewards they will go at once without adjudication at all. With them it is not enough of good to fulfil everything that the divine scripture enjoins on them to do, so that they abound through their own virtues and through their fair ... and they do more of good than what is enjoined on them in the divine commands. It is to them ... that Jesus pledges and prophecies this great good ... in the gospel, that he will say to them, seeing them ... to him in the great convention of Doomsday. ‘since ye have left for me’, saith Jesus, ‘every good thing that ye had in the world, ye have come into my household and into my fellowship. Come ye now ... that ye may be along with me on twelve thrones, without adjudication on you. Ye are judging the human race’... ” (Here a leaf seems lost in the manuscript, with omission of mention of “boni non ualde”). Four ordines on judgment also mentioned by Honorius Augustodunensis in Lucida­ rium 12 (PL 172,1166C), but without the designation boni. boni valde, etc.

818 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church §32 Oh, neither calm nor easy is that road, for there they get neither food nor drink nor resting, but constant hunger, and thirst without relief, and cold and unendurable heat. §33. Oh, sad will be the sharp cry of lamentation and the great howl of grief, and the hard, vehement wailing, and the sorrow of mind, and the suffering of heart, and the enduringly wretched hand-clapping of Doom, which the sinners, after rejecting God’s mercy, make at being dragged, strongly and urgently, to the everlasting torture of Hell. And they will be mightily praying for pardon, and wretchedly reproaching the Lord for not forgiving them in this life for the outrages they committed upon Him. §34. Oh, ‘tis then on that day the locks will be shut on the sinners ! to wit, the shutting on them by casting them into the many awful torments of hell, and the shutting of their eyes against the world, and the shutting from beholding the heavenly Kingdom without their seeing it thenceforward. §35. Oh, then they will sit in the presence of the King of Evil, to wit, the Devil, in the glen of infernal torments, where there is dark, lightless fire, and a life sad, ever-distressful, foul, sooty, virulent, impure ; and where there will be trembling on tooth, and hard shackles on body, and grief on mind, and darkness on cheeks, and miserable, mournful moans, and constant weepings, and lasting handclapping, and heavy tears of blood over cheeks at their suffering, and cries at hearing them. §36. Oh, the Devil will then make heavy-headed, cruelly-fettered, bound captives of the tortured sinners at their lasting passion in the narrow chested, rough-headed, iron, awful prison of hell for ever and ever. White faces of constant suffering with the aspect of a dead man they have ; and horrible, many-headed monsters with thick, crimson snouts upon them ; and one great monster there, with five hundred heads and five hundred fangs in every head, and a hundred feet, and a hundred toes on every foot, and a hundred nails on every toe. §37. Howbeit, the whole human race could not set forth the multitude of Hell’s many torments, Everliving fire will be continually blazing therein, and it does not illumine ; and if the sea were spilt against it the sea would not quench it.61 61  Quatrains 37-45 are clearly dependent on the Elucidarium of Honorius Augustdunensis ; see Honorius Augustodunensis, Elucidarium, III, 4, De malorum deductione ad inferos, e de poenis que ibi sustinent (PL 172, 1159D-1160A). “D. Quae sunt illae ? — M. Prima ignis, qui sic semel accen-

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 819 | §38. This is the second torment therein, to wit, unendurable cold, as saith this testimony : si mitteretur etc.,62 that is, in a mountain of fire aflame were cast therein, Hell would make of it ice and snow. § 39. The third torment, that of poisonous snakes and vermin and many monsters of hell to be gnawing and wounding the souls continually. §40. The fourth torment, the lasting, unmeet stench of Hell. §41. The fifth torment, the urgent smiting together of the demons, like the sledging of smiths in a forge, at the continual smiting and massacring of the souls. §42. The sixth torment, everlasting : A land of darkness wherein dwells the shadow of Death, and no right order, but eternal horror.63 §43. The seventh torment, namely, the confession of the sins which one did not confess in this life, so that they are then manifest to all the folk of Hell. §44. The eighth torment, the continual contemplation of the Devil’s countenance. For though there were no torment in hell, that would be enough of torment, for sparks of fire drop urgently from the base eye of the Devil as a red firebrand ( ?) drops from a hearth. sus est, ut si totum mare influeret, non exstingueretur. Cujus ardor sic istum materialem vincit ignem, ut iste pictum ignem ; ardet, et non lucet. Secunda poena est intolerabile frigus, de quo dicitur. Si igneus mons mitteretur, in glaciem verteretur. De his duabus dicitur. Illic erit fletus et stridor dentium (Mt 24.51), quia fumus exeitat fletum oculorum, frigus stridorem dentium. Tertia, vermes immortales, vel serpentes et draeo-nes visu et sibilo horribiles, qui ut pisces in aqua, ita vivunt in flamma. Quarta, fetor intolerabilis. Quinta, flagra caedenlium, ut mallei ferrum percutientium. Sexta, tenebrae palpabiles, ut dicitur. Terra tenebrarum, ubi nullus ordo, sed sempiternus horror inhabitat (cf. Job 10.22). Septima, confusio peccatorum, quia omnia peccata ibi patent omnibus, et se abscondere non valent. Octava, horribilis visio deemonum et draconum quos igne scintillante vident et miserabilis clamor flentium et insultantium. Nona, sunt ignea vincula, quibus in singulis membris constringuntur. 62  The Irish text has : “...pian tanusti ... amail adeir in promhadh so De q[u]o dicitur. si mitt[eret]ur mons innitus in glaciem uerteretur”. See the text of Honorius cited in preceding note. 63  The Irish text has. “an sesed pían, dorchadas bithbuan, amal sadberthar isin caintic so. ‘Terra tenebrarum, ubi umbra mortis, et nullus ordo, sed sempiternus [MS ; sedh simpiterrnus] horror inhabitat’“. The citation is from Job 10.22 (Vulgate), cited by Honorius (see note 61 above).

249

820 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church §45. The ninth torment : locks and fiery bonds to be blazing on every member and on every separate joint of the sinners, so that they cannot escape from the torments in which they abide for ever : for in life they did not control those members by penance and by the cross of repentance in liability for their evil and their sin. §46. But touching the saints and the righteous, the mighty Lord will welcome them attentively on that day, and will then say to them : Come ye blessed ones (in Irish text : Uenite benidicti et cete­ra), etc. §47. Then seven Glories 64 are bestowed on the bodies of the righteous, and seven glories on their souls. These are the seven Glories of those bodies, Claritatem, that is brightness, for the bodies of those that arise on that day will be seven times brighter than the sun : Velocitatem, that is, speed, for the bodies of those that arise will be swifter than wind : Fortitudinem, that is strength : Libertatem, that is freedom : Voluntatem, that is, will, for their will and the Lord’s shall be the same : Sanitatem, that is, health, for throughout eternity they will suffer no disease or sickness : Immortalitatem, that is, immortality, for in their case they will never have separation of body and soul.

| §48. These are the seven Glories of the soul, to wit, wisdom and 250 friendliness and union, power and honour, gentleness and gladness.65 Oh those are the honours and gifts that the mighty Lord bestows on his own righteous ones, to wit, on the mild and kindly and loving and merciful, the beneficent, and the virgins for sake of God.

§49. Then is Life eternal without death, and many-melodied joy, and lordly delight without limit or end, and health without sickness, and pleasure without strife, and youth without aging, and 64  Paragraphs 47-48 are clearly dependent on the Elucidarium of Honorius Augustodensis. This is evident from the Latin words embedded in the Irish text, which furthermore are in the accusative, without a governing verb, which they have in Honorius’s text. See Honorius Augustodunensis, Elucidiarium, III, 17 ; De operatione et gaudio beatorum (PL 172, 1169D). Reply to query to explain further I Corr 2.9 on the gaudia sanctorum. “D. Hoc planius edicito. — M. Septem speciales glorias corporis habebunt, et septem animae. In corpore quidem pulchritudinem, velocitatem, fortitudinem, libertatem, voluptatem, sanilatem, immortalitatem. 65  Drawn from Honorius Augustodunenssis, Elucidarium 17, PL 172,1069D : “Septem speciales glorias corporis habebunt, et septem animae. ... In anima autem sapientiam, amicitiam, concordiam, potestatem, honorem, securitatem, gaudium”.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 821 peace without disunion, and dominion without disturbance, and freedom without labour, and patience without desire, and calm without sleep. Holiness without defect, unity of angels, feasting without limit, to partake of the great Pasch among nine ranks of heaven’s angels, and together with them a Prince high, noble, fair, just, adorned : great, lordly ( ?), gentle and pure : on golden thrones and on glassen couches. And every one will be seated there according to honour and law, and according to his good works, contemplating the King perfect, entreated, righteous, truly-judging, noble, reverend, humble ; in presence of the great Godhead, to wit, the King of the Three Households, chanting together with Cherubim and Seraphim, and with nine ranks of Heaven, and with Him who was and is and will be there for ever ; without age or decay, without feebleness or weakness, without gloom or sadness, in bodies subtile and shining, in the station of angels and in the burgh of Paradise. §50. Oh, unspeakable is the size and amplitude and breadth of the Heavenly City ! For the bird whose flight and flying are swiftest on this earth could not finish the journey of that royal abode though it flew from the beginning of the world to the end. §51. Oh great and vast are the size and lastingness and radiance of that City, and its ease and its lustre, its grace and its great purity, its firmness and its stability, its costliness, its beauty, and its pleasantness, its height and its splendour, its dignity and its venerableness : its plenteous peace and plenteous unity. §52. Oh then well for him who shall be with good morals and good works to inhabit that City on the the day of Doom ! For he will be in the unity of each of the three, namely, in the unity that is greatly nobler than any unity, the unity of the royal Trinity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. §53. I entreat the mercy of great God. May we all reach the unity of that noble many-powered King, and may we dwell together with Him for ever !

Three Irish Texts XV Signs (Comestor type ?) in late Manuscripts There are three hitherto unpublished texts which are being edited by Caomhín Breatnach for volume 2 of Apocrypha Hiberniae, to be published by AELAC in the Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum. They appear to belong to the Comestor type. One is in the MS RIA 23 O 48 (MS 476 ; Liber Flavus Fergusiorum), fol. 12ra1 (written mid-fifteenth century). Without any

822 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church introduction, this gives each of the list of fifteen signs very briefly, and ends after signs 15 with “Finid”. In his examination of a tract on the fifteen Signs in BL Add. 30512 (15th and 16th cent.) fol. 95-98, R. Flower thinks that the | form of the tradition in the 251 Liber Flavus text appears to be that of Petrus Comestor.66 We may recall what Heist has said of the Comestor type : it omits Pseudo-Bede signs 3, supplements by an extra sign on the new heavens and new earth for signs 15, and regularly reverses Pseudo-Bede signs 12 and 13. The second is in the manuscript, Oxford, Bodleian Ir.e.7, which has been described by Brian Ó Cuiv in his Catalogue.67 The manuscript was written by Terence Ma Guire (Tordhealbach Maguidhir) in 1749. The text begins on p. 333. Ó Cuív says it continues on pp. 334, 331 and 332, ending imperfectly (p. 332) : bhearadh feachain ghéar nimhneach lán dfeirg 7 diombúaidh ar an during dhamanta 7 maill (….). The text, Ó Cuív continues, whose opening seems to derive from Petrus Comestor’s Pseudo-Jerome text De xv signis (PL 198, col. 1611), is not included in the list of 120 versions of the legend given by William W. Heist, The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday. Among authorities cited are Franciscus de Marione (14th century) and Pelbartus (fifteenh century). The third text, RIA 23 M 7 (287) was written by the scribe Micheál Óg Ó Longáin in Cork in 1818-1819. Its text is very close to that of the Bodleian manuscript, but does not have most of the additional material which Ó Cuív has noted in that text. Instead the scribe, Ó Longain, adds at the end : “See the poem that Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh composed on the signs of the end of the world beginning ‘s garbh éirge íodhna brátha. This is my book of devotional poems but I thought it was too long for me to put it here now, taking up space for these many little short pleasant agreeable pleasing tales. Finit”.

66  R. Flower, Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts in the British Library [formerly British Museum], Dublin, 1992 ; original London, 1927, p. 502. 67  B.Ó Cuív, Catalogue of Irish Language Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library at Oxford and Oxford College Libraries. Part I. Descriptions, Dublin, 2001, pp. 45-46.

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 823

Signs of Doomsday in a “Modern” Recension of the Evernew Tongue, ed. Georges Dottin In 1907, Georges Dottin edited what he called “Une redaction moderne du Teanga Bithnua”.68 This redaction, transcribed in 1817, was communicated to him by Douglas Hyde. Dottin compares its text with that of that of the Tenga Bithnua (Recension I) in the Book of Lismore. Other manuscripts and fragments of this recension are known (National Library of Ireland, MS G 32 ; Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, MS XLVII ; Edinburgh, Advocates Library 72.2.5 (formerly LV) ; British Library, MS Egerton 174). The oldest of these is the Edinburgh National Library of Scotland MS XLVII text, although fragmentary (perhaps of the fifteenth century). The other texts are late – mainly of the eighteenth, one of the nineteenth century. The texts of this recension have not been critically edited. The date of the recension is thus quite uncertain, but at latest before the date of the earliest manuscript (possibly 15th century). There are some notable differences between this recension and that of Recension I (Book of Lismore).69 From our point of view the most noteworthy difference is that for the signs before Doomsday it replaces the text of Lismore (Recension I) and Recension II with the (fifteen) signs, one for each day. As already noted by Flower,70 | for the Signs in this recension 252 the form found in the (Pseudo-Bedan) Collectanea is substituted for the more general signs of the other (Tenga Bithnua) texts. Conclusions Texts with the signs before Doomsday have been composed and transcribed in Ireland for well over a thousand years – from the Poems of Blathmac (750) to the latest known manuscripts, transcribed in 1817-1819. The earliest text follows no known pattern. There is an eighth-century text (Karlsruhe and related manuscripts) of the Apocalypse of Thomas tradition, which may be Irish or have Irish affiliations, and the tenth-century text in the Catechesis Celtica, of the Apocalypse of Thomas tradition, may also 68  G. Dottin, “Une rédaction moderne du Teanga Bithnua”, Revue Celtique 28, pp. 277-307, 69  On these see Flower, Catalogue, pp. 557-58. 70  Flower, Catalogue, p. 558 ; also Flower, Catalogue, pp. 501-02.

824 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church be Irish or with Irish affiliations. The late tenth-century Saltair na Rann is clearly related to the seven-day Apocalypse of Thomas tradition. Its role in the formation of the Fifteen Signs before Doomsday pattern, which clearly dominated later medieval tradition, remains to be determined, as does the role, if any, of Irish texts in the creation and dissemination of the Fifteen Signs tradition. Later Irish tradition seems to have known and used all three forms of the Fifteen Signs : the Pseudo-Bedan, the Damian and the Comestor. It is to be hoped that current research in the entire Irish tradition will clarify some of the questions raised as to Ireland’s role in the origins and development of the Fifteen Signs pattern, regarded by one of the latest scribes of these texts (1818-1819) as containing “many little short pleasant agreeable pleasing tales”. As a conclusion to this rapid overview of the Signs of Doomsday tradition in Ireland over a millennium (750 to the nineteenth century) we may say that the earliest evidence of a signs tradition (Blathmac) seems to represent no known tradition. Over the following centuries, until the later tenth, what evidence we have seems to point to the Apocalypse of Thomas tradition, while texts from the 13th or so onwards carry the XV Signs legend, representing all three forms of it. Postscript 2014 This essay has been revised to serve as an introduction to the critical edition of the Irish texts on the subject for Apocrypha Hiberniae II,3, in process of completion. Research progress in this field has led to some changes. While granting that the Armenian texts may represent an old tradition independent of the Latin, the date of the manuscripts and the known late medieval contacts of the Armenian with the Latin Church, make it more likely that in the Armenian texts on the Fifteen Signs before Doomsday we are dealing with Latin tradition imported into Armenia.71 Because of 71  See also M. Stone, “Two Unpublished Eschatological Texts”, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 18 (2009), pp. 293-302. In Stone’s opinion one of the texts he publishes (“Concerning the Places of the Underworld” ; MS Erevan, Matenadaran Institute of Ancient Manuscripts no. M4618) seems to reflect Latin views and is typical of material that made its way from the West into Armenia, from the Crusader period on, particularly through the Dominicans. Such an origin is indicated both by the term and concept of ‘Limbo’ and by the idea of purgatory, neither of which is at home in the thought of

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 825

this, the Armenian material may be omitted from the discussion of the origin and development of this tradition. We may also note that the tradition of the Fifteen Signs in Europe, in particular in German and Netherlands’ tradition, has been studied and presented in detail by C. Gerhardt and N. F. Palmer.72 In the critical edition for Apocrypha Hiberniae II,3 the Irish texts will be presented in the original vernacular and in translation. There will be a full edition of the poem by Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh and that known as Áirdena. Caoimhín Breatnach edits three hither unpublished Irish texts of the XV Signs tradition, one from manucript Oxford, Bodleian Ir. e. 7, with three paragraphs, the first with the XV signs. Paragraphs 2 and 3 have Doomsday material, with a certain Pelbartus and a Franciscus de Marione given as sources. The former is Pelbartus Ladislaus de Temesvár, Hungary (d. 1504), and paragraph 3 can be considered a translation of his Sermo IV, no. Z.73 the Armenian Apostolic Church or, indeed, of the Eastern churches in general. These ideas were given a pivotal medieval formulation by Albertus Magnus (1200–1280) and much popularized by Hugh Ripelin (c. 1210–c. 1270). This manuscript (Erevan M4618) is a miscellany made up of parts written at various times between the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries. The parts of it were copied at different places in Armenia. The second text he publishes, from MS British Library Harl. 5459, of the year 1689, is on The Fifteen Signs of the Judgement. In the manuscript it comes directly after The Crucifixion of Christ and some traditions about the wood of the Cross. It is followed without any break by a document dealing with the post-mortem state of the righteous and the wicked (fol. 101r). Stone transcribes and translates the manuscript’s setting of the Signs of the Judgement, as well as the text of that document, and the beginning of the text about the state of the righteous and wicked. The new text of the Signs resembles the recension that Stone entitled ‘II’ in his previous edition, though it differs from it in quite a number of places. On Armenian–Latin relations, Stone refers us to G. Dédéyan, Histoire des Arméniens (Toulouse : Privat, 1982), pp. 317-21. 72  See C. Gerhardt – N. F. Palmer, .xv. signa ante iudicium. Studien und Texte zur Überlieferungsgeschichte eines eschatologischen Themas, published privately, Oxford, Trier, 1986. The same authors later published Das Münchner Gedicht von den 15 Zeichen vor dem Jüngsten Gericht. Nach der Handschrift der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek Cgm 717. Edition und Kommentar (Texte des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit 41), Berlin, 2002. This treats of “Die ‘15 Zeichen vor dem Jüngsten Gericht’ in deutscher und niederländischer Überlieferung”. 73  Information on Pelbartus’s text kindly communicated to me by Mrs Ceciklia Radó, Hungary.

826 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Appendix : Catechetical text containing some parallels with the Apocalypse of Thomas edited by Charles D. Wright, Department of English, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaigne, Urbana, Illinous, USA In this appendix we publish a catechetical text containing some patrallels with the Apocalypse of Thomas. It is related to a portion of the text published by Donatien De Bruyne from MS Karlsruhe, Aug. prg. 254. (See above pages 797-800). [On the apparatus (second last/line) ę represents the e-hook character in the manuscript] Pal. lat. 220 [P], fols, 26v-28r = Pal. lat 212 [V], fol. 15rv = Karlsruhe Aug. perg. 254 [K], ed. De Bruyne, p. 325, ll. 41-60. [Note. The text of the sermon is presented as it occurs in Pal. lat. 222. I have supplied word-division and minimal punctuation but have not emended idiosyncratic spellings (e.g., fermes for uermes) or grammatical errors (e.g., alia ...locus) even when correct forms occur in one or both of the other manuscripts.] | Predicatio carere tormenta. Peccatoribus autem et impiis homicidis fornicatoribus et sceleratis mendacibus rapacibus parricidis raptoribus dolosis neglegentibus transgressoribus dei mandata et aliis quibusque non facientibus iustitiam alia preparatur locus. Id est in illo inferni loco ubi non uidetur lumen sed tenebre et dolore constituti in tristitiam gementes et ulululantes in penis in siti et fame et caligine. Ubi ignis non extinguitur ab eis et fermes non morientur. Ubi timor et tremor et angustia magna algor inmensissimus estus intollerabilis. Ubi non misericordia nec aliqua consolatio nec leti[it]ia nec iocum nec iucunditas. Nesciuntur anni nec menses nec tempora nec nomen domini laudatur nec uox letantium [27r] auditur. Predicatio c. t.] not in VK ; homicidis] homicidiis V, et homicidis et K ; mendacibus] et iniustis et m. K ; parricidis] corr. from parrucidis V, parrecidis patricidis matricidis K ; raptoribus dolosis neglegentibus] dolosis et rapacibus raptoris n. K ; dolosis] dolsis with o added above line ; mandata] mandatum K ; alia] alius V, aliud eis K ; locus] locum K ; loco] om. K ; non uidetur lumen] l. non u. K ; tenebre] in tenebris K ; constituti in tristitiam gementes] c. i. tristitia g. V, et tristitia c. gementis K ; ulululantes] ullulantes V, hiolantis K ; in siti et fame et caligine] bestie demittuntur illis in site et in fame in caligine K ; fermes] uermes V, uermis eorum K ; morientur] moriuntur K ; ubi timor  … intollerabilis] om. K ; angustia] angusta V ; estus] aestus V ; intollerabilis] intolerabilis V ; non misericordia] non est m. K ; letitia] letia ; laetitia V, letitia K ; nec iocum

253

   the (fifteen) signs before doomsday in irish tradition 827 nec iucunditas] nec iocunditas nec iogum K ; nesciuntur anni] n. quomodo ueniunt dies a. K ; nec menses] uel momenta K ; nec nomen dei laudatur] nec l. n. domini K ; auditur] add. nec aliquid auxilium inuenitur K

Ve his qui in hoc seculo gaudent et qui non faciunt penitentiam pro delictis suis ante obitum suum, quia in una hora perpetua morte moriuntur. Fratres in postremo uedebitis multa mala quae pre fine aduenient : serui dei blasfemantur, iniquitatem unusquisque ad proximum suum operatur, totus mundus in maligno positus in maledictione, in mendacio, in fornicatione, in omnibus malis et persecutione, anathema ; uirginitas denudabitur, eclesia deseratur, ueritas non agitur, pax non erit, disciplina peribit, bella exercentur in illis diebus. Ve his qui nuptias faciunt, quoniam aut gladio aut fame aut captiui filii generantur. Flebat tota terra erroribus et cassibus sacerdotes probabuntur et in mestitia predicabunt, et uirgines lacrimando plorabunt in illis diebus. Ve his qui diem iudi[27v]cii non timent, quia repentinus uniuerso mundo superueniet interitus. Ve] Uae K ; in hoc] ad hoc K ; ante obitum suum] om. K ; quia] qui with i added above line ; quia V, qui K ; perpetua morte moriuntur] morte moriuntur in perpetua morte K ; fratres] add. karissimi K ; uedebitis] uidebitis K ; quae pre fine] in seculo prefines K ; blasfemantur] blasphemantur V ; blasphemabuntur K ; iniquitatem] second i added above line ; iniquitas K ; ad proxi | mum suum] proximo suo K ; in maledictione] om. K ; persecutione] persecutionibus K ; uirginitas denudabitur] uirginitatis denutabitur K ; eclesia] ecclesia V, ecclesie K ; deseratur] deserentur K ; agitur] agetur K ; Ve] Uae K ; faciunt] facient K ; captiui filii] captiuitate filios K ; generantur] generabunt K ; flebat tota] flebit totam K ; et cassibus sacerdotes probabuntur et in] occassionibus probatur sacerdotes in K ; sacerdotes] sacerdortes with second r partially erased ; in mesticia] in mes. with i added above line V ; predicabunt] predicabuntur K ; Ve] Uae K ; qui diem] quidem V

Primo die sabbati nix et grando ueniet super terram cum tonidruo magno et fulgore terribili et clangore tube. Et mortui resurgent. Alia die mare siccabitur. Tertia die celum aperietur et terra scinditur ab oriente usque ad occidentem. Tunc fugient peccatores et dicent montibus et collibus, Cadite super nos et cooperite nos ; et non habebunt refrigerium nisi in ore inferni deglutientur. Tunc exercitus angelorum uidebitur cum christo. Tunc sacerdotes et uirgines una uoce dicent, Domine, domine, pater noster subueni nobis et cognosce nos ab omnibus creaturis tuis. Tunc adorabunt eum omnes homines et plangent super eum omnes tribus terre. Et dicent ei sancti, Domine, domine, qui in magno labore et angustia cordis [28r] iugiter seruimus tibi in tribulatione in uigiliis in ieiunis in elemosinis nec separauit nos aliquid a caritate tua. Tunc iudex iustus Ihesu Christus reddet unicuique secundum opus suum et regnabunt iusti secum in perpetuum in secula seculorum amen.

253

828 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Primo] Prima K ; sabbati] sabbato K ; super] add. omnem K ; tonidruo magno] tonitruo m. V, tonitrua magna K ; et fulgore] om. K ; et clangore] om. K ; die] dioe K ; die] dioe K ; celum aperietur] aperitur celum K ; terra scinditur] ascindetur K ; ad occidentem] in occidente K ; peccatores] peccatoribus ; et dicent] dicentes K ; cadite] cadete V, cadent K ; cooperite] operiet K ; refrigerium] refrigerio K ; deglutientur] degluttinentur nos K ; Tunc sacerdotes . . . amen] et omnes sancti et omnes iustis et erunt in letitia oeterna sine fine in consortio patriarcharum et in medio chori angelorum et in iugi letitia prophetarum et consedio cum omnium sanctorum in secula seculorum sine fine in letitia magna K ; terre] terrę V ; ieiunis] ieiuniis with last i added above line V ; elemosinis] elemosynis V ; Ihesu] Ihesus V .

| NAVIGATIO SANCTI BRENDANI. SOME POSSIBLE

CONNECTIONS WITH LITURGICAL, APOCRYPHAL AND IRISH TRADITION* After reading the recently published Bibliography of the legend of Saint Brendan by Glyn S. Burgess and Clara Strijbosch,1 I came to the conclusion that certain areas of the Navigatio sancti Brendani still merited examination : for instance, the biblical text used, aspects of the Divine Office and some liturgical feasts apparently familiar to the author, the tradition within which the account of Judas’s respite from Hell may have originated, the question of the possible influence the apocryphal Visio Pauli might have had on the author of the Navigatio and on Irish voyage literature in general with regard to the concept of the Land of Promise and on the terminology used to describe it. The Navigatio, like many literary classics, is in the nature of an archeological mound or tell, awaiting to be fully excavated in due time. In this process it is useful to cut some trenches into the mound, analyze the evidence and then consider if certain lines of enquiry merit further exploration. This essay is thus presented as “work in progress”.2

Navigatio sancti Brendani : Biblical Psalter text The author of the Navigatio shows a particular interest in the Divine Office and in the opening words of psalms recited in it. In all there are about thirty-six such Psalter texts. The biblical text *  First published in : The Brendan Legend. Texts and Versions, ed. by G. L. Burgess  – C. Strijbosch, Leiden, 2006, pp. 159-188. 1  G. S. Burgess  – C. Strijbosch, The Legend of St Brendan. A Critical Bibliography, Dublin, 2000. 2  In this study the Latin text used is that of C. Selmer, Navigatio sancti Brendani Abbatis from Early Latin Manuscripts (Publications in Mediaeval Studies, 16), Notre Dame (Indiana), 1959. English translations are from that of John J. O’Meara, The Voyage of Saint Brendan. Journey to the Promised Land. Navigatio sancti Brendani Abbatis, Mountrath (Co. Laois) ; Atlantic Highlands (NJ), 1976, and later reprints by various publishers.

159

830 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church used by a | given writer can often give very valuable informa- 160 tion regarding affiliations of a work, sometimes even with regard to the particular country or area in which it was composed. This could hold true in a special way for the Psalter biblical text. In Europe of the early Middle Ages two major texts were still being used, namely, the Vulgate (Gallicanum) and the Old Latin (Vetus Latina), both of which circulated in different recensions. There was an Irish family of Vulgate texts, referred to in the critical edition of the Vulgate under the symbols CI (the Cathach of Saint Columba and another text). Specific readings or variant readings in the Navigatio might conceivably help us to identify the cultural affiliations of the work. With this end in view, I examined all the Psalter texts used and collated them with the critical editions of both the Vulgate and Old Latin. Most of the texts are brief and identical to both the Vulgate and Old Latin. Not always, however. There are instances in which the two are clearly distinct, and in those cases the text of the Navigatio agrees with the Vulgate against the Old Latin. With regard to the Vulgate texts used in the Navigatio, in none of them is there any significant variant reading within the Vulgate family of texts. Its text has no particular affiliation with the Vulgate Irish family (CI) or with any other. This being the case, the biblical Psalter text has no light to shed on the place of composition of the Navigatio sancti Brendani. The Divine Office in the Navigatio Origin and Formation of the Divine Office It is clear the author of the Navigatio had a particular interest in the Divine Office, in the Liturgy of the Hours or rather in the psalms chanted or recited at particular hours. The thirty-six or so incipits of Psalter texts given make this evident. While he has occasional references to other elements of the Liturgy of the Hours (for instance alleluia, oracio), the author shows no interest in elements such as the hymns which, one can presume, formed part of the Divine Office in his day, whether the date of composition be early (eighth century) or late (tenth/eleventh century). A reconstruction of the Divine Office from the elements provided by the text of the Navigatio and a comparison of this against

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 831

forms of the Liturgy of the Hours as known to us from Eastern and Western | sources might help identify the religious or monas- 161 tic community to which the author did, or indeed did not, belong. A major step in the formation of the tradition of the Liturgy of the Hours, in both the East and West, came with the so-called Peace of Constantine in 312. With this, the Church acquired the freedom to develop the public and external aspects of its life. Then began to develop the public prayer of the Church, in which the Psalter played a central role. Two forms of the Divine Office took shape, the one, the Cathedral Office, intended for the laity, the other, monastic, for monks. A rich and varied tradition soon developed. The Church historian Socrates, in his Church History (written between 439 and 450), speaking of the first post-Nicene century (324–425), says that “it would be impossible to find anywhere among all the sects, two churches that agree in their prayer ritual”. 3 The tradition of Cathedral and monastic Office developed rapidly in the East – in Palestine (Bethlehem, St Jerome), Antioch and in the monastic communities of Lower and Upper Egypt. John Cassian, born in Scythia Minor (present-day Romania), went to Egypt as a young monk and lived there from about 380 to 399. He was well informed of the customs of the East and was highly impressed by the Egyptian tradition of the Divine Office. In Books II and III of his Institutes (written about 417–25) he gives a lengthy account of the Egyptian Offices. It is recognized, however, that in the Institutes Cassian is not so much attempting a history of Egyptian monasticism as a reform of Gallic monasticism along Egyptian lines. His description of the Egyptian Office (or rather Offices) is rather an idealized one. The knowledge of the Eastern, and in particular the Egyptian, Divine Office traditions was introduced to the West by Cassian, and the monastery of Lerins founded by his disciple Honoratus. In the West, while there was monasticism in Northern Italy, Rome and Campania by the end of the fourth century, apart from general references to psalmody and vigils, our sources give no information on the structure of monastic prayer there for that earlier

3  Socrates, Church History, V. 22, cited in R. Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West. The Origins of the Divine Office and its Meaning Today, Collegeville, 1985, p. 31.

832 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church period. In Gaul the oldest monastic cursus for such prayer was that legislated for by Cassian for his monastery of Saint Victor in Marseilles and for the monastery of Lerins founded by Honoratus (d.  429–30). | Cassian’s system was adopted and transformed in 162 the monastic rules of Saint Caesarius, a monk at Lerins and later bishop of Arles from 502 to 542, and by his second successor Saint Aurelian, bishop of Arles 546–51, who also wrote rules for the monasteries he founded there. From Italy, from the first quarter of the sixth century we have the Rule of the Master (probably from Catania), with its own structure of the Canonical Hours. Together with the Roman Office then current, the Rule of the Master significantly influenced Saint Benedict in the composition of his own Rule around 530–60. For the West, Benedict was to present the final synthesis of the structure of the Hours, which was to supersede almost all others in the ninth century. The origins and history of the Divine Office in Ireland still remain to be written.4 In keeping with European tradition there were probably different systems. The best known of these is the monastic cursus of Columbanus (543–615), in chapter 7 of his Regula Monachorum and in his Regula Coenobialis, chapter 9. The Rule of Benedict provides for the reading of the entire Psalter once a week, but Saint Benedict recalls (Rule, ch.  18) that the early Fathers recited the whole Psalter in a single day. Robert Taft remarks that Columban’s winter cycle comes closer to this pre-

4  There may be a generally neglected piece of evidence on the Irish office in a partly legible text in the Book of Mulling (drawn to our attention more recently by E. de Bhaldraithe, “The Bangor Antiphony”, Hallel. A Review of Monastic Spirituality and Liturgy [Mount Mellary Abbey, Waterford, Ireland], 13 (1985), pp. 164–70, at 168). The text has been published and studied by H. Lawlor, Chapters on the Book of Mulling, Edinburgh, 1897, pp. 145–66 (“The Liturgical Fragment”). This text comes at the end of the Gospel of John, and is in the same hand as that of the main text, early ninth century. In Lawlor’s words (p.  161) : “We have recovered in these obscure, scarcely legible lines of the book of Mulling a sketch of  – or, to use a more technical word, a kind of directory for – what appears to have been a daily office used night or morning in the monastery of St  Moling of Ferns in the early part of the 9th century”. It must be admitted, however, that the piece is of limited value since it has no indication of any of the psalms used.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 833

sumed ancient ideal that any other source he knows.5 Others see influences both from East and West in the Irish tradition.6 | The Divine Office in the Navigatio

With this introduction, we may pass to the evidence of the Navigatio. There is a rather detailed presentation of the Liturgy of the Hours in two chapters, with a somewhat summary account in a third text. The first occurs in chapter 11, in the context of the celebration of Easter and its Octave on the Island of the Birds. The most detailed account is in chapter 17, in a non-festal general setting on the Island of the Three Choirs. I first give this latter text. ch.  17. The Island of the Three Choirs or Anchorites Brendan and his monks arrive on the island after the hour of Terce. The Navigatio then gives the canonical hours over the next twenty-four hours as follows. sexta, ad horam nonam, ad uesperas, ad uigilias matutinas, when day dawned (cum dies illucessisset), ad tertiam. There is here no mention of Compline (completorium). I give the relevant text from this chapter in O’Meara’s translation (with Psalm references and corresponding Latin text added).7 It was about ten o’clock (hora quarta) when they put in at the landing-place on the island. When mid-day came (cum autem sexta uenisset) all the choirs began to chant together saying : “May God be merciful to us […]” (Ps 66.2), to the end of the psalm, and “Be pleased. O God, to deliver me […]” (Deus in adiutorium meum, Ps  69.2), and likewise the third of three psalms for sext : “I kept my faith […]” (Ps  115.1) and the prayer for mercy as above (similiter et tertium psalmum “Credidi”, et oracionem ut supra). Likewise Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours, 114. Thus P. Jeffery, “Eastern and Western Elements in the Irish Monastic Prayer of the Hours”, an unpublished paper referred to by Taft, The Liturgy of the Hours, 115, note 44. The essay has since been published, but has come to my attention only after completion of this paper. P. Jeffery, “Eastern and Western Elements in the Irish Monastic Prayer of the Hours”, in The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages. Methodology and Source Studies, Regional Developments, Hagiography. Written in Honor of Professor Ruth Steiner, ed. by M. E. Passler – R. A. Baltzer, New York, Oxford, 2000, pp. 99–143. A summary of the 2000 essay by M. Huglo and B. Haggh in a review of Jeffery’s essay “Eastern and Western Elements” in Peritia 15 (2001), pp. 434–437. 7  O’Meara, The Voyage, pp. 44–45 ; Bold highlighting, Latin texts and Psalm references added by present writer. 5  6 

163

834 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church at three o’clock (similiter ad horam nonam) they chanted another three psalms : “Out of the depths” (Ps  129.1), and “Behold how good” (Ps  132.1), and “Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem” (Ps  147.12). At vespers (ad uesperas) they chanted : “A hymn is due to thee, O God, in Zion” (Ps  64.2), and “Bless the Lord, O my soul, O Lord, my God” (Ps 103.1), and the third of the psalms for vespers (et tercium psalmum “Laudate pueri Dominum”), “Praise the Lord, children” (Ps  112.1). They then chanted, while seated, the gradual psalms (et quindecim gradus cantabant sedendo). When they had finished this chant, a cloud of extraordinary brightness covered the island, but now they could no longer see what they had seen, because of the denseness of the cloud. Nevertheless they continued to hear the voices of those singing their ordinary chant without interruption until matins (usque ad uigilias matutinas). Then the choirs began to chant, singing : “Praise the Lord from the heavens” (Ps 148.1), then “Sing to the Lord” (149.1), and the third of the psalms of matins (et | tercium “Laudate Dominum in sanctis eius”), “Praise the Lord in his saints” (Ps  150.1). After that they chanted twelve psalms in the order of the Psalter (per ordinem psalterii). When day dawned (cum dies illucessisset) the island was cloudless and immediately they chanted the three psalms : “Have mercy on me, O God” (Ps  50.1), “God, my God, from dawn I keep watch for thee” (Ps  62.2) : and “Lord, my refuge” (Domine, refugium, Ps  89.1). At terce (ad terciam) they chanted another three psalms, that is : “All peoples” (Ps  46.2), and “God, in your name” (Ps  53.3), and the third : “I have loved, because” (Ps  114.1), with the Alleluia. They then offered the Spotless Lamb and all came to communion.

ch.  11. In the Island of the Birds ; Feast of Easter and the Octave The second text, for Easter, is on the Island of the Birds, and the Office is given as recited by birds. The Office begins at Vespers, after which we are taken through to None of the following day, in the sequence : Vespers (uespertina hora), midnight (usque ad tertiam uigiliam noctis), Vespers (ad uesperas), dawn (cum aurora refulsisset), matins and lauds (in matutinis laudibus), terce (ad tertiam horam), sext (ad sextam), none (ad nonam). The text is as follows :8 When the hour of vespers (uespertina hora) had come, all the birds in the tree chanted, as it were with one voice, beating their wings on their sides : “A hymn is due to thee, O God, in Zion, and 8 

O’Meara, The Voyage, pp. 21–23.

164

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections

835

a vow shall be paid to you in Jerusalem” (Ps  64.1). And they kept repeating this versicle for about the space of an hour […]. Then Saint Brendan said to his brothers : “Repair your bodies, for today our souls are filled with divine food”. When supper was over they performed the divine service (ceperunt opus Dei peragere). When all was finished, the man of God and his companions gave repose to their bodies until midnight (usque ad terciam uigiliam noctis). Waking, the man of God aroused his brothers for the vigil of the holy night (ad uigilias noctis sancte), beginning with the versicle : “Lord, open my lips”. When the holy man had finished, all the birds responded with wing and mouth saying : “Praise the Lord, all his angels, praise him all his powers” (Ps  148.2). So it was as for vespers (similiter et ad uesperas)  – they chanted all the time for the space of an hour. When dawn rose (cum aurora refulsisset) they chanted : “May the radiance of the Lord, our God, be upon us !” (Ps  89.17)  – with the same tune and for the same length of time as at matins and lauds (equali modulatione et longitudine psallendi sicut et in matutinis laudibus). Likewise at terce (ad terciam horam) they chanted the versicle : “Sing praises to our God, sing praises. Sing praises to our king. Sing praises in wisdom” (Ps  46.7). At sext (ad sextam) they chanted : “Shine your countenance, Lord, upon us, and have mercy on us” (Ps  46.2). At | nones (ad nonam) they chanted : “How good and pleasant it is that brothers live together as one !” (Ps  132.1). In this way, day and night, the birds gave praise to the Lord. And so Saint Brendan refreshed his brothers with the feast of Easter until the octave day.

ch.  12. The Community of Ailbe The third text, on the Island of the Community of Ailbe, is of a general nature. In this text there is mention of tempus missarum aut uigiliarum 12, line 66 ; intremus in ecclesiam et cantemus uesperas […] ut fratres nostri possint ad tempus cantare uesperas post nos (12, 79–81) ; debitum uespertinale (12, 82). I cite the relevant sections. When they had finished the office of vespers (debitum uespertinale) (12, 82) Saint Brendan examined how the church was built […].9 While Saint Brendan was reflecting on all these matters within himself, the abbot spoke to him : “Father, it is now time to return

9 

O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 29.

165

836 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church to the refectory so that all we have to do will be done while there is light”. This they did in the same way as before. When they had completed the day’s course in order (secundum ordinem cursus diei), they all hurried with great eagerness to compline (ad completorium). When the abbot had intoned the versicle : “God, come to my aid”, and had together given honour to the Trinity, they began to chant the versicle : “We have acted wrongly, we have done iniquity ! You, Lord, who are our faithful father, spare us. I shall sleep in peace therefore, and shall take my rest ; for you, Lord, have placed me, singularly, in hope” (cf. Ps  4.9–10). After this they chanted the office of the hour (cantabant officium quod pertinet ad hanc horam). When the order of psalms had been completed (iam consummato ordine psallendi), all went out of the church […].10

The Day Hours in the Navigatio and the Antiphonary of Bangor Much more research is necessary before one can say how, if at all, the overall cursus of the Divine Office of the Navigatio relates to Irish tradition. All that can be done here is to present some of the basic evidence. With regards to the Day Hours, matters may be different. In his study of the Antiphonary of Bangor Michael Curran makes a special study of the form and content of the Day Hours of the Navigatio in connection with the Antiphonary of Bangor and the office of Columbanus.11 With regard to the text of chapter 17 of the Navigatio | he notes that “the author of the 166 Navigatio situates the events about which he speaks in the context of the liturgical year, by dating them from Easter, or Pentecost, or Christmas. The event narrated in this first story happened in October or November, so that the office described is not connected with any special liturgical season”.12 He comments on the text of Navigatio chapter 11 that “the event narrated here is situated on Easter Sunday. But the office described agrees with that in the first story (Navigatio ch. 17) and it has no exclusively Paschal character”.13 He concludes thus :15 O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 30. M. Curran, “Form and Content of the Day Hours. The Three Psalms”, in M. Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor and the Early Irish Monastic Liturgy, Blackrock (Co. Dublin), 1984, pp. 169–73, ch. 21. 12  Curran, The Antiphonary, p. 252 (note 9 to chapter 21). 13  Curran, The Antiphonary, p. 252 (note 10 to chapter 21). 10  11 

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 837 The total agreement of this office [of the Navigatio sancti Brendani], on the one hand, and the office of Columban and of the Antiphonary, in so far as they describe the psalmody of the day hours [named in the Antiphonary as secunda, tertia, sexta, nona, and vespertina], on the other hand, suggests that the office of the Navigatio was not confined to just one monastery, and that possibly the day hours at Bangor in the seventh century were celebrated as described for us in the Navigatio Sancti Brendani.

In a review of Curran’s work Peter Jeffery expresses reservations. He comments :15 The Rule of Columban tells us how many psalms were sung at the different hours, but does not indicate any specific psalms as the Navigatio s. Brendani does. The Bangor Antiphonary gives almost no information about the number and choice of psalms, but does preserve evidence | regarding the canticles, which are not mentioned in the other two sources. Is it really certain that these three documents preserve substantially the same office ? The author thinks so (pp.  166, 169). But Columban was very aware of a multiplicity of customs, and there is no reason to believe that his Rule describes a “pure” Irish office, uninfluenced by the practices of Gaul where he spent most of his time. With sources as early, obscure and eclectic as the Irish ones are, it seems far Curran, The Antiphonary, p.172. P. Jeffery, in Worship 59 (1985), pp. 459–61 (at 460–61). Jeffery goes into the matter in greater detail in his later (2000) essay, “Eastern and Western Elements”, cited above note 6. He treats of Columban (Columbanus) in his section “The Offices of the Irish Monasteries on the Continent”, pp.  110– 12, and of “The Bangor Antiphoner and its Allies” (and the Antiphonary relation to Columbanus), on pp.  112–27. He argues strongly for composition of the Bangor Antiphonary on the Continent rather than in Ireland. It was at Bobbio that the manuscript was discovered in the sixteenth century, and the textual content offers reason to think the Irishmen who created it were actually working on the Continent, if not at Bobbio itself (p.  113 ; similarly p.  127). Jeffery examines the Navigatio S. Brendani evidence in his section “Offices derived from Cassian” (pp.  108–10). He regards the Navigatio as an eighth-century work recording a fictional voyage of St  Brendan. The Offices presented in the Navigatio conflate Cassian’s two traditions (the Palestinian and the Egyptian) into a single ordo. We do not know whether the Offices described in the Navigatio S. Brendani were ever actually celebrated by anyone, since the work is a fiction. But the tension evident at Vespers, between the prescriptions of Cassian on the one hand and the practices of known Gallican centres on the other, can also be seen in the usages of the seventh century Irish monasteries on the Continent (p. 110). 14 

15 

167

838 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church safer to assume variety and divergence when there is not explicit uniformity.

Thus the evidence from a study of the texts on the Divine Office in the Navigatio can scarcely be used for or against composition of the work in Ireland. One matter, however, is clear : the cursus of the Navigatio clearly does not belong to that in The Rule of Saint Benedict. In Benedict’s cursus the psalms for Terce, Sext and None are from Ps 118, and Pss 119–27. Likewise, the psalms for the other hours are different from those of the Navigatio. Thus, if the Navigatio originated on the Continent, rather than in Ireland, it is unlikely that this was in a community of the Benedictine Rule. The Liturgical Feasts : Epiphany (Theophania), Assumption The Epiphany (Epiphania, Theophania) When Brendan and his companions came upon Judas on a rock on the Lord’s day, Judas explains that on that rock he has a place of refreshment every Sunday from evening to evening, at Christmas until the Epiphany (Theophania), at Easter until Pentecost, and on the feasts of the purification and assumption of the Mother of God (Meum uero refrigerium habeo hic omni die domenico a uespera usque ad uesperam, et in Natiuitate Domini usque in Theophaniam et a Pascha usque in Pentecosten et in Purificatione Dei Genetricis atque Assumpcione).16 In an earlier chapter (ch. 12, 145–46)17 the author also used the term Epiphania for the same feast : Tu debes nobiscum celebrare Natiuitatem Domini usque ad octauas Epiphanie. Here major liturgical feasts known to, and observed by, the author and his religious community would appear to be indicated. By Theophania the feast of the Epiphany (January 6) is almost certainly intended. | The term theophania, as a designation for a feast, does not 168 occur elsewhere in Irish texts (apart from the Navigatio), while epiphania does. Theophania as designation of the feast-day does occur in non-Irish Latin liturgical texts, e.g. Liber Sacramentorum Engolismensis, Liber Sacramentorum Augustodunensis, Anonymus

16  17 

Selmer, Navigatio, p. 67, lines 28-33. Selmer, Navigatio, p. 37.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 839

Placentinus Itinerarium, Liber Quare, Liber Sacramentorum Romanae ecclesiae ordine exscarpsus. The matter merits further investigation. While it may be that use of the term theophania in chapter 25 derives from the sources used, it more probably reflects the terminology of the author’s religious community. This would seem to indicate a continental rather than an Irish origin for the Navigatio ‒ unless, of course, the presence of theophania in the text is not original, but introduced in the process of the work’s transmission. The Assumption of Mary Since the feast of the Assumption of the Mother of God is mentioned after that of the Purification (2 February), it can be presumed that it was celebrated later in the author’s liturgical calendar, presumably on 15 August. With regard to the feast of the Assumption,18 we may note that in Jerusalem, in the fourth century at the latest, there was a feast in honour of Mary on 15 August, but without any connection (apparent at least) with either the death or the assumption of the Virgin. Soon afterwards, however, the eastern emperor Mauritios (582–602) introduced a feast in honour of the koimêsis (dormitio) of Mary, to be celebrated on 15 August. Through Byzantine influence this celebration reached Rome c. 650, and under the title Adsumptio (Mariae). There was also another tradition in the West, which continued for some time later in Gaul. We have evidence that from the beginning of the sixth century there was a feast on 18 January under the title Festivitas sanctae Mariae. What was being celebrated was the death of the Virgin, as is indicated in the Martyrologium Hiernonymianum : XV | Ka. Feb. depositio sanctae Mariae, a date on 169 which the death of Mary was also celebrated in the Coptic liturgy. It is on this day, 18 January, that the Martyrology of Oengus (c. 800) celebrates Mary’s death : 18  On this feast see H. Thurston, “The Feast of the Assumption”, The Month, 130 (1917), pp. 121–34 ; C. F. Lee, “The Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary”, The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 54 (1939), pp. 176– 87 ; B. Capelle, “La fête de l’Assomption dans l’histoire”, Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses, 3 (1926), pp. 33–45 ; M. Righetti, Storia liturgica, vol.  2, L’Anno liturgico, il Breviario, 2nd  edition, revised and corrected, Milan, 1955, pp. 281-91 (“L’Assunzione”).

840 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Mórad Petair apstail i rRóim, rád as díxu, lassin líth as úaisliu bás [variant : in MS R 2 tasc] mór máthar Íssu19 (The magnifying in Rome of the Apostle Peter — a saying that is higher — at the festival that is nobler, the great death [variant. tidings] of Jesu’s Mother.)20

The entry for 18 January in the Martyrology of Tallaght (c. 800) is in keeping with that of the Félire Óengusso : Sanctae Mariae matris Domini. Hoc die eius dormitatio in Roma audita est.21 ([The feast of] Holy Mary, the mother of the Lord. On this day [tidings of] her falling asleep were heard in Rome.)

Under Roman influence, the celebration of the Adsumptio Mariae spread. Even in Gaul the old title Nativitas sanctae Mariae was changed to Adsumptio s. Mariae, even though the feast continued to be celebrated on 18 January. Gradually, however, and from the eighth century onwards at the latest, it would appear, the celebration was changed to 15 August, and under the title Assumptio. In the Féilire Óengusso under 15 August there is no explicit mention of the Assumption of Mary. There was, however, on that day a “great feast” in her honour, expressed in the Féilire as follows : I mórfhéil a aithmit fírmáthir ar nathar co slóg rí, rán clochar Fer dá chrích, cáin cathar.22 (On the great feast of her commemoration very Mother of our Father. | with a host of kings, right splendid assembly ! Fer dá chrích, a fair champion.) 19  Felire Óengusso Céli Dé. The Martyrology of Oengus the Culdee (Henry Bradshaw Society, 29), ed. by W. Stokes, London, 1905, p. 36. 20  Stokes, Félire Óengusso, p. 36 ; glosses 46–47. 21  The Martyrology of Tallaght from the Book of Leinster, and MS 5100–5104 in the Royal Library, Brussels (Henry Bradshaw Society, 68), ed. by R. I. Best – H. J. Lawlor, London, 1931, p. 9. 22  In Stokes, Félire Óengusso, p. 176.

170

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 841

For August 16 (D. xvii. cal. Septembris), we may note, among other commemorations, the Martyrology of Oengus has one on Mary’s birth :23 gein Maire, mind núagbailc, nóebmáthir mo rígmaicc. (The nativity of Mary, a virginal, strong diadem, the holy Mother of my Prince.)

A gloss (probably from the eleventh century) in the Féilire Óengusso on gein Maire for the commemoration of 16 August reads : gein Maire (“the birth of Mary”), dormitatio Mariae.24 The purport or purpose of the gloss is not quite clear. It may contain an explicit reference to the feast of the Dormition or Assumption of Mary, and possibly an indication that both the birth and assumption were celebrated or commemorated on the same day, 16 August. The Martyrology of Tallaght has no entry on Mary under 15 August. However, for the preceding day, August 14 (.xix. kl. Septimbir) it has : Assumptio Mariae Virginis.25

Then for August 16 (as in The Martyrology of Oengus) the Martyrology of Tallaght commemorates Mary’s birth with the entry : Nativitas sanctae Mariae.26

The celebration of the feast of 15 August is more clearly presented in the Martyrology of Gorman, composed in Ireland about 1170. By then the feast of 15 August had a vigil (14 August) : Vigilia mor maire (“The great vigil of Mary”). The commemoration on August 15 apparently had the title étsecht “departure” (Transitus ?). The relevant entry for August 15 in the Martyrology of Gorman reads :27 Etsecht Maire moire mathair Ísu ind fhírógh, In Stokes, Félire Óengusso, p. 176. In Stokes, Félire Óengusso, p. 186. 25  Best  – Lawlor, Martyrology of Tallaght, p. 63. 26  Best  – Lawlor, Martyrology of Tallaght, p. 63. 27  Best  – Lawlor, Martyrology of Tallaght, p. 63 ; Félire hUí Gormáin. The Martyrology of Gorman, (Henry Bradshaw Society, 9), ed. by W. Stokes, London, 1895, pp. 156–57. 23 

24 

842 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church co deimhin fris ndaláb […]

| (The death of great Mary,

Jesu’s mother, the true virgin, whom surely I shall meet […].)

It is not altogether clear what inference is to be drawn from this evidence with regard to a feast of the Assumption of Mary in the early Irish Church. The Martyrologies of Oengus and of Tallaght (both from c. 800) agree in assigning a celebration of the Birth of Mary to 16 August. This is somewhat surprising as the feast of the Birth of Mary appears to have been well established in the western Church from the eighth century onwards, but on 8 September. Both these martyrologies also mention a celebration of the death of Mary (or news of her death) at Rome on 18 January. The Martyrology of Oengus knows of the celebration of a “great feast” (unnamed) of Mary on 15 August. The Martyrology of Tallaght gives 14 August as date for the celebration of the feast of Mary’s Assumption, while the twelfth-century Martyrology of Gorman celebrates Mary’s death or departure (Transitus) on 15 August. It may be that the two feasts of Mary’s birth and death (departure, Transitus, Assumption) were celebrated together or in close conjunction in the early and medieval Irish Church. There may be evidence for just such a joint celebration in a recently identified and edited Irish vernacular homily on both the nativity and death/departure (etsecht) of Mary. The section on her birth draws heavily on the apocryphal Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew while that on her departure is from the Irish translation of the apocryphal Transitus Mariae. The homily has been assigned by its editor Caoimhín Breatnach to the Early Middle Irish period (tenth century).28 In favour of early Irish belief in the Assumption of Mary one may adduce the belief of scholars that the form of the apocryphal Transitus Mariae, from which extant Irish texts derive, represents a very early form of the work, which must have come to Ireland in the seventh century.29

28  Text edited by C. Breatnach, “An Irish Homily on the Life of the Virgin Mary”, Ériu, 51 (2000), pp. 23–58. 29  On the Irish texts of the Transitus Mariae see M. McNamara, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975 ; 1984, nr. 97. pp. 122–23.

171

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 843

On the other hand, one might argue against any such feast of the Assumption of Mary in August from the connection made between the death of Mary (or news of this) and 18 January, together with | the lack of any mention of the Assumption with the celebration 172 of 15 August in the Martyrology of Oengus. In fact, lack of belief in Mary’s Assumption in early Ireland might seem implied in what Adomnán says about Mary’s burial place in De locis sanctis I, 12. There Adomnán reports Arculf’s account of Mary’s tomb in the Valley of Josaphat, followed by comments which are probably from Adomnán himself. Adomnán’s text reads : In the eastern portion (of the church) is an altar, and at the righthand side of the altar is the empty stone sepulchre of the holy Mary, where she was once laid to rest. But how, or when, or by what persons her holy remains were removed from the sepulchre, or where she awaits the resurrection, no one, as is said, knows for certain. 30

In conclusion we may say that while the Navigatio presupposes the Assumption of the Mother of God as a major celebration, the status, or even the existence, of such a feast in the early Irish Church is not altogether clear. The evidence as now available to us can hardly be used for or against composition of the Navigatio in Ireland itself. Respite for Judas and the damned in the Navigatio sancti Brendani and in apocryphal tradition Chapter 25 of the Navigatio is on “The Unhappy Judas”, who is presented as a man sitting on a rock. As already noted above, on that rock, Judas says, he had a place of refreshment every Sunday from evening to evening, at Christmas until the Epiphany (Theophania), at Easter until Pentecost, and on the feasts of the Purification and Assumption of the Mother of God (Meum uero refrigerium habeo hic omni die domenico a uespera usque ad uesperam, et in Natiuitate Domini usque in Theophaniam et a Pascha usque in Pentecosten et in Purificatione Dei Genetricis atque

30  Adamnan’s De Locis sanctis, ed. by D. Meehan  – L. Bieler (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae, 3), Dublin, 1958, pp. 58–59 (Latin text with English translation). See also Meehan’s note to the text.

844 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Assumpcione ; Navigatio 25, 29–32). 31 Before and after this respite, he says he is tormented in the depth of Hell with Herod, Pilate, Annas and Caiaphas. He implores Brendan and his companions to intercede with the Lord Jesus Christ for him that he be | able 173 to remain on the rock until sunrise on the morrow (ad ortum solis cras ; 25, 34–35). As eventide darkens the sea, the demons come to carry him back to Hell, but Brendan tells them that the Lord Jesus Christ had granted Judas permission to pass the night on the rock until morning (usque mane ; 25, 55–56). When that night had passed, early in the morning (transacta itaque illa nocte, primo mane) the demons took Judas away (25, 60). A number of questions arise with regard to these texts, for instance : what is the background to the Sunday respite for Judas ? ; why does he seek an extension ? ; and why precisely over Sunday night, to early Monday morning ? ; what is the background to the respites extended beyond Sunday ? Then there is the question as to what message, if any, the author of the Navigatio intends to convey in this Judas episode. It appears that the text is directly or indirectly related to what the Visio Pauli has to say on the temporary respite from Hell for the souls of the damned. Since we will have occasion to speak of the Visio Pauli in some detail again in the course of this paper, we may note here that the original of the Latin Visio Pauli, namely, the Greek Apocalypse of Paul, was composed in Egypt, and in the third century, if not slightly earlier. A copy of the early Greek edition was brought to Asia Minor from which an expanded text (known as the Tarsus text) was made in the early fifth century. The Western tradition of the work descends from a Latin translation of the Greek in its second edition. 32 The best witness to the second edition of the Greek text is the fuller Latin version, extant in a manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris (nouv. acq. lat. 1631 ; 9th century). The Latin translation must have been made soon after the Greek original. It was used in the Regula Magistri, written in Italy, south-east of Rome c. 500–25. It was also known to Benedict of Nursia (c. 480–c. 550), and in Selmer, Navigatio, p. 67 ; translation O’Meara, The Voyage, pp. 57–58. See Apocalypse of Paul. A New Critical Edition of Three Long Latin Versions, ed. by T. Silverstein  – A. Hilhorst (Cahiers d’Orientalisme, 21), Geneva, 1997, pp. 11–12. 31 

32 

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 845

France to Caesarius of Arles (c. 470–542). The Visio was extremely influential in the West. In the words of Theodore Silverstein, the Visio became “one of the chief formative elements in the developments of the later legends of Heaven and Hell which culminated in the Divina Commedia of Dante”. 33 It is | known to have 174 influenced the Vision of Saint Patrick’s Purgatory, and also the Vision of Adomnán, the Visio Tnugdali, and probably other Irish texts besides. The Visio Pauli is a lengthy work, with fifty-one chapters, which are generally grouped in seven sections according to subject matter. An indication of its popularity in the Latin West is that, together with the three or four long versions, eleven shorter recensions (or redactions as they are generally referred to) are known, in which much of the material of the long versions is omitted. The most popular of all the shorter texts was Recension IV (with Paul’s visit to Hell), which seems to have been known all over Western Europe. Apart from the distinctive Redaction VI, of which two ninth-century manuscripts are known, and Redaction XI, extant in one ninth/tenth-century manuscript, the earliest manuscripts of the redactions are from the eleventh century. With regard to its transmission in Ireland, it would be desirable to ascertain what evidence there is for its use there from earlier times, and also whether the full recension was known. 34 Answers to such questions remain for future research. Chapters 31–44 of the Visio describe Paul’s visitation of Hell in the company of the archangel Michael. Towards the end of this visit (ch. 44) the damned petition mercy from Michael, from the just on earth and from Paul. To this request Jesus replies (Visio Pauli 44, end) : “Now because of Michael the archangel of my covenant and the angels that are with him, and because of Paul 33  Th. Silverstein, Visio Sancti Pauli. The History of the Apocalypse in Latin together with Nine Texts (Studies and Documents, 4), London, 1935, 3. See also P. Dinzelbacher, “Die Verbreitung der apokryphen ‘Visio S. Pauli’ im mittelalterlichen Europa”, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch, 27 (1992), pp. 77–90. On the Visio see also McNamara, The Apocrypha, pp. 105–06, # 91.. 34  There is evidence that the long Latin version was known in England to Aldhelm (late seventh century) and to Aelfric (c.  1000) ; see Charles D. Wright, The Irish Tradition in Old English Literature (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England), Cambridge, 1993, p. 108. We can thus presume that it was known also in Ireland.

846 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church my dearly beloved whom I would not grieve, and because of your brethren that are in the world and do offer oblations, and because of your sons, for in them are my commandments, and yet more because of my own goodness : on the day whereon I rose from the dead I grant all of you that are in torment refreshment for a day and a night for ever”. 35 | By the day Jesus rose from the dead, every Sunday, rather 175 than Easter Sunday alone, is probably intended. And even if not originally intended as Sunday by the original author, the text could very easily be interpreted in this sense, as it is in the long Latin text of St Gall, MS 317, 9th century2 , where the Sunday reference is made clear : dono uobis […] noctem et diem domenicae refrigerium in perpetuum. 36 The most natural understanding of the day and the night intended would appear to be Saturday night and Sunday, although the text could be construed (and indeed was so understood by some) as extending to early Monday. The extent of the Sunday respite for the damned (and even its very existence) differs somewhat in various recensions of the Visio Pauli and in other texts making mention of the respite, such as some of the many varying forms of the Transitus Mariae. Before we turn to those, it should be noted that belief in this Sunday (Easter) respite for the damned may not have originated with the author of the Visio Pauli. It may be a Christian adaptation of the Jewish tradition of a “sabbath rest” for the damned. 37 Belief in 35  Visio Pauli, ch.  44 ; trans. M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford. Clarendon Press, 1953, p. 546. 36  I n Silverstein  – Hilhorst, Apocalypse of Paul, p. 162. 37  See I. Lévi, “Le repos sabbatique des âmes damnées”, Revue des études juives, 25 (1892), pp. 1–13 ; and “Notes complémentaires sur le repos sabbatique des âmes”, Revue des études juives, 26 (1893), pp. 131–35 (Jewish parallels). For Christian material see S. Merkle, “Die Sabbatruhe in der Hölle. Ein Beitrag zur Prudentius-Erklärung und zur Geschichte der Apokryphen”, Römische Quartalschrift für Christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte, 9 (1895), pp. 489–505. Full and recent examination of the question, with rich bibliography, in Gli apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento. III. Lettere e Apocalissi, ed. by M. Erbetta, Casale Monferrato, 1969, pp. 377–78, note 56. See also B. E. Daley, The Hope of the Early Church. A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology, Cambridge, 1991, pp. 121–22. Daley makes no mention of the views of Augustine or Prudentius on this matter, but notes (The Hope, p. 76) that Ephrem does allow for the possibility that God will mitigate the exercise of his justice against condemned sinners, and may allow “some drops of

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 847

such a respite seems to have circulated rather widely in certain Christian circles in the early fifth century. Augustine treats of this belief of a respite for the damned, without any specific reference to Sunday or Christ’s resurrection. He mentions it in his Enarratio on Ps 105, nr. 2, on Ps 105.1. 38 “His mercy endures until the end of the world”, or “for ever”. Commenting on this | text, 176 Augustine remarks that “some [of the damned] will receive more tolerable condemnation than others ; yet who would dare to say that the punishment to which one has been delivered will be mitigated, or have any pause for certain intervals, since the rich man was not counted worthy of one drop of water ?”. In this text of the Enarrationes (a work completed about 416) Augustine rejects any idea of mitigation or break in the punishment. He takes a more lenient view in the Enchiridion (ch. 112), written in 423 for the layman Laurentius :39 It is in vain, therefore, that some, indeed, very many, out of mere human sentiment deplore the eternal punishment and the unceasing and everlasting torments of the damned, and do not believe that such things will be. […] But let them believe, if they care to, that the torments of the damned are to some extent mitigated at certain intervals. Even so, the wrath of God, that is, their condemnation, […] can still be understood to rest upon them. Thus, even in His wrath, that is, while His wrath endures, He would not withhold His mercies ; yet, not so as to put an end to their eternal punishment, but rather to apply or to interpose some little respite from their torments.

water” to fall into Gehenna occasionally to refresh them. For the belief in Irish tradition see L. Gougaud, “La croyance au répit périodique des damnés dans les légendes irlandaises”, in Mélanges bretons et celtiques offerts à J. Loth, ed. by H. Champion (Annales de Bretagne), Rennes, 1927, pp. 63–72. 38  PL 37, 1406. Sed tolerabiliorem quosdam excepturos damnationem in quor­ um­dam comparatione legimus ; alicuius vero mitigari eam cui est traditus poenam, vel quibusdam intervallis habere aliquam pausam, quis audacter dixerit, quandoquidem unam stillam dives ille non meruit ? (Luke 16.24–26). 39  Enchiridion (Faith, Hope and Charity), chapter 112 ; in the translation of L. A. Arand, St. Augustine. Faith, Hope and Charity (Ancient Christian Writers, 3), Westminster (Maryland). 1947 ; London, 1947, pp. 104–05. See also De civitate Dei, 21, 24, 3 (PL 47, 738–39).

848 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church A little earlier (c. 402) Prudentius had expressed similar sentiments in his poem Cathemerinon,40 rather obviously dependent on the Visio Pauli, although he may have been thinking of Easter Sunday rather than of every Sunday. Sunt et spiritibus saepe nocentibus poenarum celebres sub Styge feriae illa nocte, sacer qua rediit Deus stagnis ad superos ex Acherunticis. (Even souls of the lost suffering in the depth of Hell Have some respite from pain, holding glad holiday On that night when the Lord came to the world above Up from Acheron’s pool, rising to life again.)

The variety on the matter in the recensions and translations of the Apocalypse of Paul (Visio Pauli) is quite interesting. The Syriac translation | makes no mention of any respite. On the other hand, 177 the Coptic version speaks of a respite for the fifty days between Easter and Pentecost (fifty days after Easter), together with the Sunday respite. This remarkable text merits citation. The relevant section of Christ’s reply to the request of the damned is as follows (in the translation of Ernest Alfred Wallis Budge) :41 But, for the sake of Michael and My beloved Paul, I do not wish to grieve you, and those (i.e. Michael and Paul) offer up offerings on your behalf, and on behalf of your children and brethren, for there is one among them who performeth My commandments. And because of My goodness, and because I rose from the dead [on that day], I will give unto you rest upon the Lord’s Day every week, and during the fifty days which follow the [day of the] Resurrection, whereon I rose from the dead.

40  Cathemerinon 5, 125–28 ; CSEL 61, 1926, ed. by J. Bergman, p. 30 ; English translation that of The Poems of Prudentius (The Fathers of the Church. A New Translation, 43), ed. by M. C. Eagan, Washington, 1962, p. 36, with reference to Augustine, Enchiridion, chapter 112. 41  Original Coptic text and English translation in Miscellaneous Coptic Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt edited with English Translation, ed. by E. A. W. Budge, London, 1915, pp.  clxii–clxxiii (summary), 534–47 (text), 1043– 84 (translation) ; text cited pp. 1069–70 (brackets as in Budge’s original). For the Coptic version, see Gli Apocrifi III., ed. by Erbetta, p. 377, note 56, who thinks that the Coptic may represent one of the texts that have not been affected by the changes proper to the Tarsus recension of the Apocalypse of Paul.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 849

In the various forms of the Transitus Mariae the case is somewhat similar with regard to the respite for the damned. In the Ethiopic version (§ 100) the damned are granted a Sunday respite until three in the afternoon.42 In the Greek Apocalypse of the Virgin (§ 29) during the days of Pentecost the damned can rest and praise the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.43 In one of the Latin versions of the Transitus the Sunday respite is for three hours. The same is true of the Irish translation.44 One definition of the period of respite was from Vespers | on Saturday until the hour of Terce 178 of Monday morning. This latter we have in one Irish translation of the Visio Pauli, which we will cite a little further below. Belief in the Sunday respite for the damned appears to have been common in the Middle Ages and seems to have passed beyond scholarly circles to popular belief. We have what appears to be an interesting example of popular belief in a Sunday respite from Saturday to early Monday in letter 72 of Peter Damian to Pope Nicholas II (1058–61), written December 1059 to July 1061. The relevant part (§§ 19–20) merits citation in full. Under the heading “That Souls Condemned to the Pains of Hell Enjoy Respite on Sundays”, the text reads :45 42  See the Italian translation in Gli Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento. Vangeli. I/2. Infanzia e passione di Cristo. Assunzione di Maria, ed. by M. Erbetta, Casale Monferrato, 1981, p. 442. 43  See James, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 563. See also W. Schneemelcher, “Later Apocalypses”, in New Testament Apocrypha. II. Apostolic and Early Church Writings, ed. by E. Hennecke – W. Schneemelcher – R. McL. Wilson, London, 1965, pp. 753–54. See note to §  100 of the Ethiopic translation in Erbetta, Gli Apocrifi. Vangeli. 1,2, p. 454. 44  The Latin text (Paris, Bibl. nat. de France, lat.  3550) is cited in Erbetta, Gli Apocrifi. Vangeli. 1,2, 454 (in note to §  100 of the Ethiopic translation). For the Irish texts see The Testament of Mary. The Gaelic Version of the Visio Mariae together with an Irish Latin Version, ed. by C. Donohue, New York, 1942, pp. 54–55 ; English translation by M. Herbert in Irish Biblical Apocrypha, ed. by M. Herbert  – M. McNamara, Edinburgh, 1989, p.  130. The “Irish” Latin text of the Dormitio has no visit to Hell, and no reference to a respite for the damned. 45  In the translation of O. J. Blum, Peter Damian Letters 61–90 (The Fathers of the Church. Mediaeval Continuation), Washington, 1992, pp. 122– 23, made from the critical edition of the original Latin text by K. Reindel, Die Briefe des Petrus Damiani, 4  vols., in MGH, Die Briefe der deutschen Kaiserzeit, letter 72 in vol.  2 (1988), pp. 326–66 ; text cited at 334–35 ; also

850 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church I think that we should speak of a subject that I heard about from Archbishop Humbert, a man of great authority. After returning from the region of Apulia, he told me of a mountain range of rugged rock near Puteoli that rose from dark and ill-smelling waters. From these steaming waters, small birds are usually seen rising, and from Saturday evening until Monday morning (a vespertina sabbati hora usque ad ortum secundae feriae) they are ordinarily visible to humans. During this time of grace, they are seen freely walking here and there about the mountain as if they had been liberated from their bonds. They stretch their wings, comb their feathers with their extended beaks and, as far as one can tell, peacefully relax during the refreshing time allotted them. These birds are never seen eating, nor is it possible to catch them with any sort of snare. But at dawn on Monday (diluscente igitur matutina secundae feriae hora) a great raven that looks like a vulture begins with arched neck to croak at the birds, and at once they hide from him by diving into the water and are not seen again by human eyes until they emerge from the depths of these sulphurous waters on Saturday evening (advesperscente iam sabbati die). So it is that some say that these | are the souls of men that have been condemned to the fierce pains of Hell, and that on Sunday and during the nights before and after they enjoy refreshing respite in honor of the Lord’s resurrection.

A similar legend, again on souls in the form of birds (and again regarding Campania, on the island of Ischia) is found in the German writer Conrad of Querfurt (end of the twelfth century), on a Sunday repose from about three in the afternoon of Saturday to the evening of Sunday :46 Videntur circa eundem locum qualibet die sabbathi, circa horam nonam, volucres in quadam valle nigrae et sulphureo fumo deturin PL 145 [ed.  1867], pp. 423–42, at 427–28. On Humbert’s inclination to cite miraculous accounts, see H. G. Krause, “Über den Verfasser der Vita Leonis IX”, Deutsches Archiv, 32 (1976), pp. 49–85 ; for the literature of this legendary phenomenon, see K. Reindel, Die Briefe, 2 (1988), p. 335, note 25. For this text, and one of Conrad of Querfurt, see A. H. Krappe, “An Italian Legend of Pierre Damian”, The Romanic Review, 15 (1924), pp. 94–99, who notes that both texts have to do with certain birds on swampy ground in the south of Italy. He believes there is a pre-Christian, pagan background to the legends, and notes (p. 96) a number of texts on the motif of condemned souls appearing in the shape of birds. 46  Latin text in Krappe, “An Italian Legend”, pp. 94–95 ; translation by the present writer.

179

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 851 patae, quae ibi quiescunt per totum diem dominicum, et in vespere cum maximo dolore et planctu recedunt, numquam nisi in sequenti sabbatho reversurae, et descendunt in lacum ferventem. Quas quidam afflictas animas arbitrantur vel daemones. (Near the same place on any Saturday about three o’clock in the afternoon, in a certain valley birds can be seen, black and disfigured by a sulphurous smoke. These birds rest there all through Sunday and in the evening with great pain and lament they withdraw, never to be seen again except on the following Saturday, and they go down into a burning lake. Some believe that these are suffering souls or devils.)

In the Irish Voyage of the Sons of Ua Corra (ninth century  ?) §§ 56–57 we have a text in the same tradition as these.47 During a voyage the Sons of Ua Corra see a soul in the form of a bird. This bird, the soul of a woman once a nun, invited them to another place to listen to birds there, and tells them that the birds they see are the souls that come on Sunday out of Hell. On their way they see three wondrous rivers, out of which the birds would come in waves over them, namely a river of otters, a river of eels and a river of black swans. The bird directing them tells them not to let the shape of the birds they see make them sad. She tells them that the birds they behold are the souls of people enduring punishment for the sins they have committed and that there are devils in the shapes they see behind them pursuing them, and the souls utter heavy and great cries as they flee from their punishment by the devils. Further, with regard to Irish tradition we may note that in one of the Irish versions of the Visio Pauli (RIA 224 P 25 pp. 68–80 ; | eleventh century),48 in response to a request of Michael and Paul, 180 Christ replies : “On account of the appeal of Mary, Michael and Paul, and the saints besides, and out of my own goodness I grant

W. Stokes, “The Voyage of the Húi Corra”, Revue celtique, 14 (1893), pp. 22–69, at 48–51. 48  J. E. Caerwyn Williams, “Irish Translations of the Visio sancti Pauli”, Éigse, 6 (1948–52), pp. 127–34, at 133. Translation followed that of M. Herbert, in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, Edinburgh, 1989, p. 135. 47 

852 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church them a respite from vespers of Saturday to the third hour of prime of Monday”.49 In the Old-Irish text Cain Domnaig, on Sunday observance, it is stated that “not even those in Hell are tortured on that day”,50 that is on Sunday. It is worth recalling that a few paragraphs earlier the same work says that Sunday observance (and thus implicitly the Sunday respite) is to be observed from Vespers on Saturday to Terce on Monday. In the Vision of Adomnán (tenth century), the respite is only for three hours on Sunday,51 although here there may be question not of the damned in Hell but of the souls in Purgatory.52 In the Vision of Tundal (written by the Irishman Mark in 1149) the respite is also for three hours, but this is repeated daily, rather than weekly as in the case of the Vision of Adomnán.53 And here the daily respite is instanced only for one person (King Cormac Mac Carthy, died 1138), rather than for all the damned. In Matthew Arnold’s poem “Saint Brendan” Judas gets only one hour respite each Christmas night.54 Judas’s petition for an extension may reflect a division of opinion as to the extent of the respite, one view reducing it from early | Monday (as in the Peter Damian text) to Saturday eve- 181 49  The Irish text ends literally. “[…] from Vespers of Saturday until Terce Prime of Monday”, where teirt prime may be due to a conflation of two traditions as to when precisely on Monday the respite ended. Otherwise this Irish text follows closely the Latin of Homily 100 of Pseudo-Bede of Recension IV of the Visio Pauli (in PL 94 [ed.  1862], 501–02). The Latin corresponding to the end of the Irish text has. concedo vobis requiem ab hora nona sabbati usque ad horam primam feriae secundae (PL 94, 502C ; “[…] from the ninth hour [None. three in the afternoon] on Saturday until the first hour [Prime] on Monday”). 50  J. G. O’Keeffe, “Cáin Domnaig”, Ériu, 2 (1905), pp. 189–212, at 195 (§  9) ; translation given is that of M. Herbert, in Herbert  – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, p. 51 (§ 6). 51  The Vision of Adamnán, §  30 in the translation of C. S. Boswell, An Irish Precursor of Dante (Grimm Library, 18), London, 1908, p. 43 ; § 38 in the translation of M. Herbert, in Herbert – McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, pp. 145-46. 52  Thus Gougaud, “La croyance”, p. 65. 53  Visio Tnugdali. Lateinisch und altdeutsch, ed. by A. Wagner, Erlangen, 1882, p. 44. 54  M. Arnold, “Saint Brandan”, in “Narrative Poems”, in Poetical Works of Matthew Arnold, London, 1898, pp. 165–67.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 853

ning (as in the Conrad of Querfurt text). Brendan’s intercession had the respite prolonged to the longer period of early Monday morning. What is unique is the extended respite Judas enjoys over the year : from Christmas to Epiphany, from Easter to Pentecost, the feast of Mary’s Purification and Assumption, as well as the Sundays outside of these (Navigatio ch. 42). This gives a total of 12 + 50 + 1 + 1 + 42 Sundays = 106 days out of 365. It would appear that the author had certain traditions for many at least of these respite days. The tradition of the Christmas respite came down as far as Matthew Arnold (but only for three hours) ; the Sunday rest is well established. The author of the Navigatio may have a tradition of a respite from Easter to Pentecost from some eastern source (Ethiopic, Coptic) ; that for the Assumption was built possibly on a text of the Transitus Mariae (which speaks at most of a Sunday rest). The author of the Navigatio seems to have moulded such traditions for his own purpose. I know of no tradition that speaks of any respite for Judas only (with such arch-sinners as Herod, Pilate, Annas and Caiaphas still in Hell’s torments ; Navigatio 25, 33). The author shows great sympathy for Judas, and has made Saint Brendan feel likewise (Navigatio 25, 16–59).55 For the author, For the legend of the respite of the damned (with reference to Judas) in the Middle Ages see L. Gougaud, Christianity in Celtic Lands, London, 1932, pp. 296–97. See also A. Graf, Miti, leggende e superstizioni del medio evo, vol.  1, Mito del paradiso terrestre, il riposo dei dannati, la credenza nella fatalità, Turin, 1892, reprint New York, 1971, pp. 241–70 (with reference to the Judas tradition as known from the Navigatio and texts dependent on it, pp. 253–54). More specifically on the Judas legend see also P. Lehmann, Judas Iscarioth in der lateinischen Legendenüberlieferung des Mittelalters (Studi Medievali, New Series II, 1929), pp. 308–09, 326ff. (a work I have been unable to consult) ; L. Kretzenbacher, “Sankt Brandan, Judas und die Ewigkeit”, in Bilder und Legenden. Erwandertes und erlebtes Bilder-Denken und Bild-Erzählen zwischen Byzantz und dem Abendland (Aus Forschung und Kunst), Klagenfurt, 1971 ; P. Dinzelbacher, Judastraditionen (Raabser Märchen-Reihe 2), Vienna, 1977 ; P. F. Baum, “Judas’ Sunday Rest”, Modern Language Review, 18 (1923), pp. 168–82 ; and most recently K. Paffenroth, Judas. Images of the Lost Disciple, Louisville and London, 2001 ; with rich bibliography, pp.  179– 96 ; the Brendan legend, pp.  125–26, while reference is made to the Voyage of St Brendan, the text in question is really the Vita Secunda, ed. by C. Plummer. See also L. Gougaud, “La croyance”, pp. –66 ; St J. Seymour, Irish Visions of the Other World, London, 1930, pp. 87–92. In Seymour’s opinion (pp.  88–89) the treatment accorded to Judas Iscariot in the Brendan legend 55 

854 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church possibly what holds for the | arch-sinner Judas will be true a for- 182 tiori of all the damned. In this episode, it appears that the author consciously stands within the tradition of the Visio Pauli, and of that with which Saint Augustine had to contend. It was an ancient problem which continued down through the Middle Ages, namely, the difficulty of reconciling eternal punishment with God’s infinite mercy and goodness. The person who has given us the Navigatio has presented the strongest form of this tradition on the respite for the damned (represented by Judas) known to us, a presentation depending on some traditional sources, but probably as we have it in the Navigatio a formulation proper to the author of the work himself. Heaven, Paradise, the Land of Promise in the Visio Pauli and Irish tradition Chapters 19–30 of the Visio Pauli recount Paul’s vision of Paradise. This is followed (chs. 31–44) by the apostle’s visit to Hell, which is immediately followed by an account of Paul’s second vision of Paradise (chs. 45–51). The Paradise in this second visit is the Paradise of Genesis 2–3, and quite different from that of the first visit. Since the geography of the heavenly realms and the terminology used may help in the study of later Irish visions and journeys (otherworld and others), I here treat of them in some detail. In the Visio Pauli the angel takes Paul into the third Heaven and sets him at the door of a gate through which the righteous enter (ch.  19). When Paul entered within the gate of Paradise, he met Enoch and Elias. Paradise here seems to be identified with Heaven, the third Heaven, or located within it. The angel then brought Paul down from the third Heaven and led him into the second Heaven, and again led him to the firmament and from the firmament he led him to the gates of Heaven. The text goes on to say that the beginning of the foundation thereof was upon the river that waters the earth. To his question as to the identity of

would appear to be unique, and thus confined to Irish literature, although parallels are found elsewhere but with obvious evidence of borrowing from the Irish legend.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 855

the river of water, the angel replied that it was the ocean (ch.  21). The text goes on to say (with Paul as speaker) :56 | And suddenly I went out of heaven, and I understood that it is the light of heaven which lightens all the earth. For the land there is seven times brighter than silver. And I said, “Lord, what is this place ?” And he said to me, “This is the land of promise [terra repromissionis]. Have you never heard what is written : Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth [terram] ? (Matt. 5.4). The souls of the just, when they have gone out of the body, are dismissed to this place for a while.” And I said to the angel, “Then this land will be manifested before the time ?” The angel answered and said to me, “When Christ, whom you preach, shall come to reign, then, by the sentence of God, the first earth will be dissolved (Apocalypse 20.4–6 ; 21.1) and this land of promise will then be revealed, and it will be like dew or cloud, and then the Lord Jesus Christ, the King Eternal, will be manifested and will come with all his saints to dwell in it, and he will reign over them a thousand years (Apocalypse 20.4–6), and they will eat of the good things which I shall now show you.”

The description of this Land of Promise follows immediately in chapter 22 :57 And I looked around upon that land, and I saw a river flowing with milk and honey, and there were trees planted by the bank of that river, full of fruit ; moreover, each single tree bore twelve fruits in the year, having various and diverse fruits ; and I saw the created things which are in that place and all the work of God, and I saw there palms of twenty cubits, but others of ten cubits ; and that land was seven times brighter than silver. And there were trees full of fruits from the roots to the highest branches, of ten thousand fruits of palms upon ten thousand fruits. The grapevines had ten thousand plants. Moreover in the single vines there were ten thousand bunches and in each of these a thousand single grapes ; moreover these single trees bore a thousand fruits. And I said to the angel, “Why does each tree bear a thousand fruits ?” The angel answered and said to me, “Because the Lord God gives an abounding profusion of gifts to the worthy and because they of their own will afflicted themselves when they were placed in the world doing all things on account of his holy name.” And again 56  In the translation of J. K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford. 1993, pp. 628–29. 57  Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, p. 629.

183

856 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church I said to the angel, “Sir, are these the only promises which the Most Holy God makes ?” And he answered and said to me, “No ! There are seven times greater than these. But I say to you that when the just go out of the body they shall see the promises and the good things which God has prepared for them. Till then, they shall sigh and lament, saying, ‘Have we uttered any word from our mouth to grieve our neighbour even on one day ?’” I asked and said again, “Are these alone the promises of God ?” And the angel answered and said | to me, “These whom you now see are the souls of the married and those who kept the chastity of their nuptials, controlling themselves. But to the virgins and those who hunger and thirst after righteousness and those who afflicted themselves for the sake of the name of God, God will give seven times greater than these, which I shall now show you.”

After this Paul is taken to be shown the City of Christ (chs. 22– end 30). It is worthy of note that in the Visio Pauli, chapter 21, the thousand year reign of Christ of  ;Apocalypse 20.4–6 is understood in the literal, not in a spiritual sense, as had been the tradition from Tyconius (c. 400) onwards. (The earliest commentary on the Apocalypse by Victorinus of Pettau [c. 304] had certain millenarian tendencies.) The passage on the Land of Promise may be of significance for Irish ecclesiastical learning in two ways. First of all it may have influenced both terminology (Terra Repromissionis ; Tír Tairngiri) and concepts in the Irish Voyage literature. The clearest example would appear to be the Navigatio (ch. 1, 18–19), where Mernóc is said to have found the Delightful Island (insulam […] nomine deliciosam)58 and Saint Barrind says he was encouraged as follows : “Father, embark in the boat and let us sail westwards to the island which is called the Promised Land of the Saints (ad insulam quae dicitur terra repromissionis sanctorum) which God will give to those who come after us at the end of time” (Navigatio 1, 33–34).59 Later he is told that here, in this island, “it is always day, without blinding darkness. Our Lord Jesus Christ is the light of this island” (Navigatio 1, 59–60 ; see Apocalypse 21.23).60 Later in the Navigatio Barrind encourages his brothers with the words :

58  59  60 

Selmer, Navigatio, p. 4 ; translation O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 3. Selmer, Navigatio, p. 5 ; translation O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 4. Selmer, Navigatio, p. 7 ; translation O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 5.

184

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 857

“You are living undoubtedly at the gate of Paradise. Near here is an island which is called the Promised Land of the Saints (terra repromissionis sanctorum) where night does not fall nor day end” (Navigatio 1, 71–77).61 The influence of the Visio Pauli may explain the rather odd quest in time of an island, the Promised Land, which will be given to the saints only at the end of time. This is not the place to explore this particular point further. This avenue of approach through the Visio Pauli, however, may throw | light on the quest of the Promised Land, Tír Tairngiri, in 185 the Navigatio and in some of the other Irish voyages. Another matter on which the Visio Pauli may shed some light is the geography of the location of the just in Irish visions, such as the Vision of Adomnán and the Visio Tnugdali.62 Enoch and Elias in Paradise in Irish voyage tradition An obvious difficulty with presumed dependence of the Navigatio on the Visio Pauli is that, unlike the latter, the Navigatio makes no mention of Enoch and Elias when speaking of Terra Repromissionis (or Paradise). It may be that the original on which the Navigatio drew did have reference to Enoch and Elias. Mention is made of them as dwelling in an island in the Voyage of Snegdus and Mac Riagla (§§ 22–23) 63 and in The Adventures of Columba’s Clerics (§§ 51–52).64 In the former it is in the second last island visited by Snegdus and Mac Riagla. The king of the island tells them that he and the others there shall dwell there till judgement come : “For good are we without sin, without wickedness, without [stain] of our crime. Good is the island wherein we are, for in it are Elijah and Enoch and noble is the dwelling wherein is Elijah”. The clerics say that they would like to see Enoch, but are told that he is in a secret place until they shall all go to the battle, on Selmer, Navigatio, 7 ; translation O’Meara, The Voyage, p. 5. For the problems with regard to the Vision of Adamnán see M. McNamara, “Some Aspects of Early Irish Medieval Eschatology”, in Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart. 1996, pp. 42–75, 71–73. 63  W. Stokes, “The Voyage of Snegdus and Mac Riagla”, Revue celtique, 9 (1888), pp. 14–25 (at 22–23). 64  W. Stokes, “The Adventure of St  Columba’s Clerics”, Revue celtique, 26 (1905), pp. 130–70 (at 164–67). 61 

62 

858 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church the Day of Judgment. Similarly in the closely related text of the Adventures of Columba’s clerics. We may recall that in 1960 Mario Esposito drew attention to an apocryphal “Book of Enoch and Elias” as a possible source of the Navigatio.65 The work in question is the Historia de Enoch et Elia which the twelfth-century chronicler Godfrey of Viterbo (born c. 1120) said was to be found in the church (Benedictine Abbey) of Saint Matthew in Brittany, the date of which book cannot be ascertained, although | it may be as old as the sixth or seventh 186 centuries. Esposito comments, that as for the apocryphal Book of Enoch read by Godfrey of Viterbo in the Benedictine Abbey of Saint Matthew in Brittany, its existence cannot be doubted, for Godfrey was a perfectly trustworthy writer, who took only minor liberties with the originals when paraphrasing them in verse. If, as seems probable, it was as old as the sixth or seventh centuries, it might well have been the original source of the Irish voyage-legends (Brendan, Mael Dúin, Snegdus, etc.). There was regular intercourse between Ireland and Brittany during the early period, and some wandering Irish monks may well have made a copy of this book belonging to the monks of Saint Matthew and taken it over to Ireland. The diffusion of this production in Ireland, Esposito continues, would explain the deep interest shown by certain Irish writers in the exceptional fate of Enoch and Elias, removed mysteriously from circulation and confined in a deserted island-Paradise, where they await death at the hands of Antichrist. These individuals are not mentioned in the Latin Navigatio, but they have been introduced into certain Italian and German versions.66 Conclusion In this paper I have examined sections of the Navigatio sancti Brendani against what seems to be their natural setting, in an attempt to see if this approach could shed some light on the circles within which the work might have originated. Two other subsections of the paper have to do with the broader question of Irish voyage literature. 65  M. Esposito, “An Apocryphal ‘Book of Enoch and Elias’ as a Possible Source of the Navigatio sancti Brendani”, Celtica, 5 (1960), pp. 192–206. 66  Esposito, “An Apocryphal ‘Book’”, pp. 203–04.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 859

The biblical Psalter text used throughout the Navigatio is the Vulgate, the Gallicanum commonly in use throughout Gaul (hence the name), the greater part of Europe and in Ireland from the early Middle Ages onwards. The texts cited are in general brief and show no regional or recensional particularity. For this reason they provide no evidence for, or against Irish, or continental origin for the Navigatio. The special interest of the author of the work in the Divine Office is evident. It does appear, however, that Navigatio contains insufficient evidence to permit us to attach the form of Divine Office he knew, the psalms used at particular canonical hours, to any of the known forms of the Divine Office, Irish or other. It is clear from the evidence | the text provides, none the less, that the 187 form of the Divine office presented in the Navigatio was not that of the Rule of Saint Benedict. Thus, if the Navigatio was composed on the Continent rather than in Ireland, it can scarcely have originated in a Benedictine community, or in one influenced by Benedictine tradition. It may be that the Divine Office put before us in the work, with the indication of psalms for particular hours, was an idealized one, the author’s own composition, put together for reasons important for him but unknown to us. It could be that he was conversant with a variety of forms of the Divine Office and moulded this tradition for his own ends. With regard to the feasts of Theophania (Epiphany) and the Assumption of the Mother of God, the use of the term theophania (thus far unknown in Irish Latinity) would favour a continental origin – unless, as noted above, the term is not original. Since some commemoration of Mary’s Assumption on 14 or 15 August seems to have been known in Early Ireland, mention of this feast in the Navigatio does not argue necessarily for composition on the Continent. The Judas episode, with the respite for this damned soul on Sundays and stated feasts and festal periods, is most interesting, and possibly potentially very informative with regard to the nature and background of the masterpiece that is the Navigatio. This form of the Judas tradition is unique, peculiar to the Navigatio and texts dependent on it. It does not form part of the continental or Irish Judas tradition. It seems clear that the author had access to a variety of forms of the respite for the damned

860 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church tradition. The most common of these was that on the Sunday respite, varying in extent from the longer None on Saturday to Terce on Monday to the shorter Saturday evening to Sunday evening. The author has particular interest in a tradition extending it to early Monday, which was being curtailed to Saturday evening. He appeals to Saint Brendan to have it extended to Monday morning, which petition is accepted by the Lord in response to Brendan’s prayer. The other tradition of an extended respite from Easter to Pentecost is known from eastern (Coptic) recensions of the Visio Pauli (and possibly in the Ethiopic version of the Transitus Mariae) but as yet it would appear unattested in Latin tradition – which, to my knowledge, has thus far not been fully researched. The items of information with regard to this extended respite for the damned (typified by Judas) may have circulated in the author’s community, or may have been drawn from books known to him. Some of the instances may be his own creation. In any case, it would | appear that the author of the Navigatio has 188 taken a definite stance with regard to the eternal punishment of the damned, in line with the position known to Saint Augustine and advanced in the Visio Pauli in its various recensions. The Sunday respite for the damned could have been known to him from the Visio Pauli, as transmitted on the Continent and in Ireland, and in certain forms of the Irish tradition (for instance the Cáin Domnaig). However, with regard to a tradition of a more extensive respite for the damned, there seems to be no evidence of this in Irish tradition. A contrary position in Irish and other traditions seems to have been to omit all mention of such a respite, or limit it to three hours on Sundays, as in the Latin text and Irish translation of the Transitus Mariae and in the Vision of Adomnán. It will be for future research to further explore the possible theological, liturgical and apocryphal affiliations of the Navigatio sancti Brendani, as well as its connection with Irish tradition.

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 861 | Appendix

189

Navigatio Sancti Brendani : Biblical Psalter Text (Texts as in ed. Selmer, Navigatio sancti Brendani, with chapter, line, page of Selmer edition) Abbreviations used : Vg = Vulgate ; VL = Vetus Latina (Old Latin). As required, reference is made to the unpublished critical edition of the Navigatio prepared by Professor Giovanni Orlandi. Ps  144.17 (ch.  1, 87–8, p.  8) Iustus Dominus in omnibus uiis suis et sanctus in omnibus operibus suis Ps 135.25–26 (ch.  6, 50–51, p.  14) Qui dat escam omni carni, confitemini Deo celi Ps 64.1 (ch.  11, 51–52, p.  25) Te decet hymnus, Deus, in Syon, et tibi reddetur uotum in Jerusalem Ps 50.17 (ch.  11, 60–61 ; p.  25) Domine, labia mea aperies Ps 148.2 (ch.  11, 62–63, p.  25) Laudate Dominum, omnes angelis eius, laudate eum omnes uirtutes eius (Bible text : L. D. de caelis, l. eum in excelsis, Laudate eum o.a.e. laudate eum omnes uirtutes eius) Ps  89.17 (ch.  11, 66–67 ; p.  26) Et sit splendor Domini Dei nostri super nos Ps 46.7–8 (ch. 11, 69–70, p. 26) Psallite Deo nostro, psallite, psallite regi nostro, psallite sapienter ; Vg and VL, without any significant variant, read : Psallite […] regi nostro psallite (v. 8) quon­ iam rex omnis terrae Deus psallite sapienter Ps 46.2 (ch. 11, 70–71, p. 26) Illumina Domine uultum tuum super nos et miserere nostri Ps  132.1 (ch.  11, 71–72, p.  26) Ecce quam bonum et quam iocundum habitare fratres in unum Ps  64.6 (ch.  11, 110–11, p.  28) Exaudi nos Deus salutaris noster, spes omnium finium terre et in mari longe Ps  69.2 (cf. Ps  37.23) (ch.  12, 103–04) Deus in adiutorium meum intende = Vg

| Ps  105.6 (ch.  12, 105, p.  35) [Iniuste egimus, iniquitatem fecimus] = Vg ; no brackets in ed. cr. by G. Orlandi Ps  4.9.10 (ch.  11, 106–08, p.  35) In pace in idipsum, dormiam et requiescam, quoniam tu Domine singulariter in spe constitu-

190

862 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church isti me Vg = VL except VL obdormiam for dormiam ; VL d. moz dormiam Ps  67.36 (ch.  15, 14–15, p.  41) Mirabilis Deus in sanctis suis Deus Israel ipse dabit uirtutem at fortitudinem plebi sue. Benedictus Deus : plebi RC plebis FM cum Ro ; Ro = VL except plebis for plebi ; plebi Ro age moz med Ga Ps  117.27 (ch.  15, 48–49, p.  43) Dominus Deus illuxit nobis. Constituite diem solemnem in condensis usque ad cornu altaris (Vg Deus Dominus et inluxit nobis […] ad cornua […]). No variant in Vg or VL “Dominus Deus” ; no v.  1. om. “et (inluxit)”, Vg cornua RL cum LXX ; ad cornu FI rell codd et edd cum Ro. This text = Vg, not VL which has “in confrequentationibus” for “in condensis”. Revised, unpublished, critical edition of G. Orlandi reads as Vg : Deus Dominus, et inluxit nobis. Constituite diem sollemnem in condensis usque ad cornu altaris Ps  83.8 (ch. 17, 18–19, p.  50) Ibunt sancti de uirtute in uirtutem et uidebunt Deum deoruum in Sion ; Vg ibunt de uirtute in uirtutem uidebitur Deus deorum in Sion ; ibunt + sancti V only V = Pal lat 65 (S. Maria de Capra, s.  xii–xiii) ; in uirtute F ; VL ambulabunt (de uir […]). No variant uidebunt in Vg or VL Ps  66.2 (ch.  17, 26, p.  50) Deus misereatur nostri = Vg ; VL d.m. nobis [nostri VL e, Aug] Ps  69.2 (ch.  17, 27, p.  50) Deus in adiutorium meum = Vg ; VL Domine Deus in adiut. (domine om. aez moz) ; ed. cr. by G. Orlandi + intende (to meum) Ps  115.1 (ch.  17, 27, p.  50) Credidi = Vg and VL ; ed. cr. of G. Orlandi + propter Ps  129.1 (ch.  17, 28, p.  50) De profundis ; = Vg and VL Ps  132.1 (ch.  17, 28–29, 50–51) Ecce quam bonum = Vg and VL Ps  147.12 (ch.  17, 29, p.  51) Laudaque Ierusalem Dominum ; Vg and VL (Lauda Hier. Dom.) ; ed. cr. of G. Orlandi has : Lauda Hierusalem Ps  64.2 (ch.  17, 30, p.  51) Te decet hymnus Deus in Syon = Vg and VL

| Ps  103.1 (ch.  17, 30–31 ; p.  51) Benedic anima mea Domino Domine Deus meus = Vg ; VL Dominum (ch Domino d moz) (Domine Deus meus). This is the second psalm for vespers ; the third is given immediately afterwards ; Selmer (p.  51) errs in

191

   navigatio sancti brendani, some possible connections 863 making two texts of this by citation marks : “Benedic anima mea Domino” ; “Domine Deus meus.” Ps 112.1 (. 17, 31–32, p. 51) Laudate pueri Dominum = Vg and VL Pss 119–33 (ch.  17, 32, p.  51) quindecim gradus Ps 148.1 (ch. 17, 37, p. 51) Laudate Dominum de celis = Vg and VL Ps  149.1 (ch.  17, 38, p.  51) Cantate Domino = Vg and VL Ps  150.1 (ch.  17, 38–39, p.  51) Laudate Dominum in sanctis eius = Vg and VL Ps  50.1 (and Ps  55.1 Vg, not VL which has mis. mihi) (ch.  17, 42, p.  51) Miserere mei Deus = Vg and VL (for 50.1 only) Ps  62.2 (ch.  17, 42–43, p.  51) Deus Deus meus ad te de luce uigilo = Vg and VL ; ed. cr. of G. Orlandi Deus, Deus meus Ps  89.1 (ch.  17, 43, p.  51) Domine refugium = Vg and VL Ps  46.2 (ch.  17, 44, p.  51) Omnes gentes = Vg and VL Ps  53.3 (ch.  17, 44, p.  51) Deus in nomine tuo = Vg and VL Ps  114.1 (ch.  17, 45, p.  52) Dilexi quoniam sub Alleluia = Vg and VL (both of which have Alleluia Dilexi quoniam) Ps  64.6 (ch.  27, 16–17, p.  77) Exaudi nos Deus salutaris noster spes omnium finium terrae et in mari longe = Vg (no variants) and VL Ps  83.5 (ch.  28, 21–22, p.  79) Beati qui habitant in domo tua in seculum seculi laudabunt te = Vg, except Vg in saecula saeculorum (no significant variant ; but = VL which has in saeculum saeculi, and VL adds Domine after in domo tua) ; ed. cr. ; CΙQΦv have in domu ; ed. cr. G. Orlandi reads : Beati qui habitant in domo tua, Domine ; in saecula saeculorum laudabunt te.

Conclusion

Robert T.  Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012 Part IV (unpublished).

LOOKING FORWARD : DE INITIIS PROJECT LEARNING IN THE EARLY CHURCH 600-800 Evidence from Bible text and Commentaries and Apocrypha on the origins of and influences on the Early Irish Church 1. Early Irish Church : A De initiis Project ? On presentation of the list of their texts for Apocrypha Hiberniae volume 2, planned to contain apocalyptic and eschatological texts, to the AELAC Editorial Committee, the Irish Editorial Board was to learn that while the texts were apocalyptic and eschatological a number of them could not be classed as apocryphal, even within this Association’s broader concept of the term. After this decision a working group in University College Cork initiated a project under the title De finibus, with the aim of critically studying and editing all these non-apocryphal Irish apocalyptic and eschatological texts, and have very successfully brought the project to completion.1 I believe there is place for a similar project on an integrated view of early Irish Christianity (500-800 A.D.) under the title De initiis. The aim of this project would be to arrive at such an integrated view using all available sources, e.g. linguistics (British, Welsh, influences), liturgy, Bible text and commentaries, Apocrypha, and archaeology. I give some examples of each of these here. 2. Liturgy, using early texts, archaeology etc. In regard to this I mention specifically the Early Irish (pre-800) Treatise on the Mass, which may give a good idea of Eucharistic liturgy in eighthor seventh-century Ireland. This vernacular text seems all the more important in that it appears to have been intended for a lay audience of Mass-goers, to help them appreciate the significance of the church furniture as well as the actions of the Mass. This treatise at, or towards, the beginning : treats of “(1) The altar is the figure of the persecution ... (2) Water, then, in calicem ... (3) The 1  The End and Beyond  : Medieval Irish Eschatology, ed. by J. Carey  – E. Nic Cárthsaigh  – C. Ó Dochartaigh, Aberystwyth, 2014.

868 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Host, then, super altare, i.e. the turtle dove (.i. in turtur)....”.2 The words of Neil Xavier O’Donoghue in this regard are worth recalling : “In earlier times, the altar itself was the preeminent symbol of Christ in the church building, but gradually the eucharistic species became associated with the altar outside of the celebration itself. In the eighth century the practice of the eucharistic doves developed, whereby the eucharistic bread was placed in a hollow metallic “dove” that was suspended above the altar itself”. 3 3. The Hebraicum Text in Ireland (pre-Amiatinus ; 6th-7th century). The specifically Irish Hebraicum text is older than Codex Amiatinus (c. 710-715). It served for the insertion of the critical signs (obelus and asterisks) in the Cathach of St Columba, early 7th century. Hence the specifically Irish Hebraicum text was in Ire-

2  Text in Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus, vol 2, ed. by W. Stokes  – J. Strachan, Dublin, 1975, reprint ; original Oxford, 1903, p, 252. On this Old Irish Treatise see P. Ó Néill, “The Old-Irish Tract on the Mass in the Stowe Missal. Some Observations on its Origin and Textual History”, in Seanchus. Studies in Early and Medieval Irish Archaeology, History and Literature in Honour of Francis J. Byrne, ed. by A.P. Smyth, Dublin, 2000, pp. 199-204. 3  N. X. O’Donoghue, The Eucharist in Pre-Norman Ireland, Notre Dame, IN, 2011, p.60, with reference to a text of the local, ninth-century, Synod of Verona (PL 136, 599). In his introduction to the new (the third) edition of The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, by F. E. Warren, Piscataway, NJ, 2010, O’Donoghue studies the edition of Rev. B. MacCarthy, “On the Stowe Missal”, Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy 27 (1886), pp. 245-65, including the Irish text of the Treatise on the Mass, in Stowe and Leabhar Breac texts, with English translations. This presented an excellent opportunity to note mention of the dove in the Stowe Tract on the Mass. “super altare .i. turtur” (thus ed. Stokes – Strachan), the manuscript reading turtur unfortunately misread by B. McCarthy as intrat (“it enters”). Archaeology has revealed examples of such metallic doves from the Merovingian (pre-Carolingian, A.D. 800) period. See M. Ryan, “Sacred Cities ?”, in Text, Image, Interpretation. Studies in Anglo-Saxon literature and its insular context in honour of Éamonn Ó Carragáin, ed. by A. Minnis – J. Roberts, Turnhout, 2007, pp. 515-528, at 521 note 24, with a reference to the “dove over the altar” in the Stowe tract as possible evidence for indoor celebration of the mass and perhaps the presence of metal doves suspended over altars in early medieval Ireland. Such doves were used to contain reserved consecrated bread. For related early and medieval Irish archaeological material see M. Ryan, Early Communion Vessels (The Irish Treasures Series), Dublin. 2000 ; also Ryan, Studies in Medieval Irish Metalwork, London, 2002.

looking forward: de initiis project

869

land pre-600. When or where this particular recension was made remains to be determined. 4. Critical signs asterisks and obeli in the Cathach (7th century). The critical signs of asterisk and obelus in the Cathach are evidence of a learned collation of a good Vulgate text against a specifically Irish text of the Hebraicum. This appears to have been carried out in an Irish school, monastic or otherwise, indicating such activity there in the sixth century. 5. Early Irish biblical commentaries (7th-8th century). The translation of Theodore’s commentary on the Psalms by Julian of Eclanum (died in Sicily c. 454) probably circulated within a limited learned circle (of Pelagians or Pelagian supporters ?) and in Northern Italy in the late fifth and sixth century. The abbreviated version, or epitome, was probably made in the same circles in the sixth century, and soon had the opening section (on Pss 1.1-16.11a) lost, to be replaced in one branch by the complete translation of Julian and in another by a distinct Antiochene-type commentary with Davidic emphasis. How or when these texts of Julian’s translation and the epitome reached Ireland (and Northumbria) has not been determined. The epitome was used in the Irish (or Northumbrian) Glossa in Psalmos of the Vatican codex Pal. lat. 68 (from c. 700), indicating the presence of the material in Ireland in the seventh century at the latest. The epitome for Pss 16.11b to the end, and the other non-Julian, Antiochene-type Davidic commentary for Pss 1.1-16.11a is used in the Psalm section of the “Reference Bible”, De enigmatibus, probably Irish and from 700-750. The commentaries on the Revelation of John in De enigmatibus and in the Cambridge University Library manuscript (Dd X 16) are believed by Professor Roger Gryson to depend on a Hiberno-Latin (Irish) commentary from the early eighth century. There are good arguments for the Irish origin of the Pseudo-Jerome commentary on Mark (early seventh century). 6. Apocrypha in Early Irish Church (7th-8th century). The Latin text or texts behind The Childhood Deeds of Jesus, available in an Irish translation of c. 700 A.D., must have been available in Ireland in the seventh century, if not earlier. The Latin behind the Irish Infancy Narratives, the I-Compilation as distinct from the J-Compilation, without any influence of Pseudo-Matthew can

870 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church be regarded as old, possibly pre-700. Parts of it may be traced back to a second-century work. How early it was taken to Ireland is not easily determined, but probably it was early. The Irish Transitus Mariae texts have an older form, corresponding to the Ethiopian and Georgian versions. How early the Latin translations of these texts were brought to Ireland, and by what channels is, once again, not easily to determine. Some scholars (e.g. Stephen J. Shoemaker) think of “before 712” as a date. On the Magi, the Irish scholar Sedulius Scottus, writing in the Continent, cites a text which he ascribed to “The Gospel according to the Hebrews”, a writing he probably knew from Ireland. The contents of what he cites is also found in the J (and I)-Compilation, which can hardly be the work intended by him, since it never bears that title, and when given ascription it is rather to James (“James of the Knees”). It is not clear whether Sedulius knew of a complete work under the name “Gospel according to the Hebrews” or drew his citation from some other composition, such as a florilegium. 7. Early Irish Texts : Theology and Devotion. One may legitimately ask what, if any, information can be drawn from the biblical and apocryphal texts with regard to the beliefs, theological concerns and the devotion of the early Irish church. In any such enquiry the nature and purpose of the individual texts must be borne in mind, whether they intend merely to transmit texts or are to be understood as professions of faith. Thus, for instance, the Irish texts on the Transitus Mariae present a very early form of the Transitus tradition (700 ?). The body of Mary was placed under the tree of life in Paradise, and Jesus ascended into heaven. The Vision of Adomnán knew the Transitus text, most probably in this early Irish form. Yet in his vision of the heavenly land, “the twelve apostles and the Virgin Mary are in a special group beside the powerful Lord”.4 And we are not to presume that the presence of the early form in the Hiberno-Latin text in the fifteenth-century (Franciscan) manuscript (TCD F.5.3) represents the current form of belief in Mary’s Assumption. In relation to the apocrypha we can compare the Irish translations with the known Latin originals, and take additions in the renderings as representative of 4  In the translation of M. Herbert, in M. Herbert  – M. McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocrypha, p. 138.

looking forward: de initiis project

871

Irish belief and devotions. This is clear in the verse rendering of the Boyhood Deeds of the Lord Jesus and the Irish translations of the J (I)-Compilation.5 With regard to theological speculation one may ask whether in the early Irish schools there was any interest in, or discussion on, Christological or Trinitarian matters, such the Persons of the Trinity. The Creed of the Antiphonary of Bangor (680-690) professes faith in Jesus Christ more or less as in the Apostles’ Creed, but at greater length regarding the Holy Spirit. Credo et in Spiritum Sanctum, Deum omnipotentem, unam habentem substantiam cum Patre et Filio, ... “having one substance with the Father and the Son”. Julian’s full translation of Theodore’s commentary on Psalms 2 and 8 contains reflections on the relationship of Christ and his humanity to the Father and on the humanity and divinity of Christ.6 The Irish glosses on the Latin take up Theodore’s reflections on these psalms (Milan Codex, fols 16a-18c for Ps 2 ; fols 24d-26b for Ps 8). The Irish word for substantia (immaterial and material) is folud. It is recognized that folud is used in Wb (Würzburg glosses) and Ml (Milan glosses) to translate the Latin substantia in the sense substance, nature, essence (both of material and immaterial things).7 In the Würzburg gloss Wb 32b3 (c. 800, roughly contemporary with the Milan glosses) on Hebrews 1.3, folud glosses substantia of the biblical text in figura substantiae eius (of God the Father), as “the (Father and Son) have the same form of Substance (fúad folid leu)”. The next gloss (Wb 32b4), without strict basis in the biblical text (purgationem peccatorum faciens) but rather on the preceding figura reads : “as it is He is splendor and is figura”. In glosses on the relevant sections of Julian’s full translation of Theodore’s commentary on Pss 2 and 8 there are abundant references to the Godhead and Manhood of the Son. In the relevant section of the commentary on Ps 8 there 5  See M. McNamara, “Jesus in (Early) Irish Apocryphal Gospel Traditions”, see above pp. 585-651, at 631-33. 6  See M. McNamara, “Christology and the Interpretation of the Psalms in the Early Irish Church,” in Studies in Patristic Christology (Proceedings of the Third Patristic Conference, Maynooth, 1996), Dublin, 1998, pp. 196-233, at 204-09. 7  See under “folud” in the Royal Irish Academy Dictionary of the Irish Language, Dublin, 1957, col. 280, 78-80.

872 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church are at least three occurrences of the folud without the presence of substantia or natura in the Latin text : Ml 25c8 .i. afolud inna doinachtae. “i.e. the substance of the Manhood”, on non sit of “Quid est homo ... (Ps 8.5). naturae nostrae aperte indicat uilitatem et quae non sit tanti meriti” (“...he openly implies the lowliness of our nature and that it is not of great merit...” ; Ml 25d6 .i. a folad inna deachtae, “i.e the substance of the Godhead” on et of et haec quidem coronat gloria et honore, “i.e. the substance of the Godhead”, followed immediately by another Ml 25d7 on Haec (on haec autem insigni capitis decoratur) : .i. folud inna doinacht, “i.e. the substance of Manhood”. While neither of these two last glosses is on substantia or natura of the text, it must be recalled that in the context immediately preceding Theodore’s theological discussion has used both : “manifestum ergo est quod aliam Diuinae Scripturae nos docent Dei Verbi esse substantiam et aliam Hominis suscepti natura” (“It is clear that the divine Scriptures teach us that the substantia of God the Word is one thing, the natura of Man assumed another”). It may be noted that the substance of this text of Theodore is central to his position, and led to his condemnation in 553 at the Council of Constantinople and in the Constitutum of Pope Vigilius. The substance of it is conserved in Greek and in a Latin version different from the Ambrosian text of Julian’s translation.8 It may be worth examining whether these debates were still alive in Northern Italy, and Bobbio, in the sixth century and whether Irish scholarship abroad and at home had an interest in such questions. The Irish Abroad ninth century Should one wish to consider the (possible) influence of the Bible and Apocrypha abroad as well as at home, it would then be a matter of exploring further the points made by Professor Bischoff with regard to Paschasius Radbertus and Christian of Stablo, and other writers as well, for instance Sedulius Scottus, John Scottus Eriu­ gena, Clemens Scottus, Zacharias of Besançon, Peter Comestor and possibly some others, something best done after deeper exam8  Greek and Latin text, with English translation in R. C. Hill, Theodore of Mopsuestia. Commentary on Psalms 1-81. Translated with Introduction and Notes, Atlanta, 2006, pp. 92-93.

looking forward: de initiis project

873

ination of the texts listed by Bischoff in his essay “Wendepunkte”, but which may be tentatively explored already. Postscript 2014 Since completion of these essays I have developed the theme of De initiis further, concentrating on the biblical commentaries in the early Irish Church A.D. 600-800.9 Particular attention has been paid to works inherited from outside and those composed within the country itself, with special emphasis on the commentaries on the Psalms. It is clear that portions of the full translation of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s commentary on the Psalms by Julian of Eclanum and good portion of the epitome of this came from outside, probably from Northern Italy. So too, probably, did the glosses on Pss 1.1-16.11 with an Antiochene Davidic-type interpretation preserved in the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen (Rouen Bibl. mun. 24) and the Psalter section of De enigmatibus. Together with these we have full-length commentaries on the Psalms composed in Ireland during the period A.D. 600-800. Chief among these is the Glossa in Psalmos, preserved in the Vatican Codex Pal. lat. 68, now acephalous through the loss of the gloss on Pss 1.1-39.11a. It was composed, or compiled, in Ireland or Northumbria under Irish influence, in the early eighth century. It combines three forms of exegesis : that of the Epitome of Julian of Eclanum, a Davidic exegesis interpreting the Psalms of David without any Christian reference, and a Christian interpretation. The compiler must have borrowed the texts with the Davidic interpretation from a work circulating in Ireland in the seventh century, and very probably composed there. Some authors believe that this Davidic commentary continued to be used in Ireland down to the tenth and probably eleventh or twelfth century, but this does not concern us here. The Glossa in Psalmos and the Davidic commentary are evidence for serious exegetical activity and composition in Ireland

9  M. McNamara, “Bible Text and Commentaires in Ireland 600-800 A.D. An Overview”, PIBA 35 (2012), pp. 121-46 ; McNamara, “De initiis : Irish Monastic Learning 600-800 AD”, Eolas. Journal of the American Society of Irish Medieval Studies 6 (2013), pp. 4-40.

874 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church in the seventh and early eighth century. To this we may add the commentary on the Apocalypse preserved in the Cambridge University Library manuscript Dd. X. 16, recently critically edited by Roger Gryson.10 This commentary is closely related to the commentary on the Apocalypse in De enigmatibus. This is a well-constructed commentary. It has a developed ecclesiology, a theology of the Church : there are two parts in the Church : one a Church without spot or wrinkle, which is truly the body of Christ, and the other part which professes the name of Christ but does not shine like the first with the virtues brought to the full height, and is called on to repent. Gryson reckons that this work belongs to the Hiberno-Latin group identified by Bernhard Bischoff in his essay “Wendepunkte”, and assigns it a date of 750-900 A.D., more probably nearer the former. To these works we may add the Hiberno-Latin commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, and some other works from the period in question. Those just listed, however, suffice to indicate the extent of the exegetical activity in Ireland during the period 600-800. This activity is better understood when viewed against the background of the contemporary activity in the fields of traditional Irish law and canonical collections. Early Irish Law A rich heritage of early Irish law has survived in Old Irish lawtexts.11 Most of these originate in the seventh-eighth centuries A.D. but survived – often incompletely and corruptly – in fourteenth-sixteenth century manuscripts.12 The laws cover a wide variety of subjects : persons, property, offences, contracts, pledges and sureties, distraint and legal entry, procedure, punishment. The most important collection of Irish law-tracts is that known as the Senchas Mar (literally “the great tradition”), possibly put together Incerti Auctoris Glossa in Apocalypsin e codice Bibliothecae Universitatis Csantabrigiensis Dd. X. 16, ed. by R. Gryson (CCSL 108G), Turnhout, 2013. 11  F. Kelly, A Guide to Early Irish Law (Early Irish Law Series 3), Dublin, 1988 ; L. Breatnach, A Companion to the Corpus Iuris Hibernici (Early Irish Law Series 5), Dublin, 2005. 12  See F. Kelly, A Guide to Early Irish Law (Early Irish Law Series 3), Dublin, 1988, p. 1. 10 

looking forward: de initiis project

875

at a law-school (or law-schools) in the Irish Northern Midlands (counties of Meath and Westmeath). Another group of texts comes from what is referred to as a “poetico-legal” school, referred to as the Nemed (“holy, privileged”) collection of texts, and is preoccupied with the rights and duties of “men of arts”, especially poets. While the language of the texts is from the seventh-eighth centuries the central tradition they carry seems to represent a pre-Christian and pre-literate Irish legal tradition which was passed on by lawyers from generation to generation in the form of alliterative verse or legal maxims. The transmission and development of this legal tradition was revolutionized with the advent of Christianity and the monastic schools, leading to the more elaborate treatment of the legal tradition we find in our present texts. While some of the writing down may have been done in the sixth century, as already noted, the bulk of the work was done in the seventh and eighth centuries. The formulation of this traditional legal material was done in dialogue with Christian reflection. The extent of Christian influence on this traditional material is a matter of some debate. There seems to have been a certain Christian input, and the texts even contain Latin phrases.13 Liam Breatnach has shown that a text of the Nemed School (Bretha Nemed Toísech), through mention of names, can be dated to the second quarter of the eighth century and in Munster, and that parts of it are translations of the Collectio Canonum Hibernensis.14

Collectio Canonum Hibernensis The Collectio Canonum Hibernensis is a collection of ecclesiastical canon law.15 There are seventy books in this Collectio, each containing on average about twenty chapters. Each inquiry, inquisitio, on a topic follows the same pattern ‒ Bible, Fathers, councils, 13  See D. Ó Corráin  – L. Breatnach  – A. Breen, “The Laws of the Irish”, Peritia 3 (1984), pp. 382-438 ; 430-38 for material in Latin (134 examples) in the Irish Law texts. 14  L. Breatnach, A Companion, pp. 190-91 ; L. Breatnach, “Canon Law and Secular Law in Early Ireland : The Significance of Bretha Nemed”, Peritia 3 (1984), pp. 439-59. 15  See M. Sheehy, “The Bible and the Collectio Canonum Hibernensis”, in Ireland and Christendom, ed. by P. NÍ Chatháin  – M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1987, pp. 277-83.

876 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church decretals, and histories. The work shows close acquaintance with the Bible on the part of the compilers. There are almost a thousand exact or close quotations from Scripture in the work, and of these about two thirds are taken from the Old Testament. The composition indicates extensive research on the part of the compilers, from the Bible and other sources (Fathers, councils, history). The work is known in two recensions, Recension A and Recension B, and it is uncertain which is the older. The compilers of the work were Ruben of Dairinis, on the Blackwater, near Youghal in Cork (died 725) and Cú Cuimne of Iona (died 747). The connection of the work with the Irish law-text Bretha Nemed, already mentioned, has Liam Breatnach surmise that the author of the Irish text used that of the Munsterman Ruben of Dairinis, whose work would probably have been composed in Munster in the early eighth century.16 Given this intensive activity in native Irish and Canon law during the seventh and eighth century, there is nothing exceptional in similar activity in the biblical exegetical field, provided there is evidence for this.

16  See Breatnach, “Canon Law”, pp. 456-57 ; Breatnach, A Companion, pp. 190-91.

Appendix I A Bibliography of the Works of Martin McNamara in Irish Biblica and Apocrypha 1971 “Notes on the Irish Gospel of Thomas”, Irish Theological Quarterly 38 (1971), pp. 42-66. 1972 “A Plea for Hiberno-Latin Studies”, Irish Theological Quarterly 39 (1972), pp. 337-53. 1973 “Hiberno-Latin Studies. An Addendum”, Irish Theological Quarterly 40 (1973), pp. 364-69. “New Testament Apocrypha in the Irish Church”, Studia Evangelica 6 (1973), pp. 330-40. “Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies. II An Irish Abbreviation of St Gregory the Great on the Book of Job”, Irish Theological Quarterly 40 (1973), pp. 367-70. “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (A.D. 6001200)”, PRIA 73 C (1973), pp. 201-98. 1974 “Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies ; The AGM of the Irish Biblical Association”, Irish Theological Quarterly 41 (1974), pp. 317-19. 1975 The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975. “The Bible in Ireland (AD 600-1150)”, Scripture Bulletin 6/2 (19751976), pp. 36-39. 1976 McNamara, M (Ed) Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution. Edited by Martin McNamara (PIBA 1), Dublin, 1976 (including “Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, by Dr Bernhard Bischoff, translated into English by Colm O’Grady, MSC). 1978 ‘Sources of Early Irish Theology. The Apocrypha, the Canon of Scripture”, Milltown Studies 2 (1978), pp. 58-69.

878 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 1979 “Ireland and Northumbria as illustrated by a Vatican Manuscript”, Thought (Fordham University) 54 (no. 214, 1979), pp. 274-290 (R.E. McNally Festschrift). “The Psalter in Early Irish Monastic Spirituality”, Monastic Studies 14 (1983), pp. 179-205. 1984 “Early Irish Exegesis. Some Facts and Tendencies”, PIBA 8 (1984), pp. 57-96. “Tradition and Creativity in Early Irish Psalter Study”, in Irland und Europa/Ireland and Europe. Die Kirche im Frühmittelalter/The Early Church, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin and M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 328-89. 1986 Glossa in Psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11-151.7) (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1986. “New Publications Series of Hiberno-Latin Texts”, Hiberno-Latin Newsletter vol. 1, no. 1 (Fall 1986), pp. 3-4. 1987 “The Inverted Eucharistic Formula conversio corporis Christi in panem et sanguinis in vinum. The Exegetical and Liturgical Background in Irish Usage”, PRIA 87 C (1987), pp. 573-93. “Plan and Source Analysis of Das Bibelwerk. Old Testament”, in Irland und die Christenheit/Ireland and Christendom. Bibelstudien und Mission/The Bible and the Missions, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin and M.  Richter, Stuttgart, 1987, pp. 84-112. “The Text of the Latin Bible in the Early Irish Church. Some Data and Desiderata”, in Irland und die Christenheit/Ireland and Christendom. Bibelstudien und Mission. The Bible and the Missions, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin and M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1987, pp. 7-55. “The Echternach and Mac Durnan Gospels. Some Common Readings and their Significance”, Peritia 6-7 (1987-1988), pp. 217-22. 1988 “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin”, PIBA 11 (1988), pp. 88-96. 1989 “The Bird hiruath of the ‘Ever-new Tongue ; and herodius of Gloss on Ps. 103.17 in Vatican Codex Pal. lat. 68”, Ériu 39 (1988), pp. 87-94. “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin. (including) 5. How Irish is the Commentary on Hebrews in St Gallen 73 ?”, PIBA 12 (1989), pp. 86-95. “Celtic Scriptures : Text and Commentaries” An Introduction to Celtic Christianity, ed. by J. P. Mackey, Edinburgh, 1989, pp. 414-40.

appendix i: bibliography mcnamara

879

“Hiberno-Latin Writings 1200-1500”, Hiberno-Latin Newsletter 3 (1989), pp. 9-12. Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation. Edited by Máire Herbert and Martin McNamara MSC. Edinburgh, 1989. 1990 Studies on Latin Texts of Early Irish Gospels (A.D. 600 – 1200) (Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 20), Steenbrugis, in Abbatia S. Petri  – Dordrecht, 1990. “The Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica 21 (1990), pp. 185-237. “Monastic Schools in Ireland and Northumbria before A.D. 750”, Milltown Studies 25 (1990), pp. 19-36. 1991 “Two Decades of Study on Irish Biblical Apocrypha”, Hiberno-Latin Newsletter 5 (1991.2), pp. 2-5. 1992-93 “Non-Vulgate Readings of Codex AMB I.61 sup.”, in Sacris Erudiri 33 (1992-1993), pp.  183-257. 1993 “Non-Vulgate Readings of Codex Ambrosianus I.61 sup. The Gospel of Matthew.” Philologia Sacra. Biblische und patristische Studien für Hermann J. Frede und Walter Thiele zu ihrem siebzigsten Geburtstag, ed. by R. Gryson. Freiburg, 1993, vol. I, pp.  177192. “Psalm 8 in the Bible, in Earlier and Irish Tradition”, Milltown Studies no. 32 (1993). “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin.” PIBA 16(1993), pp. 114-124. “How Irish is the Commentary on Hebrews in MS St Gallen 73 ? A Note by Liam Breatnach”, PIBA 16 (1993), pp, 1212-24. 1994 “Irish Gospel Texts, Amb. I 61 sup., Bible Text and Date of Kells”, in The Book of Kells, Proceedings of a Conference at Trinity College Dublin 6-9 September 1992, ed. by F. O’Mahony, Aldershot, 1994, pp. 78-101. “Sources and Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica (MS Vat. Reg. 49)”, Sacris Erudiri 34 (1994). 1995 “The Celtic-Irish Mixed Gospel Text. Some Recent Contributions and Centennial Reflections”, in Filologia mediolatina 2 (1995), pp. 69-108 “Psalm 16 in the Bible, in Earlier and Irish Tradition”, Milltown Studies 36 (1995), pp. 52-63.

880 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church “Patristic Background to Medieval Irish Ecclesiastical Sources”, in Scriptural Interpretation in the Fathers. Letter and Spirit (The Patristic Symposium 2), Dublin, 1995, pp. 253-281. 1996 “The Irish Tradition of Biblical Exegesis, A.D. 550-800”, in Iohannes Scottus Eriugena. The Bible and Hermeneutics (Proceedings of the Ninth International Colloquium of the Society for the Promotion of Eriugenian Studies held at Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve June 7-10, 1995), ed. by G. van Riel, C. Steel and J. McEvoy, Leuven, 1996, pp. 25-54. “Some Aspects of Early Medieval Irish Eschatology”, in Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Bildung und Literatur/Learning and Literature, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin and M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, pp. 42-75. 1997 “The Bible in Academe and in ecclesia. Antiochene and Early Irish Exegesis of Messianic Psalms”, Milltown Studies 39 (1997), pp. 112-29. 1998-1999 “Christology and the Interpretation of the Psalms in the Early Irish Church”, in Studies in Patristic Christology, ed. by T. Finan and V. Twomey, Dublin, 1998, pp. 196-233. “The Psalms in the Irish Church : the Most Recent Research on Text, Commentary and Decoration  – with Emphasis on the So-called Psalter of Charlemagne”, in The Bible as Book : the Manuscript Tradition, ed. by J.  L. Sharpe III and K. van Kampen, London, 1998, pp. 89-103. “Affiliations and Origins of the Catechesis Celtica. An ongoing Quest”, The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland (Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 31), ed. by T.  O’Loughlin, Steenbrugis, in Abbatia S. Petri  – Turnhout, 1999, pp. 179-203. “Bible Text and Illumination in St Gall Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51, with Special reference to Longinus in the Crucifixion Scene”, in Pattern and Purpose in Insular Art (Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Insular Art held at the National Museum Gallery Cardiff 3-6 September 1998, pp. 191-202. “Some Affiliations of the St Columba Series of Psalm Headings : A Preliminary Study”, PIBA 21 (1998), 87-111 ; 22 (1999), pp. 91-123. 2000 The Psalms in the Early Irish Church, Sheffield, 2000. “Irish Gospel Books and Related Texts”, PIBA 23 (2000), pp. 61-66. “Catechesis Celtica Homily on the Resurrection Narrative (Mt 28.1– 15)”, in PIBA 23 (2000) 67–89.

appendix i: bibliography mcnamara

881

2001 Apocrypha Hiberniae. I. Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara, et al., 2 volumes (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13-14), Turnhout, 2001. “Bible Text and Illumination in St Gall Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51, with Special reference to Longinus in the Crucifixion Scene”, in Pattern and Purpose in Insular Art (Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Insular Art held at the National Museum Gallery Cardiff 3-6 September 1998), ed. by M. Redknap, N. Edwards et al., Oxford, 2001, pp. 191-202. “The Newly-Identified Cambridge Apocalypse Commentary and the Reference Bible : A Preliminary Enquiry”, Peritia 15 (2001), pp. 208-60. “Irish Psalters and Bibles”, at International Conference “La Città e il Libro” (International Conference at La Certosa di Firenze 30, 31 Maggio, 1 Giugno 2001 (published electronically in http.//www. florin.ms/aleph3.html). 2002 “Sankt Gallen Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51, with Special Reference to the Biblical Text of the Fourth Gospel”, in Ogma. Essays in Celtic Studiers in Honour of Proinséas Ní Chatháin. Edited by M. Richter & J.-M. Picard, Dublin, 2002, pp.  262-267. “Irish Homilies A. D. 600–1100”, in Via Crucis. Essays on Early Medieval Sources and Ideas in Memory of J. E. Cross (Medieval European Studies 1), ed. by Thomas. N. Hall, Morgantown, 2002, pp. 235-284. “Apocryphal Infancy Narratives. European and Irish Transmission”, in Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Texte und Überlieferung/Texts and Transmission, ed. by P. Ní Chatháin & M. Richter, Dublin, 2002, pp. 123146. “The Irish Biblical Association and its Publication Committee”, PIBA 25 (2002), pp. 9-17. 2003 “Christ Forty Hours in the Tomb and the Forty Hours Devotion”, Cel­ tica 24 (2003), pp. 205-12. Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage. The Middle East and Celtic Realms, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 2003. “The Irish Legend of Antichrist”, in Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome. Studies in Ancient Intercultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst (JSJSup 80). Ed. by F. García Martínez and G. P. Luttikhuizen ; Leiden, 2003, pp. 201-19. “Apocalyptic and Eschatological Texts in Irish Literature : Oriental Connections ?”, in Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage, ed. by M. McNamara, Dublin, 2003, pp. 75-97.

882 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 2004 “The Latin Gospels, with Special Reference to Irish Tradition”, in The Earliest Gospels. The Origins and Transmission of the Earliest Gospels. The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P45 (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series ; Proceedings of the Chester Beatty 2000 Conference,), ed. by Horton, London and New York, 2004, pp. 86-106. 2006 “Navigatio Sancti Brendani. Some Possible Connections with Liturgical, Apocryphal and Irish Tradition” in The Brendan Legend. Texts and Versions, ed. by G. S. Burgess and C. Strijbosch, Leiden, 2006, pp. 159-88. 2007 “The (Fifteen) Signs before Doomsday in Irish Tradition”, in Miscellanea Patristica Reverendissimo domino Marco Starowieyski septuagenario professori illustrissimo viro amplissiom ac doctissimo oblata (Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne XX/2.2007), Warsaw 2007, pp. 223-54. 2009 “Twenty-Five Years of the IBA Special Publications Trust”, PIBA 32 (2009), pp. 131-35. “Five Irish Psalter Texts”, PRIA 109 C (2009), pp. 37-104. 2010-2011 “Jesus in (Early) Irish Apocryphal Gospel Traditions”, in Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, ed. by J. Frey and J. Schröter, Tübingen, 2010, pp.  685-739. “End of an Era in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis : Caimin Psalter Fragments (11th-12th Century) and Gospels of Máel Brigte (1138 A.D)”, PIBA 33-34 (2010-11), pp. 76-121. 2012 “Bible Text and Commentaries in Ireland 600-800 A.D. An Overview”, PIBA 35 (2012), pp.  121-46. 2013 “De initiis : Irish Monastic Learning 600-800 AD”, Eolas. Journal of the American Society of Irish Medieval Studies 6 (2013), pp. 4-40. “Téacs agus tuiscint an Bhíobla i seanmóirí Gaeilge, AD 600-1200” [“Text and understanding of the Bible in Irish-language Sermons AD 600-1200”], in Saltair saíochta, sanasaíochta agus seanchais. A Festschrift for Gearóid Mac Eoin, ed. by D. O Baoill, et al., Dublin, 2013, pp. 124-43.

appendix i: bibliography mcnamara

883

2014 “Bernhard Bischoff’s ‘Wendepunkte’ Sixty Years on”, PIBA 36-37 (2013-2014), pp. 90-104. 2015 “The Multifaceted Transmission of the Bible in Ireland A.D. 5501200”, in The Bible in Ireland : A Social and Cultural History, ed. by B.  A.  Anderson and J.  Kearney (forthcoming). “Jewish Texts and Traditions in Irish Transmission” (forthcoming) “The ‘Leabhar Breac Gospel History’ against its Hiberno-Latin Background” (forthcoming) “Irish Gospel Texts Publication Project and Irish Origin of Vienna Codex 940”, PIBA 38 (2015) (forthcoming) “Irish Apocryphal and Related Texts on the Public Life of Jesus and the Passion Narratives” (forthcoming)

Appendix II Critical Editions of Irish Biblical and Apocryphal Texts “Wendepunkte” No. 1A. De enigmatibus: Introduction and Pentateuch. The Reference Bible – Das Bibelwerk. Inter Pauca Problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis nunc prompta sunt Praefatio et Libri De Pentateuch Moysi. Edited by G. MacGinty (CCCM 173; Scriptores Celtigenae pars III), Turnhout, 2000. 1A. De enigmatibus : De Libris Regum. Incipiunt Virtutes Eliae. Incipiunt Virtutes Helisaei. Critical edition by F. Dolbeau ‒ É. Poirot, “Sur les miracles d’Élie et d’Élisée (CPL 1155c)”, Sacris Erudiri, 34 (1994), pp. 135-64, at 160-64. 1A. De enigmatibus: Pauca de Psalmis Dauid Regis Israhel. Critical edition of main text and the abbreviation prepared for publication. 1A. De enigmatibus. Commentary on the Apocalypse: In variorum auctorum Commentaria Minora in Apocalypsis Johannis. Edited by R. Gryson (CCSL 107), Turnhout, 2003, pp. 233-295. 1A bis. A Hiberno-Latin commentary on the Apocalypse closely related to that in De enigmatibus. Edited by R. Gryson in Incerti Auctoris Glossa in Apocalypsin e codice Bibliothecae Universitatis Cantabrigiensis Dd. D. 16 (CCSL 108G), Turnhout, 2013. No. 2. De operibus sex dierum. Edited by M. Gorman, “A Critique of Bischoff’s Theory of Irish Exegesis: The Commentary on Genesis in Munich Clm 6392 (Wendepunkte 2)”, The Journal of Medieval Latin 7 (1997), pp. 178-233. No. 3. Commemoratio Geneseos. Not edited. No. 4. Without title. Discussion of selected questions on the work of creation and on the Fall. No. 5. Lathcen filius Baith. Eglogae de moralibus Iob quas Gregorius fecit. Edited by M. Adraien (CCSL 145), Turnhout, 1969. No. 6A. Glossa in Psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus Latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11-151.7). Edited by M. McNamara (Studi e Testi 310), Città del Vaticano, 1986.

886 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church No. 6B. Eclogae tractatorum in Psalterium, preface edited by P. Verkest, “The Praefatio of the Irish Eglogae tractatorum in psalterium”. Edited with a Critical Introduction”, Sacris Erudiri 40 (2001), pp. 267–92. Edition of full text prepared for publication. No. 7. Canticle of Canticles. Unedited. No. 8. Iosephus Scottus. Abbreviatio commentarii Hieronymi in Isaiam. Not edited. No. 9. Ezekiel. Fragments. Edited by M. Gorman, “‘La plus ancienne edition commentée’: the Ezechiel Fragment in Irish Minuscule, now in Zurich (CLA 7.1008)”, Revue Benedictine 114 (2004), pp. 276-288; M.  C. Ferrari, “Before the Glossa Ordinaria: the Ezekiel Fragment in Irish Minuscule Zurich, Staatsarchiv W.3.19.XII, and the Other Experiments towards a Bible commentée in the Early Middle Ages”, in Biblical Studies in the Early Middle Ages, edited by C. Leonardi ‒ G. Orlandi (Millennio medievale 52), Florence, 2005, pp. 283-307. No. 10. Amos. Fragments. Unedited. No. 11A. Expositio IV Evangeliorum. Recension I. Edited in PL 30,531590; 114,861-916. No. 11B-C. Expositio IV Evangeliorum. Recensions II and III. Unedited. No. 12. Ailerani interpretatio mystica progenitorum Domini Iesu Christi. Edited by A. Breen, Dublin, 1995. (Compare with no. 25). No. 13. Pauca de libris catholicorum scriptorum in evangelia excerpta. Edited by R. E. McNally in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973, pp. 213-19. No. 14 I. Quaestiones vel glosae in evangelio nomine. Edited in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973. No. 14 II. Quaestiones Evangelii. Unpublished. No. 15. De quaturo evangeliis seu de aliis quaestionibus. Unpublished. No. 16 I. Liber questionum in Evangeliis. Edited by J. Rittmueller in Scriptores Celtigenae. Pars V (CCSL 108F), Turnhout, 2003. No. 16 II. Mt 7.26-8.13. Fragment. MS: Hereford, Cathedral Library, P. II, 10. Identified by J. Rittmueller (Liber questionum, pp. 63*67*) as part (Northumbrian family) of Liber questionum in Evangeliis. No. 17 I. Commentary on Matthew, in MS Vienna 940. Edition being prepared for publication.

 appendix ii: critical editions of irish biblical material 887 No.17 II. Fragment of commentary on Matthew 3.3-6; 8.18-28. Edited by E.A. Lowe, “An Unpublished Fragment of Irish Exegesis in Visigothic Script”, Celtica 5 (1960), 1-7. No. 18. Ex dictis sancti Hieronimi. Edited by R. E. McNally in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I, pp. 225-30. No. 19. Sedulius (senior), Tractatus Mathei. A brief text published by Bischoff. No. 20. Frigulus (Figulus) Commentary on Matthew. Critical edition by A.J. Forte, with the publisher (Aschendorff, Münster). No. 21. Lost Commentary on Matthew. References in Bischoff, “Wendepunkte”. No. 22. Matthew chapter 1-27; 1.1-16.18. Text of Matthew’s Gospel with Irish glosses; MS: Würzburg, M. p. th. f. 61. Edited (with serious omissions) by K. Köberlin in Eine Würzburger Evangeliehandschrift, Ausburg, 1891. New critical edition in preparation. No. 23. Commentary on Matthew 1-6.24 (without title). Unpublished. No. 24. Matthew Chapters 1-5; 7; 10; 17; 27. Genelogium Iesu Christi secundum carnem. Unpublished. No. 25. Aileranus, Interpretatio mystica progenitorunm Christi and Interpretatio moralis progenitorum Christi. For ed[ition] Bischoff says: “Cf. Stegmüller [2, nos 944f.]; Clavis, no. 1120”. Edition: A. Breen, Ailerani Interpretatio mystica et moralis progenitorum Domini Iesu Christi, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, 1995. No. 26. De questione porcorum. A text published by Bischoff in “Wendepunkte”. No. 27. Ps.-Jerome (Cummeanus?) Commentarius in Evangelium Marci. Edited by M. Cahill in Expositio Evangelii secundum Marcum (CCSL 82; Scriptores Celtigenae 2), Turnhout, 1997. No. 28. Praefatio secundum Marcum. Edited by R.E. McNally in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973, pp. 220-30. No. 29. Historica investigatio evangelium (!) secundum Lucam. A critical edition is being prepared for publication. No. 30. Commentary on Luke, without title; MS Vienna 997. Edited by J.F. Kelly, “Commentarium in Lucam”, in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores (CCSL 108C), Turnhout, 1974, pp. ix-xi, 1-101.

888 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church No. 31. Commentary on John, without title. MS Vienna 997. Edited by J.F. Kelly, “Commentarium in Iohannem”, in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores (CCSL 108C), Turnhout, 1974, pp. xi-xii, 103-31. No. 32. Pauline Epistles including Hebrews. MS Munich Clm 6235. Edition in preparation for publication. No. 34A. Epistle to the Hebrews. MS St Gall Stiftsbibliothek 73. Edited by H. Zimmer, Pelagius in Irland. Texte und Untersuchungen zur patristischen Litteratur, Berlin, 1901, pp. 420-448; reproduced in Patrologiae Latinae Supplementum IV, 1627-1653; see PLS 1122a. No. 34B. Ps.-Hieronymus. Another form of the commentary. Excerpts published by E. Riggenbach, Die ältesten lateinischen Kommentare zum Hebräerbrief. ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Exegese und zur Literaturgeschichte des Mittelalters, Leipzig, 1907, pp. 206-12. No. 35. Commentarius epistolae Iacobi (etc.). Edited by R.E. McNally in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973, pp. 1-50. No. 36. Ps.-Hilarius, Expositio in VII Epistolas canonicas. Edited by R.E. MCNALLY in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973, pp. 51-124. No. 37. Commentarius de Apocalypsi. Edited by R. Gryson in Variorum auctorum Commentaria Minora in Apocalypsis Johannis (CCSL 107), Turnhout, 2003, pp. 161-229. No. 38. Ps.-Augustine, De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae. Edited in PL 35,2149-2200. A new edition has been prepared for publication. No. 39. Virtutes, quas Dominus dominica die fecit. Edited by R.E. McNally in Scriptores Hiberniae Minores. Pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973, pp. 175-86.

Exegetical Texts from the Ninth to the Eleventh Century

Sedulius Scottus (about A.D. 850) B. Löfstedt (ed.), Sedulius Scottus Kommentar zum Evangelium nach Matthäus 1,1 – 11,1, Freiburg, 1989. B. Löfstedt (ed.), Sedulius Scottus Kommentar zum Evangelium nach Matthäus 11,2 bis Schluss, Freiburg, 1991. Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. I. In Epistolam ad Romanos, introduced and edited by H. J. Frede ‒ H. Stanjek, Freiburg, 1996.

 appendix ii: critical editions of irish biblical material 889 Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. II. In Epistolas as Corinthios usque ad Hebraeos, introduced and edited by H. J. Frede ‒ H. Stanjek, Freiburg, 1997.

John Scottus Eriugena Glossae Divinae Historiae. The Biblical Glosses of John Scottus Eriugena, edited with an introduction by J.F. Contreni ‒ P. P. Ó Néill, Tavarnuzze, Florence, 1997. Texts from a later Period

Texts on the Psalter Meyer, Hibernica Minora, being a fragment of an Old-Irish TreatiseN on the Psalter, with Translations, Notes and Glossary (= Anecdota Oxoniensia, Mediaeval and Modern Series VIII), Oxford, 1894. Theodori Mopsuesteni Expositionis in Psalmos Iuliano Aeclanensi interpretete in latinum versae quae supersunt (CCSL 88A), edited by L. De Coninck, with M.-J. D’Hont, Turnhout, 1977. Expositiones psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adseruantur (CCCM 256; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VII), edited by L. De Co­ninck, Turnhout, 2012. Psalterium Suthantoniense, (CCCM 240; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VI), ed. by P. P. Ó Néill, Turnhout, 2011. B.W. Hawk, “A Fragment of Colossians with Hiberno-Latin Glosses in St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 1395”, Sacris Erudiri 51 (2012), pp. 23b3-56. Liber de ortu et obitu patriarcharum (CCSL 108E; Scriptores Celtigenae pars I), edited by J. Carracedo Fraga, Turnhout, 1996. Homiliarium Veronense, (CCCM 186; Scriptores Celtigenae pars IV), edited by L. T. Martin, Turnhout, 2000. Liber de ordine creaturarum, Un anónimo irlandés del siglo VIII, edited by M.C. Diaz y diaz, Santiago de Compostela, 1972.

Irish Apocrypha McNamara, M, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975. Apocrypha Hiberniae. I. Evangelia Infantiae. 2 volumes (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13-14), edited by M. McNamara, et al., Turnhout, 2001 (edition of Infancy Narratives).

890 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Apocrypha Hiberniae II, 1. Apocalyptica 1. In Tenga Bithnua. The EverNew Tongue (CCSA 16), edited by J. CAREY, Turnhout, 2009. Apocrypha Hiberniae II, 2. Eschatologica 1. Edition of texts: Fís Adomnáin, Dhá Bhrón Flatha Nime. The Two Sorrows of the Kingdom of Heaven; The Transitus Mariae; Visio Sancti Pauli Recension IV; Irish and Related Latin texts on Antichrist Tradition. Texts with publisher. Apocrypha Hiberniae II, 2. Eschatologica 2. Irish texts on the Signs Before Doomsday (Donnchadh Mór Ó Dálaigh, Áirdena, Saltair na Rann), Scéla Laí Brátha, a Poem on the Day of Judgment. Texts being prepared for publication.

Irish language apocrypha-related eschatological texts The End and Beyond. Medieval Irish Eschatology. Ed. by John Carey et al., Aberystwyth, 2014.

Appendix III Cumulative Bibliography Abbott, T. K., Euangeliorum uersio antehieronymiana ex codice Usseriano, 2 vols, Dublin. 1884. ‒, The Codex Rescriptus Dublinensis of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Z) ; also a new edition, revised and augmented ; also fragments of the Book of Isaiah, in the lxx version … together with a newly discovered fragment of the Codex Palatinus, Dublin and London, 1880. Acher. W. B. and Auterbach J. Z. L., “Rabba bar bar Ḥana”, in The Jewish Encyclopaedia, vol. 10, New York, 1907, pp.  290-91. Adams, A. W. (ed.), Primasius episcopus Hadrumetinus. Commentarius in Apocalypsim (CCSL 92), Turnhout, 1985. Adkin, N., “An Undefined Latin Quotation of Scripture Related to Is. 31.9”, Revue Bénédictine, 93 (1983), pp.  123–25. Aland, K. (ed.), Die alte Übersetzungen des Neuen Testaments, die Kir­ chenväterzitate und Lektionare (Arbeiten zur Neutestamentlichen Textforschung 5), Berlin, New York, 1972. Aland, K. and B., Der Text des Neuen Testaments. Einführung in die wissenschaftlichen Ausgaben und in Theorie wie Praxis der modernen Textkritik, Stuttgart, 1982. ‒, The Text of the New Testament. An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, trans. E. F. Rhodes, Grand Rapids, MI, 2nd edn, 1989. Alexander, J., Insular Manuscripts 6th to the 9th Century. A Survey of the Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles, vol. 1, London, 1978. Amann, É., Le Protévangile de Jacques et ses remaniements latins. Introduction, textes, traduction et commentaire (Les Apocryphes du Nouveau Testament), Paris, 1910. Amelli, A., Miscellanea Cassinense I, Patristica 23–24, Monte Cassino, 1897. Amos, T. L., “Miracle, Myth or Middle Ground ? The Catechesis Cracoviensis as a Hiberno-Latin Exegetical Text” (unpublished). ‒, “The Origin and Nature of the Carolingian Sermon” (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1983).

892 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, “The Catechesis Cracoviensis and Hiberno-Latin Exegesis on the Pater Noster”, PIBA, 13 (1990), pp.  77–99. Amphoux, C. B. See under Parker, P.C. Amsler, F. (ed.), Acta Philippi. Commentarius (CCSA 12), Turnhout, 1999. Andrieu, M. (ed.), Le Pontifical Romain au Moyen Age. Tome I. Le Pontifical Romain au XIIe siècle (Studi e Testi 86), Vatican City, 1938. Arand, L. A. (trans. and annotated), St. Augustine. Faith, Hope and Charity (Ancient Christian Writers, 3), Westminster, MD., 1947. Archiv für celtische Lexikographie, vol. 1, ed. by W. Stokes and K. Meyer, Halle, 1900. Arnold, M., ‘Saint Brandan”, in “Narrative Poems”, in Poetical Works of Matthew Arnold, London, 1898, pp.  165–67. Arras, V., De Transitu Mariae. Apocrypha Aethiopice I (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium. Vol. 343, Scriptores Aetiopici, tomus 67), Louvain, 1973. Asin Palacios, M., Islam and the Divine Comedy, translated and abridged by H. Sutherland, London, 1926. ‒, La escatologia musulmana en la Divina Comedia sequida de la historia y critica de una polemica (Instituto Hispano-Arabe de Cultura), 3rd edn, Madrid, 1961. Atkinson, R. (ed.), The Passions and the Homilies from the Leabhar Breac, Dublin, 1887. Autenrieth, J., Brunhölzl, F. (eds), Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff, Stuttgart, 1971. Auwers, J. M., “Le texte latin des Évangiles dans le Codex de Bèze”, in Codex Bezae. Studies from the Lunel Colloquium, June 1994 (NTTS, 22), ed. by P.  C. Parker and C. B. Amphoux, Leiden, 1966, pp.  183–216. Bagatti, B., Excavations at Nazareth, vol. 9, trans. E. Hoade, Jerusalem, 1969. Bains, D., A Supplement to Notae Latinae (Abbreviations in Latin MSS. of 850 to 1050 ad), with a foreword by W. M. Lindsay, Cambridge, 1936. Baldi, D. (ed.), Enchiridion Locorum Sanctorum, Jerusalem, 1957. Bannister, H. M., “Irish Psalters”, Journal of Theological Studies, 12 (1910–11), pp.  280–84. Batiffol, P., “Transformare”, Bulletin d’ancienne littérature et d’archéologie chrétiennes 1 (1911), pp.  54–55.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

893

‒, L’Eucharistie. La Présence Réelle et la transsubstantiation, 5th edition, Paris, 1913. Bauckham, R., Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church, Edinburgh, 1990. Bauer, W., Das Leben Jesu im Zeitalter der neutestamentlichen Apokryphen, Tübingen, 1909 ; reprint, Darmstadt, 1967. Baum, P. F., “Judas’ Sunday Rest”, Modern Language Review, 18 (1923), pp.  168–82. Bayless, M. and Lapidge, M. (eds), Collectanea Pseudo-Bedae (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae 14), Dublin, 1998. Becker, G., Catalogi bibliothecarum antiqui, Bonn, 1885 (later anastatic reprint, no date). Beda Venerabilis, Opera Exegetica III. In Lucae Evangelium Expositio. In Marci Evangelium Expositio (CCSL 120), ed. by D. Hurst, Turnhout, 1960. Bede, De locis sanctis, book 2 (CSEL 39), ed. by P.  Geyer, Prague, Vienna, Leipzig, 1898, (reproduced in Itineraria et alia geogra­ phica. Itineraria Hierosolymimitana. Itineraria Romana. Geographica (CCSL 175), ed. by P.  Geyer, O. Cuntz et al., Turnhout, 1965. Beggiato, F. 1996, “Origine e diffusione del topos legendario-narrativo del ‘Petdono di Longino’ nelle letterature romanze”. Paper read the III Colloquio internazionale medievo romanzo e orientale : “Il viaggio dei testi”. Venice. Typescript. Later published. ‒, “Origini e diffusione del topos leggendario-narrativo del ‘Perdono di Longino’ nelle letterature romanze”, in Medioevo romanzo e orientale : Il viaggio dei testi, III Colloquio internazionale (Venezia, 10-13 ottobre 1996), Soveria Mannelli, 1999, pp.  217-28. ‒, “Il mito di Longino dall’Irlanda all’Europa continentale”, in Gli echi della terra. Cultura celtica in Friuli : dati materiali e momenti dell’immaginario, Pisa, 2002, pp.  85-92. Benedictines of the Congregation of St Maurus in Rome. Summary listing of Queen Christina’s manuscripts, published in 1739 in De Montfaucon, Bibliotheca bibliothecarum manuscriptorum nova, vol. I, pp.  14–61. ‒, Gallia Christiana in provincias ecclesiasticas distributa…, XII, Paris, 1770. Berger, S. Histoire de la Vulgate pendant les premiers siècles du Moyen Âge, Paris, 1893 ; reprint New York, 1961. Best, R. I., “The Lebar Brecc Tractate on the Canonical Hours”, in Miscellany Presented to Kuno Meyer, Halle, 1912, pp.  142-66.

894 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Best, R. I. and Bergin, O. (eds), Lebor na hUidre. Book of the Dun Cow, Dublin, 1929. Best, R. I. and Lawlor, H. J. (eds), The Martyrology of Tallaght from the Book of Leinster, and MS 5100–5104 in the Royal Library, Brussels (Henry Bradshaw Society, 68), London, 1931. Best, R. I. and McNeill, E., The annals of Inisfallen, reproduced in facsimile from the original manuscript (Rawlinson B 503) in the Bodleian Library. With a descriptive introduction by R. I. Best and E. Mac Neill, Dublin, 1933. Beyers, R. (ed.), “Latin translation of the Protevangelium of James in MS. Paris, Sainte-Geneviève, 2787”, in Apocrypha Hiberniae, vol. 1. Evangelia Infantiae, ed. by M. McNamara et al. (CCSA 14), Turnhout, 2001, pp.  881–957. ‒, Libellus de Nativitate Sanctae Mariae. Introduction, édition, traduction et commentaire (CCSA 10), Turnhout, 1997. Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Versionem ad codicum fidem, Vatican City, 1969. Liber Isaiae ; 1972. Liber Hieremiae et Lamentationes ; 1978. Liber Hiezechielis. Bieler, L., “Der Bibeltext des heiligen Patrick”, Biblica, 28 (1947), pp.  31–58, 236–63. ‒ (ed.), Libri Epistolarum Sancti Patricii Episcopi (Clavis Patricii II), Dublin, 1993. Bieler, L. and Carney, J., “The Lambeth Commentary”, Ériu, 23 (1972), pp.  1-55. Bienert, W. A., “The Relatives of Jesus”, in Hennecke, Schnee­ melcher, New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1. Gospels and Related Texts, ed. by Schneemelcher, trans. by McL. Wilson, pp.  47088. Biggs F. M. and Wright, C. D., in The Apocrypha (Sources of AngloSaxon Culture), ed. by F. M. Biggs, Kalamazoo, MI, 2007. Bihlmeyer, B., “Un texte non interpolé de l”Apocalypse de Thomas”, Revue Bénédictine 28 (1911), pp.  270–82. Bischoff, B., “Lorsch im Spiegel seiner Handschriften”, in Die Reichsabtei Lorsch. Festschrift zum Gedenken an ihre Stiftung 764, ed. by F. Knöpp, 2 vols, Darmstadt, 1973-77, II, pp.  7-128. ‒, “Panorama der Hanschriftenüberlieferung aus der Zeit Karls des Großen”, in Bischoff, Karl der Grosse : Lebenswerk und Nachleben, Düsseldorf, 1966, Pt. 2, pp.  233-54. ‒, “Vom Ende der Welt und vom Antichrist (I) ; Fragment einer Jenseitsvision (II) (Zehntes Jahrhundert), Anecdota Novissima. Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1984, pp. 80-84.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

895

‒, “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter”, Sacris Erudiri, 6 (1954), pp.  189–281 ; revised edition in Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien, I, pp. 205–73 ; trans. by C. O’Grady, “Turning Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, in McNamara Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, pp.  73–160. ß ‒, Die südostdeutschen Schreibschulen und Bibliotheken in der Karolingerzeit, Teil I. Die bayrischen Diözesen, Wiesbaden, 1974. ‒, Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, 2 vols, Stuttgart, 1966, 1967. ‒, “La Scuola nell’Occidente Latino nel’alto medioevo”, in Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo 19, Spoleto, 1972, pp.  385-415. ‒, “Theodulph und der Ire Cadac-Andreas”, in Historisches Jahrbuch, 74 (1955), 92-98, reproduced in Mittelalterliche Studien, II, pp.  19-25. Bischoff, B. and Lapidge, M. (eds), Biblical Commentaries from the Canterbury School of Theodore and Hadrian (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England 10), Cambridge, 1994. Blaise, A., Dictionnaire latin-français des auteurs chrétiens, Turnhout, 1954. Blum, O. J. (trans.) Peter Damian Letters 61–90 (The Fathers of the Church. Mediaeval Continuation), Washington, 1992. Blume, C. (ed.), Die Hymnen des Thesaurus Hymnologicus H. A. Daniels und anderer Hymnen-Ausgaben. I. Die Hymnen des 5.–11. Jahrhunderts und die irisch-keltische Hymnodie aus den ältesten Quellen (Analecta Hymnica Medii Aevi), Leipzig 1908, repr. New York & London, 1961. Bonner, G., “Saint Bede in the Tradition of Western Apocalyptic Commentary”, in Church and Faith in the Patristic Tradition  : Augustine, Pelagianism, and Early Christian Northumbria, ed. by G. Bonner, Aldershot, 1966, pp.  1-29. Bonner, G. D., “Towards a Text of Tyconius”, Studia Patristica 10/1 (Texte und Untersuchungen 107), Berlin, 1970, pp.  9–13. Bonner G., Rollason, D., Stancliffe, C. (eds), St Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community to AD 1200, Woodbridge, 1989. Boswell, C. S., An Irish Precursor of Dante. A Study on the Vision of Heaven and Hell Ascribed to the Eighth-century Irish Saint Adamnán, with Translation of the Irish Text, London, 1908. Bourke, C., “Chronology of Irish Crucifixion Plaques”, in The Age of Migrating Ideas. Early Medieval Art in Northern Britain and Ire-

896 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church land, ed. by R. M. Spearman and J. Higgitt, Edinburgh, 1993. pp.  175-81. Bovon, F., Bouvier, B. and Amsler, F. (eds), Acta Philippi. Textus (CCSA 11), Turnhout, 1999. Brandes, H., Visio S. Pauli. Ein Beitrag zur Visionsliteratur mit einem deutschen und zwei lateinischen Texten, Halle, 1885. Breatnach, C., “An Irish Homily on the Life of the Virgin Mary”, Ériu, 51 (2000), pp.  23–58. Breatnach, L., A Companion to the Corpus Iuris Hibernici (Early Irish Law Series 5), Dublin, 2005. ‒, “Canon Law and Secular Law in Early Ireland : The Significance of Bretha Nemed”, Peritia, 3 (1984), pp.  439-59. ‒, “How Irish is the Commentary on Hebrews in MS St Gallen 73 ? A Note by Liam Breatnach”, PIBA, 16 (1993), pp.  122-24. Breeze, A., “The Blessed Virgin and the Sunbeam through Irish, Welsh Glass”, Celtica, 23 (1999), pp.  19–29. Brinktrine, J., “Die transformatio (transfiguratio) corporis et sanguinis Christi in den alten abendländischen Liturgien”, Theologie und Glaube, 8 (1916), pp.  311–18. ‒, “Zum Ursprung der Termini transfigurare corpus et sanguinem Christi, transfiguratio corporis et sanguinis Christi”, Römische Quartalschrift für Altertumskunde und für Kirchengeschichte (Freiburg im Breisgau), 54 (1959), pp.  247–49. ‒, “Die eucharistische Wandlung. Adduktion oder Reproduktion ?”, Theologie und Glaube, 33 (1941), pp.  97–99. ‒, “Interpretation vorscholastischer Texte über die Eucharistie”, Divus Thomas, 20 (1942), pp.  278–84. ‒, Das Opfer der Eucharistie. Dogmatische Untersuchungen über das Wesen des Messopfers, Paderborn, 1938. Brown, R. E. et al. (eds), Mary in the New Testament. A Collaborative Assessment by Protestant and Roman Catholic Scholars, London, 1978. Brown, T. J., “The Irish Element in the Insular System of Scripts to circa A. D. 800”, in Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. by H. Löwe, Stuttgart, 1982, pp.  101-19. ‒, in T. D. Kendrick et al., Evangeliorum Quattuor Codex Lindisfarnensis, II. Commentary, Olten-Lausanne, 1960. ‒, “Northumbria and the Book of Kells”, Anglo-Saxon England, 1 (1972), pp.  219–46.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

897

Bruce-Mitford, R. L. S., “The Early Gospel Book in the British Isles with special Reference to the Gospels of St Chad”, in 30th Annual Report of the Friends of Llanduff Cathedral, April 1962– March 1963, pp.  16–20. ‒, “The Durham-Echternach Calligrapher”, in Bonner, Rollason, Stancliffe, St Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community, pp.  175–88. Brueggemann, W., “Death, Theology of”, Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Supplement, ed. by G. A. Buttrick, Nashville, 1976, pp.  219–22. Brüning, G., “Adamnans ‘Vita Columbae’ und ihre Ableitungen”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 11 (1917), pp.  240–41. Bruun, J. A., An Enquiry into the Art of the Illuminated Manuscripts of the Middle Ages, Part 1, Edinburgh, 1897. Bullough, D. A., “Columba, Adamnán and the Achievement of Iona II”, Scottish Historical Review, 44 (1965), pp.  17-33. Burgess G. S. and Strijbosch, C., The Legend of St Brendan. A Critical Bibliography, Dublin, 2000. Burgess, G. S. and Strijbosch, C. (eds), The Brendan Legend. Texts and Versions, Leiden, 2006. Cabrol, F., “Egbert (Pontifical d’)”, in Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, ed. by F. Cabrol, H. Leclercq, vol. 4.2, cols. 2211-2220. Caerwyn Williams, J. E., “Welsh Translations of Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium”, PIBA, 17 (1994), pp.  102–25. ‒, “‘Aighneas and Chuirp leis an Anam’. An Leagan is Luaithe sa Bhreatnais”, in Cothú an Dúchais. Aisti in omós don Athair Diarmuid Ó Laoghaire S.J., ed. by M. Mac Conmara and É. Ní Thiarnaigh, Dublin, 1997, pp.  218–27. ‒ (ed.), “Irish Translations of the Visio Sancti Pauli”, Éigse, 6 (1948– 52), pp.  127–34. Cagin, P.  (ed.), Le sacramentaire gelasien d’Angoulême, Societé historique et archéologique de la Charante, Angoulême, 1918. Cahill, M. (ed.), Expositio Evangelii secundum Marcum (CCSL 82 ; Scriptores Celtigenae 2), Turnhout, 1997. Capelle, B., “La fête de l’Assomption dans l”histoire”, Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses, 3 (1926), pp.  33–45. Carey, J. (ed.), Tenga Bithnua. The Ever-New Tongue (Apocrypha Hiberniae II. Apocalyptica 1 : CCSA 16), Turnhout, 2009. Carey, J., Nic Cárthaigh, E., and Ó Dochartaigh, C. (eds), The End and Beyond : Medieval Irish Eschatology, Aberystwyth, 2014.

898 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Carney, J., “Two Old Irish Poems”, Ériu, 18 (1958), pp.  1–43. ‒, “Old Ireland and her Poetry”, in Old Ireland, ed. by R. E. McNally, Dublin, 1965, pp.  147–72. ‒, “Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan”, in Early Irish Poetry (Thomas Davis Lectures), ed. by J. Carney, Cork, 1965, pp. 45–57. Carney, J. (ed.), The Poems of Blathmac Son of Cú Brettan together with The Irish Gospel of Thomas and A Poem on the Virgin Mary (Irish Texts Society 47), Dublin, 1964. Carozzi, C., “Structure et fonction de la Vision de Tnugdal”, in Faire croire. Modalités de la diffusion et de la réception des messages religieux du XIIe au XIVe siècle (Collection de l”École Française de Rome 51), ed. by A. Vauchez, Paris, 1981, pp.  223–34. Carracedo Fraga, J. (ed.), Liber de ortu et obitu Patriarcharum (CCSL 108E ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars 1), Turnhout, 1996. Casagrande, D. (ed.), Enchiridion Marianum Biblicum et Patristicum, Rome, 1974. Cassiodorus, Expositio in Ps. XC (CCSL 98, 829). Catalogue général des manuscrits publiques de France, Department tome XII, Orléans, Paris, 1889. Catalogue des manuscrits français (Paris, Bibliothèque Impériale, Departments des manuscrits). Tome premier. Ancien fonds, vol. 1 (Publié par l’ordre de l’Empereur), Paris, MDCCCLXVIII [1868]. Cecchelli, C., “The Iconography of the Laurentian Syriac Gospels”, in Cecchelli, Furlani and Salmi, The Rabbula Gospels, pp. 23–82. Cecchelli, C., Furlani, G. and Salmi, M. (eds), The Rabbula Gospels. Facsimile Edition of the Miniatures of the Syriac Manuscript Plut. I, 56 (Medicaean-Laurentian Library). Olten, Lausanne, 1959. Ceriani, M. A., Monumenta Sacra et Profana ex codicibus praesertim Bibliothecae Ambrosianae, I, 1, Milan, 1861. Charles, R. H., The Ethiopic Version of the Hebrew Book of Jubilees, Oxford, 1895. ‒, The Ethiopic Book of Enoch (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Semitic Series, part II), Oxford, 1906. ‒ (ed.), The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, 2 vols, Oxford, 1913 ; vol. I : Apocrypha ; vol. II : Pseudepigrapha ; reprint 1963. Charlesworth, J. H. and Mueller J., R. (eds.), The New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. A Guide to Publications, with excursuses on Apocalypses, Methuchen, NJ, and London, 1987.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

899

Chroust, A., Monumenta Palaeographica. Denkmäler der Schreibkunst des Mittelalters, I. Abt. Schrifttafeln in lateinischer und deutscher Sprache. I. Serie, III. Bd., Lief. 19. (= Ser. 1, vol. 3, fasc. 19), Munich, 1905. CLA see Lowe, E.A. Clayton, M., “The Transitus Mariae. Tradition and its Origins”, Apo­ crypha, 10 (1999), pp.  74-98. Coccia, E., “La cultura irlandese precarolingia miracolo o mito ?”, in Studi medievali 3a serie, 8,1 (1967), 257-420. Collins, A. Yarbro ; see under Yarbro Collins, A. Colwell, J. J., “Fís Adamnán. A Comparative Study, with Introduction, Text, and Commentary based on the Version of Lebor na hUidre” (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Edinburgh, 1952). Considine, P., “Irish Versions of the Abgar Legend”, Celtica, 10 (1973), pp.  237–57. Cottineau, L. H., Répertoire topo-bibliographique des Abbayes et prieurés, II, Macon, 1939. Cross, J. E., Cambridge Pembroke College MS 25 (King’s College London Medieval Studies I), London, 1987. Cullmann, O., “The Protevangelium of James”, in Hennecke, Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, I, pp.  370-88. Curran, M., The Antiphonary of Bangor and the Early Irish Monastic Liturgy, Blackrock (Co. Dublin), 1984. (Acc. To Jefferey review – Dublin, Irish academic press). d’Arbois de Jubainville, H., “Gloses irlandaises du psautier de saint Caimin”, Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartes, 46 (1885). (In the course of a Review of T. J. Gilbert, Facsimiles of National Manuscripts of Ireland, pp. 341-45, the author adds his comments on the glosses of the Psalter of Caiman on pp.  344-45 but without a title.) ‒, “Gloses irlandaises du psautier de saint Caimin”, Revue Celtique, 7 (1886), p.  96. Daley, B. E., The Hope of the Early Church. A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology, Cambridge, 1991. Darling, G. J., The Cross Legends of the Leabhar Breac. A Critical Edition, translation, and Commentary, Ann Arbor, MI, 2003. David, P., “Un receuil de conférences monastiques irlandaises du VIIIe siècle”, Revue Bénédictine, 49 (1937), pp.  62–89.

900 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Dawood, N. J., The Thousand and One Nights, Harmondsworth, 1954 ; Penguin Classics 1955. De Bhaldraithe, E., “The Bangor Antiphonary”, Hallel. A Review of Monastic Spirituality and Liturgy [Mount Melleray Abbey, Waterford, Ireland], 13 (1985), pp.  164–70. De Brún, P. and Herbert, M., Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts in Cambridge Libraries, Cambridge, 1986. De Bruyne, D. (ed.), “Fragments retrouvés d’apocryphes priscillianistes”, Revue Bénédictine, 24 (1907), pp. 318-35 (Latin texts reproduced in PLS 2, 1503-1522). ‒, Préfaces de la Bible Latine, Namur, 1920. Dekkers, E. and J. Fraipont, Enarrationes in Psalmos LI-C (CCSL  39), Turnhout, 1956 ; second edition 1990. De Coninck, L., Incerti auctoris expositio psalmorum I.1 - XVI.11a iuxta litteram. An Anonymous “Historical” Commentary on Psalms 1.1-XV.11a. Pars prima. Praefatio editoris ; pars altera. Textus¸ Kortrijk. Catholic University of Leuven Campus Kortrijk, preprint 1989. ‒, “The Composite Literal Gloss of the Double Psalter of St.-Ouen and the Contents of MS Vatican Vat. Pal. Lat. 68”, in The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland (Instrumenta Patristica 31), ed. by T. O’Loughlin, Steenbrugge and Turnhout, 1999, pp.  81–93. ‒, Expositiones Psalmorum duae sicut in codice Rothomagensi 24 adservantur (CCCM 256 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars VII), Turnhout, 2012. De Coninck, L. and D’Hont, M. J. (eds), Theodori Mopsuesteni Expositionis in Psalmos Iuliano Aeclanensi interprete in latinum versae quae supersunt (CCSL 88A), Turnhout, 1977. De Gestis Episcoporum Autissiodorensium, PL 138. De Grüneisen, W., Sainte-Marie Antique, Rome, 1911. Dehusses, J. (ed.) Le sacramentaire grégorienne. Ses principales formes d’après le plus anciens manuscrits, edition comparative, tome troisième, textes complémentaires divers (Spicilegium Friburgense vol.  28), Fribourg, Switzerland, 1982. De Montfaucon, B., Bibliotheca bibliothecarum. Catalogus MSS codicum bibliotheca Petavii, senatoris Parisiensis, a quo … ad Christinam reginam Sueciae pervenerunt (Paris, Bib. Nat., Coll. Moreau 849, fol. 221ff., 2 vols, 1739. De Pontfarcy ; see under Picard.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

901

De Puniet, P., “Le sacramentaire romain de Gellone”, in Ephemerides Liturgicae, 48 (1934), pp.  190-97. ‒, Le sacramentaire romain de Gellone (Bibliothèque des Ephemerides Liturgicae IV), Rome, 1938. De Sainte-Marie, Dom H. (ed.), Sancti Hieronymi Psalterium Iuxta Hebraeos. Collectanea Biblica Latina vol. XI, Vatican City, 1954. de Santos Otero, A., Los evangelios apocrifos (Biblioteca de autores cristianos), 2nd edn, Madrid, 1963. ‒, Das kirchenslavische Evangelium des Thomas (Patristische Texte und Studien 6), Berlin, 1967. De Waal, A., “Die apokryphen Evangelien in der altchristlichen Kunst”, Römische Quartalschrift für Christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte, 1 (1887), pp.  173-96. Deferrari, R. J., Saint Ambrose. Theological and Dogmatic Works (The Fathers of the Church, A New Translation, vol. 44), Washington, 1963. Dehusses, J. (ed.), Le sacramentaire grégorienne. Ses principales formes d’après les plus anciens manuscrits, edition comparative, tome troisième, textes complémentaires divers (Spicilegium Friburgense vol. 28), Fribourg, Switzerland, 1982. Dekkers, E., Clavis patrum latinorum, 3rd edn, Turnhout and Steenbrugge, 1995. Di Majo, A., Federici, C. Palma, M., “Indagini sulla pergamena insulare (secoli VII–XVI)”, Scriptorium, 42 (1988), pp.  131–39. Dictionary of the Irish Language (= DIL), Dublin, 1913–1976 ; one-volume edition, Dublin 1990. Available online. Dinzelbacher, P., Judastraditionen (Raabser Märchen-Reihe 2), Vienna, 1977. ‒, “Die Verbreitung der apokryphen ‘Visio S. Pauli’ im mittelalterlichen Europa”, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch, 27 (1992), pp.  77–90. Dolbeau, F. and É. Poirot, “Sur les miracles d’Élie et d’Élisée (CPL 1155e)”, Sacris Erudiri, 34 (1994), pp.  135-64. Dold, A., Eizenhofer, L. (eds), with a contribution by D. H. Wright, Das irische Palimpsestkommentar im Clm 14429 der Staatsbibliothek München (Texte und Arbeiten, 53–54), Beuron, 1964. Donahue, C., The Testament of Mary. The Gaelic Version of the Dormitio Mariae together with an Irish Latin Version, New York, 1942. Dooley, A., “The Gospel of Nicodemus in Ireland”, in The Medieval Gospel of Nicodemus. Texts, Intertexts, and Contexts (Medieval and

902 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Renaissance Texts and Studies 158), ed. by I. Zbigniew, Tempe, AZ, 1997, pp.  361-401. Dottin, G., “Les deux Chagrins du royaume du Ciel”, Revue Celtique, 21 (1900), pp.  349–87. ‒, Manuel d’Irlandais Moyen, Paris, 1913. Doutreleau, L., Origène. Homélies sur la Genèse (Sources Chrétiennes 7 bis), Paris 1976. Doyle, P., “A Study of the Text of St, Matthew’s Gospel in the Book of Mulling and of the Palaeography of the Whole Manuscript” (Ph.D. Dissertation, National University of Ireland, 1967). ‒, “The Text of St. Luke’s Gospel in the Book of Mulling”, PRIA, 73 C (1973), pp.  177–200. Duchesne, L., Fastes Épiscopaux de l’Ancienne Gaule, II, 2nd edn, Paris, 1910. Duft, J. and Meyer, P. The Irish Miniatures in the Abbey Library of St. Gall, Olten, Berne and Lausanne, 1954. Dumville, D., “Biblical Apocrypha and the Early Irish. A Preliminary Investigation”, PRIA, 73 C (1973), pp.  299–338. ‒, “The English Element in Tenth-century Breton Book Production”, in Dumville, Britons and Anglo-Saxons in the Early Middle Ages, Aldershot, 1993. ‒, A Palaeographer’s Review. The Insular System of Scripts in the Early Middle Ages (Kansai University Institute of Oriental and Occidental Studies ; Sources and Materials Series 20–1), 2 vols, Suita, Osaka, 1999. ‒, “Scéla lái Brátha and the collation of Leabhar na hUidre”, Éigse, 16 (1975–76), pp.  24–28. ‒, “Towards an Interpretation of Fís Adamnáin”, Studia Celtica, 12–13 (1977–78), pp.  62–77. Dupuy, P., Catalogus librorum manuscriptorum bibliothecae V. C. Alexandri Petavii Senatoris Parisiensies, drawn up in 1647 by P.  Dupuy, in Paris, Bibl. Nat. Coll. Dupuy, vol. 653 ; unedited, but much of contents in de Montfaucon, Bibliotheca bibliothecarum, tom. I, pp.  61–96. Dwyer, M. E., “An Unstudied Redaction of the Visio Pauli”, Manuscripta, 32 (1988), pp.  121-38. Elliott, J. K. (ed.), The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1993. Engelbert, P., “Zur Frühgeschichte des bobbieser Skriptoriums”, Revue Bénédictine, 78 (1968), pp.  220–60.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

903

Erbetta, M. (ed.), Gli Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamenti. III, Lettere e Apocalissi, Casale Monferrato, 1969. ‒, Gli Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento, 3 vols, Turin, 1966–75. ‒, Gli Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento. Vangeli. I/2. Infanzia e passione di Cristo. Assunzione di Maria, Casale Monferrato, 1981. Esposito, M., “On the So-called Psalter of St. Caimin”, PRIA, 32 C (1913-16), pp.  78-88. ‒, “An Apocryphal ‘Book of Enoch and Elias’ as a Possible Source of the Navigatio sancti Brendani”, Celtica, 5 (1960), pp.  192–206. Étaix, E., “Un manuel de pastorale de l’époque carolingienne (Clm 27152)”, Revue Bénédictine, 91 (1981), pp.  105-30. Evangeliorum Quattuor Codex Cenannensis III, Bern, 1951. Falsini, R., “La ‘transformazione del corpo e del sangue di Cristo’. Antico formula eucaristica nella liturgia e letteratura dal IV al IX secolo”, Studi Francescani (Florence), 52 (1955), pp.  307–59. Faraci, D., “Navigatio Sancti Brendani and its Relationship with Physiologus”, Romanobarbarica, 11 (1991), pp.  261-71. Feltoe, C. L., “A study of some Eucharistic phrases in the West”, Journal of Theological Studies, 11 (1909–10), pp.  575–79. Ferotin, M. (ed.), Mozarabicus Sacramentorum (Monumenta Ecclesiae liturgica, vol. 6), Paris, 1912. ‒, Liber Ordinum (Monumenta Ecclesiae liturgica, vol. 5), Paris, 1904, col. 281. Finlayson, C. P., Celtic Psalter. Edinburgh University Library MS. 56, Amsterdam, 1962. Fischer, B., “Bibelausgaben des frühen Mittelalters”, in La Bibbia nell’alto medievo, Spoleto, 1963 (Settimane di studio del CISAM 10), pp.  519–600 (= Lateinische Bibelhandschriften, pp.  35–100). ‒, “Bedae de titulis psalmorum liber”, in Autenrieth and Brunhölzl, Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff, 1971, pp.  90–110. ‒, “Das Neue Testament in lateinischer Sprache. Der gegenwärtige Stand seiner Erforschung und seine Bedeutung für die griechische Textgeschichte”, in Die alten Übersetzungen des Neuen Testaments, die Kirchenväterzitate und Lektionare (Arbeiten zur neutestamentlichen Bibel, 11), ed. by K. Aland ; Berlin, 1972, pp.  1–92 ; reproduced in Fischer, Beiträge zur Geschichte der lateinischen Bibeltexte, pp.  156–274. ‒, Beiträge zur Geschichte der lateinischen Bibeltexte (Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel, 12), Freiburg, 1986.

904 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, “Die Alkuin-Bibeln”, in Fischer, Lateinische Bibelhandschriften, pp.  203-403. ‒, “Zur Überlieferung des lateinischen Textes der Evangelien”, in Recherches sur l’histoire de la Bible latine (Colloque organisé à Louvain-la-Neuve pour la promotion de H. J. Frede au doctorat honoris causa en théologie le 18 avril 1986 ; Cahiers de la Revue théologique de Louvain 19), ed. by R. Gryson and P.-M. Bogaert, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1987, pp.  51–104. ‒, Die lateinischen Evangelien bis zum 10. Jahrhundert, Freiburg, 1988– 1991 [1988, I. Varianten zu Matthäus ; 1989, II. Varianten zu Markus ; 1990, III. Varianten zu Lukas ; 1991, IV. Varianten zu Johannes]. ‒, Auswertung und Untersuchung des in den Bänden 13, 15, 17, 18 vorgelegten Materials zur Überlieferung der lateinischen Evangelien (for the series “Aus der Geschichte der lateinischen Bibel” ; unpublished). ‒ (ed.), Lateinische Bibelhandschriften im frühen Mittelalter [Aus der G, eschichte der lateinischen Bible 11], Freiburg, 1985. Flower, R., Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts in the British Museum, London, 1926, reprint Dublin, 1992 (with British Museum of title changed to British Library). Frede, H. J. in Vetus Latina, vol. 25, pars II, fasc. 3 (introduction to the edition of Hebrews), Freiburg 1987, pp.  1022-26. ‒, Pelagius, der irische Paulustext, Sedulius Scottus, Freiburg, 1961. Frede, H. J. and Stanjek H. (eds), Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. I. In Epistolam ad Romanos, Freiburg, 1996. ‒ (eds), Sedulii Scotti Collectaneum in Apostolum. II. In Epistolas as Corinthios usque ad Hebraeos, Freiburg, 1997. Fredriksen, P., “Tyconius and Augustine on the Apocalypse”, in Apoca­ lypse in the Middle Ages, ed. by R. K. Emmerson and B. McGinn, Ithaca and Lobdon, 1992, pp.  20–37. Freedman, H., Translation in Midrash Rabbah, vol. 1 (Genesis I), London, 1939 ; 3rd impression, 1961). Friend, A. M., “The Canon Tables of the Book of Kells”, in Studies in Memory of Arthur Kingsley Porter, II, ed. by W. R. K. Koehler. Cambridge, MA, 1939, pp.  611–41. Gaidoz, H., “Le coq cuit qui chante”, Mélusine, 6 (1892–93), cols. 25–27. Gallia Christiana in provincias ecclesiasticas distributa, vol. 12, Paris, 1770 (Instrumenta, pp.  98–102, 182–84).

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

905

Gamber, K., Codices liturgici latini antiquiores, Freiburg, 1968. Gantz, J., Early Irish Myths and Saga, London, 1981. Garitte, G., “Le fragment géorgien de l’Évangile de Thomas”, Revue d”histoire ecclésiastique 51 (1956), pp.  513–520. Geerard, M., Clavis Apocryphorum Novi Testamenti (Corpus Christianorum), Turnhout, 1992. Geisselmann, J., Die Eucharistielehre der Vorscholastik (Forschungen zur Christlichen Literatur- und Dogmengeschichte, XV, 1-3), Paderborn, 1926. Gerhardt, C. and Palmer, N. F., .xu. signa ante iudicium. Studien und Texte zur Überlieferungsgeschichte eines eschatologischen Themas, Trier, 1986 (preprint). ‒, .xv. signa ante iudicium. Studien und Texte zur Überlieferungsgeschichte eines eschatologischen Themas, Privately printed, Oxford und Trier, 1986. ‒, Das Münchner Gedicht von den 15 Zeichen vor dem Jüngsten Gericht. Nach der Handschrift der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek Cgm 717. Edition und Kommentar (Texte des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit 41), Berlin, 2002. Geyer, P.  (ed.), Itineraria et alia geographica (CCSL 175), Turnhout, 1965. Gijsel, J., “Les ‘Évangiles latins de l’Enfance’ de M.R. James”, Analecta Bollandiana, 94 (1976), pp.  289–302. ‒, Die unmittelbare Textüberlieferung des sog. Pseudo-Matthäus (Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Akademie voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België), Brussels, 1981. ‒, “Het Protevangelium Iacobi in het Latijn”, in Antiquité classique, 50 (1981), pp.  351–66. ‒ (ed.), Pseudo-Matthaei Evangelium. Textus et commentarius (CCSA 9), Turnhout, 1997. Ginsberg, L., The Legends of the Jews, vol. 1, Philadelphia, 1909 ; notes, vol. 5 (1925). Glunz. H. H., History of the Vulgate in England from Alcuin to Roger Bacon, Cambridge, 1933. Goeje, J., “La légende de Saint Brandan” in Actes du VIIIe Congrès International des Orientalistes, Section 1, Leiden, 1891, pp.  43–76. Gorman, M. M., “An Unedited Fragment of an Early Irish Epitome of St Augustine’s De Genesi ad litteram”, Revue des Études Augustiniennes, 28 (1982), pp.  76–85.

906 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, “A Critique of Bischoff’s Theory of Irish Exegesis. The Commentary on Genesis in Munich Clm 6302 (Wendepunkte 2)”, Journal of Medieval Latin, 7 (1997), 178-233. ‒, “The Argumenta and Explanationes on the Psalms Attributed to Bede”, Revue Bénédictine, 108 (1998), pp.  214–33 (essay reprinted in M. M. Gorman, The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Florence, 2007, pp.  20–45). ‒, “The Myth of Hiberno-Latin Exegesis”, Revue Bénédictine, 110 (2000), pp.  42-85. ‒, “The Canon of Bede’s Works and the World of Bede”, Revue Bénédictine, 111 (2001), pp.  399-445 (reprinted in Gorman, The Study of the Bible, pp. 338-339). ‒, The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Florence, 2007. Gougaud, L., “The Earliest Irish Representations of the Crucifixion”, Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 50 (1920), pp.  128–39. ‒, “La croyance au répit périodique des damnés dans les légendes irlandaises”, in. Mélanges bretons et celtiques offerts à J. Loth, ed. by H. Champion (Annales de Bretagne), Rennes, 1927, pp.  63–72. ‒, Christianity in Celtic Lands, London, 1932. Gounelle, R., “À propos des volailles cuites qui ont chanté lors de la passion du Christ”, Recherches Augustiniennes, 33 (2003), pp.  29–63. Graf, A., Miti, leggende e superstizioni del medio evo, vol. 1, Mito del paradiso terrestre, il riposo dei dannati, la credenza nella fatalità, Turin, 1892, reprint New York, 1971. Grébaut, S., Les miracles de Jésus. Text éthiopien, (Patrologia Orientalis 12). Paris, 1919, pp.  625–642. Greenwell, W. (ed.), The Pontifical of Egbert, Archbishop of York, A.D. 732–766 (The Surtees Society, vol. 27), Durham, 1853. Gregory, C. R., Textkritik des Neuen Testament, vol. 1, Leipzig, 1900. ‒, Homilia XXVI, 1 in Evangelia (PL 76, 1197 CD). ‒, Moralia 14, 70. Grillmeier, A., Der Logos am Kreuz. Zur christologischen Symbolik der älteren Kreuzigungsdarstellung, Munich, 1956. Hesbert, R. J., Le Problème de la Transfixion du Christ dans les Traditions bibliques, patristiques, iconographique, liturgique et musicale, Paris, Tournai, Rome, 1940. Grogan, B., “Eschatological Teaching in the Early Irish Church”, in McNamara, Biblical Studies, pp.  46–58.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

907

‒, “The Eschatological Doctrines of the Early Irish Church” (unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Fordham University 1972). Grondus, L. H., Autour de l’Iconographie Byzantine du Crucifié mort sur la Croix (Bibliotheca Byzantina Bruxellensis 1), Utrecht, 1950 ; Leiden, 1960. Grosjean, P., “A propos du manuscrit 49 de la Reine Christine”, Analecta Bollandiana, 54 (1936), pp.  113–36. Gryson, R., “Die Kommentare zur Apokalypse”, Vetus Latina. 44. Arbeitsbericht der Stiftung ; 33. Bericht des Instituts, 2000, Freiburg, 2000, pp.  30–33. ‒, Altlateinische Handschriften. Manuscrits vieux latins. Répertoire descriptif. Première partie. Mss 1–275 d’après un manuscrit inachevé de Hermann Josef Frede, Vetus Latina. Die Reste der altlateinischen Bibel 1/2A, 2 vols, Freiburg, 1999. ‒, “Les commentaires patristiques latins de l’Apocalypse”, Revue théologique de Louvain, 28 (1997), pp.  305–37. ‒, in Vetus Latina. 55. Bericht der Stiftung 44. Forschungsbericht des Instituts, Beuron, 2011, p.  37. ‒, “Le commentaire de Tyconius sur l’Apocalypse”, in Vetus Latina. 54. Bericht der Stiftung 43. Forschungsbericht des Instituts, Beuron, 2010, pp.  25-34. ‒, Altlateinische Handschriften, Manuscrits Vieux latins. Répertoire descriptif. Deuxième partie. Mss. 300-485 [Manuscrits du psautier], Freiburg, 2004. ‒ (ed.), Apocalypsis Johannis, Vetus Latina, 26/2 : Einleitung, Freiburg, 2000 ; Einleitung (Fortsetzung und Schluß) ; Apc 1,1–2,7, Freiburg, 2000. ‒, Philologia Sacra. Studien zu Bibel und Kirchenvätern für Hermann J. Frede und Walter Thiele zu ihrem siebzigsten Geburtstag, 2 vols, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1993. ‒, Variorum auctorum Commentaria Minora in Apocalypsis Johannis (CCSL 107), Turnhout, 2003. ‒, Tyconius, Expositio Apocalypseos (CCSL 107A), Turnhout, 2011. ‒, Tyconius, Commentaire de l’Apocalypse (Corpus Christianorum in Translation 10), Turnhout, 2011. ‒, Incerti Auctoris Glossa in Apocalypsin e codice Bibliothecae Universitatis Cantabrigiensis Dd. X. 16 (CCSL 108G), Turnhout, 2013. Gurevich, W., “Observations on the iconography of the wound on Christ’s side with special reference to its position”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 20 (1957), pp.  358–62.

908 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Gwynn, E. J., “An Unrecorded Gloss”, Ériu, 4 (1910), p.  182. Gwynn, J. (ed), Liber Ardmachanus. The Book of Armagh, Edited with Introduction and Appendices, Dublin, 1913. Gwynn, A. and Gleeson, D., A History of the Diocese of Killaloe. Part I. The Early Period, Dublin, 1962. Hänggi, A. and Pahl, I., Prex Eucharistica. Textus e variis liturgiis antiquioribus selecti (Spicilegium Friburgense 12), Fribourg, 1968. Harbison, P., “Earlier Carolingian Narrative Iconography — Ivories, Manuscripts, Frescoes and Irish High Crosses”, Jahrbuch des römisch-germanischen Zentral-museums, 31 (1984), pp.  455–71. ‒, “The Bronze Crucifixion Plaque said to be from St John’s (Rinnagan), near Athlone”, Journal of Irish Archaeology, 2 (1984), pp.  1–17. ‒, “The Date of the Crucifixion Slabs from Duvillaun More and Inishkea North, Co. Mayo”, in Figures from the Past. Studies on Figurative Art in Christian Ireland in Honour of Helen M. Roe, ed. by E. Rynne, Dun Laoghaire, 1987, pp.  73–91. ‒, “The Shield of Longinus”, in Bathron. Beiträge zur Architektur und verwandten Künsten, Festschrift Heinrich Drerup (Saarbrücker Studien zur Archäologie und Alten Geschichte 3), Saarbrücken, 1988, pp.  179–83. ‒, The High Crosses of Ireland. An Iconographical and Photographic Survey, 3 vols (Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Forschungs-institut für Vor- und Frühgeschichte Monographien 17, 1–3), Bonn, 1992. ‒, Irish High Crosses with the Figure Sculptures Explained, Drogheda, 1994. ‒, The Golden Age of Irish Art. The Medieval Achievement 600–1200, London, 1999. Harrington, C., Women in a Celtic Church : Ireland 450–1150, Oxford, 2002. Harsley, F. (ed.), Eadwine’s Canterbury Psalter, Pt 2, Cambridge, London, 1889. Hartung, K., Ein Traktat zur Apokalypse des Apostels Iohannes in einer Pergamenhandschrift der K. Bibliothek in Bamberg, Bamberg, 1904. Haussleiter, J. (ed.), Commentarii in Apocalypsis editio Victorini et recensio Hieronymi una cum posteriorum additamentis, in Victorini episcopi Petavionensis opera (CSEL 49), Vienna, 1916. ‒, Die lateinische Apokalypse der alten afrikanischen Kirche (Forschungen zur Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons 4, 1), Erlangen-Leipzig, 1891.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

909

Hawk, B. W., “A Fragment of Colossians with Hiberno-Latin Glosses in St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 1395”, Sacris Erudiri, 51 (2012), pp.  233-56. Heidel, A., The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels, Chicago, 1946. Heist, W. W., The Fifteen Signs before Doomsday, East Lansing, 1952. Henderson, G., From Durrow to Kells. The Insular Gospel-Books 650– 800, London, 1987. Hennecke, E. and Schneemelcher, W. (eds), New Testament Apo­ crypha, vol. 1. Gospels and Related Writings, trans. by R. McL. Wilson, London, 1963 ; rev. edition ed. by W. Schneemelcher, trans. by R. McL. Wilson, Cambridge and Louisville, KY, 1991. Hennessy, W. M., “On a Manuscript Written by St Caimin of Inisceltra”, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, New Series 9 (1873), pp.  241–47. Henry, F., Irish Art in the Early Christian Period to A.D. 800, London, 1965. ‒, Irish Art during the Viking Invasions, 800–1020 A.D., London, 1967. ‒, Irish Art in the Romanesque Period, 1020–1170 A.D., London, 1970. ‒, Irish Art in the Romanesque Period (1020–1170 a.d.), London, 1970. Henry F. and Marsh-Micheli, G. L., “A Century of Irish Illumination (1070-1170)”, PRIA, 62 (1962), pp.  101-65. Henschenius, G. and Papebrochius D. (eds), Acta Sanctorum (Bollandists), March vol. 2, Paris, Rome, 1865. Herbert, M. and McNamara, M. (eds.), Irish Biblical Apocrypha. Selected Texts in Translation, Edinburgh, 1989. Herren, M. W., “Irish Biblical Commentaries before 800”, in Roma, Magistra Mundi. Itineraria Culturae Medievalis. Mélanges offerts au Père L. E. Boyle à l’occasion de son 75e anniversaire, ed. by J. Hamesse, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1998, pp.  391-497. Hesbert, R.-J., Le Problème de la Transfixion du Christ : dans les Traditions bibliques, patristique, iconographique, liturgique et musicale, Paris, 1940. Hieronymus, Commentariorum in Matthaeum libri IV (CCSL 77), ed. by D. Hurst and M. Adriaen, Turnhout, 1969. Hieronymus, Epistula 53, 9 (CSEL 54, 463, 9). Hill, R. C., Theodore of Mopsuestia. Commentary on Psalms 1-81. Translated with Introduction and Notes, Atlanta, 2006. Hill, T. D., Introduction to Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture. Volume One. Abbo of Fleury, Abbo of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, and Acta Sanctorum, ed. by F. M. Biggs et al., Kalamazoo, 2001.

910 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Hillgarth, J. N., “The East, Visigothic Spain, and the Irish”, Studia Patristica, 4 (1961), pp.  442-56. ‒, “Ireland and Spain in the Seventh Century”, Peritia, 3 (1984), pp.  1–16. Hirn, Y., The Sacred Shrine. A Study of the Poetry and Art of the Catholic Church, London, 1958. Hittorpius, M., De diuinis Catholicae Ecclesiae officiis ac ministeriis …, Cologne, 1568, book I. Hogan, E. (ed.), The Irish Nennius from L. na Huidre and Homilies and Legends from L. Breac (Todd Lecture Series 6), Dublin, 1895. Honorius, Augustodunenssis, Elucidarium 17, PL 172,1069D. Horton. C., (ed.), The Earliest Gospels. The Origins and Transmission of the Earliest Gospels. The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P45 (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series ; Proceedings of the Chester Beatty 2000 Conference), Edinburgh, 2004. Howlett, D., “The Polyphonic Colophon to Cormac’s Psalter”, Peritia, 9 (1995), pp.  81–91. Hughes, I. (ed.), Stair Nicoméid. The Irish Gospel of Nicodemus (Irish Texts Society 55). London, 1991. Huglo, M. and Haggh, B., A Review of P.  Jeffery, “Eastern and Western Elements in the Irish Monastic Prayer of the Hours”, in Peritia, 15 (2001), pp.  434-37. Hurst, D. (ed.), Beda Venerabilis, Opera Exegetica 3, In Lucae evangelium expositio. In Marci evangeliun expositio (CCSL 120), Turnhout, 1960 ; reprint 2001. Hyde, D., “A Medieval Account of Antichrist”, in Medieval Studies in Memory of Gertrude Schoepperle Loomis, ed. by R. Sherman Loomis, Paris-New York, 1927, pp.  391-98. Jackson, K. H., Aislinge Meic Con Glinne, Dublin, 1990. James, M. R., Apocrypha Anecdota (Texts and Studies, II, 3), Cambridge, 1893. ‒, Catalogue of Additions to the Manuscripts in the British Museum in the Years MDCCCC–MDCCCCV, London, 1907. ‒, “Notes on Apocrypha. 1. Revelatio Thomae”, Journal of Theological Studies 11 (1909-10), pp.  288–91. ‒, Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of St John’s College Cambridge, Cambridge, 1913. ‒, “Irish Apocrypha”, Journal of Theological Studies, 20 (1918-19), pp.  9–16.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

911

‒, “Learning and Literature till the Death of Bede”, Cambridge Medieval History, vol. 3, ed. by H. M. Gwatkin, et al., Cambridge, 1922, pp.  506-07. ‒, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford, 1924 ; corrected edition, Oxford, 1953. ‒, Latin Infancy Gospels. A New Text with a Parallel Version from the Irish, Cambridge, 1927. ‒, The Canterbury Psalter, London, 1935. Janin, P., “Gesta pontificum autissiodorum. Édition critique avec introduction et notes” (unpublished doctoral thesis, Paris. Ecole des Chartes, 1969) ; see “École Nationale des Chartes. Positions de thèses souténues … 1969”, Paris, École des Chartes, 1969, pp.  69–74. Jastrow, M., A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic literature, vol. 1, New York, 1950 ; original edition, 1903. Jeffery, P., “Review of Curran, The Antiphonary of Bangor and the Early Irish Monastic Liturgy, in Worship, 59 (1985), pp.  459–61. ‒, “Eastern and Western Elements in the Irish Monastic Prayer of the Hours”, in The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages. Methodology and Source Studies, Regional Developments, Hagiography. Written in Honor of Professor Ruth Steiner, ed. by M. E. Passler and R. A. Baltzer, New York and Oxford, 2000, pp.  99–143. Jennings, B., Michael Ó Cléirigh Chief of the Four Masters and his Associates, Dublin and Cork, 1936. Jerome, Liber interpretationis hebraicorum nominum (CSSL 72), ed. by P.  De Lagarde, Turnhout, 1959. Jiroušková, L., Die Visio Pauli. Wege und Wandlungen einer orientalischen Apokryphe im Lateinischen Mittelalter. Unter Einschluss der alttschechischen und deutschsprachigen Textzeugen (Mittellateinische Studien und Texte 34), Leiden and Boston, 2006. Jülicher, A., Matzkow, W. and Aland, K., Itala. Das Neue Testament in Altlateinsicher, Berlin, 1938–63. Jung, L. (trans.), Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo‘ed (Yoma), London, 1938. Jungmann, J., The Place of Christ in Liturgical Prayer, London, Dublin, 1965. Junod, E. and Kaestli J.-D. (eds), Acta Iohannis Textus alii — Commentarius Indices (CCSA 2), Turnhout, 1983. Kaestli, J.-D., “Le Protévangile de Jacques en latin. État de la question et perspectives nouvelles”, Revue d’histoire des textes, 26 (1996), pp.  41–102 ;

912 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, “La figure de l’Antichrist dans l’Apocalypse de saint Jean le Théo­ logien” (Première Apocalypse apocryphe de Jean)”, in Les forces du Bien et du Mal dans les premiers siècles de l’Église (Théologie historique, 118), ed. by J.-M. Blanchard, B. Pouderon, M. Scopello, Paris, 2010, pp.  277-90. ‒, “Mapping an Unexplored Second Century Apocryphal Gospel : the Liber de Nativitate Salvatoris (CANT 53)”, in Infancy Gospels. Stories and Identities, ed. by C. Clivaz, A. Dettwiler, L. Devillers, E. Norelli with B. Bertho (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament I, 281), Tübingen, 2011, pp.  506-59. ‒, “Recherches nouvelles sur les Évangiles latins de l”enfance et sur le récit apocrype de la naissance de Jésus”, Études théologiques et religieuses, 72 (1997), pp.  219–33. ‒, “Un témoin latin du Protévangile de Jacques. L’homélie Postulatis filiae Jerusalem en honneur de Sainte Anne (BHL 483–485)”, Apocrypha, 9 (1998), pp.  179–223. Kehl, A., “Der Stern der Magier. Zu § 94 der lateinischen Kindheis­ evangelium der Arundel-Handschrift”, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, 18 (1975), pp.  69-80. Kelly, F., A Guide to Early Irish Law (Early Irish Series 3), Dublin, 1988. Kelly, J. F. T., “Early Medieval Evidence for Twelve Homilies by Origen on the Apocalypse”, Vigiliae Christianae, 39 (1985), pp.  273– 79. ‒, “Bede and the Irish Exegetical Tradition on the Apocalypse”, Revue Bénédictine, 92 (1982), pp.  393–405. ‒, “Das Bibelwerk : organisation and Quellenanalyse of the New Testament section”, in Ní Chatháin, Richter, Ireland and Christendom : the Bible and the Missions, pp.  113–23. Kenney, J. F. The Sources for the Early History of Ireland. Ecclesiastical. An Introduction and Guide, Columbia, 1929 (later reprints, New York, 1966 ; etc.). Kitson, P., “The Jewels and Bird hiruath of the “Ever-New Tongue”“, in Ériu 35 (1984), pp.  113–36. Klijn, A. F. J., Jewish Christian Gospel Tradition (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 17), Leiden, 1992, pp.  79–86 (82 and 85 for Sedulius’s text). Knott, E. (ed.), “A Poem of Prophecies”, Ériu, 18 (1958), pp.  55-84. ‒, Togail Bruidne Da Derga, Dublin, 1936. Koeberlin, K (ed.), Eine Würzburger Evangelienhandschrift (Mp. th. f. 61 s. VIII), Augsburg, 1891.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

913

Koehler, W., Buchmalerei des frühen Mittelalters  : Fragmente und Entwürfe aus dem Nachlass, ed. by E. Kitzinger and F. Mütherich, Munich, 1972. Kohut, A., Aruk completum, vol. II, Vienna, 1926. Krasnodębska-D’Aughton, M., “The Homily on the Epiphany in the Catechesis Cracoviensis and the Four Epiphanies on Irish High Crosses”, Peritia, 17-18 (2003-04), pp.  471-94. Kretzenbacher, L., “Sankt Brandan, Judas und die Ewigkeit”, in, Bilder und Legenden. Erwandertes und erlebtes Bilder-Denken und Bild-Erzählen zwischen Byzantz und dem Abendland (Aus Forschung und Kunst), ed. L. Kretzenbacher, Klagenfurt, 1971. ‒, “Der Hahn auf dem Kirchturm. Sinnzeichen, Bibelexegese und Legende”, Rheinisches Jahrbuch für Volkskunde, 9 (1958), pp. 194–206. Kürbis, B. and Sobieraj, M. (eds), Kazania na różne dni postne i inne teksty z kodeksu krakowskiego 140 (43) [Sermons for different fast days and other texts from Cracow MS 140(43)], in Monumenta Sacra Polonorum, vol. 4, Kazania na różne dni postne i inne teksty z kodeksu krakowskiego 140 (43), ed. by B. Kürbis and M. Sobieraj, Cracow, 2010. Laistner, M. L. W., “The influence during the Middle Ages of the Treatise ‘De vita Contemplativa’ and Its Surviving Manuscripts”, Miscellanea Giovanni Mercati, vol. 2 (Studi e Testi 122), Vatican City, 1946, pp.  344-58 ; reproduced in Laistner, The Intellectual Heritage of the Esrly Middle Ages. Selected Essays, Ithaca, N, 1957, pp.  40-56. Langgärtner, G., “Der Apokalypse-Kommentar des Caesarius von Arles”, Theologie und Glaube, 57 (1967), pp.  210–25. Lapidge, M. and Sharpe, R., A Bibliography of Celtic-Latin Literature 400-1200, Dublin, 1985. Lauer, P., Bibliothéque Nationale. Catalogue général des Manuscrits la­tins. Tome 1er (Nos 1–1438), Paris, 1939. Ingram, J. K., “On a Fragment of an anti-hieronymian version of the gospels, in the library of Trinity College, Dublin”, PRIA, Second series, vol. 2 (1879-88), pp.  22-23. Lawlor, H. J., Chapters on the Book of Mulling, Edinburgh, 1897. Le Goff, J., The Birth of Purgatory (trans. by A. Goldhammer), London, 1984 [French original, La naissance du purgatoire, Paris, 1981]. Leahy, D. J., Saint Augustine on Eternal Life, London, 1939. Leclercq, H., “Topographie de Sancta-Maria-Antiqua”, Dictionnaire d’Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, vol. 5, Paris, 1922, cols.

914 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 2006-2043 (section IV of “Forum Chrétien”, cols. 1997-2065) ; also “Marie Antique (Sainte)”, in vol. 10, Paris, 1931, cols. 20772078 (with bibliography). Lee, C. F., “The Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary”, The Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 54 (1939), pp.  176–87. Lehmann, P., “Judas Ischarioth in der lateinischen Legenden-Überlieferung des Mittelalters”, in Erforschung des Mittelalters, 2 vols, ed. P.  Lehmann, Stuttgart, 1959, II, pp.  229-85. Lewis, T. J., “Dead, Abode of”. The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol. 2, ed. by D. N. Freedman, New York, 1992, pp.  101–05. Lindsay, W. M., “Irish Cursive Script”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 9 (1913), pp.  301–08. Lindsay, W. M., Notae Latinae. An Account of Abbreviations in Latin MSS. of the Early Minuscule Period (c. 750–850), Cambridge, 1915. Lo Bue, Fr., (ed), The Turin Fragments of Tyconius’ Commentary on Revelation, prepared for the press by G. G. Willis (Texts and Studies ns 7), Cambridge, 1963. ‒, “Old-Latin Readings of the Apocalypse in the ‘Wordsworth-White’ Edition of the Vulgate”, Vigiliae Christianae, 9 (1955), pp.  21–24. Lobrichon, G., “Conserver, réformer, transformer le monde ? Les manipulations de l’Apocalypse au Moyen Age central”, in Biblio­ logia 4, The Role of the Book in Medieval Culture, vol. 2, ed. by P.  Ganz, Turnhout, 1986, pp.  73–94. Löffler, K., “Die Sankt Galler Schreibschule in der 2. Hälfte des 8. Jahrhunderts”, in Palaeographia Latina, part 6 (St Andrews University Publications 28), ed. by W. M. Lindsay, Oxford, 1929, pp.  5–68. Loth, J., “Une glose brittone inédite du IXe–Xe siècle : une autre origine douteuse”, Revue Celtique, 5 (1933), pp.  357–62. Louandre, C., Les Arts somptuaires ; Histoire du Costume et de l’Ameublement et des Arts et Industries qui s’y rattachent. Introduction générale et Texte explicitatif, Texte, 2 vols, Paris, 1857–58 ; Planches, 2 vols, Paris, 1858. Lowe, E. A., Codices Latini Antiquiores (=CLA) VI, Oxford, 1953. ‒, Codices Latini Antiquiores (=CLA) XI, Oxford, 1970. ‒, Codices Latini Antiquiores (=CLA), vols I–XI, Supplement, Oxford, 1934–71. Maasynbaerde Ford, J., “The Physical Features of the Antichrist”, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, 14 (1996), pp.  23–41. Mabillon, J., Annales ordinis S. Benedicti, I, Paris, 1703 ; II, Paris, 1704 ; IV, Paris, 1707.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

915

Mac Conmara, M., An Léann Eaglasta in Éirinn 1000-1200, Dublin, 1982. Mac Donncha, F., “Dáta Vita Tripartita Sancti Patricii”, Éigse, 18 (part 1, 1980), pp.  125–42. ‒, “Medieval Irish homilies”, in McNamara, Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, pp.  59–71. Mac Eoin, G., “The Date and Authorship of Saltair na Rann”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 28 (1960), pp.  51–67. ‒, “Observations on Some Middle-Irish Homilies”, in Ireland and Europe in the early Middle Ages. Learning and Literature, ed. by P.  Ní Chatháin and M. Richter, Stuttgart, 1996, pp.  195-211. MacGinty, G. (ed.), The Reference Bible – Das Bibelwerk. Inter Pauca Problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis nunc prompta sunt Praefatio et Libri De Pentateuch Moysi (CCCM 173 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars III), Turnhout, 2000. Machielsen, J., Clauis Patristica Pseudepigraphorum Medii Aevi, vol. 1A, Opera homiletica, Pars A, no. 1237, Turnhout 1990. ‒, Clavis Patristica Pseudepigraporum Medii Aevii, vol. IIA, Theologica Exegetica (CCSL), Turnhout, 1994. MacRae, G., review of De Santos Otero, Das kirchenslavische Evangelium, in The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 30 (1968), pp.  635–36. Macray, C. M., Catalogi codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae, 5, 4, Oxford, 1898. Magistretti, M. (ed.), Pontificale in usum Ecclesiae Mediolanensis necnon Ordines Ambrosiani ex codicibus saecc. IX–XV (Monumenta Veteris Liturgiae Ambrosianae), Milan, 1897. Manning, C., Clonmacnoise Co. Offaly, 2nd edn, Clonmacnoise, 1998. Markschies, C., Schröter, J., Heiser A. (eds), Antike christliche Apokryphen in deutscher Übersetzung. Vol. 1 : Evangelien und Verwandtes, Tübingen, 2012. Marrou, H. I., “Autour du monogramme constantinien”, Mélanges Étienne Gilson, Toronto and Paris, 1959, pp.  403–14. Martin, J. R., “The Dead Christus on the Cross in Byzantine Art”, in Late Classical and Medieval Studies in Honour of Albert Mathias Friend Jr, ed by K. Wuittzmann, S. Der Nersessian et. al., Princeton, 1955, pp.  189–96. Martin, L. T. (ed.), Homiliarium Veronense (CCCM 186 ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars IV), Turnhout, 2000. Matter, E. A., “The Apocalypse in Early Medieval Exegesis”, in The Apocalypse in the middle ages, ed. by R. K. Emmerson and B. McGinn, Ithaca, NY, and London, 1992, pp.  38–50.

916 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Matthews, M., Brevis Synopsis Provinciae Hiberniae Fratrum Minorum, Analecta Hibernica, 6 (1934), pp.  12-191. Mazzuconi, D., “La diffusione del expositio Missae ‘Primum in ordine’ e l’expositio orationis Dominicae cosiddetta Milanese”, Archivio Ambrosiano, 45 (1982), pp.  208–66. McGinn, B., Apocalyptic Spirituality. Treatises and Letters of Lactantius, Adso of Montier-en-Der, Joachim of Fiore, the Franciscan Spirituals, Savanarola, Mahwah, NJ, 1979, pp.  81-96. ‒, Visions of the End. Apocalyptic Tradition in the Middle Ages, New York, Chichester, 1979 (1998 reprint). ‒, “Portraying the Antichrist in the Middle Ages”, in Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages, ed. by W. Verbeke, D. Verhelst and W. Welkernhuysen (Mediaevalia Lovaniensia 1,15), Leuven, 1988, pp.  1-48. ‒, Apocalypticism in the Western Tradition, Aldershot, 1994. McGurk, P., “The Irish Pocket Gospel Book”, Sacris Erudiri, 8 (1956), pp.  249–70. ‒, Latin Gospel Books from A.D. 400 to A.D. 800 (Les Publications de Scriptorium 5), Paris, Brussels, Antwerp, Amsterdam, 1961. ‒, “The Gospel Text”, in The Book of Kells. MS 58 Trinity College Library Dublin, ed. by P.  Cox, Lucerne, 1990, pp.  37–152. McNally, R. E., “Isidoriana”, in Theological Studies, 20 (1959), pp.  432-42. ‒, “‘In Nomine Dei Summi’. Seven Hiberno-Latin Sermons”, Traditio, 35 (1979), pp.  121-143. ‒, Der irische Liber de numeris. Eine Quellenanalyse des pseudo-isidorischen Liber de numeris (Doctoral dissertation Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität zu München), Munich, 1957 ‒, “The ‘Tres linguae sacrae’ in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis”, Theological Studies, 19 (1958), pp.  395-403. ‒, The Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Westminster, MD, 1959. McNally, R. E. (ed.), Scriptores Hiberniae Minores, pars I (CCSL 108B), Turnhout, 1973. ‒, “The Three Holy Kings in Early Irish Latin Writing”, in Kyriakon. Festschrift Johannes Quasten¸ 2 vols, ed. by P.  Granfield and J. A. Jungmann, Münster, Westfalen, 1970, vol. 2, pp.  667-90. McNamara, M., “Notes on the Irish Gospel of Thomas”, Irish Theological Quarterly, 38 (1971), pp.  42-66. ‒, “A Plea for Hiberno-Latin Studies”, Irish Theological Quarterly, 39 (1972), pp.  337-53.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

917

‒, “Hiberno-Latin Studies. An Addendum”, Irish Theological Quarterly, 40 (1973), pp.  364-69. ‒, “Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies. II. An Irish Abbreviation of St Gregory the Great on the Book of Job”, Irish Theological Quarterly, 40 (1973), pp.  367-70. ‒, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (ad 600–1200)”, PRIA, 73 C (1973), pp.  201–76, with appendices by M. Sheehy, 277–98. ‒, “Psalter Text and Psalter Study in the Early Irish Church (AD 6001200)”, PRIA, 73 C (1973), pp.  239-41. ‒, “New Testament Apocrypha in the Irish Church”, Studia Evangelica, 6 (1973), pp.  330-40. ‒, “Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies ; The AGM of the Irish Biblical Association”, Irish Theological Quarterly, 41 (1974), pp.  317-19. ‒, The Apocrypha in the Irish Church, Dublin, 1975 ; reprint with corrections 1984. ‒, “The Bible in Ireland (AD 600-1150)”, Scripture Bulletin, 6/2 (197576), pp.  36-39. ‒, “Sources of Early Irish Theology. The Apocrypha, the Canon of Scripture”, Milltown Studies, 2 (1978), pp.  58-69. ‒, “Ireland and Northumbria as illustrated by a Vatican Manuscript”, Thought (Fordham University), 54 (no. 214, 1979), pp.  274-90 (R. E. McNally Festschrift). ‒, “The Psalter in Early Irish Monastic Spirituality”, Monastic Studies, 14 (1983), pp.  179-205. ‒, “Early Irish Exegesis. Some Facts and Tendencies”, PIBA, 8 (1984), pp.  57-96. ‒, “Tradition and Creativity in Early Irish Psalter Study”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Europe. The Early Church, pp.  33-89. ‒, Review of Stancliffe, “Red, White and Blue Martyrdom”, in Heythrop Journal, 26 (1985), pp.  80–82. ‒, Glossa in Psalmos. The Hiberno-Latin Gloss on the Psalms of Codex Palatinus Latinus 68 (Psalms 39.11–151.7), (Studi e Testi 310), Vatican City, 1986. ‒, “Plan and Source Analysis of Das Bibelwerk, Old Testament”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Christendom. The Bible and the Missions, pp.  84-112. ‒, “The Text of the Latin Bible in the Early Irish Church. Some Data and Desiderata”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Christendom. The Bible and the Missions, pp.  7-55.

918 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, “The Inverted Eucharistic Formula conversio corporis Christi in panem et sanguinis in vinum. The Exegetical and Liturgical Background in Irish Usage”, PRIA, 87 C (1987), pp.  573-93. ‒, “The Echternach and Mac Durnan Gospels. Some Common Readings and their Significance”, Peritia, 6–7 (1987–88), pp.  217–22. ‒, “Hiberno-Latin Bulletin”, PIBA, 11 (1988), pp.  88-96. ‒, “Hiberno-Latin Writings 1200-1500”, Hiberno-Latin Newsletter, 3 (1989), pp.  9-12. ‒, “Celtic Christianity, Creation and Apocalypse, Christ and Antichrist”, Milltown Studies, 23 (1989), pp.  5-39. ‒, “How Irish is the Commentary on Hebrews in St Gallen 73 ?”, PIBA, 12 (1989), pp.  90-94. ‒, “Celtic Scriptures : Text and Commentaries”, in An Introduction to Celtic Christianity, ed. by J. P. Mackey, Edinburgh, 1989, pp. 41440. ‒, Studies on texts of Early Irish Latin Gospels (A.D. 600–1200) (Instrumenta Patristica, 20), Steenbrugge and Dordrecht, 1990. ‒, “The Irish Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica”, Celtica, 21 (1990), pp.  291–334. ‒, “Non-Vulgate Readings of Codex AMB I.61 sup.”, in Sacris Erudiri, 33 (1992-93), pp.  183-257. ‒, “Non-Vulgate Readings of of Matthew”, Philologia für Hermann J. Frede Geburtstag, vol. 1, ed. 92.

Codex Ambrosianus I.61 sup.  The Gospel Sacra. Biblische und patristische Studien und Walter Thiele zu ihrem siebzigsten by R. Gryson, Freiburg, 1993, pp.  177-

‒, “Psalm 8 in the Bible, in Earlier and Irish Tradition”, Milltown Studies, 32 (1993), pp.  24-41. ‒, “Irish Gospel Texts, Amb. I 61 sup., Bible Text and Date of Kells”, in The Book of Kells. Proceedings of a Conference at Trinity College Dublin 6-9 September 1992, ed. by F. O’Mahony, Aldershot, 1994, pp.  78-101. ‒, “Sources and Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica (MS Vat. Reg. lat. 49)”, Sacris Erudiri, 34 (1994), pp.  185-237. ‒, “The Celtic-Irish Mixed Gospel Text. Some Recent Contributions and Centennial Reflections”, Filologia mediolatina, 2 (1995), pp.  69–108. ‒, “Psalm 16 in the Bible, in Earlier and Irish Tradition”, Milltown Studies, 36 (1995), pp.  52-63. ‒, “Patristic Background to Medieval Irish Exegetical Texts”, Appendix, in Scriptural interpretation in the Fathers. Letter and Spirit

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

919

(Proceedings of the Second Patristic Conference, June 1993), ed. by T. Finan, V. Twoomey, Dublin, 1995, pp.  276–81. ‒, “Some Aspects of Early Irish Medieval Eschatology”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages, pp.  42–75. ‒, “Some Affiliations of the St Columba Series of Psalm Headings : a Preliminary Study, II”, PIBA, 22 (1998), pp.  91–123. ‒, “Christology and the Interpretation of the Psalms in the Early Irish Church”, in Studies in Patristic Christology (Proceedings of the Third Patristic Conference, Maynooth, 1996), ed. T. Finan, V. Twoo­mey, Dublin, 1998, pp.  196-233. ‒, “The Psalms in the Irish Church : the Most Recent Research on Text, Commentary and Decoration — with Emphasis on the So-called Psalter of Charlemagne”, in The Bible as Book : the Manuscript Tradition, ed. by J. L. Sharpe III and K. van Kampen, London and New Castle, DE, 1998, pp.  89–103 (reproduced in McNamara, The Psalms, pp.  143–64). ‒, “The Affiliations and Origins of the Catechesis Celtica. An Ongoing Quest”, in O’Loughlin, The Scriptures in Early Medieval Ireland, pp.  179–203. ‒, The Psalms in the Early Irish Church, Sheffield, 2000. ‒, “Irish Gospel Books and Related Texts”, PIBA, 23 (2000), pp. 60–66. ‒, “The Newly-identified Cambridge Apocalypse Commentary and the Reference Bible. A Preliminary Enquiry”, Peritia, 15 (2001), pp.  208-60. ‒, “Bible Text and Illumination in St Gall Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51, with Special reference to Longinus in the Crucifixion Scene”, in Pattern and Purpose in Insular Art (Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Insular Art held at the National Museum Gallery Cardiff 3-6 September 1998), ed. by M. Redknap, N. Edwards et al., Oxford, 2001, pp.  191-202. ‒, “Irish Psalters and Bibles”, at International Conference “La Città e il Libro” (International Conference at La Certosa di Firenze 30, 31 Maggio, 1 Giugno 2001, published electronically in http.// www.florin.ms/aleph3.html). ‒, “Sankt Gallen Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51 : with Special Reference to the Biblical Text of the Fourth Gospel”, in Ogma. Essays in Celtic Studiers in Honour of Proinséas Ní Chatháin, ed. by M. Richter and J.-M. Picard, Dublin, 2002, pp.  262-67. ‒, “Irish Homilies A. D. 600–1100”, in Via Crucis. Essays on Early Medieval Sources and Ideas in Memory of J. E. Cross (Medieval

920 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church European Studies 1), ed. by T. N. Hall, Morgantown, 2002, pp.  235-84. ‒, “The Irish Biblical Association and its Publication Committee”, PIBA, 25 (2002), pp.  9-17. ‒, “Christ Forty Hours in the Tomb and the Forty Hours Devotion”, Celtica, 24 (2003), pp.  205-12. ‒, “The Irish Legend of Antichrist”, in Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome. Studies in Ancient Intercultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 82), ed. by F. García Martínez and G. P. Luttikhuizen, Leiden, 2003, pp.  201-19. ‒, “Apocalyptic and Eschatological Texts in Irish Literature : Oriental Connections ?”, in McNamara, Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage, pp.  75-97. ‒, “The Latin Gospels, with Special Reference to Irish Tradition”, in The Earliest Gospels. The Origins and Transmission of the Earliest Gospels. The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P45 (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series ; Proceedings of the Chester Beatty 2000 Conference), ed. by C. Horton, Edinburgh, 2004, pp.  88-106. ‒, “The (Fifteen) Signs before Doomsday in Irish Tradition”, in Miscellanea Patristica Reverendissimo domino Marco Starowieyski septuagenario professori illustrissimo viro amplissimo ac doctissimo oblata (Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne XX/2.2007), Warsaw 2007, pp.  223-54. ‒, “Twenty-Five Years of the IBA Special Publications Trust”, PIBA, 32 (2009), pp.  131-135. ‒, “Jesus in (Early) Irish Apocryphal Gospel Traditions”, in Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferungen, ed. by J. Frey, and J. Schrö­t er, Tübingen, 2010, pp.  685-739. ‒, “End of an Era in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis. Caimin Psalter Fragments (11th-12th Century) and Gospels of Máel Brigte (A.D. 1138)”, PIBA, 33-34 (2010-11), pp.  76-121. ‒, “Bible Text and Commentaries in Ireland 600-800 A.D. An Overview”, PIBA, 35 (2012), pp.  121-46. ‒, “De initiis : Irish Monastic Learning 600-800 AD”, Eolas. Journal of the American Society of Irish Medieval Studies, 6 (2013), pp.  4-40. ‒, “Apocryphal Infancy Narratives. European and Irish Transmission”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Texts and Transmissions, pp.  123-46. McNamara, M. (ed.), Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage. The Middle East and Celtic Realms, Dublin, 2003.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

921

McNamara, M., et al. (eds), Apocrypha Hiberniae. I. Evangelia Infantiae. 2 vols (Corpus Christianorum Series Apocryphorum 13-14), Turnhout, 2001. Meehan, D. and Bieler, L., (eds), Adamnan’s De Locis sanctis (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae, 3), Dublin, 1958. Ní Úrdail¸ M., The Scribe in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Ireland : Motivations and Milieu, Münster, 2000. Mellinkoff, R., “Cain’s Monstrous Progeny in Beowulf. Part I, Noachic Tradition”, Anglo-Saxon England, 8 (1979), pp.143–62. Mercati, G., De fatis bibliothecae monasterii S. Columbani Bobiensis et de codice ipso Vat. lat. 5757, Vatican City, 1934. Merk, A., Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine, 8th edn, Rome, 1948. Merkle, S., “Die Sabbatruhe in der Hölle. Ein Beitrag zur Prudentius-Erklärung und zur Geschichte der Apokryphen”, Römische Quartalschrift für Christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte, 9 (1895), pp.  489–505. Metzger, B. M., The Text of the New Testament. Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, 2nd edn, Oxford, 1968. ‒, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Stuttgart, 1971 (corrected edn, 1975). Metzger, M. J. (ed.), Zwei karolingische Pontifikalien vom Oberrhein (Freiburger theologische Studien, Heft 17), Freiburg im Breisgau, 1914. Meyer, R. T. (ed.), Bernard of Clairvaux. The Life and Death of Saint Malachy the Irishman (Cistercian Fathers series no. 10) Kalamazoo, MI, 1978. Meyer, K., Aislinge Meic Conglinne. The Vision of MacConglinne. A Middle-Irish Wonder Tale, London, 1892. ‒, “Dùan in chùcat cest innso sìs”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 4 (1903), pp.  234-37. ‒, “Hebräische Wörter erklärt”, in Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 8 (1912), p.  113. ‒, “Ein altirische Gedicht über das Ende der Welt”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 8 (1912), pp.  195-96. ‒, The Death-Tales of the Ulster Heroes (Todd Lecture Series 14), Dublin, 1906. ‒ (ed.), Hibernica Minora, being a Fragment of an Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter (Anecdota Oxoniensa, Mediaeval and Modern Series, part VIII), Oxford, 1894.

922 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, Sanas Cormaic. An Old-Irish Glossary Compiled by Cormac úa Cuilennáin (Anecdota from Irish Manuscripts, vol. 4), Halle, 1912. Mezey, L., “Un fragment d’un codex de la première époque carolingienne (Tyconius in Apocalypsin  ?)”, in Miscellanea codicolo­ gica F. Masai dicata 1 (Les Publications de Scriptorium 8), ed. by P.  Cockshaw, M.-C. Garand and P.  Jodogne, Ghent 1979, pp.  411–50. Micheli, G.-L., “Recherches sur les manuscrits Irlandais decorés de Saint-Gall et de Reichenau”, Revue Archéologique, 6th ser., 7 (1936), pp.  193–207. Migne, J. P., Patrologia Graeca. Milik, J. T., The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments from Qumran Cave 4, Oxford, 1976. Miller, L. and Simon, M. (trans.), Babylonian Talmud, Seder Kodashim (Bekoroth. ‘Arakin), London, 1948. Mizzi, J., “The Old-Latin Element in Jn. I,29–III,26 of Cod. Sangallensis 60”, Sacris Erudiri, 28 (1978–79), pp.  33–62. Mohlberg, L. C., Eizenhöfer, L., Siffrin, P.  (eds), Missale Gallicanum vetus (Cod. Vat. Pal. lat. 493), (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Do­cumenta, Series Maior, Fontes III), Rome, 1958. Mohlberg, L. C. (ed.), Missale Gothicum (Vat. Reg. lat. 317), (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes V), Rome, 1961. Mohlberg, L. C., Eizenhöfer, L., Siffrin, P.  (eds), Liber sacramentorum Aeclesiae ordinis anni circuli (Cod. Vat. Reg. lat. 316/Paris Bibl. Nat. 7193, 41/56), (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes IV), Rome, 1960. Mohlberg, L. C., Eizenhöfer, L., Siffrin, P.  (eds), Missale Francorum (Cod. Vat. Reg. lat. 257), (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes II), Rome, 1957. Mone, F. J., Lateinische und griechische Messen aus dem zweiten bis sechsten Jahrhundert, Frankfurt am Main, 1850. Moraldi, L., Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento (Classici delle Religioni, sezione 5), Turin, 1971. Moran, P.  F., “Biblical Manuscripts of the Early Irish Church”, The Atlantis. or Register of Literature and Science conducted by members of the Catholic University of Ireland, 9 (1870), pp.  77–79. ‒, Essay on the Biblical Manuscripts of the Early Irish Church, Dublin, 1870. Moreschini, C., Tutte le opere di Sant’ Ambrogio, vol. 16, Opere Dogmatiche, Milan-Rome, 1979.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

923

Morin, G. “Le commentaire homilétique de S. Césaire sur l’Apocalypse”, Revue Bénédictine, 45 (1933) pp.  43–61. ‒, “Un commentaire romain sur S. Marc de la première moitié du Ve siècle”, Revue Bénédictine, 27 (1910), pp.  352–63. ‒ (ed.), “De monogramma Christi”, in Anecdota Maredsolana, 3, part 3 (1903), pp.  194–978 ; repr. PLS, 2 (1960) pp.  287–91. ‒, Sancti Caesarii Arelatensis Opera varia, Maredsous, 1942. Murphy G., Catalogue of Irish Manuscripts of the Royal Irish Academy, fascicle XI, Dublin, 1933. ‒, “Eleventh- or Twelfth-Century Irish Doctrine Concerning the Real Presence”, in Medieval studies presented to Aubrey Gwynn, S. J., ed. by J. A. Watt et al., Dublin, 1961, pp.  19–28. Nagy, I., “The Roasted Cock Crows. Apocryphal Writings (Acts of Peter, the Ethiopic Book of the Cock, Coptic Fragments, the Gospel of Nicodemus) and Folklore texts” (internet site, 40 pages ; http.//haldjas.folklore.ee/folklore/ vol36/nagy.pdf ; consulted August 2008). Nees, L., “The Irish Manuscripts at St Gall and their Continental Affiliations”, in Sangallensia in Washington : the Arts and Letters in Medieval and Baroque St Gall viewed from the Late Twentieth Century, ed. by J. King, New York, 1993, pp.  95–132, 314–24. Nestle, E. and Aland, K., Novum Testamentum Graece et latine, 26th edition, Stuttgart, 1984. Netzer, N., Cultural Interplay in the Eighth Century. The Trier Gospels and the Making of a Scriptorium at Echternach (Cambridge Studies in Palaeography and Codicology 3), Cambridge, 1994. ‒, “Willibrord’s Scriptorium at Echternach and its Relationship to Ireland and Lindisfarne”, in Bonner, Rollason, Stancliffe, St Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community, pp.  203–12. Ní Bhrolcháin, M., “Maol Íosa Ó Brolcháin. An assessment”, Seanchas Ardmhacha, 12 (1986), pp.  43–68. ‒, Maol Íosa Ó Brolcháin, Maynooth, 1986. Ní Chatháin, P. and Richter, M. (eds), Irland und Europa/Ireland and Europe. Die Kirche im Frühmittelalter/The Early Church, Stuttgart, 1984. ‒, Irland und die Christenheit/Ireland and Christendom. Bibelstudien und Mission/The Bible and the Missions, Stuttgart, 1987. ‒, Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Bildung und Literatur/Learning and Literature, Stuttgart, 1996.

924 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, Irland und Europa im Frühmittelalter/Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Texte und Überlieferung/Texts and Transmission, Dublin, 2002. Nic Énri Ú. and Mac Niocaill, G., “The Second Recension of the Evernew Tongue”, Celtica, 9 (1971), pp.  1-59. Nordenfalk, C., Celtic and Anglo-Saxon Painting. Book Illumination in the British Isles 600–800, New York, 1976. Ó Corráin, D., Breatnach, L. Breen, A., “The Laws of the Irish”, Peritia, 3 (1984), pp.  382-438. Ó Cróinin, D., “Rath Melsigi, Willibrord and the Earliest Echternach Manuscripts”, Peritia, 3 (1984), pp.  17–49. ‒, “Lebar buide meic murcada”, in A Miracle of Learning. Studies in Manuscripts and Irish Learning. Essays in honour of William O’Sullivan, ed. by T. Barnard, D. -Ó Cróinín, K. Simms, Aldershot, 1998, pp.  40–51. ‒, “Is the Augsburg Gospel Codex a Northumbrian Manuscript ?”, in Bonner, Rollason, Stancliffe, St Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community, pp.  189–201. ‒, Evangeliarium Epternacense, Munich, 1988. Ó Cuív, B., “Two Items from Irish Apocryphal Tradition”, Celtica, 10 (1973), pp.  87–113. ‒, Catalogue of Irish Language Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library at Oxford and Oxford College Libraries. Part I. Descriptions, Dublin, 2001. O’Donoghue, N. X., The Eucharist in Pre-Norman Ireland, Notre Dame, IN, 2011. ‒, The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church (of F. E. Warren), third edition with new material by N. X. O’Donoghue, Piscataway, NJ, 2010. O’Dwyer, P., Célí Dé. Spiritual Reform in Ireland 750–900, Dublin, 1981. Ó Fiaich, T., Gaelscrínte san Eoraip, Dublin, 1986. Ó Floinn, R., “Irish Romanesque Crucifix Figures”, in Figures from the Past. Studies on Figurative Art in Christian Ireland in Honour of Helen M. Roe, ed. by E. Rynne, Dun Laoghaire, 1987, pp.  168– 88. Ó Laoghaire, D., “An spioradáltacht : an naomhshacraimint, oilithreachtaí”, in Mac Conmara, An léann eaglasta in Éirinn, pp.  52–69.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

925

‒, “Irish Elements in the Catechesis Celtica”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Christendom : the Bible and the Missions, pp.  146– 64. Ó Máille, T., “Christ was Crucified,” Ériu, 3 (1907), pp.  196–99. Ó Néill, P.  P., “The Earliest Dry-Point Glosses in Codex Usserianus Primus”, in “A Miracle of Learning”. Studies in Manuscripts and Irish Learning. Essays on Honour of William O’Sullivan, ed. by Toby Barnard et al., Aldershot, 1998, pp.  1-28. ‒, “The Old-Irish Treatise on the Psalter and its Hiberno–Latin Background”, Ériu, 30 (1979), pp.  149–63. ‒, “The Background to the Cambrai Homily”, Eriu, 32 (1981), pp.  137– 47. ‒, “The Old-Irish Tract on the Mass in the Stowe Missal. Some Observations on its Origin and Textual History”, in Seanchus. Studies in Early and Medieval Irish Archaeology, History and Literature in Honour of Francis J. Byrne, ed. by A. P.  Smyth, Dublin, 2000, pp.  199-204. ‒ (ed.), Psalterium Suthantoniense (CCCM 240 ; Scriptores Celtigenae part 6) ; Turnhout, 2011. O’Brien, M. A. (ed.), Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae, vol. 1, Dublin, 1976. ‒, “The Old Irish Life of St. Brigit”, Irish Historical Studies, 1 (1938– 39), pp.  123–34, 343–53. O’Connor, A., “‘Mac no hÓighe Slán’. A Short Study of the ‘Cock and Pot’ in Irish Folk Tradition”, Sinsear. The Folklore Journal, 2 (1980), pp.  34–42. O’Donoghue, N. X., The Eucharist in Pre-Norman Ireland, Notre Dame, IN, 2011. McCarthy, B., “On the Stowe Missal”, Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, 27 (1886), pp.  135-268. O’Dwyer, P., Mary. A History of Devotion in Ireland, Dublin, 1988. O’Grady, C. (trans.), “Turning Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages”, translation of Bischoff “Wendepunkte”, in McNamara, Biblical Studies. The Medieval Irish Contribution, pp.  73–160. O’Grady, S. (ed. and trans.) Silva Gadelica (I-XXXI). A Collection of Tales in Irish with Extracts illustrating Persons and Places. (I) Irish Text, London and Edinburgh, 1892 ; reprint, Dublin. 1935 ; II. Translation and Notes, London, 1892. O’Keeffe, J. G., “Cáin Domnaig”, Ériu, 2 (1905), pp.  189–212.

926 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church O’Loughlin, T., “The Plan of the New Jerusalem in the Book of Armagh”, Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies, 39 (2000), pp.  23–38. ‒, Saint Patrick. The Man and his Works, London, 1999. ‒ (ed.), The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland (Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 31), Steenbrugis, in Abbatia S. Petri, Turnhout, 1999. O’Meara, John J. (trans.), The Voyage of Saint Brendani : Journey to the Promised Land : Navigatio Sancti Brendanis Abbatis, Dublin, 1976 (and later reprints). O’Rahilly, T. (ed.), Measgra Dánta. Miscellaneous Irish Poems, II, Cork, 1977. O’Reilly, J., “The Book of Kells, folio 114r. A Mystery Revealed yet Concealed”, Hallel, 19 (1994), pp.  107–20 ; first published in The Age of Migrating Ideas. Early Medieval Art in Northern Britain and Ireland, ed. by R. M. Spearman, J. Higgit, Edinburgh, 1993. ‒, “Early Medieval Text and Image : the Wounded and Exalted Christ”, Peritia, 6–7 (1987–88), pp.  72–118. O’Sullivan, W., “The Lindisfarne Scriptorium. For and Against”, Peritia, 8 (1994), pp.  80–94 (review article of Bonner, Rollston, Stancliffe, St Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community). Ochsenbein, P., Schmucki, C. and Von Euw, A., Irische Buchkunst : die irischen Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek St Gallen und das Faksimile des Book of Kells, St Gall, 1990. Origen, Hom. Luc. XIV, in the translation of Jerome, on Luke 2.21–24 (GCS 49, 90–91, ed. by M. Rauer). Osiek, C., The Shepherd of Hermas. A Commentary, Minneapolis, MN, 1999. Paffenroth, K., Judas. Images of the Lost Disciple, Louisville and London, 2001. Palmer, N. F. ; see under Gerhardt, c. Parker, P.  C., Amphoux, C. B. (eds), Codex Bezae. Studies from the Lunel Colloquium, June 1994 (NTTS, 22), Leiden, 1966. Parridge, A., Caoineadh na dTrí Muire. Téama na Páise i bhFilíocht Bhéil na Gaeilge, Dublin, 1983. Paulus. B. (ed.), Pascasius Redbertus, De corpore et sanguinbe Domini (CCCM  16), Turnhout, 1969. Peebles, R.J., The Legend of Longinus in Ecclesiastical Tradition and English Literature and its Connection with the Grail (Bryn Mawr Monographs 9), Baltimore, 1911.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

927

Peeters, P., Evangiles apocryphes II : L’évangile de l’enfance : rédactions syriaques, arabes et arméniennes, traduites et annotées (Textes do­cuments pour l’étude historique du christianisme 18), Paris, 1914. Petitmengin, P., “La compilation ‘De uindictis magnis magnorum peccatorum’”, in Gryson, Philologia Sacra. Studien zu Bibel und Kirchenvätern für Hermann J. Frede und Walter Thiele, II, pp. 622– 38. Picard, J.-M., The vision of Tnugdal, transl. from the Latin by J.-M. Picard with an introduction by Y. de Pontfarcy, Dublin, 1989. Plummer, C., Irish Litanies (Henry Bradshaw Society 62), London, 1925. ‒, Vita secunda sancti Brendani abbatis de Cluain Ferta, in Vita Sanctorum Hiberniae, vol. 2, Oxford 1910, reprint 1968, pp.  272-94. Poirot, É. See under Dolbeau, F. Poirot, É., in Le saint prophète Elisée d’après les Pères de l’Eglise. Textes presentés par les Carmélites du Monastère Saint-Élie (Spiritualité orientale 59), Bellefontaine, 1993, pp.  207-11 Popovic, M. V., “Les Évangiles de Split”, in Bulletin de la Société Nationale des Antiquaires de France 1987, Paris, 1989, pp.  266–89. Porter, A. K., The Crosses and Culture of Ireland, Newhaven, London, Oxford, 1931. Praedicatores, Fratres (ed.), Summa Theologica XII, Rome 1906. Freté, S. E. (ed.), Doctoris Angelici Thomae Aquinatis … Opera Omnia, vol. 11, Paris, 1874. Prendergast, A. C., The Latinity of the De vita contemplativa (Patristic Studies 55), Washington, 1938. Primasius, Comm. in Apoc. ; See under Adams Raes, A. SJ, [Prefect of Vatican Library], Les manuscrits de la Reine de Suède au Vatican. Réédition du catalogue de Montfaucon et cotes actuelle (Studi e Testi 238), Vatican City, 1964. Rahner, K., “Virginitas in partu”, in Theological Investigations. Collected Essays of K. Rahner, vol. 4. More Recent Writings, trans. by K. Smyth, Baltimore and London, 1966, pp.  134–162. Read, A., The Faddan More Psalter. Discovery, Conservation and Investigation, Dublin, 2011. Riggenbach, E., Die ältesten lateinischen Kommentare zum Hebräerbrief. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Exegese und zur Literaturgeschichte des Mittelalters, Leipzig, 1907. Righetti, M. Storia liturgica, vol. 2, L’Anno liturgico ; il Breviario, 2nd edn, revised and corrected, Milan, 1955.

928 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Rittmueller, J., “MS Vat. Reg. 49 Reviewed”, Sacris Erudiri, 33 (1992-93), pp.  259-305. ‒, “The Gospel Commentary of Máel Brigte Ua Máeluanaig and its Hiberno-Latin Background”, Peritia, 2 (1983), pp.  185-214. ‒, The Leabhar Breac Latin and Middle-Irish Homily “In Cena Domini”. An Edition and Source Analysis (Ph.D. Dissertation Harvard University, 1984 ; published, University Microfilms International), Ann Arbor, MI, 1989. ‒, “MS Vat. Reg. 49 Reviewed”, Sacris Erudiri, 33 (1992–93), pp.  259– 305. ‒, “Postscript to the Gospels of Máel Brigte”, Peritia, 3 (1984), pp.  215–18. ‒ (ed.), Liber questionum in Evangeliis (CCSL 108F ; Scriptores Celtigenae pars V), Turnhout, 2003. Rönsch, H., Das Buch der Jubiläen oder Die Kleine Genesis, Leipzig, 1874 ; reprint, Amsterdam, 1970. Romanelli, P.  and Nordhagen, P.  J., S. Maria Antiqua, Rome, 1964. Romero Pose, E. (ed.), Sancti Beati a Liébana Commentarius in Apocalypsin, 2 vols, Rome, 1985. Rowley, H. H., “Death and Beyond”, in The faith of Israel. Aspects of Old Testament Thought, London, 1956, pp. 150–76 (earlier, “Future Life in the Thought of the Old Testament”, The Congregational Quarterly, 33 (1955), pp.  116-32). Rule, M., “‘Transformare’ and ‘Transformatio’”, Journal of Theological Studies, 12 (1911), pp.  413–27. Ryan, J., Irish Monasticism. Origins and Early Developments, Dublin and Cork, 1931. Ryan, M., “Sacred Cities ?”, in Text, Image, Interpretation. Studies in Anglo-Saxon literature and its insular context in honour of Éamonn Ó Carragáin, ed. by A. Minnis and J. Roberts, Turnhout, 2007, pp.  515-28. ‒, Early Communion Vessels (The Irish Treasures Series), Dublin, 2000. ‒, Studies in Medieval Irish Metalwork, London, 2002. ‒ (ed.), Treasures of Ireland. Irish Art 3000 B.C.–1500 A.D, Dublin, 1983. Rynne, E. (ed.), Figures from the Past. Studies on Figurative Art in Christian Ireland in Honour of Helen M. Roe, Dun Laoghaire, 1987. Saint-Roch, P.  (ed.), Liber sacramentorum Engolsmensis (CCSL 159C), Turnhout, 1987. Salmon, P.  (ed.), Les “Tituli psalmorum” des manuscrits latins (Collectanea Biblica Latina 12), Rome, 1959.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

929

Sauser, E., Frühchristliche Kunst. Sinnbild und Glaubensaussage, Innsbruck, Vienna, Munich, 1966. Scherrer, G., Verzeichniss der Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek von St. Gallen, Halle, 1875. Schiller, G., Iconographie der christlichen Kunst. 2. Die Passion Jesu Christi, Gütersloh, 1968. Schirmer, G., Die Kreuzlegenden im Leabhar Breac, Inaugural Doctoral Dissertation, Saint Gall, 1886. Schneider, H., Die altlateinischen biblischen Cantica (Texte und Arbeiten 29–30), Beuron, 1938 (“V. Die biblischen Cantica im iroschottischen Liturgiekreis”, pp.  89–98). ‒, “Die biblischen Oden im christlichen Altertum”, Biblica, 30 (1949), pp.  28–65. ‒, “Die biblischen Oden im Mittelalter”, Biblica, 30 (1949), pp.  479– 500. ‒, “Die biblischen Oden seit dem sechsten Jahrhunndert”, Biblica, 30 (1949), pp.  239–72. ‒, “Die biblischen Oden in Jerusalem und Konstantinopel”, Biblica, 30 (1949), pp.  433–52. Selmer, C., Navigatio sancti Brendani Abbatis from Early Latin Manuscripts (Publications in Mediaeval Studies, 16), Notre Dame, IN, 1959. Seymour, J. D. St, “The Cock and the Pot,” The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries, 51 (1921), pp.  147–51. ‒, “The Bringing forth of the Soul in Irish Literature”, Journal of Theological Studies, 22 (1920-21), pp.  16–20. ‒, “Irish Versions of the Transitus Mariae”, Journal of Theological Studies, 23 (1921-22), pp.  36–43. ‒, “The Signs of Doomsday in the Saltair na Rann”, PRIA, 36 C (1921–24), pp.  154–3. ‒, “The Book of Adam and Eve in Ireland”, PRIA, 36 C (1921–24), pp.  121–33. ‒, “Irish Versions of the Vision of St Paul”, Journal of Theological Studies, 24 (1922-23), pp.  54–59. ‒, “The Eschatology of the Early Irish Church”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 14 (1923), pp.  179–211. ‒, “The Seven Heavens in Irish Literature”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie, 14 (1923), pp.  18–30. ‒, “Studies in the Vision of Tundal”, PRIA, 37 C (1924–27), pp. 87–106.

930 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, “Notes on Apocrypha in Ireland”, PRIA, 37 C (1924–27), pp. 107–17. ‒, “The Vision of Adamnan”, PRIA, 37 C (1924–27), pp.  304–12. ‒, Irish Visions of the Other-World. A Contribution to the Study of Mediaeval Visions, London, 1930. Sharpe III, J. L. and van Kampen, K. (eds), The Bible as Book. The Manuscript Tradition, London, 1998. Sharpe, R., “Books from Ireland, Fifth to Ninth Centuries”, Peritia, 21 (2010), pp.  1-55. Sheehy, M., “The Bible and the Collectio Canonum Hibernensis”, in Ní Chatháin and Richter, Ireland and Christendom : the Bible and the Missions, pp.  277-83. ‒, “The Collectio Canonum Hibernensis – a Celtic Phenomenon”, in Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. by H. Löwe, Stuttgart, 1982, pp.  525-35. ‒, “Introduction to the Psalter in the Irish Reference Bible”. Appendix IV of McNamara, “Psalter text and Psalter Study”, pp.  291–98. Shoemaker, S. J., Ancient Traditions of the Virgin Mary’s Dormition and Assumption, Oxford, 2002. Siffrin, P., Konkordanztabellen zu den romischen Sakramantarien. II. Liber Sacramentorum Romanae Aeclesiae (Cod. Vatican. Regin. lat. 316). Sacramentarium Gelasianum (Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series Minor, Subsidia Studiorum 5), Rome, 1959. Silagi, G., “Notwendige Bemerkungen zu Gormans ‘Critique of Bisch­ off’s Theory of Irish Exegesis’”, Peritia, 12 (1998), pp.  87-94. Silverstein, Th., Visio Sancti Pauli. The History of the Apocalypse in Latin together with Nine Texts (Studies and Documents, no. 4), London, 1935. ‒, “The Vision of Saint Paul. New Links and Patterns in the Western Tradition”, Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraires du moyen âge, 34 (1959), pp.199–248. Silverstein Th. and Hilhorst, A., Apocalypse of Paul. A New Critical Edition of Three Long Latin Versions (Cahiers d’Orientalisme, 21), Geneva, 1997. Simon, M. (trans.), Babylonian Talmud, Seder Neẓiḳin III (Baba Bathra, vol. I), London, 1935. ‒ (trans.), Babylonian Talmud, Seder Mo‘ed (Sukkah. Bezah), London, 1938. Simon, R., Bibliothèque critique ou recueil de diverses pièces critiques, 4 vols, Paris, 1708-10), I (1708), pp.  271-75.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

931

Simpson McKee, H., “Breton manuscripts of biblical and Hiberno-Latin texts”, in O’Loughlin, The Scriptures and Early Medieval Ireland, pp.  275–90. Sinthern, P.  (ed.), Roma Sacra. A series of one hundred and fifty-two views in colors, Vienna, Munich, Biel, 1925. Slotki, I. W. (trans.), Babylonian Talmud, Seder Neẓiḳin II (Baba Bathra), London, 1935. Slotki, J. J. (trans.), Midrash Rabbah, vol. 4 (Leviticus Rabbah), London, 1939. Sobieraj, M., “Dekoracja malarska karolinskiego rekopisu w Bibliotece Kapitulnej na Wawelu”, Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jegiellonskiego. Prace z Historii Sztuki, 12 (1975), pp.  9-56 (with a French summary) ; summary in Scriptorium 32 (1978), Bulletin Codicodologique, no. 578 (p.  101]). Socrates, Church History. Souter, A., “The Sources of Sedulius Scottus’s Collectaneum on the Epistles of Paul”, Journal of Theological Studies, 18 (1917), pp.  184-228. Sparks, H. D. F. (ed.), Novum testamentum latine, pars III, fasc. iii. Apocalypsis Iohannis, Oxford, 1954. ‒, “A Celtic Text of the Latin Apocalypse Preserved in two Durham Manuscripts of Bede’s Commentary on the Apocalypse”, Journal of Theological Studies, 5 (1954), pp.  227–31. Stancliffe, C., “Red, White and Blue Martyrdom”, in Ireland in Early Mediaeval Europe, ed. by D. Whitelock et al., Cambridge, 1982, pp.  21–46. ‒, “Early ‘Irish’ Biblical Exegesis”, in Studia Patristica XII. Papers presented to the Sixth International Conference on Patristic Studies held in Oxford, 1971. Part I. Inaugural lecture, editiones, critica, biblica, historica, theologica, philosophica, liturgica (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 115), ed. E. A. Livingstone, Berlin, 1975, pp.  361-70. Steffens, F., Lateinische Paläographie, 3rd edn, Berlin, Leipzig, 1929. Stegmüller, F., Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aevi 1, Madrid, [MCMXL, but 1950). Stein, W. A., The Lichfield Gospels (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkley 1980). Steinhauser, K. B., “Bemerkungen zum pseudo-hieronymianischen Commemoratorium in Apocalypsin”, Freiburger Zeitschrift fur Philosophie und Theologie, 26 (1979), pp.  220–42.

932 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church ‒, The Apocalypse Commentary of Tyconius. A History of its Reception and Influence (European University Studies, ser. 23, vol. 301), Frankfurt, Bern, New York, 1987. Stevenson, J., “Altus prosator”, Celtica, 23 (1999), pp.  326–68. ‒, “Ascent through the Heavens, from Egypt to Ireland”, Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies, 5 (Summer 1983), pp.  21–35. Stichel, R., Beiträge zur frühen Geschichte des Psalters und zur Wirkungsgeschichte der Psalmen (Abhandlungen der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 116), Paderborn, Munich, Vienna, Zürich, 2007, pp.  417–533. Stokes, W. “Tidings of Doomsday. An Early Middle-Irish homily”, Revue Celtique, 4 (1880), pp.  245-57, 479-80. ‒, “The Irish Verses, Notes and Glosses in Harl. 1802”, Revue Celtique, 8 (1887), pp.  346-49. ‒ (ed.), “The Voyage of Snegdus and Mac Riagla”, Revue Celtique, 9 (1888), pp.  14–25. ‒, “Tidings of the Resurrection”, Revue Celtique, 25 (1904), pp.  232-59. ‒, “The Evernew Tongue”, Ériu 2 (1905), pp.  96–162. ‒, “The Adventure of St Columba’s Clerics”, Revue Celtique, 26 (1905), pp.  130–70. ‒, “The Fifteen Tokens of Doomsday”, Revue Celtique, 28 (1907), pp.  308-26. ‒ (ed.), “The Voyage of the Húi Corra”, Revue Celtique, 14 (1893), pp.  22–69. ‒, Félire hUí Gormáin. The Martyrology of Gorman (Henry Bradshaw Society, 9), London, 1895. ‒, Félire Óengusso Céli Dé. The Martyrology of Oengus the Culdee (Henry Bradshaw Society 29), London, 1905. ‒, Saltair na Rann (Anecdota Oxoniensia, Medieval and Modern Series, I,iii), Oxford, 1883. Stokes W., and Strachan, J. (eds), Thesaurus Palaeohibernicus. A Collection of Old-Irish Glosses Scholia Prose and Verse, vol. 2, Non-Biblical Glosses and Scholia, Dublin, 1975 (reprint of original publication, Cambridge, 1903). Stone, M. E., Signs of the Judgment, Onomastica Sacra and The Gene­ rations of Adam (University of Pennsylvania Armenian Texts and Studies 3), Chicago 1981. ‒, “Jewish Tradition, the Pseudepigrapha and the Christian West”, in The Aramaic Bible. Targums in their historical context (Journal for

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

933

the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 166), ed. by D. R. G. Beattie and M. J. McNamara, Sheffield, 1994, pp. 431– 49. ‒, “Two Unpublished Eschatological Texts”, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 18 (2009), pp.  293-302. Sulzer, M. J., “Pomerius”, in New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 11, New York, 1967, pp.  544-45. ‒, English translation of De vita contemplative (Ancient Christian Writers, vol. 4), Washington, 1947. Taft, R., The Liturgy of the Hours in East and West. The Origins of the Divine Office and its Meaning Today, Collegeville, 1985. Thoby, P., Le Crucifix des Origines au Concile de Trente. Étude iconographique, Nantes, 1959 ; suppplement 1963. Thomas, C., The Early Christian Archaeology of North Britain, London. 1971. Thomas Aquinas, St, Catena Aurea. In Marci Evangelium (in Doctoris Angelici Divi Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia, vol. 16), Paris, 1876. Thomason, D. A., “Thomas, Apocalypse of”, Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. D. N. Freedman, vol. 6 (New York. Doubleday, 1992), p. 534. Thompson, E. M., “Apocryphal Legends”, Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 37 (1881), pp.  241–43. Thurston, H., “The Feast of the Assumption”, The Month, 130 (1917), pp.  121–34. Tischendorf, C., Evangelium Palatinum, Leipzig, 1847. ‒, Apocalypses apocryphae, Leipzig, 1866 ; reprint Hildesheim 1966. ‒, Evangelia apocrypha, 2nd edn, Leipizig, 1876. ‒ (ed.), Novum Testamentum Graece ad antiquissimos testes denuo recensuit apparatum criticum omni studio perfectum apposuit, vol. I, Leipzig, 1872. Todd, J. H. (ed.), Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh. The War of the Gaedhil with the Gaill, or the Invasion of Ireland by the Danes and Norsemen. The original Irish text, edited, with translation and introduction, London, 1867. Ussher, J., The Whole Works of Most Rev. James Ussher (17 vols), Dublin, 1847. Valgimogli, L., “La tradizione esegetica negli Argomenta dello pseudoBeda (PL XCIII)”, Filologia Mediolatina, 5 (1998), pp.  95–147. Van Esbroeck, M., “Les textes littéraires sur l’Assomption avant le Xe siècle”, in Les Actes Apocryphes des Apôtres, ed. by F. Bovon, Geneve, 1981, pp.  265–85.

934 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Van Hamel, A. G. (ed.), “Poems from Brussels MS 5100–4”, Revue Celtique, 37 (1917–19), pp.  345–49. Van Riel, G., Steel, C. and McEvoy, J. (eds), Iohannes Scottus Eriugena. The Bible and Hermeneutics (Proceedings of the Ninth International Colloquium of the Society for the Promotion of Eriugenian Studies held at Leuven and Louvain-la-Neuve June 7-10, 1995), Leuven, 1996. Van Rompay, L., Théodore de Mopsueste. Fragments syriaques du Commentaire des Psaumes (Psaume 118 et Psaumes 138–48), (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium vol.  436 ; Scriptores Syri tomus 190), Louvain, 1982 (Syriac text in same series, vol. 435, Scriptores Syri tomus 189). Vattioni, F., “Frammento latino del Vangelo di Giacomo”, Augustiniarum, 17 (1977), pp.  505–09. Vendryes, J., Review of T. Ó Máille, Contributions to the History of the Verbs of Existence in Irish, Dundealgan Press, in Revue Celtique, 32 (1911), pp.  350–52. Verey, C., “Notes on the Gospel Texts”, in Verey, Brown and Coatsworth, The Durham Gospels, pp.  68–108. Verey, C. D., Brown, T. J. and Coatsworth, E. (eds), The Durham Gospels (Early English Manuscripts in Facsimiles 20), Copenhagen, 1980. Verhelst, D., Adso Dervensis, De ortu et tempore Antichristi, necnon et tractatus qui ab eo dependunt (CCCM 45), Turnhout, 1976. Verkest, P., “The Praefatio of the Irish ‘Eglogae tractatorum in psalterium’, Edited with a Critical Introduction”, Sacris Erudiri, 40 (2001), pp.  267–92. Vielhauer, P.  and Strecker, G., “Jewish-Christian Gospels”, in Hennecke, Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha. I, pp.  134–78. Vogel, C., Introduction aux sources de l’histoire du culte chrétien au Moyen Age, Spoleto, 1966. Vogels, H., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der lateinischen Apokalypse-Übersetzung, Düsseldorf, 1920. Vogt, P., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der lateinischen Apokalypse, 2 vols, doctoral dissertation Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1965. Voicu, S., “Notes sur l’Histoire de l’Enfance de Jésus”, Apocrypha, 2 (1991), pp.  119–32 ; ‒, “Verso il testo primitivo dei Παιδικὰ τοῦ Κυρίου Ἰησοῦ ‘Racconti dell’Infanzia del Signore Gesù’”, Apocrypha, 9 (1998), pp.  7–95.

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

935

‒, “Nuove restituzioni a Severiano di Gabala”, Rivista di studi bizanti e neoellenici, n.s. 20–21 (1983–84), pp.  3–24. Wagner, W. (ed.), Visio Tnugdali. Lateinisch und Altdeutsch, Erlangen, 1882. Walker, A. (trans.), Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations (AnteNicene Christian Library vol. 16), Edinburgh, 1870. Walker, G. S. M., Sancti Columbani Opera (Scriptores Latini Hiberniae, 2), Dublin, 1970. Wallis Budge, E. A., Miscellaneous Coptic Texts in the Dialect of Upper Egypt edited with English Translation, London, 1915. Wampach, C., Geschichte der Grundherrschaft Echternach in Frühmittelalter I, 2, Luxembourg, 1930. Ward, B. (trans.), Apophthegmata Patrum, in The sayings of the Desert Fathers. The alphabetical Collection, London, 1975. Ware, J., De scriptoribus Hiberniæ : Libri duo. Prior continet scriptores, in Hiberniâ natos ; Posterior, scriptores alios qui in Hiberniâ munera aliqua obierunt, Dublin, 1639 ; translation in James Ware, His two books of the writers of Ireland, Dublin, 1704. Warren, F. E., The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, Oxford, 1881. ‒, The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, with a new introduction by N. X. O’Donoghue ; 3rd fac. edn, Piscataway, NJ, 2010. ‒ (ed.), The Antiphonary of Bangor : an Early Irish Manuscript in the Ambrosian Library at Milan (Henry Bradshaw Society 10), London, 1895. Weber, R. (ed), Ambrosius Autpertus Opera I. Expositionis in Apocalypsim libri I–V ; Opera II. Expositionis in Apocalypsim libri VI–X (CCCM 27–27A), Turnhout, 1975. Weber, R. et al., Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Stuttgart, 1969. Westcott B., F. and Hort, F. J. A., The New Testament in the Original Greek. Introduction, Appendix, Cambridge and London, 1882. Westwood, J. O., Facsimiles of Miniatures and Ornaments of AngloSaxon and Irish Manuscripts, London, 1868. ‒, The Art of Illuminated Manuscripts. Illustrated Sacred Writings, London, 1988. White, H. J. (with Wordsworth, J.), “The Latin Versions”, in F. G. A. Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament for the Use of Biblical Students, 2 vols, London, 1894, II, pp.  41–90.

936 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Wilhelm, F., Deutsche Legenden und Legendare, Leipzig. 1907. Willard, R., “The Latin Texts of the Three Utterances of the Soul”, Speculum, 12 (1937), pp.  147–66. ‒, “The Testament of Mary. The Irish Account of the Death of the Virgin”, Recherches de theologie ancienne et medieval, 9 (1937), pp.  341–64. Williams, J., “Purpose and Imagery in the Apocalypse Commentary of Beatus of Liébana”, in Emmerson and McGinn, Apocalypse in the Middle Ages, pp.  217–33. Wilmart, A., “De opusculo quodam Pauli Casinensis”, Spicilegium Romanum, 5 (1841), pp.  144-45. ‒, “Transfigurare”, Bulletin D’ancienne littérature et d’archéologie, 1 (1911), pp.  282–92. ‒, Codices Reginenses latini. Tomus I. codices 1–250 recensuit et digessit, Vatican City, 1937. ‒ (ed.), Analecta Reginensia. Extraits des manuscrits latins de la Reine Christine conservés au Vatican (Studi e Testi 59), Vatican City, 1933. Wolff, J. H., Fabula Judaici de portentiosa magnitudinis ave zyz sdy dicta, quam paulo enucleatam, Leipzig, 1683. Wordsworth, J., White, W. J., Nouum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi secundum editionem Sancti Hieronymi, Oxford, 1889– 98. Wordsworth, J. and White, F. J., Nouum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Latine. Pars Prior — Quattuor Evangelia, Matthew, Oxford, 1889. Wordsworth, J. and White, F. J., Nouum Testamentum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Latine. Pars Prior — Quattuor Evangelia, John, Oxford, 1895. Wright W. (ed.), Contributions to the Apocryphal Literature of the New Testament, London, 1865. Wright, C. D., “Some Evidence for the Irish Origin of Redaction XI of  the Visio Pauli”, Manuscripta, 34 (1990), pp.  33-44. ‒, The Irish Tradition in Old English Literature (Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England), Cambridge, 1993. ‒, “Bischoff’s Theory of Irish Exegesis”, Journal of Medieval Latin, 10 (2000), pp.  115-75. ‒, “The Apocalypse of Thomas. Some New Latin texts and their Significance for the Old English Versions”, Apocryphal Texts and Tradi-

appendix iii: cumulative bibliography

937

tions, ed. by K. Powell and D. G. Scraggs, Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2003, pp.  27–64. Yarbro Collins, A., Early Christian Apocalypticism. Genre and Social Setting (Semeia 36), Decatur, GA, 1986. ‒, “Apocalyptic Themes in Biblical Literature”, Interpretation, 53 (1999), pp.  117–30. Zimara, C., “Zu vorscholastischen Anschauungen über die Eucharistie. Eine Erwiderung”, Divus Thomas, 19 (1941), pp.  440–46. ‒, “Interpretation vorscholastischer Texte über die Eucharistie. Ergänzungen”, Divus Thomas, 20 (1942), pp.  284–90. ‒, Review of J. Brinktrine, Das Opfer der Eucharistie. Dogmatische Untersuchungen über das Wesen des Messopfers, Paderborn, 1938, in Divus Thomas, 17 (1939), pp.  250–52. Zimmer, H., Pelagius in Irland. Texte und Untersuchungen zur patristischen Litteratur, Berlin, 1901, pp.  420-48 ; reproduced in Patrologiae Latinae Supplementum IV, 1627-1653 ; see CPL 1122a. Zimmermann, E. H., Vorkarolingische Miniaturen, 5 vols, Berlin, 1916.

INDICES Index of Scriptures

Index of Writers and Writings Index of Manuscripts Index of Modern Authors Index of Subjects, Persons and Places

­­INDEX OF SCRIPTURES* Old Testament 325 Genesis 1-3 1 : 1-26 1 : 1 1 : 6 1 : 16-17 2-3 2 : 3 2 : 7 3 : 1, 4 3 : 8 3 : 9 4 : 7, 17, 23 4 : 2 6 6 : 4 11 : 1 22 : 9 48 : 7 49

56, 100-104, 107n28, 161 100, 101, 351 351, 742 332, 644 333 101 100, 102, 699, 854 102 719 66-67 694 406 102 100 103 572 104 261 100

Exodus 104-107 15 : 1-19 Cantemus Domino 149, 153-155, 169 15 : 12 720 25-28 106n26 25 : 2 105 25 : 4 -5 106 26 : 1, 7 105 32 : 1-20 105n25 35 : 5 -6 106 35 : 7, 23 105 38 : 21 106 Leviticus 19 : 31 20 : 6, 27

107-108 721 721

Numbers 3 : 2 6 5 : 11-31

108 105 574

16 : 32 24 : 17 33 : 2 -49 Deuteronomy 11 : 14 16 18 : 1 25 : 3 32 : 1-43 Audite 33 : 9 Joshua 5 : 12 10 : 12-13 20 : 7-9

720 239 108 108 108 108 721 108 caeli 149, 152, 153-155, 169 108 109-110 677-678 619n73 130

Judges 110-111 19-21 (20 : 2 0, 25, 35) 249 Ruth 1 : 1-2 2-4

601 601

Kings 111-112 1 Samuel (I Kings) 2 : 1-10 Exultavit cor 149, 153-155, 169 28 : 3 -19 721 28 : 7-19 112 Chronicles 1 Chronicles 16 : 4 -43 25 : 1-9

113

Esther

122

Job 10 : 2 0-21

119 720

145 145

*  Boldface indicates significant quotations or the treatment in detail of an author or work.

942 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 10 : 2 2 14 : 21 19 : 2 5 19 : 2 6 26 : 5 26 : 11 33 : 18 39 : 6 39 : 13-14 39 : 2 6 40 : 10 40 : 12, 13 Psalms† 1-121 1 : 1-16 : 11a 1 1 : 1-6 1 : 1 1 : 5 2 3 4 4 : 9 -10 5, 6 6 : 1 6 : 2 6 : 6 7 8 8 : 5 9 9 : 2 0 11 : 6 (12 : 5) 15 (16) 15 : 4 15(16) : 9, 10 15(16) : 10 15(16) : 11b-end 16(17) : 15 17-20 17-77 : 70

819n61, 63 720 734 732, 751 720 745 720 520 521 520 372 720 113-116, 873 133 32-34, 132-133, 165, 214n6, 215 114-115, 132, 134, 138-140, 143, 177179 345 348, 397 739-741 871 172 165, 172 836, 861 172 725 745 720 172, 174 871 872 165 732 732 174 165 732 418, 720 31-32, 115-116, 133, 215-217 748 175 132, 165

17 : 2 7 (18 : 2 6) 173 18 : 6 (19 : 5) 115 18 (19) 170-171 21 : 7 (22 : 6) 618 21 : 3 0 (22 : 2 9) 734 22 : 4 (23 : 4) 115 23(24) : 7, 9 368 26(27) : 13 421 27(28) : 1 720 29 : 8 (30 : 9) 720 30 (31) 175 30(31) : 13b 173 30 : 2 0 (31 : 2 0) 747 32(33) : 12 173 33 : 11 (34 : 10) 27, 363 33 : 13 (34 : 12) 173 37 : 2 (38 : 1) 745 38(39) : 11-151 : 7 32, 56, 213, 216, 620n73 40 (41) 247 40 : 5 (41 : 4) 411 41 : 8 (42 : 7 ) 409 43 : 2 3 (44 : 2 2) 732 44 (45) 34 46 : 2 (47 : 1) 834, 835, 861, 863 46 : 7-8 (47 : 6 -7) 861 46 : 7 (46 : 7 ) 835 48 : 16 (49 : 15) 721 49(50) : 3 419, 738, 740 49(50) : 3, 5 753 49(50) : 11 519-520 50 (51) 834 50 : 3 (51 : 1) 863 50 : 6 (51 : 4) 96 50 : 17 (51 : 15) 861 50 : 19 (51 : 16) 402 53 : 3 (54 : 1) 834, 863 56 : 9 (57 : 8) 732 61 (62) 175 62 : 2 (63 : 1) 834, 863 64 : 2 (65 : 1) 834-835, 861-862 64 : 6 (65 : 5) 861, 863 65(66) : 12 418 66 : 2 (67 : 1) 833, 862 67 : 2 (68 : 1) 732 67 : 3 6(35) 862

†  Primary references here follow the Vulgate numbering; Hebrew references are in parentheses.

index of scriptures 68 : 4 b (63 : 3) 193 68 : 10 (69 : 9) 414 69 : 2 (70 : 1) 861, 862 70(71) : 2 0 720 72 115 72(73) : 2 4 721 73(74) : 14 105n25 76 (77) 175 77(78) : 2 5 109, 678 78 (79) 175 80 (81) 175 81 (82) 160 81(82) : 6 158 82 : 1-99 : 5 206-209 83 (84) 160 83 : 5 (84 : 4) 863 83 : 8 (84 : 7 ) 862 83 : 4 (84 : 3) 159 84 (85) 160 85(86) : 9 745 86 (87) 134, 160 86(87) : 1 398 86(87) : 2 116 87(88) 160 87(88) : 6 418 87 : 11 (88 : 10) 720 87 : 13, 15 (88 : 12, 14) 720 88(89) 160 89(90) : 1 834, 863 89(90) : 17 29-30, 835 90 (91) 141, 142n17, 160 90(91) : 17 159 91 (92) 160 92 (93) 160 93(94) : 17 720 94 (95) 160 96(97) : 2 -3 738, 740 99 175 101 : 14 (102 : 13) 419 102 : 2 (103 : 1) 834, 862 103(104) : 17 513-524 103(104) : 2 9-30 720 103(104) : 3 0 734 104(105) : 19 411 105 : 1 (106 : 2) 847 105(106) : 6 861 107(108) : 15 411 109 (110) 34, 115 109(110) : 1 419

943

110(111) : 8 175 112(113) : 1 834, 863 113 : 2 5 (115 : 17) 720 114(116) : 1 834, 863 115 : 1 (116 : 10) 833, 862 117(118) : 2 7 862 118 (119) 28, 91, 133, 142 143, 178, 180, 217 229, 838 118(119) : 1-16 133, 182-198, 225 227 118(119) : 8 191 118(119) : 33-116 133, 182-198, 225 228 118(119) : 4 0 188, 190 118(119) : 41-48 188 118(119) : 57 191 118(119) : 62 181 118(119) : 67, 69 190 118(119) : 70 191 118(119) : 81 190, 194 118(119) : 82 193-194 118(119) : 8 3 194n115 118(119) : 91 181, 619n73 118(119) : 9 6, 97 191 118(119) : 103 123 118(119) : 105 190 118(119) : 107 191 118(119) : 123 191, 193 118(119) : 161-167 85 119-133 863 119-127 838 129(130) : 1 834, 862 129(130) : 3 745 131(132) : 8 734 132(133) : 1 834, 835, 861, 862 135(136) : 2 5-26 861 138(139) : 8 720 141, 142-144 215 144 (145) 174 144(145) : 10 173-174 144(145) : 17 861 145-148 215 146(147) : 5 178 147 : 1(12) 178, 834, 862 148-150 151, 834 148 151, 834, 835 148 : 1 151, 834, 863 148 : 2 835, 861 148 : 7 565-566

944 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 149 149 : 1 149 : 5 150 : 1 151

834 151, 834, 863 151 151, 834, 863 152, 164, 169, 182, 216

Books of Solomon Proverbs 2 : 18 5 : 15-17 9 : 5 9 : 18 21 : 16 25 : 1, 2 31 : 1 31 : 2 3

116-119 117 720 117 748 720 720 117 117 740

Ecclesiastes 1 : 4 1 : 5 1 : 7 2 : 1 9 : 4 9 : 5, 10 11 : 7 12 : 2 , 3, 4, 5-7

117-118, 747 117 117-118 117 358 117 720-721 720 117

Song of Songs 2 : 2 ; 4 : 12 6 : 4 6 : 8 6 : 10 7 : 4 -7 8 : 8 -12

47, 118-119, 368 361 116, 118 413 361 56 56

Prophets 123-126, 312-314 Isaiah 56, 124, 313, 314, 621 3 : 14 740 7 : 14 418 8 : 19 721 9 : 6 418 11 : 10 418 12 : 1-6 Confiteor 149, 153-155, 169 13 : 9 738 14 : 9 720 26 : 14, 19 720 32 : 2 356 38 : 10-20 Ego dixi 149, 153-155, 169

38 : 17 49 : 6 51 : 14 52 : 2 52 : 10 53 : 7 66 : 2 4

720 461, 462 720 461 461, 732 418 725, 746

Jeremiah 16 : 19 18 : 2 3

312-313 462 255

Ezekiel 124-125, 313 1 : 10-11 271 2 : 6 -3 : 12; 4 : 1-6, 9 56 4 : 1 572 10 : 12, 14 271 31 : 3 4 720 37 : 1-14 721 37 : 4 733 Daniel 688, 764, 766 3 : 57-88 Benedicite 149, 153-155, 169 7 : 2 5 436 12 : 1-3 721 Hosea

125

Joel

125

Amos 56, 125-126 1 : 6 -3 : 12; 4 : 1-6 : 9 125 Jonah 2 : 6

125 720

Micah

125

Habakkuk 2 : 4 3 : 2 -19 Domine

125 95, 125 audivi 149, 153-155, 169

Zephaniah

125

Zechariah 5 : 9 -11 9 : 9 10 : 3 11 : 12-13

125 356 333 391, 423 255

Malachi

125

945

index of scriptures Intertestamental Literature Sirach 46 : 5

110, 120

Wisdom 1 : 5 3 : 1-9 4 : 10-14

119-120 743 721 809

Esdras

120-121, 147

Maccabees II 12 : 39-45

121-122 721

Judith

122

Tobit

122

New Testament Gospels

56-57, 284, 325

Matthew 1-27 1 : 1-16 : 18 1 : 1-6 : 2 4 1-5 1-2 1 : 1-17 1 : 1 1 : 16 1 : 18-25 1 : 18 1 : 19 1 : 2 0-4 : 17 1 : 2 0-2 : 16 1 : 2 0 1 : 21, 24 1 : 2 5 2 : 1-12 2 : 1 2 : 2 2 : 4 , 6 2 : 7 2 : 8 2 : 11 2 : 14 2 : 16

57-58, 230-232, 276, 315, 317-318, 322, 325 237 57 57 57 549, 561-562 238-239 244, 397 244 245n55, 257-258 238, 243-244, 417 600-601 275-276 283 601 244 245, 528 55, 481 239 246, 556, 596, 626-627 528 245, 301, 528 245, 318 246-247, 258, 573574 247 248

2 : 18 2 : 19-4 : 17 3 : 2 3 : 3 -6 : 8 3 : 3, 7 3 : 14 4 : 1-11 4 : 3, 10 4 : 13-22 4 : 17 4 : 18 4 : 19 4 : 2 3-25, 5 : 12 5 : 4 5 : 15, 33, 44 6 : 9 -13 6 : 2 8 6 : 3 3 7 7 : 12 7 : 15-21 7 : 2 6-8 : 13 8 : 1-13 8 : 2 -9 : 6 8 : 2 8 : 11 8 : 12 8 : 2 3-37 8 : 2 4 8 : 2 7 8 : 2 8 9 : 6 9 : 10-13 9 : 16 9 : 2 0 10 10 : 16 10 : 2 7-28 10 : 31 11 : 2 9 12 : 10 12 : 2 9 12 : 3 8 12 : 4 2 12 : 4 6, 49-50 13 13 : 4 5-46 13 : 5 5 14 : 6 16 : 6

249 295, 306, 529 410 57 528 418 344 318 599-600 410 318, 528 318 346 374, 700, 855 318 345, 346 318 358-359, 746 57 369 258 57 258 306, 529 251 257, 462 318 258 254, 257, 318 257, 318 58, 318 318 262-263 302 635 57 357-358 412 528 410 635 435 258 370-371, 635 367-368 57 370 604 249 528

946 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 16 : 9 -17 : 17 16 : 9 -17 : 7 16 : 2 4 16 : 2 8 17, 18-28 19 : 16-30 19 : 16-20 19 : 2 2 19 : 2 8 20 : 1-16 20 : 17-19 20 : 2 8 20 : 2 9-34 21 : 1-17 21 : 1-13 21 : 1-11 21 : 1-7 21 : 10-11 21 : 3 3-34 22 : 13 22 : 3 4 23 : 2 5 24 : 3 24 : 3b-35 24 : 12-28 : 3 24 : 14 24 : 3 0 24 : 31 24 : 3 4 24 : 3 6 24 : 51 25 : 1b-46 25 : 31 25 : 32-46 25 : 3 4-35 25 : 3 4 25 : 3 5 25 : 4 0 25 : 41 25 : 4 2-43, 44 25 : 4 2, 44 25 : 4 6 26 : 17-30 26 : 2 6 26 : 31-46 26 : 39-58 26 : 39 26 : 52 26 : 6 3

529 306 356-357 462 57 737-738 345 251 740 345 349 319 349, 366 349-350 350 371 333 370 345 746 301 301-302 474, 711, 783 810 281 461, 463 237, 753, 783 783 462 461, 464 819n61 810 722, 740 753 351 286, 422, 740, 746 739-740 274 746, 810n52 739-740 810n52 722 38, 109, 236-237, 653, 674-676 303, 672, 677 480 306, 529 318 318 252-253

26 : 75 27 27 : 9 27 : 2 9-46 27 : 41 27 : 4 6 27 : 49 27 : 51 27 : 62, 66 28 : 1-15 28 : 6

251 57 255 306, 529 254 530-531 254-255, 285, 530-531 286, 531 442 352-353, 442 419

Mark 1 : 1-3 : 16 1 : 1 1 : 14-21 1 : 4 2 2 : 21 3 : 16-19 5 : 1 6 : 3 9 : 1 12 : 2 5 13 13 : 4 13 : 10 13 : 3 0 13 : 32 14 : 2 2 14 : 6 0 14 : 61 14 : 71 15 : 3 8 16 : 15-16

58, 230-231, 276, 297, 315, 322, 323, 325 237-238 397 599-600 528 302 237, 253 58 604 462 809 688 474, 711 461 462 461, 464 656, 673, 679 252 253 252 254, 286, 531 274

Luke 1-2 1 : 1-51 1 : 1 1 : 2 2 : 7 2 : 8 -20 2 : 11 2 : 12 2 : 21-24 2 : 21-23 2 : 2 3

58, 74, 230, 276, 297, 316, 322 549, 561-562 238 256, 453 397 574 618-619 418n3 276-277 617n69 365-366 617-618

947

index of scriptures 2 : 41-51 3 : 6 3 : 14 4 : 5 -9 : 5 4 4 : 14-15, 16-30 4 : 16-30 5 : 14 5 : 3 6 6 : 2 4 8 : 21 8 : 2 6 9 : 2 7 10 : 3 11 : 2 7-28 12 : 31 13 : 6 -9 16 : 2 2 16 : 2 4-26 18 : 2 5 21 : 7 21 : 2 5 21 : 32 23 : 4 3 24 : 47 John 1-3 1 1 : 1 1 : 2 9-3 : 2 6 2 : 1-11 2 : 17 2 : 18-3 : 31 2 : 2 5 3 : 5 3 : 8 3 : 17 3 : 18 4 : 13 5 : 4 5 : 2 8-29 6 : 19, 24, 30 6 : 31 7 : 2 8-8 : 16 8 : 2 5 11 : 14-44 12 : 17-13 : 6 12 : 4 8 13 : 3 -17

559 732 38 281 599-600 634 251 302 358 368 58 462 357-358 366-369 358-359 360-362 722 847n38 251 474 787 462 722 461 58-59, 276-278, 281, 295, 297, 316, 321, 322, 462 301 282-283 397, 399, 417 275, 283 365 414 529 321 735 321 722 739-740 748 285 734 679-680 679-680, 747 529 140n14 275, 276, 278 529 722 276

13 : 4 -15 13 : 10 13 : 2 5 14 : 1-2 15 : 5 18-19 18 : 10 18 : 37 19 : 2 5 19 : 3 0 19 : 3 4 19 : 37 19 : 5 4 20 : 1-21 : 4 20 : 21 20 : 2 6-31 20 : 3 3 21 : 2 0-21 21 : 2 4-25 27 : 13

350 529 634 363-364, 736-737 361 447 636 401 605 254, 286, 418, 531-532 285, 530-532 391, 403, 542 542-543 529 420 354-355 528 528 527-529 297

Acts 1 : 1 1 : 7 1 : 8 1 : 9 1 : 11 2 : 17 2 : 31 12 : 11-12 12 : 17 13 : 47 15 : 13 21 : 8 26 : 2 3 28 : 2 8

46-47 403 436 461 403 419 463 732 245 604 461 604 604 461 461

Pauline Epistles

283-284

Romans 1 : 1 1 : 17 2 : 4 -6 2 : 14 3 : 4 11 : 12 12 : 1

397 96, 125 363 107 96 739-740 391, 402, 410

I Corinthians 2 : 9

820n64

948 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 3 : 8 3 : 11-15 3 : 13-15 9 : 16 10 : 11 11-13 11 : 2 4-26 13 : 8 13 : 9 13 : 12 15 : 7 15 : 3 5, 44 15 : 5 0 15 : 51

242 730-731 722 462 462 408 304 414 728 106 558n24, 604 722 722, 734 462

II Corinthians 3 : 2 -3

462

Galatians 1 : 5 1 : 18-19 2 : 9, 12

402n5 604 604

Colossians 3 : 5 -24

42-43, 47 43

I Thessalonians 688 4 : 13-15 734 4 : 17 462 5 : 2 , 3 787 II Thessalonians 688 2 : 3 470 Hebrews 1 : 2 1 : 3 9 : 17 10 : 31 11 : 3 0

462 871 45 745 44

Epistles 1 Peter 1 : 1 2 : 9

397 402

2 Peter 3 : 9 3 : 11

363 419

I John 2 : 18 2 : 2 2 4 : 3

462, 470 470 470

II John 1 : 7

470

Apocalypse (Revelation) 18, 46-48, 339, 359, 737, 749 1 : 1-2 : 5 394, 399-415 1 : 1-2 688 1 : 6, 7, 9 391 1 : 13-16 363-364 1 : 13 391 2 : 3 391 2 : 18-4 : 1 382 3 : 2 0 364 4 : 5a 364-365 4 : 6 -7 271 5 : 1-6 : 6 416-426 5 : 1-5 360 5 : 1 389, 392 6 709 6 : 2 , 6 391 6 : 12-13 807 7 : 1 709, 807 7 : 9 -10 363-364 7 : 13 709 7 : 15 359, 748 7 : 16-12 : 6 382 8 : 10-11 390n49 11 : 3 436 12 : 7 709 13 : 13-14 : 1 427-428, 429 436 13 : 17-18 439 13 : 18 381, 386-387, 391 19 : 17-22 : 18 437-439 20 : 1-21 : 4 383 20 : 2 -7 754 20 : 4 -6 700-701, 855-856 21 : 1 700, 855 21 : 2 3 391, 856

­­EARLY AND MEDIEVAL WRITERS AND WRITINGS* Pseudo-Abdias Apostolic History Acts of John Acts of Philip A cts

of th e

A cts

of

511, 703, 772 642

S cil l ita n M a rt yrs 263

T homas

Adomnán Cáin Adomnáin De locis sanctis I, 2 I, 12 Vita Columbae See also Fís Adomnáin

509-510 50, 324 755 50, 73, 86, 325n87 241n48 843 27, 103

Adso of Montier-en-Der De ortu et tempore Antichristi 470-472, 707, 764, 781 A dventur es 51-52

of

Columba’s Clerics 857-858

A ided C honch ubuir par. 5

367

Aileran the Wise of Clonard Interpretatio moralis progenitorum  Christi 58, 73 Kanon Evangeliorum 50, 57, 86 Mystica interpretatio nominum pro  genitorum Christi 50, 58, 86 A ir bertach Mac Coisse of RosAilither 62, 91, 755 See also Saltair na Rann A ir dena (Airdena inna Cóic Lá ndéc ria mBráth) 476-480, 789,

19-53 23-36 24-53 37-45 47-48 49-53

801, 812-821, 825 814-821 814 477, 813 813-814, 818n61 813-814, 820n64 814

A isl inge M eic C on G l inne (The Vision of Mac Conglinne) 156 Alcuin 271, 323 commentaries on the Psalms 137 Aldhelm of Malmesbury 62, 695n29 A ltus prosator stanza 14

388-389 388

Amalarius of Metz Liber officialis 789 Ambrose of Milan 114n37, 268, 613 Commentary on Luke 39, 51 De Cain et Abel 126 VI, 18 (PL 14, 350) 102 De fide 4, 19, 124 668 Hexameron 126 De incarnatione 4, 23 668, 670 671, 682 Ambrosian collects 152 Pseudo-Ambrose

114

*  Boldface indicates significant quotations or the treatment in detail of an author or work.

950 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Ambrosiaster

268

Ambrosius Autpertus 339, 388 A miatinus , C odex

28, 179, 270, 319

A nna l es H ebr a eorum 789, 794 A nna ls

of th e

Four M asters 234, 243, 538

A nna ls of I nisfa l l en fols 53, 57 176 A nna ls

of

Ulster

235, 282, 538-539

Anselm of Canterbury 814 A ntiphona ry of B a ngor 149n37, 150, 174, 871 formula 62 152 formula 64 151 formula 83 150 formula 90 151 Antony of Piacenza 458 A poca lypse

of

P eter 697

A poca lypse of T homas 689, 698, 714, 785, 794, 797-799, 806-807, 826 MS of 785, 798 signs before doomsday 474-477, 708 712, 760, 784-786, 789-790, 799-800, 801, 823-824 Anglo-Saxon translation 698, 709-710, 785

A poca lypse 29

of th e

Virgin 849

(T h e F irst) A pocryph a l A poca ­ lyp s ­ e of J ohn 470, 689-690, 703-706, 779-780 A pophth e gmata Patrum PG 65, 160 670, 672 673 Verba Seniorum PL 73, 979 669, 673 A postl e ’s C r eed

871

Apponius In Canticum Canticorum explanatio 119, 126, 368 Lib. XII 118 CCL19 p lxxvii 361 383-384

Apringius A r abic G ospel 38-39 48-49

of th e

I nfa nc y 485, 506 508 495

A r magh , B ook of (D) abbreviations text type Mt 6 : 3 3 John Pauline Epistles Apocalypse

232, 324, 290 199, 379 275, 282283, 295, 310, 323 359 529-530 511 379-380

A r menia n G ospel 16

I nfa nc y 485 506-507

A scension 11.2-14

of

of th e

Isaia h

613

A ssumptio Mosis

511

Athanasian Creed commentary on

798-799

951

index of writers and writings A uctor I gnotus

217

A ugsberg G ospels fol 157v

310, 314-317, 318-321, 324 310

Augustine 127, 383, 723, 728-729, 854, 860 De civitate Dei 126, 750 XIII.19-20 727n17 XV.7.1 (PL41, 443) 102 XV.10 103 XVI.8 103 XVIII.18 103 XVIII.5 & 6 105 XVIII.23 784 XX.7-16 383 XX.6 751-752 XXI.24.3 (PL 47, 738-39) 847n39 XXII.12-21 726, 752 XXII.13 733n28 De doctrina christiana 2.xi(16) 264, 269 Enchiridion 126, 750 XXIII.84-93 726 XXIII.87 103 LXXXV 733n28 LXXXVII 751 LXXXIX 733n29 CX 738 CXII 847 Enarrationes in Psalmos 195-196, 215 on Ps 4 : 4 147 16 on Ps 73.14 (CSEL 39.1014) 105n25 17 on Ps 77 678 17 on Ps 77.25 (PL 36, 995; CCSL 39, 1080) 109 on Ps 105 : 1 (PL 37.1406) 847 Epistles 37 to Simplicianus 112 159.4 to Evodius 727 de Genesi ad Litteram 126-127 12.35.68 728n17

De Genesi imperfectus liber 126 Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis 58, 737 49.10 727 67 on Jn 14 : 1-3 749 121.4 (PL 35, 1958) 617n72 De sacra uirginitate 3, 3 & 3, 5 367-368 Sermons 127 8 (PL 38, 671-74) Ten Plagues 104 191.2 (PL 38, 1010) 617n72 215.247 613-614 242-243 726 280.5 727 328.6.5 727 (Irish) Pseudo-Augustine (Au­gus­ tinus Hibernicus) 53, 61 Liber de gradibus caeli 351 De mirabilibus sacra Scripturae 50, 52, 59, 73, 86-88 3 (PL 35, 2149-2200 at 2154) 566 Sermons 195 De Annuntiatione Dominica (PL 39, 2107-2110) 455, 551n16, 554, 564 250 (PL 39, 2210 line 7) 744n52 Natali Domini I no 22 (PL 2, 1960 cols909-25) 617n72 Augustine Mac Raighin translation B eath a E oin B ruinne (The Life of John of the Breast) 703, 772-774 2-9 773-774 A ur il ius

humilis árd

247

Ava Das Jüngste Gericht (The Last Judgment) 476, 790

952 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Ballymote, Book of fol 12 538 Basil of Caesarea Preface to the Psalms 144 Beatus of Liébana Commentary on the Apocalypse 384, 387, 388, 449 Bécán Bec mac Dé Poem

772

Bede (Beda Venerabilis) 314, 344 Opera Exegetica 3 Expositio in Lu­cam 17 on 1 : 1 (PL 92, 307CD) 256-257, 453-454 on 5 : 4 (CCSL 120; PL 93, 385CD) 251 on 18 : 2 5 (PL 93, 555C) 328 251 Ecclesiastical History 85, 314 In primam partem Samuehelis Libri IIII 135n5 De locis sanctis 257 book 2 (CSEL 39) 241n48 Explanatio Apocalypsis 379-380, 384, 387, 441, 449 PL 93, 156CD 390n49 Pseudo-Bede Preface to the Psalms Dauid filius Iessae 144-148 De Titulis Psalmorum (In Psalmorum librum exegesis PL 93, 4771098) 133-143, 179- 180 Argumenta 34, 131, 143 on Ps 1 (PL 93, 483B) 139 Explanationes 131, 158, 182 183, 196, 215-



216, 222-223 MSS of 136 PL 93, 483C 139 on Ps 91 (90) PL 93, 970B, C 141-142 on Ps 118 143 Collectanea vel flores 51, 67, 127, 373, 713, 788 I nos 1-304 713, 788 PL 94, 541CD 365 PL 94, 545D 352, 744 II nos 305-379 713, 788 nos 330-337 De septem donis spi­ ritus sanci (PL 94, 553B) 345, 713 nos 356-371 de quindecim signis 474, 476-477, 713, 787-793, 796-797, 807, 809, 813, 823 no 374 De septem peccatis (PL 94, 556A) 102, 713 Homily 100 (PL 94, 501-502) 469-470, 852n49

Benedict of Nursia 695, 832, 844 Regula 39, 838 18 832 B enedictio formula Sacramentary Gelasianum 148 661 Sacramentary of Gellone 1209 662-663 Gregorian Sacramentary 663 Carolingian Pontifical 663-664 Ambrosian Rite 32 664 Pontifical of Egbert 22 664 Bernard of Clairvaux 478 Life of St Malachy 685-686 B eth u Pátr aic

570

B eza e , C odex

274, 295, 529

953

index of writers and writings D as B ibelwer k

see de enigmatibus

Blathmac Poem (to Mary) 4, 287, 471, 474, 538 539, 541, 670, 765 766, 795 797, 823-824 quatrain 1-149 795 quatrain 1 539 quatrain 20-21 542 quatrain 55-57 539, 542 quatrain 58 539, 540 quatrains 150-259 795 quatrain 203 680 quatrain 230-235 795-796 quatrain 236-242 796-797 quatrain 258-259 765-766 B obiensis , C odex (k) 266-267, 268, 274-275, 295, 529 B ook

of

A dam

and

E ve 511

Brollacháin, Máel Ísu Ua Ode to Crinoc 35 Cadmug Gospel of Fulda 273, 296, 323, 327 Caesarius of Arles 695, 728 730, 744n52, 845 Expositio in Apocalypsim 1-19 383, 392, 394, 405n10, 416, 428 on 1 : 4 400 on 1 : 14-1 : 7 409nn13 411n23 on 5 : 3 -6 : 5 420n3-424n20 on 6 : 2 391 on 13 : 18 431nn5-6, 433n1 on 21 : 12 437, 439 on 21 : 15 438 on 21 : 2 3 438

Sermons 344, 446 Serm 158 351 Serm. 167; 179; 206 729-730 Rule 832 C aimin P sa lter description abbreviations sources headings glosses fol 2a

30, 40n21, 91, 133, 182-198 183, 217, 218219 188, 220 217, 221-229, 517 223-224 62, 188, 190191, 221-225, 224-228 183-184, 186-187, 218

C á in D omnaig

852, 860

C a mbr ai H omily

681

Canterbury Psalter 169-170 Cassian, John De institutis coenobiorum 126, 837n15 II & III 831 VII.15 (CSEL 17, p138-39) 108 Conlationes 126 V.16 (CSEL 13, p140-143) 108 V.17-27 (CSEL 13, p143-51) 108 Cassiodorus Commentary on the Psalms 183, 191, 195 197, 221-222 Introduction 113-114, 126, 133, 180, Divisio 139, 158, 160 161, 172 175 Ps 91/90 (CCSL 98) 141, 142 CCSL 97, 27.1-6, 9-10, 13-16 140nn13-14 on Ps 40 247, 258

954 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Commentary on the Apocalypse (PL 70, 1319-418) 385, 737 C atech esis C eltica (MS Vat Reg lat 49) 16, 297, 335 336, 735-749, 752, 801-804, 816n60 Irish affiliations 13, 127, 330 334, 343, 823 abreviations 336-337 on Ps 1 177-178 on Apoc 343, 359, 389 fols 1-16, 17rb9-18va1 on Mt 343-350 fol 9v 335 fol 11v 348 fol 12ra28-40 347 fol 12rb 331, 348 fol 12rb31-12va32 347 fol 12vab 348 fol 13r 335 fol 13ra 348 fol 13ra30-13rb8, 25-35 347 fol 14rb on Mt 21 : 1-7; fol 17v 333 fols 16va12-17rb8 on Jn 13 : 4 -15 350 fol 16v 335, 350 fol 17v De cena Domini 333, 672, 675 677, 683 fol 18va1-10 350-351 fols 18va11-20ra16 on Gen 1 : 1-26 351, 742-744 fol 19r on Gen 1 : 1 332, 333 fols 19v-20r 742-744 fol 20r 331-332, 742 fol 20ra17-22vb40 351-353 fol 20va18-20rb20 443-445 fol 20va 5 744, fol 23vb 332, 353-354 fol 24ra27-30va 366-371 fol 30va2-31v on the Nativity 277, 371, 745 fol 32r 333, 354 fol 32v 332-333

lines 10-12 333 fol 32va1-35vb13 on Jn 20 : 2 6-31 354-355 fol 35vb14-39rb22 356-358 fol 38va 333, 355 fol 39rb22-47vb 358-366 fol 39rb-40va 746-747 fol 39vb16-22, 26 747 fol 39vb33-40ra28, rb27, va 747-748 fol 40ra 359 fol 40vab 416 fol 43v-45 736-737, 748-749 fol 48-53rb 371-374 fol 48-49v 277, 371, 745 fols 49vb-50ra 741-742, fol 49vb 736, 745 fols 50ra27-51ra12 736, 745 fols 50-51 737-738, 745 fol 50v 745-746 fol 52v 802-804 fol 53b 334 C atech esis C r acoviensis 16-17, 338 339, 678 679, 740 nos. 23-24 357-358 Liber XIII 373 C atech esis Veronensis 16, 371 Veronensis , C odex (b) 267n11, 281 282, 301 C h a nson

de geste

540

C h a r l emagne , P sa lter of 85, 223 T h e C hil dhood (B oyhood) D eeds of Jesus (Infancy Narrative of Thomas) 455, 459 460, 488-489, 559, 583, 631 633 sources & transmission 20, 483, 563, 597, 869, 871 1-10 489-491, 490,

955

index of writers and writings 11-21 11 13 16 17 20, 21, 22-39 22 23 24, 25 26 27-28 29-33 29 33 34-39 34 39 40-44 45-48 47 See also G ospel

632-633 491-494 632 492, 632-633 492 493, 633 493 494-496 496, 498 497 498 499 500 501 498 494 495, 503-504 498, 633 494 505-506 507-508 632

C ol l ectio C a nonum H iber nensis 85, 325, 344, 875-876 XIII, 1.2.3.4.5.6 372, 374 Book 38 85 PL 73, 978-9 & 983 673n67 Columba of Iona (Colum Cille) 27, 50, 279, 755 Cathach of St Columba 13, 27, 29-30, 179, 211-212, 279, 289, 868 869 critical signs 29-30, 211 212, 229, 869 Psalm Headings 13, 134, 137, 211 Poem on the end of the World 771-772 266, 274-275, 305, 324, 693, 832-833, 836

Columbanus Regula Monachorum 7 Regula Coenobialis 9

832

Chromatius Tractatus in Matthaeum 39

Comianus

12, 37, 252, 656, 679

Pseudo-Clement Recognitiones (PG 1207-1454) 126, 363 I, 27-28 (PG 1, 1222A-C) 107n28 I, 49 & 69 (PG I 1235 & 1244) 373 II, 31 369 III, 27 (PG 1, 1295) 107

Cummeanus

53, 58, 87

of

T homas

Christianus Druthmar of Sta­v e­ lot (Christian of Stablo) 55, 481 Expositio in Mattaeum (PL 106, 1475) 672

C o ga dh Gá edh el r e G a l l aibh (Wa r of th e G a el with th e for eigner) 156, 197 Colcu Ua Duinechda Scúap Chrábaid (Broom of Devotion) 795

832

Cummain 87 letter to Segene and Beccán 87 T h e C onception a nd tics of A ntichr ist ¶1-15 ¶16-26 ¶16, 17-27

C h a r acte ­r i ­s ­ 470-472, 764-765, 770 770 471, 765 770-771

Conrad of Querfurt 850-851 Cormac mac Cuileannáin Sanas Cormaic 66

956 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church C or mac Psalter Antiphons Canticles (fols 56v, 176) Psalm Prayer 3 fol 1v prayer Ps 67 : 16-21 Ps 144 Ps 151 fol 59r colophon

132, 165-176, 166-167 174-175 59, 117, 175v, 153-155, 169, 174 150, 152-153, 174 168 173-174 174 170, 176 168

C oupa r A ngus P sa lter 62, 165-166, 169 Canticles 153-155 Psalm Prayers 1  &  2 150-151 Psalm Prayer 3 151-152, 153, 174 Psalm Prayer 4 152 Cyprian

264, 267, 384

Cyril of Alexandria 487 Cyril of Jerusalem Catachesis 4 : 3 6 & 6 : 31 487 Dante Divine Comedy

468, 523n21, 695

D ebate (D ia lo gue) th e S oul D escensus

B ody a nd 702-703, 801

of th e

a d inferos

D ies D omenica

39 798

Divine Office 829-836 Liturgy of the Hours 830-831, 836-838 office of Lauds 149 D oubl e P sa lter

of

S t.-O uen 62, 80, 90-91,

132-133, 142-143, 176-182, 183, 198 heret & obelus signs 178, 188-190, 219 146 : 5; 147 : 1 178 commentary 127, 214-217, 873 glosses 15, 33-35, 115, 180-182, 195 1 : 1-16 : 11a 133, 165, 181 182 1 177-179 16 : 11b-150 180 118 142, 180, 183, 221-225 118 : 62, 91 181 Prayer Psalm 3 153, 174 Ps 151 170 Durham Gospels text illuminations

297-299, 303, 305, 309, 323 534

D ur row, B ook

272-273, 278, 290, 294, 299-300, 309

of

E chter nach ma nuscr ipts 308-321 Echternach Gospels 280, 282, 296, 311-312, 314 317, 324, 326 Matthew 317-318, 530 Echternach Prophets 310, 312-314 E clo ga tr actatorum in P sa lter ium 53, 116, 163 on Ps 1 140 E dinburgh P sa lter

220, 229-230

D e enigmatibus MS & transmission

18, 55-56, 6566, 93-130 93-95, 96, 377, 389-390, 731-732

index of writers and writings sources 126-128 contents 95-96 map 110, 130 Pentateuch 14, 100-108, 162 on Gen 66-67, 100 104, 351 Psalms 113-116, 132, 161-165, 869, 873 preface 163-164 paragraphs II 147 Psalm 1 132, 138 paragraph XXXIII 140 Ps 151 164 Esdras paragraph XIX-XX 147 Mt 587 2 : 16 248-249 26 : 17-30 675-678, 677, 678 on Mark 15-16 732-735 on Lk 277 2 : 2 3 617 on the Apocalypse 18, 162, 377, 389-390, 392-393, 449-450, 869 preface 394, 395 397 glosses on Apoc 1 : 1-2 : 5 398-415 glosses on Apoc 5 : 1-5 360, 416, 417-420 glosses on Apoc 6 : 1-6 : 6 422-426 glosses on Apoc 8 : 10-11 390n49 glosses on Apoc 13 : 13-14 : 1 427-428, 429-436 glosses on Apoc 19 : 17-22 : 18 437-439 E noch , B ook 106.1-18

of



Pseudo-Ephrem PLS 4, 608

691-693 691-692 104, 846n37 764, 766

E pistl e 4

of th e

A postl es 494, 500

E pistl e

to th e

L aodica ea ns 511

957

Eriugena, John Scottus 60-61, 89-90, 814 Eucherius of Lyons Formula spiritalis intellegentiae 39 CSEL 31 p28, p53 106 Instructionum lib 126 I Gen CSEL 31 p68 102 I Gen CSEL 31 p76-77 107 I Ex xxxi, xxxii, xxxiii 105 I Chron (CSEL 31, 87-88) 113 I Ps (CCSL 31) 115 I Eccl CSEL 31 p104-105) 117 II (CSEL 31 p147) 117 Eusebius of Caesarea Historia Ecclesiastica 1 : 7 Juluis Africanus Letter 239 1.7.14 607 1 : 13 Letter of Abgar 587, 633-634 2.23 604-605 2.23.12-18 604 2.23.18 605 3.11 605 3.19.1 606 3.20.1 606, 607 3.20.2 606 3.20.3 606 3.32.3 605 3.32.5-6 606 3.32.7-8 605 4.22.2; 4b-6 605 4.22.8 604 4.22.42 605 Canon Tables 271, 300, 304

958 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church E x positio Missae primum in PL 138, 1180-81 669

ordine

Faddan More Psalter 21, 28 Fís A damnáin (Vision of A domnáin) 460, 481-482, 687, 718, 750, 752, 754-758, 761-762 respite for damned 852, 860 on Mary’s death 466, 870 and Visio Pauli 468, 695, 697, 845 geography of afterworld 702, 857 3-14 756 6-8 758 6, 8, 12, 13 757 41 755 Franciscus (Francis) de Mayronis (Marione) 478, 822, 825 Frigulus Commentary on Matthew 247 preface 40, 242, 260 261 Gelasius I Gelasian Decree (Decretum Gelasianum) 456, 487, 596, 784 Gelasian Sacramentaries 661-663 Codex Vaticanus fol 23r-v formula 148 661-662 Geoffrey of Paris Bible of the Seven Ages of the World 637-638 D e G estis E piscoporum A utissiod o ­ r ensium

XXIX; PL 138, 247B 337n28 Gilbert of Limerick Liber de statu ecclesiae (PL 159, 995-6) 148

G losa P sa l morum niorum

ex tr a ditione se ­-

G lossa O r dina r ia

44-45, 214

91, 284, 673

G lossa in P sa l mos (Vat. Pal. Lat. 68) 5, 11, 56, 216 217, 221-225, 516-518, 873 heret signs 188-189, 219 commentary 34, 133, 136 136, 159, 191 193, 213-214, 869 Ps 103 : 17 516-517, 523n21 Ps 118 178 Ps 118 : 62 181 Ps 118 : 91 181, 619n73 Ps 118 : 161-167 85 Ps 146, 147 178 Ps 148 : 7 565-567 Gospel of the Ebionites 596 G ospel

of th e

H ebr e ws 284, 355, 511, 551, 573, 589, 596, 626, 636

E vangelium secundum E breos (iuxta H ebr eos) 247, 256-257, 453 G ospel of

th e

Nazor ea ns 551, 555, 556558,

Naassenes G ospel according to Tho­ mas 505 G ospel

of

r a ea ns)

G ospel

of



th e

Naza r enes (Na ­z a 284, 596-597

Nic OD emus 537-538, 539, 542, 562, 587-588, 636-637

index of writers and writings G ospel of P seud o -M atth e w 484-485, 488-489, 559, 567-572, 587, 842 sources & transmission 455-456, 551, 553-554, 562-563, 564, 567-569, 869-870 contents 553 1, 1-13, 1 561, 572 1.1-12.3 551 1.1, 2; 2.1 571 7.2 566 8.5 567 12 : 1-3 575-576 13 : 1 601 18-25 587 18-21 457, 567, 629 18.1 565-567, 594 20.1-21.1 629 22-24 631 24.1 631 25-42 572, 597 26 490-491, 506 28 490-491 31, 1 497-498 31, 2 497, 499-501, 504 31, 3 501-503 30, 2, 4 504 32 506 37 508 G ospel

of

P eter

455-456, 555, 558, 608

G ospel of T homas (Gnostic, from Nag Hammadi) 486, 585 Naassenes G ospel according to Tho­ mas 505 See also G ospel of th e H ebr e ws G ospel

of

T homas (infancy gospel) 458-459, 505, 508-511, 551, 555, 558-

959

559, 585 MSS of 484-486 6.2b-d 633 Georgian 486 Greek recension A 484 6, 2 497 6, 4 500 7, 1-2 501 Greek recension B 484 6, 1 497 Ethiopic 586 Irish see Childhood Deeds of Jesus Latin 485 6, 1-6 497 6, 1 497, 501 6, 2 502, 504 6, 3 504 6, 6 498-500 6, 7 501 6, 8-11 501 Slavonic 486, 502 Syriac 484-485, 486, 501-502 11 506 15, 1 497 30, 2 504 30, 4 504 31 501 Gregory the Great 322, 723, 730 731, 756 Expositio Veteris et Novi Testamenti I Genesios (PL 79, 685) 102 I, 32-33 (PL 79, 696-97) 102 II Exodum (PL 79, 723ff) 105 Deut (PL 79, 773-784) 108 Josh (PL 79, 786) 110 Jud (PL 79, 789) 111 XI Ps (PL 79, 819-896) 116 Homilies on Ezekiel 124-126, 358 Moralia in Iob 86, 126, 356, 370, 740, 750 (PL 75, 515-76, 782; CCSL 143) 119 4, 27, 49 & 52 357

960 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 7, 28, 34 357 12, 21, 26 (CCSL 143A, 644f) 731 14, 56, 72-74 on 19 : 2 6 724, 730, 751 752 14, 70 734n31 26, 27, 50-51 (PL 75, 378-379) on 36 : 6 739-741 Homilies on the Gospels 39, 344-345 I, 14, 1 (PL 76, 1127G) 670, 681, II, 3, 3-4 361 2, 40, 8 (PL 76, 1308D-1309B) 730-731 XXVI.1 (PL 76, 1197CD) 617 Dialogi 4.26.1-2 730 4, 41, 3-4 731 4, 57 731 Gregorian Sacramentary 663 Pseudo-Gregory Liber de gradibus caeli 351 Gregory of Nyssa De hominis opificio 90 Gregory of Tours 467 G w ynn gwa r a ndaw (A rw yddion e yn D ydd B r awd) 476, 790, 801 Haimo of Auxerre 339 Homiliae de tempore (PL 118, 363C) 672 Heiric of Auxerre Miracula S. Germani 338

Hincmar of Reims De cauendis uitiis et uirtutibus exercendis (PL 125, 914D) 671-672, 681 Hippolytus Refutation of All Heresies 5.2 487 5.2.7 505 On Antichrist 764 Commentary on Daniel 764 H istor ia

E noch

de

H istor ica

E l ia 858

in vestigation e va ngel ium

L uca m

secundum

H omily

et

635

F east of th e A s ­ 570-572, 583, 594, 842 on Annunciation 571 for th e

sumption



H omily I nquir endum

est

551, 561-562

Homily Postulatis (Feast of St Anne) 551 Honorius Augustodunensis Elucidarium 477, 479, 813 814 III.4 (PL172, 1159D-1160A) 818n61 III.12 (PL 172, 1166C) 817n60 III.17 (PL 172, 1069D) 820nn64-65 I nter pr etatio P sa lter ii a rtis til ena e 217 Irenaeus Adversus Haereses 1.20.1

ca n ­

271-272, 427

Pseudo Hilary Expositio in VII Epistolas canonicas 59, 114n37

I r ish G ospel H istory 634-635

Hildegard of Bingen Scivias 759

Isidore of Seville

494, 500

87-88, 257, 348

index of writers and writings Chronicon 126 17-22 (PL 83, 1026-28) 111 47 (PL 83, 1055) 122 Chronica Maior MGH AA II 112 Differentiarum lib.I (PL 83, 45) 99 De ecclesiasticis officiis 126 I.12.2 (PL 82, 747) 122 I.12.3 (PL 82, 747) 121 I.12.8-9 (PL 83, 748-49) 98, 120 I.12.12 98 Etymologiae 126 I.iii.9 405n6 I.xxi.22 436n5 II.24.4, 5-6, 7 (PL 83, 141B, C, D) 117 III.2 (PL 83, 155) 117 3, 10 (PL 82, 161) 110 V.3 (PL 82, 199) 99 VI.1-4 98 VI.1.1-3 99 VI.1.45-46 99 VI.1.28 (PL 82, 233) 121 VI.1.29 (PL 82, 233) 122 VI.1.33 (PL 82, 233) 121 VI.2.30, 31-32 (PL 82, 233f) 120 VI.2.51-52 98 6, 9, 15 147 VI.18 (PL 82, 231D-232B) 116 9, 3 (PL 82, 311-348) 112 11.a.39 194n116 15, 15, 1-7 (PL 82, 555-56) 110 XVI.xxvi.6 425n4 De ortu et obitu partum 126 (PL 83, 129-147) 123 (PL 83, 136) 119 Ch 25, 44 (PL 83, 137) 100

961

Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum 105, 126 Ex (PL 83, 287ff) 105 Ex (PL 83, 313-318) 106 Lev 108 Num (PL 83, 339-360) 108 Deut (PL 83, 365-67) 108 Deut 16 (PL 83, 366-67) 108 Jos VI, 1-2 (PL 83, 373) 109 (PL 83, 375) 110 XIV (PL 83, 377) 110 Jud VI (PL 83, 386-88) 111 Kings (PL 83, 407-410) 112 Prov (PL 83, 164) 116 De rerum natura 126 Synonima 2, 24-25 (PL 83, 851AB) 362, 370 Pseudo-Isidore 87 Liber de Numeris 51, 67, 127, 766-768 III, 11 & 18 on Four Groups 373, 738 on Antichrist 767-768 VII, 1 on Gifts 345 VII, 18 on Seven Joys 352, 744 VIII, 18 373 44 on Antichrist 766-767 Liber de ordine creaturarum 88 Liber de ortu et obitu partum 25, 44 (PL 83, 137) 100 PL 83, 1775-94 51 de Questionibus adversus Iudeos 242n49 Comemoratorius de Apocalypsi 59, 385-286 Jerome

724-726, 789, 831

962 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Homilia in Johannem 1.1 614 Interpretation of Hebrew Names 39, 239, 413n26 De viris illlustribus 2.12 558n24 Commentaries 124-126 Liber quaestionum hebraicarum in Genesim 102, 104, 126 Tractatus in Psalmos 126 on 103 : 17 513 Commentary on Ecclesiastes (CCSL 72 p249-250) 117, 411n18 Prologus in libris Salomonis paragraph 2 120 In Esaiam 16 : 1 (CCSL 63, 179) 111 on 66.24 725 epitome by Josephus Scottus 56, 124 commentary on Daniel 124 Antichrist in Daniel 764 On Amos 126 on Matthew 39, 676, 740 CCSL 77 252 on Mt 27 : 9 255 on Mk on 14 : 61 253 Commentarii in epistulam ad Galatas lib I on Gal 1 : 5 (PL26, 317B) 402n5 Epistles to Damasus Novum Opus 238, 257, 264, 269 53.9 (CSEL 54, 463, 9) 394, 396 72.2 to Vitalis 725-726 73 126 73.6 104 78 Ad Fabiolam 108 79.43 110 98 126 to Pammachius 724-725 108 to Eustochium 23-26 725

Translations of Origen 617n70 of Vitorinus’ commentary on Apo­calypse 381 Hebraicum Psalms 28-29, 115, 144 MSS of 131-132 Vulgate 39, 264, 266, 278-279, 311 Isaiah, Kings 149 Psalms (Gallicanum) 27-28, 131, 144 Ecclesiastes 117 Gospels 270-271, 290 Pseudo-Jerome 355 Preface to the Psalms Dauid filius Iessae 144-148 Exposito IV Evangeliorum 40, 325 preface (PL 30, 531-533) 242 on Mark 50, 58, 231, 252-255, 869 on Mark 14 : 2 2 673, 679 PL 30, 589-644 325 on 3 : 16-19 253 on Jn 6 : 19, 30 679-680 Comemoratorius de Apocalypsi 59, 385-286 Epistles 47.2-3 (PL 30, 293-96) 144 de monogramma Christi 386-387, 428, 433n1, 439, 441 See also M a rt yrolo gium H ierono n ­ y­ mia num

John Chrysostom 694 Catechesis 3, 13-19 255n89 homily PG 59, 553-54 542-543 Josephus Jewish Antiquities 20.9.1

604

index of writers and writings Josephus Scottus Epitome commentarii Hieronymi in Isaiam 56, 124 J ubil ees , B ook of 693-694 13, 10-21; 15, 20-49, 22 693 J ud gement, P oem

D ay of 460, 480

on th e

Julian of Eclanum 31-32, Commentary on Job (CCSL 78, 105) 372 Translation of Theodore’s commentary on Psalms 63, 213, 869, 873 on Ps 2 & 8 871 See also Theodore of Mopsuestia Epitome of Translation of Theodore on Ps 115-116, 126 127, 165, 191, 195, 221-222, 516-517, 873 on Ps 17-end 132, 133, 180 181, 215 on Ps 68 : 4 193 on Ps 84 : 4 159 on Ps 103 : 2 6 372 Junilius Africanus De partibus divinae legis (PL 68, 18C) 99, 117, 126 Letter to Aristides 239, 607 K el ls , B ook of (Q) Beast Canon Tables fol 291v Matthew

183, 297-305, 309, 319, 323, 272-273, 281 300, 304 304 530

L ambeth C ommentary 88, 231-232 Lathcen (Ladchen) Ecloga Moralium Gregorii in Iob (CCSL 145, 3) 50, 52-53, 56, 86, 119 L atin Infancy G ospels 455, 457, 554-

the I Compilation the J Compilation contents 1-21 55 60; 62.2 72 73-74 73.1-73.4 81 87-95 89.1 91.1 93.1-2 94

963 555, 594-596, 869-871 455-456, 554, 563-564, 573574 455-456, 551, 554-556, 564, 600 555-556 564 577-578 602 619 581-582, 595, 608-612 610-612 622 626 246-247 246 624-625 626

L eabh a r B r eac 83-84, 330, 344, 349, 373, 511, 554, 670 contents 560, 573, 597 598 p66b1-68b49 (homily on Mt 7 : 12) 369 p73b5-15 Homily on St Michael 332, 705, 769-770 p147b First Preaching of Jesus 634-635 p159b30 – end (on Longinus) 538 p169a (Christ’s death & resurrection) 332, 354 p199a (homily on Epiphany) 352, 558n23, 744 p222b-223a (Judas) 638-639 on Lord’s Prayer 346 homily In cena Domini on Mt 26 : 17-29 653-655, 657, 675-676, 681, 683-686 34-35, 38, 39-40 682

964 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Homily on the Gospel 83-84 Instruction on the Sacraments 681-683, 868n3 on Antichrist 707 infancy narrative 239, 246-248, 454-456, 550 551, 560-561, 567, 583, 594 595, 600 ¶126-129, 133-136 587 ¶59b 601-602 ¶62.1-5; 64.1-2 602 ¶66.3; 67.70; 72.1-2 620 ¶73.1-3 615, 621 ¶75.3-6 621 ¶81.1-4 621-623 ¶84.1-2 623 ¶84.3-85.1a 623-624 ¶87; 89.1 574, 627-628 ¶93.1-2 625-626 ¶87-95 626-628 ¶121-132 628-630 ¶121 628, 629 ¶122 630, ¶123 628, 630 ¶124 628 ¶126, 127, 128-129 629, 630-631 ¶131-132 629 ¶133-138 631 See also Fís Adomnáin L eabh a r G abhá l a É ir ea nn 102 L eabh a r Uí M á ine 65 L eb or na h Uidr e (Book of the Dun Cow) 187 Scéla na hEsérge (Tidings of the Re­surrection) 34a24-37b20 749-752 8 815n59 16 751 19-20 751 33 751-752 Scéla laí brátha (Tidings of Doomsday) 373, 460, 480,

contents 5-12 15-18 19 See also Fís Adomnáin rows

750, 752-754 753 810n52 816n60 754 and Two Sor­

Pseudo-Leontios of Byzantium 487 L etter

of

C hr ist

L etter

of

L entulus 453, 587, 633

to

A b ga r 511, 587, 598, 633-634

L iber F lavus F ergusoriorum (LFF) 245, 454, 467n32, 511, 559, 566, 598-600, 779 sources, transmission & influence 456, 476-477, 551, 562, 583, 595 Infancy narrative 46.1-2 598 57 574-576 60 600-601 62.2-3 602-603 62.4 602, 603 62.5 601-602 70.2-4; 71 609 72.1-2 619 73-74 581-582 73.2-3 614 73.1-74.4 609, 615-616 Udhacht Mhuire (q.v.) 465, 591 Visio Pauli (q.v.) 696 XV Signs (q.v.) 821-823 Fís Adomnáin (q.v.) 754 Beatha Eoin Bruinne (Life of John) 703, 772-774 2-9 773-774 L iber H ymnorum

153-155, 156, 187

index of writers and writings L iber de de M a r ia

natiuitate sa luator is et

(LNS) 456-457, 596

uel obstetr ice

Liber questionum in euangeliis (LQE) 80, 230-231, 255, 284, 330, 335 on Mt 1 : 18-2 : 16 245, 247-248 on Mt 20 : 2 9-34 366 on Mt 21 : 1-11 Palm Sun 371 on Mt 26 : 17-30 236-237, 675-677 question 4 683 question 5 677 on Mt 27 : 9 255 on Luk 2 : 1-20 nativity 371 on Jn 20 : 2 6-31 354 L iber R e quiei

465

L ichfield G ospels (B ook of St Chad) 272, 319, 323 Matthew 530 L ife

of

F inia n

of

C lona r d 273

L indisfa r ne G ospels 308-309, 319 L ismor e , B ook of Sgél Ainnte Crisd 1-6 Tenga Bithnua (q.v)

471-474, 473, 778-779, 781 705, 707-708, 775-777 775-776 804, 823

Lucifer of Cagliari 268 Pseudo-Macarius Homily 4.12

671

M ac D ur na n G ospels 272-273, 282, 295, 296, 311 abbreviations 199 Máel-Brigte Gospels (BL Harley 1802) 23, 39-41, 198[date/Mt],

965

230-259, 284, 327, description 232-235, 237-239 text type 254-255, 294, 311 glosses 61, 235, 244 252, 676 colophons (fols 127v, 156v) 233 fols 1r-3r Jerome 238 fols 3r-3v Monarchian prologue to Mt 238, 257 fols 3v-4v Mt 1 : 1-17 238-239 fols 4, 5 Jerome 239 fol 5v poem on Magi 239, 240 fol 6r-8v Monarchian prologues to Mk, Lk & Jn 240-242, 257 fol 8v glosses 240-241, 257 fols 9r-57r 236n40 fol 9ra-b preface to Mt 260-261 fol 9v poem on apostles 242-243 fol 10r-13v Mt infancy narrative 244-249 fol 10r-11v glosses 245-249 fol 10r, v 244-245, 257 fol 10r on Mt 1 : 18 238, 243, 244 fol 10r on Mt 1 : 21 244 fol 10r on Mt 2 : 11 40, 573-574 fol 10v on Mt 2 : 1 239-240, 481-482 fol 11v gloss on Mt 2 : 14, 16 247-249 fol 11r on Mt 2 : 7-8, 11 245-246, 258 fol 17r on Mt 7 : 3 -10 237 fol 22r on Lk 250 fol 26 on Mt 10 : 2 -4 237, 243 fol 34 gloss on Mt 14 : 6 249-250 fols 47v-55r 236n40 fol 49 on Mt 24 : 3 0 237 fols 53v20-55r64 on Mt 26 : 17-30 236, 675-676, 683, 685

966 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church fol fol fol fol fol fol

54rv on the Eucharist 237 56v on Mt 26 : 6 3 252 57r on Mt 27 : 2 237 61r-64r Mk 1 : 1-3 : 19 237 61r, v 253 87r-88v on Lk 238

Maél Ísu ua Brolcháin Poem on St Michael 768 M a ese yck G ospels

310-311, 316-317, 319321

Marianus Scottus (Muiredach Macc Robartaig) 50, 61 M a rt yrolo gium H ieronon ymia num XV 839 M a rt yrolo gy Aug 15

of

G or ma n 841-842

M a rt yrolo gy of Ó engus see under Óengus of Tallaght M a rt yrolo gy Jan 18 Aug 14-16

of

Ta l l aght 840-842 840 841-842

Pseudo-Melitus of Sardis Transistus Mariae 467, See also T r a nsistus M a r ia e Acts of John 511, 703, 772 Acts of Philip 642 M idr ash R abba h Genesis 19 : 4 Leviticus 22 : 10 Ecclesiastes 1.8.3

520 520 608

M issa l e F r a ncorum Benedictio fols 33v-36v 660-661 M issa l e G a l l ica num formula 331

vetus

658

M issa l e G othicum formula 57 formula 154

658-659, 666 659 659

Monarchian Prologues 257 to Mt 238 Moza r abic S acr a menta ry 665-667, 771, 673 Mulling G ospel B ook 273, 275, 294 D e Nativitate M ariae 551, 554-555, 563-564, 587 Navigatio B r enda ni 523n21, 829 864 1 701-702, 856-857, 861 6.50-51 861 11 833, 834 835, 836, 861 12 835-836, 838, 861 15 862 17 833-834, 836, 862 863 25 843-844, 853-854 27, 16-17 863 28, 21-22 863 42 853 Italian & German translations 858 Nemed Irish Law tracts 45, 875 Bretha Nemed Toísech 875-876 Nicephorus of Constantinople Stichometry 487 O bse quies

of th e

H oly Virgin 464-465, 510, 591-593

Ó Dálaigh, Dónnchadh Mór Garbh éirghidh iodhna an bhrátha 477, 808-812,

967

index of writers and writings quatrain 22-38

822, 825 810-812

O des

613

of

S olomon

Orosius Historiae adversus paganos i.1 (CSEL 5 p6) 112 vi.20 371

Óengus of Tallaght Félire (Martyrology of Oengus) 114n37, 768, 839-843 Epil. Lines 137-138 114n37 Jan 18, Aug 15 840, 843 Aug 16 841-842

Paschasius Radbertus 55, 61, 481 De corpore et sanguine Domini (PL 120, 1319) 671-672, 673n67

O l d I r ish H omily

287

O l d I r ish

45

Passion of L onginus (Irish) 525, 536 538, 539, 542 Passio L ongini (Latin) 536-537

text on oaths

O l d -I r ish T r eatise Preface 360-368 (Ps 1) 360, 365 O pus

P sa lter 63-65, 91, 127, 138, 212, 229 62, 113-115 134, 177 138-139

on th e

imper fectum in

O r dines R oma ni



M atta eum 258, 627 346

Origen 243-244, 552, 723 724 Homily on Genesis 11, 1 572 Hom in Ezk 3 724 Homily on Ezekiel 4, 1 572 Homily in Luke 1 487 Hom. Luc. XIV on Lk 2 : 21-24 617 Homilies on the Apocalypse 381, 386 de principiis 723 Pseudo-Origen 243-244, 259 Homilies on Matthew 40, 257-258 1 on Mt 1 : 18-23 (PL 95.1162) 245n55

Passion

of

A ndr e w

Passion

of

P eter

Passion

of

P hil ip

a nd

511

Paul 510 804

Paterius 102, 107, 116 Liber testimoniorum veteris testamenti XI in Ps (PL 79.819-896) 126 See also Gregory Expositio St Patrick 271, 274-275 Confessio 460-464 11 463 14 464 34 463 38 & 39 462 40 & 58 463 Vision of St Patrick’s Purgatory 523n21, 695, 845 Pauca

de l ibr is

C athol icorum

scr ip ­-

tor ium in eua ngel ia excer pta





40, 242, 260n94

Paul the Deacon Homilary

258

Pelagius

31, 64, 869

968 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Commentary on the Pauline Epistles 41, 43-44, 51, 511, 589 Verba Seniorum (translation of A po ­phth e gmata Patrum ) 668, 671 PL 73, 979 669-670, 672-673 Pelbartus Ladislaus of Temesvár 478 Sermo III & IV 478, 822 Sermo IV no. Z 825 P enbrok e H omil ies 335-336, 346 homily 26 on Mt 21 : 1-13 349-350 homily 27 on Mt 21 : 13-17 349 Peter (Petrus) Comestor 240n46, 482, 822 Historia scholastic :  Historia evange­ lica 141 (PL 198, 1611) 474, 476, 787, 790-793 Peter Damian 474, 476, 807 De Novissimis et Antichristo IV (PL 145, 840) 787, 790, 813 letter 72 to Nicholas II 19-20 (PL 145) 849-850 Peter the Lombard Maior Glossatura 62, 91, 235 Libri Quatuor Sententiarum (Sentences) 787 Philip the Presbyter Commentarium in librum Iob 388 P h ysilo gus

523n21

Pliny Natural History 8.7.7 331 Pomerius, Julianus 728-730 de vita contemplative I.1-7 728

I.2 (PL 59, 420A) 729 I.4.2 (PL 59, 422AB) 729 P r ebia r ium

de multorum ex empl a ­

r ibus

22 (CCSL 108B)

356

Primasius of Hadrumetum 384 Commentary on the Apocalypse (PL 68, 793-936) 384, 393, 416 sources & influence 383, 386, 390n49, 392 394, 428 parallel with Ps-Jerome De monogramma Christi 434n1 PL 68, 796A 396 on 1 : 1 (PL 68, 796BC) 398 on 6 : 2 423n15 on 6 : 6 425nn22&5 on 7 : 5 (PL 68, 833D, 834) 359 on 13 : 17-18 (PL 68, 885C) 436nn3-4 PL 68, 996A 396 Prosper of Aquitaine 180 Exposito Psalmorum 215, 195-196 P rote va ngel ium MS on Mary 1-8 12.2 16.1-2 16.2 18, 1-2

of

Ja mes 19, 454-456, 496, 552553, 564-565, 574-583, 586-587, 593 550, 559, 574, 593, 561-562 245, 612-613 551, 561 598 574-575 577-580 620

Prudentius Cathemerinon 5, 125-28 (CSEL 61, 1926) 848

969

index of writers and writings Q uestions

of

E zr a

690

R abbul a G ospels illustrations

286 532, fig2

Reference Bible see

de enigmatibus

R e gul a M agistr i (R ul e of th e M as ­ter) 695, 832, 838, 844 R e vel ation of C hronicl e)

th e

R iagail E chtguis R icema rch , P sa lter

M agi (Z uqnin 457, 626-627 685-686 of

187, 200n3

Rufinus translations of Origen :  see Origen of Basil 144 of Eusebius 239, 633-634 of Clementine Recognitions see Pseu­do-Clement R ush worth (M ac R e gol) G ospels 283, 295, 324 Mt 18 : 10 413n25 John 529-530 S a ltair na R a nn 91, 754-756, 804, 824 sources 511, 710, 800 801 Cantos 151-162 800 Cantos 153-162 (signs before doomsday) 477, 474-480, 712, 789-790, 800, 813-814 (Caelius) Sedulius Tractatus Mathei Carmen Paschale (PL 19, 569-570;

126 57 CSEL 10, 28) 110

Sedulius Scottus (Sedulius the Younger) 41-42, 60, 89

Psalter 89-90 on 2 : 11 247 Collectaneum in Matthaeum on the Magi 556-558, 564, 573-574 Commentary on Matthew 39-41, 257 258, 511 on 1 : 18 243-244 on 2 : 2 246-248, 596, 626, 870 on 2 : 11 40 on 8 : 2 251n76 Collectaneum in apostolum on I Cor 15 : 7 558n24 Commentary on the Epistles of Paul 41 Commentary on Hebrews 43-46 on 9 : 17 45 on 11 : 3 0 44 S ench as M a r Irish Law tracts 874-875 S e venteen Wonders C hr ist ’s B irth

Night of 551, 561, 597

of th e

Severian of Gabala homily PG 59, 553-54 542-543 S h eph er d

of

H er mas 688

Sibylline Oracles

613

(F ifteen) S igns befor e D oomsday 51, 374, 460, 474-478, 482, 708-715, 786-789, Armenian text 760, 791-795, 824-825 S iniaticus , C odex Mt 27 : 4 6-49 Jn 21

285 530-531 527-528

Smaragdus of St Mihiel 57

970 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Socrates Church History V.22

831

S outh a mpton P sa lter 20, 28, 46, 62, 80, 143 148, 198 illuminations 534-535, fig 4 Canticles 153-154 Psalm Prayers 1, 2, 3 150-152, 174 Fol 2 143 intro to Ps 118 183 Ps 118 : 8 gloss (fol 84a) 191 S towe M issa l 535-536, 660 Treatise on the Mass 868n3 Sulpicius Severus Chronicorum 126 I (CSEL 1, p4, l. 16-17) 103 Synod of Verona PL 136, 599 Ta l mud (Babylonian) b. Yoma 80a b. Sukka 5a-b b. Baba Bathra 25a 73b b. Abodah Zarah 16b-17a b. Bekorot 57b Ta rgums Ps 50 : 11 T eaching

of

868n3

521 521 520-521 518-519 608 521 3, 714 519

M a el R uain 118

A n T enga B ithnua (T h e E ver - ne w Tongue) 102, 460, 480 481, 482, 513-

524, 642-651, 687, 801, Fifteen signs before doomsday 474-476, 712, 789-790, 804-808 MSS of & recensions 514-515, 644 645, 823 2, 3, 6, 9 645-646 11, 13 647 16-17 648 35-36 514-515 57 524 58 514 91-93 807-808 91 805-806 93 806 95, 97-99 649 103 648-649 104-107 650 on 12th day before, & death 643-644 Tertullian

263, 552, 671

Theodore of Mopsuestia 31-32, 63 Commentary on Psalms 89, 137-138, 142, 511, 589 Syriac translation on Ps 118 193-194 on Ps 138-148 193 Epitome of Julian 31, 213 See also under Julian of Eclanum Theodoretus of Cyrus Eranistes 2 670 Theodulph of Orleans 271 Commemoratoruim 449-450 Thomas Aquinas 63, 726 Catena Aurea 241n48, 674 Summa Theologica XII.48.1.4 787 T housa nd a nd O ne Nights 73rd Night 522-523

971

index of writers and writings Timothy of Constantinople 487

MSS of 464-468 See also Transistus Mariae

To gail B ruidne D a D erga paragraph 102 367

Uí Mhaine, Book of 638 Críst rocrochadh (Christ was crucified) 638-640 18-23 639-640 Conception & Characteristics of An­ tichrist 705

Tosefta t. Hullin 2.24 T r act

on th e

608 C a nonica l H ours 770

T r a nsitus M a r ia e 245, 458, 464-468, 482, 591-593, 756, 846, 860, 870-871 nos. 1-3 629 Ethiopic 458, 464-467, 592, 860, 870 100 849 Georgian 465 Syriac T h e T esta ment of M a ry / O b s­ e quies of th e H oly Vir igin 464-465, 510, 591-593 Irish vernacular see Udh acht M h ui r­ e T r eatise

on th e

M ass (Early Irish) 867

T r ier G ospels

310-311, 318321

T wo S or rows of th e K ingd om of H eaven (Dá Brón Flatha Nime) 460, 707, 756, 768 8 768-769 Tyconius 381-382 Commentary on the Apocalypse 18, 383, 386, 427, 856 Liber regularum 383 Udh acht M h uir e

245, 458, 591, 697, 842, 860

Ussh er G ospels Primus (r1) glosses Jn 19 : 3 0 Lk 2 : 11

codex Usserianus 274-277, 276-278, 281-282, 290, 294, 301 38-39, 52 531 418n3

Vaticanus, Codex fol 23r-v

285, 661 661-662

Victorinus of Petau 381 Commentary on the Apocalypse 383-384, 856 Vigilius Constitutum

384, 872

Virgil Eclogues V, 36-37 361 Georgics I, 154 361 Virgilius (Fergal)

310, 312, 314, 316

Virgilius Maro Grammaticus (Vir­gil the Grammarian) 352 Virgilius of Salzburg 89, 766 Visio (S ancti) Pauli (A pocalypse of Paul) 468-470, 763, 689, 691, 694 703, 786, 800, 829, 857 MSS of 469-470, 694-698 contents 699, 845-846

972 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 13-18 702 19-30 (paradise/heaven) 756 19 700, 854-855 21-22 700-701 21 855, 856 22-30 (city of Christ) 701 22 855-856 31-44 (hell) 845, 854 44 (respite for damned) 844-846 45-51 (paradise) 854 Coptic 848, 860 Greek & Tarsus recension 844, 848n41 Irish (Latin) 468, 851-852 Recension IV 460, 468-470, 482, 696, 845 Redaction VI 695, 697, 698, 845 Redaction XI 468, 695, 697 698, 710, 798, 845 Syriac 848 Visio T nugda l i (Vision of T unda l) 523n21, 695, 702, 752, 758-

XIV-XV XV, XVI

759, 845, 852, 857 373, 758 738

Vision

697

of

L aisrén

Vita e P roph eta rum

123

Voyage of S ne gdus 22-23

M ac R iagl a 857

a nd

Voyage of (th e S ons (Ua C or r a) 56-57 Wolfcoz

of)

Uí C hor r a

697, 851 28, 30, 189

Yrymes D etbr awt (Armes Dydd Brawd; Prophecy of Judgement Day) 712, 790 Zacharias Chrysopolitanus (Za­chary of Besançon) 240n46, 481 482 Z uqnin C hronicl e (R e vel ation of th e M agi) 457, 626-627

­­INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS* Augsburg, Universitatsbibliothek I.2.4 Harburg/Maihingen Gospels 314 See A ugsburg G ospels Avranches, France, Bibliothèque mu­n icipal 108 r472-474, 781 Cambridge, St John’s College C. 9 S outh a mpton P sa lter (q.v.) 62 Cambridge, Magdalene College Pepysian MS 2981 D ur h a m G ospel (q.v) 534-535 Cambridge, University Library Dd X 16 18, 162, 377, 390-393, 869, 874 description & contents 446-448 Apoc preface 394, 395-397 glosses on Apoc 1 : 1-2 : 5 398-415 glosses on Apoc 5 : 1-6 : 6 fol 73v 416, 417-426 glosses on Apoc 13 : 13-14 : 1 fol 92v 427-428, 429-436 glosses on Apoc 19 : 17-22 : 18 437-439 fol 46v8 443-445 Canterbury, Cathedral Library Additional 16 285 Mt 27 : 4 6-49 530-531 Cracaw, Cathedral Library

MS 140 338-339 See C atech esis C r acoviensis Dublin, National Library of Ireland G 50 C hil dhood D eeds of Jesus (q.v.) 483, 572 Dublin, Royal Irish Academy 8, 19, 77-78 RIA 23 N 15 (490) 776-777, 778-779 RIA 23 O 48 a-b (476) Liber F l a ­ vus F ergusiorum (q.v.) 559, 595 RIA, 23 M 7 (287) F ifteen S igns (q.v.) 822 Dublin, Trinity College TCD 55 A.iv.15 (codex Usserianus Primus) Ussh er G ospels (q.v.) 274 TCD 56 A. 4. 6 Usserianus Secundus (r2) 287, 293-294 TCD 60 B ook of D ur row (q.v.) 273, 300 TCD 80 L iber H ymnorum 153-155, 156, 187 TCD F.5.3 T r a nsistus M a r ia e (q.v.) 592 TCD 1336 569 col. 729 569-570 Durham, Cathedral Library MS A.II.17 297 See D ur h a m G ospels MSS A.iv16 & A.iv.28 Bede on Apo­calypse 379-380, 391 See also under Bede.

*  This list does not include every manuscript mentioned, only those from which quotations are taken or which are discussed at some length or multiple times. See also Index of Writers and Writings, and under “manuscripts lists” in Index of Subjects.

974 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Freiburg im Breisgau, Universitatsbibliothek Codex 363 C arolingian Pontifical 663-664 No 39 Benedictio 664 Fulda, Germany 125 Codex Bonifatianus, Landesbi­blio­ thek 3 C a dmug G ospel 273, 296, 323, 327 Codex Fuldensis (F), Abbey Library 61 270 Karlsruhe, Germany, Badische Landesbibliothek Augiensis XXXVIII (K) T r ipl e P sa lter of R eich enau (Vetus Latina no. 316) 179, 190n109, 219 Augiensis CXCVI 17, 339n32 15 on Mt 25 : 31 740-741 sermo 26 & 27 357-358 Augiensis CCLIII Mone M asses 658 Augiensis CCLIV 797-800 fol 153-213 item 3 799-800 London, British Library BL Additional 36929 C or mac P sa l t­ er (q.v.) 165-176 BL Additional 43725 C odex S i ­naiticus 285, 527-528, 530-531 BL Arundel 404 Latin Infancy Gospels (q.v.) 594 55 577-578 73-74 580-582 73.1-73.4 610-612 81 622 89-95 626 93.1-2 624-625 94 626 BL Cotton Vitellius Psalter F XI 197, 153-154 BL Egerton 91 fol 51b Life of St Maighneann 774-775 BL Egerton 609 (E) 279-280, 321,

323, 324, 530 BL Egerton 1781 550 BL Egerton 1782 fol 49b-50a 67 BL Harley 1023 282, 311 Mt 27 : 4 6-49 530 BL Harley 1775 (Z) C odex H a r ­ l eia nus 291, 321-322 BL Harley 1802 Máel -Brigte G os pels (q.v.) 39-41 BL Harley 5280 fol 41, 47 67 BL Royal 6.A.xi. 513 fol 146v 515 BL Royal E. VII.7 fol 340 637 BL Royal 13 A XIV 567-568 fols 260v-270v 568 BL Vespasianus A i (P sa lter of A u g­ ustine of C a nter bury ) fol 9 171-172 London, Lambeth Palace Library Lambeth 1370 282. See M ac D ur na n G ospels . Maaseik, Belgium Sint Katherinenkerk CLA 1588 M a ese yck G ospels 310-311, 316-318, 320-321 Milan, Ambrosian Library Codex Ambrosianus I.61 sup. (S.P. 10,21; CLA III 350) Matthew 291n4, 293 294, 296, 305-308 Codex Ambrosianus C.301 inf. 56, 62-63, 213, 215, 284, 517, 871 Milan Commentary on the Psalms; Julian’s translation of Theodore on Ps (q.v.) Psalm prefaces 144-147 Dauid filius Iessae 145-146 PL 30, 293C 146

index of manuscripts PL 93, 477D 147 fols 16a-18c for Ps 2 871 fols 24d-26b for Ps 8 871 fol 25 glosses c8, d6, d7 872 Milan, Biblioteca del Capitolo me­tropolitano Codex D. I, 12 No 32 Benedictio 664 Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek 86 Cgm 717 Münchener Gedicht 479-480 Clm 6235 fol 1v-31v glossed Pauline Epistles 58-59 fol 32r Pauca…in euangelia 40, 242, 260n94 fol 32v 65 fol 48v-49v preface to Mark 58 fol 49v-65v glossed Luke 58, 635 Rom 12 : 1 391 Clm 14276 de enigmatibus (q.v.) OT 93, 128 Clm 14277 de enigmatibus (q.v.) NT 93, 731-732 Clm 14387 fols 20-94 Ps-Bede Argumenta & Explanationes (q.v.) 135 fol 94 135 Clm 29167 fol 322 Apoc 5 : 1-5 360 Oxford, Bodleian Library Laud Misc 605 Poem on the End of the World 771-772 Laud Misc 610 fols 34-38 Transistus Mariae (q.v.) 592 Ir.e.7 477-478, 822

975

Rawlinson MS B. 502 Annals of Tigernach 221n16 Leinster Genealogies 94 Rawlinson B. 512 44ra–44vb Vision of Laisrén 697 Oxyrhynchus Papyrus VI 850 Acts of John 703, 772 Paris, Bibliotheque nationale de France BNF lat. 257 Gospel Book 533, 540, fig 8 BNF lat. 614A De Enigmatibus excerpt 732, 733nn25-27, 734n30 BNF fr 2452 131-132, 202-209 abbreviations 199-201 variants fol 75-79, Pss 82-99 202-209 glosses on Ps 82 : 6 158 on Ps 84 : 4 159 fol 83r Ps 90 (91) 140-141, 142 fols 75-84 (Hebraicum Ps 82 : 7-94 : 2) 157-161 BNF lat. 10575 fols 7-172 P ontifi ­ ca l of E gbert 664 no 22 664 BNF lat. 11561 fols 1v-217v De Enigmatibus NT 93, 390, 731. See also De Enigmatibus. fols 156r-169v Mark 732 fols 158ra-159vb 732-735 fol 203ra-217v Apoc 377 fol 203ra preface 395-397 on Apoc 1 : 1-2 : 5 398-415 fol 207r2-207v Apoc 5 : 1 360

976 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church fol fol on fol fol

209v Apoc 8 : 10-11 390n49 207rb-va Apoc 5 : 1-5 417-420 Apoc 6 : 1-6 : 6 422-426 209v Apoc 8 : 10-11 390n49 213ra4 Apoc 13 : 13-14 : 1 429-436

Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Gene­ viève 2787 P rote va ngel ium of Ja mes (q.v.) 559, 561, 593 16.2 574, 577 580 Saint Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek (san­gallensius) St Gall Codex 20 (Vetus Latina no. 427) 189n109, 219 St Gall Gospel Book 51 37n15, 282 283, 287 288, 296, 327 description 525-528 illuminations 16, 532, 533 536, fig1, fig 6, fig7 colophon 238 Mt 1 : 2 0-4 : 17 275 Mt 1 : 2 0-2 : 16 283 Mt 2 : 19-4 : 17, et al. 295, 529 Mt 27 : 49 285n34 Jn 19 : 3 4 530 Jn 21 527-528 St Gall 60 (Gospel of John) 282-283, 287, 296, 301, 327, 365 St Gall 70 (Winithar MS) 290 St Gall 73 Commentary on Hebrews 43-46, 59, 290 St. Gall 261 See Ecloga tractatorum in Psalterium St Gall 317 (Visio Pauli) 846

St Gall 728 See Libri scottice scripti St Gall codex 1395 42-43, 47, 275, 278 Rouen, France, Biblioth èque mu­nicipale 24[A 41] See D oubl e P sa lter of S t.-O uen Salisbury, Cathedral Library 115 (De Enigmatibus, q.v.) 732, 734n30 fol 40v 733nn25-26 Split, Croatia, Chapter Archives MS 621 (P) 292, 321 323 Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Turin G.vii.15 See Codex Bobiensis Vatican, Palatium Lateranense Pal Lat 65 See Coupar Angus Psalter Pal Lat 68 See Glossa in Psalmos Pal Lat 222 fols 26v-28r 826-828 Pal Lat 556 668-669 Vatican, Vaticanus Reginensis latinus Reg lat 49 See Catechesis Celtica Reg lat 76 fols 1-106 96-98, 161 contents 97 Reg lat 316 (Codex Vaticanus ) 285, 661 fol 23r-v 661-662 Verona, Cathedral Library Codex Veronensis (b) See Catechesis Veronensis Vienna, Nationalbibliothek Vienna 940 fol 13r-141v (Commentary on Matthew) 57, 231, 284, 347-349 fol 14r-v 242 fol 42v, 43v 347 fol 56 369

index of manuscripts Vienna 997 fol 1r-66r (commentary on Luke) 58 CCSL 108C 361, 371 67r-84v (commentary on John) 58

977

Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek 88 fol 12 41, 290 fol. 61 57, 231, 635 gloss 32b3 & 4 on Hebr 1 : 3 41, 871

­­INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS* Abbott, Thomas Kingsmill 277, 267n11, 297, 569 Adams, Arthur White 384, 396n3&2 Adkin, N. 572n51 Adriaen, M. 56, 141n16, 252n82, 411n18 Aland, Kurt 265, 292n8 Alexander, Jonathan James Graham 232n29, 304n35, 305, 526, 534, 536 Alexander, P. S. 691n8 Amann, É. 550n11 Amelli, Ambrogio M. 112, 129 Amos, Thomas 10n21, 16-17, 22, 339n32, 357, 678n86, 679n87 Amphoux, C.-B. 269n14 Amsler, F. 642n110 Andrieu, M. 665n38-39 Arand, L. A. 847n39 Arnold, Matthew 852 Arras, Victor 464n24, 465-467, 592 Atkinson, R. 58, 250, 332n12, 352, 369, 373, 536-537, 539, 542, 642n107, 643n111-113, 654n1-4, 683n103, 684n105, 769n10-11 Autenrieth, J. 141n15 Auwers, J. M. 269n14 Bacher, W. Bagatti, B. Bains, D.

519n10 607n51 199n1, 200n3-4, 201n5-6

*  Including Editors and Translators.

Baldi, D. 459n12 Baltzer, R. A. 833n6 Bannister, H. M. 152, 153n45, 154n46, 155 Bardski, K. 783 Barnard, T. 569n47 Batiffol, P. 655n7 Bauckham, Richard 604, 606n47-49, 607-608 Bauer, Walter 601n42, 604n45, 607n50 Baum, Paull F. 853n55 Bayless, Martha 474, 713, 788 Beattie, Derek R. G. 714n82, 760n87, 791n19 Becker, G. 104n24, 119n50 Beggiato, Fabrizio 539, 541 Benz, E. 243n53, 258n91 Berger, Samuel 166, 270, 280, 289, 291, 305, 306n39, 528 Bergin, O. 749n59, 752n67, 770n12 Bernard, Edward 446 Bernard, J. H. 58 Best, Richard Irvine 176n70, 187, 569, 749n59, 752n67, 840n21, 841n25 27 Beyers, Rita 551n13, 561, 566n39, 593 Bieler, Ludwig 4, 59, 62, 200n2, 230n21, 232n27, 274, 462n18 464n23, 843n30 Bienert, W. A. 601n42, 604n45

index of modern authors Biggs, F. M. 474n52, 785n6 Bihlmeyer, Pius 708n68, 710n70, 784, 799, 807 Bischoff, Bernhard 3-7, 11-12, 14, 17, 21-23, 51-66, 69, 73-74, 76, 86-87, 93-96, 98, 101, 103, 111-112, 118 119, 125n53, 126, 127, 135, 137, 161 162, 231-232, 236, 239n45, 240n46, 252, 258, 325, 339n32, 340, 385 386, 392, 439, 449-450, 472-473, 481, 482n62, 511, 589, 635, 656, 661, 674, 679, 693-694, 707-708, 781-782, 872-874 Blaise, A. 736n39 Blanchard, J.-M. 470n44 Blum, O. J. 849n45 Blume, C. 389n45 Bogaert, P.-M. 266n8 Bonner, G. 309n50, 380n9, 382n16, 387n39, 438n3, Boswell, Charles Stuart 718, 754n72 Bousset, W. 780n28 Bouvier, B. 642n110 Bovon, François 457, 627, 642n110 Boylan, Patrick 72 Boyle, Leonard E. 14, 340-341 Brandes, Herman 469 Brearley, Denis 9-10, 14 Breatnach, Caoimhín 9, 79, 465-466, 471, 478, 561, 570 571, 580n55, 592n24, 594, 782, 821, 825, 842 Breatnach, Liam 874n11, 875-876

979

Breatnach, Pádraig 9, 79 Breen, A. 875n13 Breeze, A. 618n72 Briain, S. Ó. 719n7 Brinktrine, J. 655n7, 657, 671n61 Brown, R. E. 613n61 Brown, T. Julian 281n26, 305, 307, 309 Bruce, James 691 Bruce-Mitford, Rupert L. S. 309, 323n85 Brueggemann, Walter 719n8 Brunhölzl, F. 141n15 Bruun, Johan A. 187-188 Buckley, Patrick 79 Budge, Ernest Alfred Wallis 484-485, 848 Bullough, D. A. 324n87 Burgess, Glyn S. 26n81, 829 Busa, R. 241n48 Byrne, Francis J. 94n6 Cabrol, F. Cagin, P. Cahill, Michael Capelle, B. Carey, John Carney, James Carozzi, Caudel Carrington, P. Casagrande, D.

664n35 662n26-27 10n21, 12n35, 231, 252n83-253n86, 325, 679n88 839n18 20, 79, 81, 460, 473n50, 482n63, 524, 570n49, 644645, 647, 648n121122, 649, 691n8, 761, 804-807, 867n1 4, 6, 200n2, 232n27, 287n35, 368, 459, 483, 487, 499n6, 538539, 572n52, 680, 765n3, 795n24-25, 796 758n78, 759 607n50 613n62, 614n63-65

980 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Cathcart, Kevin 80 Ceriani, M. A. 693n20 Champion, H. 847n37 Charles, R. H. 691-692, 693n20 Charlesworth, James H. 549n2, 689-690, 705n57, 709n68 Chroust, Anton 525 Clayton, M. 464n25 Clines, David 76 Coatsworth, E. 281n26 Coccia, Edmondo 22 Cockshaw, P. 382n14 Colgan, John 186 Collins, Adela Yarbro 689, 704n55, 780n27 Colwell, J. J. 754n72 Condon, K. 72 Connolly, Seán 377, 390 Considine, P. 634n86 Contreni, J 10n21 Cottineau, L. H. 337n28 Cox, P. 281n25 Cross, James E. 19, 103n23, 336 Cullmann, Oscar 486, 552 Cuntz, O. 241n48 Curran, Michael 149n37, 150n39, 151-152, 836-837 Daley, Brian E. 723n9-10, 725, 726n13-14, 727, 728n18, 730, 731n23, 846n37 Darling, G. J. 638n97-99 David, Pierre 17, 338, 678n86, 679n87 Davies, Lunod 325 Dawood, N. J. 523n20 de Bhaldraithe, Eion 832n4 De Brún, Padraig 143n21 De Bruyne, Donatien 143-144, 146-147, 242n50, 322, 708n68, 710n70, 797-799, 826

De Coninck, Luc 15, 21, 115n41, 134n5, 142n18-20, 159n56, 176, 177n72, 178, 180n76-78, 181, 188-189, 198, 214n6, 215n7-8, 216-217, 221-225, 517n6 Dédéyan, G. 825n71 Deferrari, R. J. 668n48 de Grüneisen, Wladimir 532-533 Dekkers, E. 68, 145n27, 258n91, 382n12, 383n18, 385n25, 386n31, 678n85 de Puniet, P. 663n28 De Sainte-Marie, H. 202n7, 206 De Santos Carrecedo, C 10n21 de Santos Otero, A. 484-486, 492, 500, 502, 503n7, 709n68-69, 710n70, 783 Deshusses, Jean 663 Deshusses, S. 663n28 de Strycker, Émile 550n11 D’Hont, M. J. 115n41, 159n56, 181n79, 517n6 Díaz y Díaz, M. C. 88 Dillon, Myles 755 Di Majo, E. g. Anna 306, 341 Dinzelbacher, P. 695n28, 845n33, 853n55 Dolbeau, François 128-129 Dold, Alban 510 Donahue, Charles 466-467, 510, 592 Dooley, Ann 539, 541-542 Dottin, Georges 472-473, 537, 707, 778, 781, 823

index of modern authors Doutreleau, L. 572n51 Doyle, Peter 74, 281 Duchesne, L. 337n28 Duft, Johannes 527 Dumas, A. 663n28 Dumville, David N. 277n23, 368, 447, 589, 697, 753n68, 754n72, 756, 761 Dupuy, P. 341n36 Dutton, P 10n21 Dwyer, Mary E. 468n39, 697-698 Edwards, N. 16n62, 283n31, 525n1 Eizenhöfer, Leo 510, 658n14, 661n22 Elliott, J. Keith 587, 588n9, 595, 608, 700n45-46, 855n56-57 Emmerson, R. K. 380n9, 388n41 Engelbert, P. 306n42-43, 307 Erbetta, M. 549n5, 704n55, 709n68, 846n37, 848n41-849n44 Esposito, Mario 60, 187, 189, 218n12, 858 Étaix, Raymond 17 Falsini, Rinaldo 656n7, 657, 667n47, 670n56, 671n60, 672n65 Faraci, D. 523n21 Federici, C. 306 Feltoe, C. L. 655n7 Ferotin, M. 665n40-667n45 Finan, T. 13nn45,47, 750n65 Finlayson, C. P. 199n2 Fischer, Bonifatius 137, 141n15, 158, 179, 264-266, 268n13, 270-271, 278, 282-283, 291-296, 301-302, 306, 308, 311, 317 319, 321, 323, 326, 391n50, 529, 533

981

Flannery, Austin 74 Flower, Robin 51n10, 67, 232n29, 234, 239, 243n52, 550, 774n19, 822 823 Ford, J. Maasynbaerde 706n60, 780n28 Fraga, J. Carracedo 12n34 Fraipont, J. 678n85 Frede, Hermann Josef 23, 60, 112, 129, 266n8, 290 Frederici, Carlo 341 Frederiksen, P. 381n12 Freedman, D. N. 709n68 Freedman, H. 520n13 Freté, S. E. 787n11 Frey, Jörg 19, 585n1 Friend, Albert M. 304 Gaidoz, H. 636n91 Gamber, Klaus 657, 660n20 Gantz, J. 375, 416n2 Ganz, David 18, 377-378, 440, 446 Ganz, D. 339n35 Garand, M.-C. 382n14 Garitte, Gerard 486 Geerard, Mauritius 587, 598n37, 642n108, 704n55, 709n68 Geisselmann, J. 655n7 Gerbert, M. 346 Gerhardt, Christoph 479, 712n75, 825 Geyer, P. 241n48, 459n12 Gijsel, Jan 554-555, 558, 561n31, 562, 566nn38,41, 567 568, 572, 576n53, 594, 597 Ginsberg, L. 518n8, 521n18 Glorie, F. 124 Glunz, Hans H. 5, 234-235, 284 Goeje, M. J. 523n21

982 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Goldhammer, A. 719n6 Gorman, Michael 22, 127, 134n5, 135, 136n8, 137, 441, 447 Gougaud, Louis 49n1, 533, 542, 847n37, 852n52, 853n55 Gounelle, Rémi 588, 636n91&92, 637n93&95, 638, 641n105 Graf, A. 853n55 Granfield, P. 240n46, 482n62, 561n30 Grébaut, Sylvain 486 Greehy, John 75 Greenwell, W. 664n35-37 Gregory, Caspar René 528 Gribomont, Jean 265 Griesser, Br. 56 Grogan, Brian O’Dwyer 74, 372, 718 Grosjean, Paul 59, 87, 330-331, 333n16-334n19, 735 Gryson, Roger 12n38, 18, 128, 149n36-37, 150n38, 153n45, 154n47, 162, 190n109, 219n13, 266n8, 307n47, 378, 380n9 381n10, 382nn14,16, 384nn19,21, 385nn23,27,29, 386, 387n39, 390n49, 405n11, 438n3, 441, 448 450, 692n18, 869, 874 Gwynn, Aubrey 3n1, 197n119 Gwynn, Edward J. 187, 190n111, 194, 195n118 Gwynn, John 379 Haggh, B.

833n6

Hall, T. N. 19n73 Hamesse, J. 22n89 Hänggi, A. 666n42 Harbison, Peter 533, 535, 540-541 Harley, Robert 234 Harrington, C. 635n88 Harrington, Wilfrid 6, 72, 74, 75, 80 Harsley, F. 170n67 Hartung, K. 59, 385n26 Harvey, Anthony 10n21, 79 Haussleiter, J. 380n9, 381n11, 387n34 Heidel, A. 719n8 Heist, William W. 51, 475-479, 712-714, 759-760, 775n22, 787n12, 788n13, 789-790, 794, 800-801, 804, 806, 809, 813, 822 Henderson, G. 324n85, 533, 535 Hennecke, Edgar 453n2, 484-487, 494-495, 499 500, 549, 550n11, 558n25, 585n2, 586-587, 601, 709n68, 849n43 Hennessy, William Maunsell 186 Henning, J. 368 Henry, Françoise 187-188, 220n16, 235, 304, 533 Herbert, Máire 9, 11, 79, 143n21, 459, 466n29, 467n33-35, 512, 572n52, 580n55, 592n21, 629n83, 645n117-646n118, 648n122, 703n52, 704n53-54, 708n67, 717n2, 754n72, 757n77, 768, 773, 775, 804, 849n44, 851n48, 852n50-51, 870n4 Herren, Michael W. 9, 22n89

index of modern authors Herwagen, Johann 134-135, 139, 788 Higgit, J. 303n32 Hilhorst, Anthony 695n27, 763, 786, 844n32 Hill, R. C. 872n8 Hill, Thomas D. 711, 785 Hillgarth, J. N. 127n56, 467n37 Hirn, Y. 618n72 Hittorpius, Melchior 665 Hoade, E. 607n51 Hogan, Edmund 455, 550, 551n17, 554, 654n5, 681 682 Holz, L 10n21 Hort, F. J. A. 255n89 Horton, C. 263n* Howlett, David 10n21, 76-77, 168n66 Hughes, Ian 537 Huglo, M. 833n6 Hurst, D. 251n75, 252n82 Hyde, Douglas 775, 823 Jackson, K. H. 156n50 James, D. 523n21 James, Montague Rhodes 50, 73, 143, 166, 170n67, 455-457, 484-485, 494, 500, 502, 506, 509, 549-550, 551n16, 554-555, 558, 580, 583, 587-588, 590 591, 594-595, 608 609, 612-614, 636, 642n109, 644, 687, 691-692, 709n68, 763, 798, 849n43 Janin, P. 339n34 Janssens, Bart 478n56 Jastrow, M. 521n18 Jeauneau, Édouard 61, 90

983

Jeffery, Peter 833n6, 837 Jennings, B. 185n86, 218n12 Jeremias, J. 608n53 Jiroušková, Lenka 469 Jodogne, P. 382n14 Jubainville, Henri d’Arbois de 186 Jülicher, Adolf 265 Jung, L. 521n16 Jungmann, J. A. 240n46, 304, 482n62, 510n12, 561n30 Junod, E. 642n108-109 Kaestli, Jean-Daniel 246n56&58, 455 457, 470n44, 550, 551n15, 555, 561n31, 562, 567n43, 578n54, 594, 597, 642n108 109 Kavanagh, Ann 325 Kealy, S. 10n21 Keane, A. H. 780n28 Kehl, Alois 457, 626-627 Kelly, F. 874n11-12 Kelly, Joseph F. T. 6, 9, 68, 73, 87, 237n41, 365, 371, 381n10, 390n49, 732n24 Kendrick, T. D. 309n50 Kennedy, Kevin 74 Kenney, James F. 49-51, 58, 61, 93n2, 124n51, 230, 232n29, 526, 590, 750, 755n74, 758n78 Killian, S. B. 10n21 Kirkwood, K. A. 10n21 Kirwin, Elizabeth 777n23 Kitson, Peter 513, 515n4, 518 Klijn, A. F. J. 558n24 Klostermann, E. 243n53, 258n91

984 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Knott, E. 367, 772n16 Köberlin, K. 57, 635n90 Kohut, A. 521n18 Krappe, A. H. 850n45-46 Krasnodębska-D’Aughton, Małgorzata 16n64 Kretzenbacher, L. 636n91, 853n55 Krause, H. G. 850n45 Kürbis, B. 16n64 Lagrange, Marie-Joseph 595-596, 608 Laistner, M. L. W. 137, 728n18 Lambert, B. 385n27, 447 Lamirande, E. 727n17 Landau, Brent 457, 627 Lane, E. W. 523n20 Langgärtner, G. 383n18 Lapidge, Michael 8, 124n51, 232n29, 474-475, 693-694, 713, 788-789, 806n44 Lauterbach, J. Z. 519n10 Law, T. G. 267n11 Lawlor, H. J. 212n3, 281, 832n4, 840n21, 841n25 27 Leahy, D. J. 727n17 Leclercq, Jean 685n108 Lee, C. F. 839n18 Le Goff, Jacques 719n6, 730, 731n23 Lehmann, P. 382n13, 636n91, 637n94, 853n55 Leroquais, V. 673n68 Lesley, A. 667n47 Lévi, I. 846n37 Lewis, D. 568n44 Lewis, T. J. 719n8 Lindsay, Wallace Martin 93n2, 199n1, 232n29, 525-527 Livingstone, E. A. 22n85 Lobrichon, Guy 18, 339n35, 441, 449

Lo Bue, Francesco 378, 382n15 Löffler, Klemens 526-527 Löfstedt, Bengt 10n21, 23, 243, 244n55, 246n57, 247n61, 248nn62,66, 251, 252n80, 257, 556n22, 626n78 Lohmeyer E. 607n51 Loomis, R. S. 775n21 Lot, Feerdinand 447 Loth, J. 330n4 Lowe, E. A. 56, 57, 125, 306, 312, 339nn32-33, 661n23 Löwe, H. 7n14, 307n45 Lucas, A. T. 640n102 Luttikhuizen, G. P. 19n77, 763 Mabillon, J. 337n28 Mac Cana, Prionsias 76-77 MacCarthy, B. 868n3 Mac Conmara, M. 682n95, 703n51, 814n58 McCool, Francis 3 Macray, C. M. 568n45 Mac Donncha, Frederic 74, 681n93, 684, 753 Mac Eoin, Gearóid 719n7, 749, 753, 755 McEvoy, J. 12n40 McGinn, Bernard 380n9, 388n41, 470n45, 472, 473n51, 689n3, 706-708, 780-782 MacGinty, Gerard 59, 128, 162 McGurk, Patrick 295, 264, 273, 281, 299-304 Machielsen, Johannis 145n27, 242n49, 618n72, 744n52 McKee, H. Simpson 377n1

index of modern authors McKenna, L. 809 McKitterick, David J. 446 McLaughlin, R. 240n47, 242n49 McNally, Robert E. 4-6, 14, 16, 51, 56, 59-61, 67n24, 68, 87, 89, 102n21, 240n46, 242n51, 331, 344-345, 352, 356, 373, 482n62, 561, 698, 738n44, 744, 766, 767n6, 798 McNamara, Martin J. 5n3-6, 5n8, 6, 8-10, 11nn24-33, 12n38, 13nn42,48, 15n59, 16n62, 18-20, 72, 74, 75-77, 79, 102n20, 106n26, 113n34, 114n37-39, 115n40, 116n45, 118n46 48, 128, 131, 134n5, 140n13-14, 143n23, 148n34, 158n54?, 159n56, 163n62-164n64, 177n74, 181n81 82, 188nn101,103, 189n107, 190n110, 192n113, 213n4, 214n6, 219n14, 221n17, 231n23, 235n36, 237n41, 239n42, 246n56, 58-59, 248n64,68 69, 250n72-3, 254n87-88, 255n89, 270n15, 272n17-18, 279n24, 282n29 283n31, 285n34, 290n3, 295n13 14, 301n27, 305, 307n47, 308n48-



985 49, 311n56, 312n58, 317n72, 329n3330n5, 331, 334n20, 344-346, 351, 352, 354, 359-360, 363, 365-366, 371, 372, 389n48, 416n12, 418n2, 442, 447, 453n1, 454, 460n15, 512, 516n5, 517n7, 529-530, 536, 550n10, 555, 556n22, 561n29, 565, 566n40, 572n52, 579, 588n10, 589n11, 592n21, 593n26, 594, 597, 599nn38, 41-42, 611n57, 614n66, 620nn7374, 622n75, 625n76626n77, 628n82629n83, 632n84633n85, 645n117646n118, 648n122, 656n9, 681n93, 690, 691nn8-9, 693n21 695n28, 696n30, 699n44, 702n4950, 703nn51-52, 705n59, 708n6768, 711n73, 714n82, 717n2, 719n6, 732n24, 735n3435, 736nn36-38,4041, 744n51, 745n5354, 746n56, 748n57, 750, 753n69, 754n72, 757n77, 759n83, 760n87, 772n17, 791n19, 795n23, 801n36, 802n38-39, 804n40&42, 807n45, 808n47, 812n53, 816n60, 842n29, 849n44,

986 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church 850n46, 851n48, 852n50-51, 857n62, 870n4, 873n9 Mac Neill, E. 176n70 Mac Niocaill, Gearóid 62, 514n3, 807 MacRae, G. 486n4 Maffei 385 Magistretti, M. 664n33-34, 665n38 Maher, M. 719n7 Mai, Angelo 97, 101 Maloney, Oliver 79 Mandolfo, C. 115n42 Mangan, Céline 80 Markschies, Christoph 453n2 Marrou, H. I. 387nn35,38 Marsh-Micheli, Geneviève L. 187-188, 220n16, 235 Marstrander, C. 770n12 Martin, L. 10n21 Martin, M. 10n21 Martínez, Florentino García 19n77, 763 Matthews, F. 185n86 Matzkow, Walter 265 Mayes, Andrew 6, 72, 74, 75, 80 Mazzuconi, Daniele 447 Meehan, D. 241n48, 843n30 Meier, J. 608n53 Mellinkoff, R. 693n18 Mercati, G 307 Merk, Augustinus 531 Merkle, S. 846n37 Metzger, Bruce M. 255n89, 263n1, 265n3, 268nn12 13, 427n1-2 Metzger, M. J. 664n31-32 Meyer, A. 601n42, 604n45, 607n50 Meyer, Kuno 138n12, 156n50, 177n73, 212n2,

367, 376, 527, 771n15 Meyer, Robert 685n109 Micheli, G. L. 304 Migne, J.-P. 56, 59, 61, 131, 166, 239n43, 385, 667n47 Milik, Jósef Tadeusz 692-693 Miller, L. 521n15 Minnis, A. 868n3 Mohlberg, Leo Cunibert 658, 659n17 660n19, 661, 662n25 Mone, Franz Joseph 658 Montfaucon, Bernard de 341n36-37, 342 Moraldi, L. 549n5 Moran, Patrick F. 185 Morel, Jean-Baptiste 383 Moreschini, C. 668n48 Morin, Germain 56, 137, 243n53, 258n91, 351, 383, 387, 428n3-4, 436n3, 656, 659, 744n52 Mueller, J. R. 689n5, 705n57, 709n68 Murphy, Gerard 685n110-686n112, 777 Nagy, I. 636n91 Nasmith 446 Nayless, M. 806n44 Netzer, Nancy 309n50-51, 311n54, 312, 316, 318-321 Ní Bhrolcháin, M. 684n107 Nic Cárthaigh, Emma 761, 867n1 Nic Énri, Úna 514n3, 807 Ní Chatháin, Proinséas 7nn15-18, 16n62, 237n41, 291n7,

index of modern authors 324n87, 331n8, 522n19, 549n1, 702n49, 717n1, 732n24, 857n62, 875n15 Nigra, Constantine 185-186 Ní Thiarnaigh, É. 703n51 Ní Úrdail, M. 777n23 Nordenfalk, C. 305 Nordhagen, Jonas 532 O’Boyle, Sean 75 O’Brien, M. A. 368 O’Callaghan, Ciarán 80 Ó Cléirigh, Míchél 183-187, 218 O’Connor, A. 636n91, 640n101, 641n103-104&106 Ó Corráin, D. 875n13 Ó Cróinín, Dáibhi 309-310, 312n60, 314-315, 317, 568 571 Ó Cuív, Brian 6, 9, 471, 561, 599n39, 705-706, 764-765, 770-771, 777n23, 822 Ó Curraoin, T. 72 Ó Dochartaigh, Caitríona 761, 801, 867n1 O’Donnell, Manus 279 O’Donoghue, Neil Xavier 868 O’Dwyer, Peter 114n37, 368 Ó Fearghail, Fearghas 80 Ó Fiaich, Tomás 338 Ó Fiannachta, Pádraig 9, 74, 76, 246n59, 248n68, 580n55 Ó Floinn, R. 533 O’Flynn, John A. 71-72 O’Grady, Colm 4, 52n14, 74, 161n59, 231n23, 385n24, 589n11, 656n9, 693n21

987

O’Grady, Standish 774-775 Ó’hAodha, Donncha 719n7 O’Keeffe, J. G. 852n50 Ó Laoghaire, Diarmuid 74, 331n8, 580n55, 682n95, 735n34 O’Leary, A. 10n21 Ó Longáin, Míchaél Óg 471, 822 O’Loughlin, Thomas 14n51, 130, 142n20, 214n6, 324n87, 377n1, 389n47&48, 460n17 Ó Macháin, Pádraig 777n23 O’Mahony, F. 305 Ó Máille, T. 639n100, 681n93 O’Meara, John J. 702n47-48, 829n2, 833- 836, 857n61, 856n58-60, 857n61 Ó Néill, Pádraig P. 10n21, 20, 114n39, 138n11, 163n62, 188, 198, 214n5, 681n91, 868n2 O’Rahilly, T. F. 538 O’Reilly, Jennifer 303, 533 Ortiz, A. 667n47 Osiek, C. 689n2 O’Sullivan, William 309-310, 310n53, 316, 317n71 Paffenroth, K. 853n55 Pahl, I. 666n42 Palacios, M. Asin 523n21 Palma, Marco di 306, 340-341 Palmer, Nigel F. 479, 712n75, 825 Parker, P. C. 269n14 Parridge, A. 636n91 Passler, M. E. 833n6 Paulus, B. 671n62

988 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Peebles, Rose Jeffries 540 Peeters, Paul 485-486 Petitmengin, Pierre 692, 693n19 Picard, J.-M. 16n62, 324n87, 758n78 Plummer, C. 768n8, 853n55 Poirot, É. 129, 130n61 Pontfarcy, Yolande de 758n78-79, 759n80 Popovic, M. Vladislaz 322-323 Poppe, E. 634n87 Pose, Eugenio Romero 388 Powell, K. 710n71, 785n3 Pouderon, B. 470n44 Praedicatores, Fratres 787n11 Prendergast, A. C. 728n18 Purdue, Peter 75 Rádo, Cecilia 478n56, 825 Raes, A. 376 Rahner, Karl 613 Ramsay, W. L. 64 Rapisarda, Grazia Lo Menzo 385 Rauh, H. D. 780n28 Read, A. 21n84 Redknap, M. 16n62, 283n31, 525n1 Reeves, W. 232n29 Reid, J. 10n21 Reindel, K. 849n45 Reynolds, R. 10n21 Rhodes, E. F. 265n3 Richter, Michael 7nn15-18, 16n62, 237n41, 291n7, 324n87, 331n8, 702n49, 717n1, 732n24, 857n62, 875n15 Riggenbach 59 Righetti, M. 839n18

Rittmueller, Jean 5, 10n21, 14-15, 109n30, 198n121, 230, 236, 244n54, 247n60, 250, 284, 329n3, 331, 337, 344-374, 655, 657, 673n67, 674-676, 802n36 Roberts, J. 868n3 Rochais, H. M. 685n108 Rollason, D. 309n50 Romanelli, F. 532 Rowley, H. H. 719n8 Rule, M. 655n7 Ryan, Dermot 72, 77 Ryan, John 3, 49n1 Ryan, M. 868n3 Saint-Roch, P. 662n26 Salmon, Pierre 170n68, 171 Schanzer, Danuta 10n21 Scheppard, C. 10n21 Schiller,G. 541 Schirmer, G. 638n97 Schneemelcher, Wilhelm 484n3, 549, 550n11, 558n25, 585n2, 586-587, 596n34, 601, 709n68, 849n43 Schneider, H. 148n35 Schröter, J. 585n1 Scopello, M. 470n44 Scragg, Donald G. 710n71, 785n3 Scrivener, F. G. A. 289 Selmer, Ed. C. 702n47-48, 829n2, 838n16-17, 857n61, 856n58 60, 857n61 Seymour, John D. 466-467, 511n16, 590-592, 636n91, 712, 718, 737n42, 749n59, 756, 761, 806, 813, 853n55 Sharpe, J. L. III 13n43, 131n3

989

index of modern authors Sharpe, R. 124n51, 232n29, 259n92 Sheehy, Maurice 4-5, 8, 113, 140n13-14, 147n32, 163n62 63, 875n15 Shoemaker, Stephen J. 458n11, 459n12, 464n25, 467, 870 Siffrin, P. 658n14, 661n22, 663n28 Sigali, G. 22n89 Silverstein, Theodore 468-469, 695-697, 786, 844n32, 845 Simms, George O. 297 Simms, K. 569n47 Simon, M. 520n14, 521n15&17-18 Simon, Richard 234 Slotki, Israel W. 518n9, 520n11-12 Smyth, A. P. 868n2 Smyth, K. 613n61 Smyth, M. 10n21 Sobieraj, M. 16n64, 339n32 Sparks, Hedley Frederick Davis 265, 360, 378, 379-380 Spearman, R. M. 303n32 Stancliffe, Clare 21, 106n26, 309n50 Stanjek, Herbert 23 Starowieyski, Marek 783 Steel, C. 12n40 Steffens, Franz 525 Stegmüller, Frederic 94n3, 108n29, 124n51, 387, 693n20, 709n68 Stein, W.-A. 323n85 Steiner, Ruth 833n6 Steinhauser, K. B. 382n16, 384n20, 385n29, 386, 388n41 Stevenson, J. 388n42-44, 754n72 Stichel, R. 164n64

Stokes, Whitley 58, 62, 145n28, 187, 190n111, 232n29- 234n33, 236, 239n44, 249n70, 391n51, 514, 536, 644, 749 750, 753, 755, 768n7, 800, 804n41, 810n52, 812-814, 815n59, 816n60, 840nn20,22, 841nn23-24,27, 851n47, 857n63 64, 868n2-3 Stone, Michael E. 713-714, 760, 791, 794, 824n71 Strachan, John 58, 62, 145n28, 187, 190n111, 391n51, 536, 868n2-3 Strange, Thomas 185 Strecker, G. 596n34 Strijboscch, Clara 20n81, 829 Sulzer, M. J. 728n18 Sutherland, H. 523n21 Taft, R. 831n3, 832-833 Thiele, Walter 265 Thomas, C. 467n37 Thomason, D. A. 709n68 Thompson, E. M. 636n91, 637n94 Thurneysen, R. 58-59 Thurston, H. 839n18 Tischendorf, Konstantin von 265, 267, 427, 484-485, 486n4, 531, 553n19, 556, 563, 704, 779 Todd, J. H. 156n49, 197n120, 267 Twomey, V. 13nn45,47, 750n65 Ussher, James

184-186

Van der Plaetse, Roel 8 van Esbroeck, Michel 592-593 van Hamel, A. G. 685n110

990 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Van Kampen, K. 13n43, 131n3 van Riel, G. 12n40 van Rompay, L. 193n114, 194n115 Vattioni, F. 551n14 Vauchez, A. 758n78 Vendryes, Joseph 536 Verbeke, W. 706n60, 780n28 Verey, Christopher 281, 297-298, 302 303, 305 Verhelst, D. 470n45, 472n47, 706n60, 780n28 Verkest, P. 14n33 Vielhauer, Philip 511n15, 558, 596n34, 597 Vogel, C. 661n23-24, 663n28, 665n38, 666n43, 667n47 Vogels, H. 380n9 Vogt, Kl.-P. 378n2 Voicu, Sever 459, 542, 559 von Arx, Ildefons 42, 47 Wagner, A. 758n78 Walker, Alexander 484-485, 503, 704n55, 705n58, 779 Walker, G. S. M. 274-275, 308n48, 324n86 Wampach, C. 312n60 Ward, B. 673n67 Ware, James 184 Warren, F. E. 150n39, 151n40 41, 152n43, 304, 868n3 Watt, J. A. 685n110 Weber, Robert 265, 388 Welkernhuysen, W. 706n60, 780n28 Wenger 467 Westcott, B. F. 255n89 Westwood, John O. 185, 291 White, Henry Julian 265, 270, 289, 291-292, 297, 307 308, 315, 319, 322,

378, 380, 529 Whitelock, D. 106n26 Wiedmann, C. 147n31 Wilhelm, Friedrich 784, 799 Willard, Rudolf 467, 591, 696 Williams, J. 388n41 Williams, J. E. Caerwyn 563, 703n51, 851n48 Wilmart, André 13, 96, 97, 100 101, 329, 331, 332n11, 333-334, 337, 342, 344 374, 467, 655n7, 656, 659, 668 669, 672n66, 676n76, 677nn80&83, 683, 735, 736nn38,41, 738n43, 742n46 744n51, 745n53 746n55 Wilson, R. Mc L. 484-487, 494-495, 499-500, 549n4, 550n11, 585n2 Wolff, J. H. 518n8 Wordsworth, John 265, 270, 291-292, 297, 307-308, 315, 319, 322, 378, 380, 529 Wotke, C. 115n42 Wright, Charles D. 10n21, 22n89, 270, 378, 380, 468, 474n52, 695n29, 697-698, 710, 711n72, 761 762, 782, 784-786, 798-799, 802, 826, 845n34 Wright, David H. 140, 158, 180 Wright, William 465, 484-485 Zimara, C. Zimmer, H. Zimmermann

656n7 59 526-527

­­INDEX OF SUBJECTS, PERSONS AND PLACES abbreviations 199-201, 336 337, 379, 440. See also heret and obelus. Adam

102, 353, 457, 542, 623, 647, 694, 800, 815

AELAC (Association pour l’Étude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne) 8-10, 78-79, 454, 549-550, 588, 593, 687-688, 763, 782, 783, 821, 867 Afra text type

267-268

Aidan of Lindisfarne

85

AKI Irish recension 29-31, 131, 159-160 allegorical interpretation 62-63, 73, 170, 214 angels 568, 709, 727, 784, 821. See also Michael.

Armagh

35, 234, 282, 295, 685

Armenian

713, 791, 794-795, 824-825

art 42, 305, 388n41, 532-533, 540 543, 640, 868n3. See also crucifixion, evangelists, illumination, and initials. Autem symbol

306, 446

Auxerre

337-338, 340, 383

baptism

351, 539, 815

birds dove island of phoenix sparrows

513-524, 619, 805, 808, 835, 850-851 868 834-835 473, 708, 782 489-491

Bobbio monastery 89, 213, 266, 305-307, 382, 693-694, 785, 837n15

St Anne

551, 553, 598

Brepols Publishers 8, 10, 78-79, 687

Antichrist

470-474, 703-708, 787, 858

Brian Bórama (Boru), King 156, 197, 755

Antiochene exegesis 31-34, 63, 137, 213-214, 869 antiphons

174-175

Arianism

258

St Brigid

368

canon of Scripture 98, 161, 453-454 Canterbury

693, 814

canticles

148-150, 153156, 169, 837

992 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Carolingian 55, 149, 305. See also Palatine school, and under minuscule. Charlemagne

41, 568, 659

Charles the Bald 90, 338 Christological Ps headings 13, 34-35 Clonmacnois

39, 183, 220, 540

colophons

168, 169, 184, 233, 238, 777, 822

Cormac mac Carthaigh 132, 233-234 continental

29, 36, 44-45, 55, 87, 148n35, 161, 277, 307, 526

contractions 5, 526. See also abbreviations, heret, and obe­lus. Coptic

848, 853, 860

Cornish

329, 618n72

crosses, stone

535, 540, 547, fig 5

crucifixion

285-286, 534-536, fig 2-6, fig 8

DELQR Irish text type 36, 254, 270, 279 282, 285-286, 291 296, 298, 307-308, 315, 317-318, 372 devotion

16, 651, 870-872

Docetism

455, 505, 554, 609, 613

Doomsday 480, 647, 752 754, 774, 776. See also fifteen signs before Doomsday. dragons

566, 594, 630, 768

dry point glosses 38, 278 Easter

88, 353, 646-647, 765, 833-836

eastern influence 19, 467, 690-691. See also Coptic, Syriac, and Ethiopic. eighth day

709, 784

ends of the earth 462 Enoch

688, 717, 765-766, 768, 776-777, 854, 857-858

Ethiopic 459, 635, Transistus Mariae 458, 860, Eucharist

466-467, 586, 691-692, 853 464-467, 592, 870

11, 40, 236-237, 653-686, 731

European Mixed text 291, 326 Eutychius of Constantinople 724, 730 evangelists

47, 271-272, 533534

fasts

351, 373, 645

feasts

551, 747-748, 769, 770, 835, 838-843, 859

index of subjects, persons and places

993

Fifteen signs before Doomsday 374, 474-480, 711-715, 786-790

Irish Biblical Association 7-8, 73-80, 454, 550, 687, 763

four groups at judgement 373, 480, 737 741, 745-746, 753, 756-757, 758, 762, 816

Irish characteristics 23, 53-55, 65-67, 301-302, 331-332, 674-675

four beasts

766

fourfold sense (stoir, siens) 63, 142, 196, 215, 251-252 fruit

603, 700

Georgian

459

Germany

132, 314

Glosses 40, 52, 180-182, 191-196, 311-312, 329, 427, 574, 693. See also under individual MS.

Irish exegesis

55, 62-65, 77, 148n35, 161

Irish mixed text. See DELQR James

602, 604-605, 620, 870

John 634, 703, 773. See also evangelists. Joseph

239, 247, 490-493, 495, 497, 555, 557, 575, 602-606, 609

Judas

588, 636-642, 843-854, 859860

Kalamazoo

9-10, 16, 19

Gnosticism

487, 492, 494, 500-501, 613n61

heret

132-133, 178 188189, 213, 219

lemmata

390-391

Hibernian text 275-278, 293-294 See also DELQR.

libraries

15, 63-64, 73, 86, 185-186, 218, 234, 858

illumination

303-304, 339, 527

Lindisfarne

85-86, 309

initials

167, 525, 533-534

Lismore

35, 59, 685-686

liturgy

149, 829-838

liturgical texts

42, 149, 303-304, 322, 525, 657669, 671-674

insular characteristics 384, 393, 440, 447 Ionia

53, 73, 300, 303304

994 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church Longianus

285-286, 536-543, fig 2-6, fig 8

midwife

Magi

239, 246, 256, 365, 456-457, 481-482, 556558, 561, 574, 583, 596, 624-628, 870

minuscule script 187, 313 Carolingian / Caroline 335, 337, 340, 446-447, 525-527 insular 309, 340, 525

manna

109, 678

miracles / marvels 129, 373, 621, 628-629, 631 at Christ’s birth 371, 561, 580, 597 598, 615, 620 See also palm tree.

manuscript lists 68 of gospels 35-36, 264, 281 with Jn 19 : 3 4 interpolation 530-531 of Psalms 27-29, 159-160, 212, 131-133 of commentaries 50-51, 55-62, 86-90, 230 231 martyrium hyacinthinum 106 hyacinth colored tunic 557 Mary 366, 444, 552 553, 569-571, 575-578, 609, 634-635, 680, 809, 839-843. See also Transitus and under Blathmac in Writings index. masses

83, 536, 731, 867868

Maynooth Conference 14, 22, 523n21 Michael, archangel 696, 699, 765 766, 768-770, 773, 815, 845

559, 580, 602, 609, 620, 622

monasteries 183-184, 309 Donegal 184, 858 Inis Cealtra 183, 197, 220 Lerins 831-832 Limerick 567-568 Moone 535 Rath Melsigi 309-310, 314-315 St Benoit, Fleury 330, 341-342 See also individual monasteries monastic life

35, 49, 65, 149

non difficile

53-54, 86

Mont St. Michel 472, 707, 781 Northumbria

5, 85, 88, 12n39, 213, 298, 516

obelus sign

29-30, 189-190, 211-212, 219, 868869

Oxford Patristic Conference 6 Palatine school

28, 41, 219, 323

palm tree

457-458, 464465, 553, 567, 630-631

index of subjects, persons and places Paradise

694, 699-702, 741, 821, 854-857, 857-858

Parchment preparation 306 Paris recension

166, 169

Philip (the Apostle) See An Tenga Bithnua in Writings index. pocket gospels

272-275

prayers (Psalm prayers) 148-153, 168 virgin praying 609, 615 Probeabschnitte of Fischer 293-294, 301-302, 306, 321, 529 Psalm headings 13, 137-138, 142, 170-175, 211 Rabbis Ashi 520 bar bar Hana 518-519 Eliezer ben Hyrcanus 608 Judah ben Simon 520-521 respite for the damned 696, 843-854, 859-860 resurrection

727, 774, 751

RETSU group of Vulgate mss 313-314

995

scribes 322 Cormac 132 Diarmait 89 Eadwine of Canterbury 169 Eláir of Loch Cré 114n37 Fergal / Vergilius 312, 314, 316 Guilhelm 335, 341 Máel Brigte 255-256 Micheál Mac Peadair 777 Micheál Óg Ó Longáin 478, 822 Terence Ma Guire 822 Thomas 316 Wilcoz / Wolfcoz 30, 189, 219 script 175-176, 339 Irish / half-uncial 43, 86-87, 158, 273, 525 See also minuscule and uncial. scriptoria Breton 177, 329, 337, 377, 440 continental 44-45, 96, 277, 313 insular 167, 273, 280 St Amand/ Salzburg 55, 137 Tours 55, 313 Verona 55, 171 seven

44, 114, 129, 389, 353, 694, 709, 820

sapiens lists of

84-85, 355, 358, 41, 100-125, 113115, 163-164, 344

singing 149, 808, 833-835. See also canticles.

scent

603, 610-611, 615, 744

666 (616)

381, 386, 391, 427-428, 435

996 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church souls before judgement 372, 726-727, 730 731, 741-742

translations ‒ see Obsequies of the Holy Virigin and see under Gospel of Thomas and Theodore of Mopsuestia in Writings index.

Spanish

151-152, 171, 343, 359, 363, 467, 526, 665

stylus

38

tres linguae sacrae 54, 65-66, 120, 123, 240, 481 3 voices in Psalms 177-178

subsalmistae

145-148, 156

uncial script

Sunday

374, 843-844

Syriac theology

459, 484, 465, 509-510, 552, 591, 627 67, 127 (creation), 686 (Eucharist), 741, 870-872

Tir Tairngiri (Land of Promise) 700-702, 829, 854-857

273, 316

Vetus Latina text 18, 27, 265, 267 269, 290 Vulgate (Gallicanum) 27-28, 290, 293 Willibrord

309-310, 312, 315, 317

wisdom

83, 353

TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vii

Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ix

INTRODUCTION Fifty-nine years of Study in Irish Bible and Apocrypha (1955-2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   Robert T. Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012, Part I, unpublished

3

PART I The Bible : Texts and Commentaries The Bible in Ireland and Abroad : Summary of Evidence . 27   Robert T. Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012, Part II, unpublished

A Plea for Hiberno-Latin Biblical Studies . . . . . . 49   Irish Theological Quarterly 39 (1972), pp.  337-353

The Irish Biblical Association and its Publication Committee 71   Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association 25 (2002), pp.  9-17

The Bible in Ireland (A. D. 600-1150) .

.

  Scripture Bulletin 6.2 (1975-1976), pp.  36-39

.

.

.

.

.

. 83

Plan and Source Analysis of Das Bibelwerk. Old Testament

93

Five Irish Psalter Texts . . . . . . . . . . . .

131

  Ireland and Christendom. The Bible and the Missions, P.  Ní  Cha  tháin  & M.  Richter (eds.), Stuttgart, 1987, pp.  84-112   Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 109 C (2009), pp.  37-104

End of an Era in Early Irish Biblical Exegesis : Caimin Psalter Fragments (11th-12th Century) and the Gospels of Máel Brigte (A.D. 1138) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211   Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association 33-34 (2010-2011),   pp. 76-121

The Latin Gospels, with Special reference to Irish Tradition 263 The Earliest Gospels. The Origins and Trans­mission of the Earliest Gospels – The Contribution of the Chester Beatty Gospel Codex P 45

998 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church (Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 258),  2004, pp.  88-106

The Celtic-Irish Mixed Gospel Text : Some Recent Contributions and Centennial Reflections . . . . . . . . . 289 Filologia mediolatina 2 (1995), pp.  69-108

Sources and Affiliations of the Catechesis Celtica (MS Vat. Reg. lat. 49) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 Sacris Erudiri 34 (1994), pp.  185-237

The Newly-identified Cambridge Apocalypse Commentary and the Reference Bible : A Preliminary Enquiry . . . . 377 Peritia 15 (2001), pp.  208-260

PART II Apocrypha The Apocrypha in Ireland and Abroad : Summary of Evidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 453 Robert T. Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012, Part III, unpublished

Notes on the Irish Gospel of Thomas . . . . . . . . 483 Irish Theological Quarterly 38 (1971), pp.  42-66

The Bird hiruath of the “Ever-new Tongue” and herodius of gloss on Ps. 103.17 in Vatican Codex Pal. lat. 68 . . . 513 Ériu 39 (1988), pp. 87-94

Bible Text and Illumination in St Gall Stiftsbibliothek Codex 51, with Special Reference to Longinus in the Crucifixion Scene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 Pattern and Purpose in Insular Art (Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Insular Art held at the National Museum Gallery Cardiff 3-6 September 1998), M.  Redknap, N.  Edwards et al. (eds.), Oxford,  2001, pp.  191-202

Apocryphal Infancy Narratives : European and Irish Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 549 Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Texts and Transmission, P.  Ní Chatháin & M.  Richter (eds.). Dublin,  2002, pp.  123-146

Jesus in (Early) Irish Apocryphal Gospel Traditions .

.

. 585

Jesus in apokryphen Evangelienüberlieferung, J. Frey & J. Schrö­ ter (eds.), Tübingen,  2010, pp.  685-739

999

table of contents

The Inverted Eucharistic Formula Conversio Corporis Christi in Panem et Sanguinis in Vinum : The Exegetical and Liturgical Background in Irish Usage . . . . . . . . . 653 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 87 C (1987), pp. 573-593

Apocalyptic and Eschatological Texts in Irish Literature : Oriental Connections ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687 Apocalyptic and Eschatological Heritage : The Middle East and Celtic Realms, Dublin,  2003, pp.  75-97

Some Aspects of Early Medieval Irish Eschatology . . . 717 Ireland and Europe in the Early Middle Ages. Learning and Literature, P.  Ní Chatháin and M.  Richter (eds.), Stuttgart,  1996, pp.  42-75

The Irish Legend of Antichrist

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 763

The (Fifteen) Signs before Doomsday in Irish Tradition .

783

Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome. Studies in Ancient Intercultural Interaction in Honour of A. Hilhorst, F. García Martínez & G. P. Luttikhuizen (eds.) (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 82), Leiden, 2003,  pp.  201-219 Miscellanea Patristica Reverendissimo Marco Starowieyski septuagenario professori illustrissimo viro amplissimo ac doctissimo oblata (Warszawskie Studia Teologiczne XX/2), Warsaw, 2007, pp.  223-254

Navigatio Sancti Brendani. Some Possible Connections with Liturgical, Apocryphal and Irish Tradition . . . . . . 829 The Brendan Legend. Texts and Versions, G.  S. Burgess & C.  Strijbosch (eds.), Leiden, 2006, pp.  159-188

CONCLUSION Looking forward : De Initiis Project. Learning in the Early Church 600-800 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 Robert T. Farrell Lecture, Kalamazoo, 2012, Part IV, unpublished

APPENDICES A Bibliography of the Works of Martin McNamara in Irish Biblica and Apocrypha (1971-2015) . . . . . . . . 877 Critical Editions of Irish Biblical and Apocryphal Texts .

885

Cumulative Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . 891

1000 the bible and the apocrypha in the early irish church INDICES Index Index Index Index Index

of of of of of

Scriptures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Writers and Writings . . . . . . . . . . Manuscripts . . . . . . . . . . . . . Modern Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . Subjects, Persons and Places . . . . . . . .



941 949 973 978 991

FIGURES (see pp. 525-548) Fig. 1 : St.  Gall Stiftsbibliothek MS  51, p.  265 Fig. 2 : Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, MS Plut. 1.56, fol  13r Fig. 3 : Crucifixion scene with Longinus and Stephaton, from the church of Santa Maria Antiqua, Rome Fig. 4 : Crucifixion scene from the Southampton Psalter (Cambridge, St  John’s College, MS  C9 (59)) Fig. 5 : Detail from shaft of the South Cross, Clonmacnoise Fig. 6 : St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek MS  51, p.  266 Fig. 7 : St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek MS  51, p.  267 Fig. 8 : Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 257, fol.  12v

Fig. 1 : Final page of text in St  Gall Gospel Book (Stiftsbibliothek MS  51, p.  265). The two lines in Carolingian minuscule which appear below the main text have featured in the redating of the manuscript. (Photograph by permission of the Stiftsbibliothek, St Gall)

Fig. 2 : Crucifixion from the Rabbula Gospels, Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, MS  Plut.  1.56, fol  13r. (Photograph by permission of the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali)

Fig. 3 : Crucifixion scene with Longinus and Stephaton, from the church of Santa Maria Antiqua, Rome. (Photograph by permission of the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali)

Fig. 4 : Crucifixion scene from the Southampton Psalter (Cambridge, St  John’s College, MS  C9 (59)). (Photograph by permission of the Master and Fellows of St John’s College)

Fig. 5 : Detail from shaft of the South Cross, Clonmacnoise. (Photograph Peter Harbison)

Fig. 6 : St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek MS  51, p.  266. (Photograph by permission of the Stiftsbibliothek, St Gall)

Fig. 7 : St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek MS  51, p.  267. (Photograph by permission of the Stiftsbibliothek, St Gall)

Fig. 8 : Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 257, fol.  12v. (Photograph by permission of the BnF)