Language and History in Early England

This first selection of studies by Helmut Gneuss focuses on language and its development in Anglo-Saxon England, and at

552 111 63MB

English Pages 332 [335]

Report DMCA / Copyright


Recommend Papers

Language and History in Early England

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

Helmut Gneuss

Language and History in Early England


Also by Variorum: Bede and his World: The Jarrow Lectures, 1958-1993 Jn the Collected Studies Series:

HELMUT GNEUSS Books and Libraries in Early England

H.S. OFFLER ed. A.I. Doyle and A.J. Piper North of the Tees: Studies in Medieval British History

URSULA DRONKE Myth and Fiction in Early Norse Lands

MICHAEL W. HERREN Latin Letters in Early Christian Ireland

WALLACE MARTIN LINDSAY ed. Michael Lapid&e Studies in Early Medieval Latin Glossaries

P. SIMS-WILLIAMS Britain and Early Christian Europe

CHARLES W. JONES ed. Wesley M. Stevens Bede, the Schools and the Computus

DAVID N. DUMVILLE Britons and Anglo-Saxons in the Early Middle Ages

NEIL WRIGHT History and Literature in Late Antiquity and the Early Medieval West

SUSAN REYNOLDS Ideas and Solidarities of the Medieval Laity: England and Western Europe

ADRIAAN VERHULST Rural and Urban Aspects of Early Medieval North-West Europe

BENEDICTA WARD Signs and Wonders: Saints, Miracles and Prayer from the 4th Century to the 14th


Language and History in Early England



I ~ ~.~..... .I d ..... '-' This edition copyright C 1996 by Helmut Gneuss.

Published by VARIORUM Ashgate Publishing Limited Gower House. Croft Road, Aldershot. Hampshire GUI I 3HR Great Britain Ashgate Publishing Company Old Post Road, Brookfield. Vermont 05036-9704 USA ISBN 0-86078-601-3

Brltbh IJbnry CIP.Data Gneuss, Helmut Language and History in Early England. - (Varionun Collected Studies Series: 559) 1. English Language Old English, c. 450-1100. 2. English Language Old English, c. 450-1100-Etymology. 3. English Language Old English, c. 450-1100-Foreign Elements. l Title. 429'.0141 US IJbnry of Congress CIP Data Gneuss, Helmut Language and History in Early England I Helmut Gne•ss. p. cm. - (Varionun Collected Studies Series: CS559) Includes indexes (cloth: alk. paper) 1. English Language Old English, c. 450-1100-History. 2. Great Britain-History-Anglo-Saxon period, c. 449-1066--Historiography. 3. English Language Old English, c. 450-1100-Lexicography. 4. Maldon (England), Battle of, 991, in literature. 5. Maldon (Anglo-Saxon poem). I. Title. Il. Series: Varionun Collected Studies: CS559. PE125.G58 1996 96-23383 429-dclO


The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for lnf011oation Sciences- Peauumence of Paper for Printed Libnuy Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984 .. TM


Printed by Gaillard (Printers) Ltd Great Yaawooth, Norfolk, Great Britain COIJ.ECTED STUDIES SERIES CS559


32.. b 0 l. 9 )'1

e r1' I

12 ~ o 2 9


Foreword Acknowledgements I




.. Vil •• •


The Origin of Standard Old English and ~thelwold's School at Winchester Anglo-Saxon England 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972


Some Problems and Principles of the Lexicography of Old English Fesuchrift jUr Karl SchMUkr, ed. E. S. Dick and K. R. Janlwwslcy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1982


The Study of Language in Anglo-Saxon England. The Toller Memorial Lecture 1989 Bulletin ofthe John RylaNU University library of Manchester 72. Manchester: The John Rylands University library, 1990

A Grammarian's Greek-Latin Glossary in AngloSaxon England



From Anglo-Saxon to &rly Middle Eng/Uh. St111M1 presented to E. G. Stanley, ed. M. Godden. D. Gray and T. Hood Oxford: Clarendon Prus, 1994


Anglicae linguae interpretatio: l..anguage Contact, Lexical Borrowing and Glossing in Anglo-Saxon England. Sir Israel Gollancz Memorial Lecture 1992 Proceedings ofthe British Acadmsy 82, 1992 Lectures and Memoirs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, for the British Academy, 1993


Latin Loans in Old English: A Note on their lnflexional Morphology First publication





VU Bine angelsicbsische Kt>nigslistc


Sein litteras. Forschungtn van mitulalterlichtn Gei.steskben, ed S. Kr/Jmer and M. Bernhard. Bayerischt Akademie der Wi.ssenschaften, Phil- Hi.stor. Klasst, Abhandlungen, N. F., Heft 99. Munich: Bayerischt Akotkmit der Wi.ssenschaften, 1988

VIIl Die Benediktine11egel in England und ibre altcnglische Obersetzung


Die Prosabtarbeitungen der BtntdikliM~gel, ed A. SchrlJer, 2nd tdn. Darmstadl: Wi.ssenschaftlicht Buchgeseluchaft, 1964, Appendix


Die Battle of Maldon a1s historisches und litcrarisches Zeugnis


Bayerischt Akatkmit der Wi.ssenschaften, Klasse, Sitzungsbtrichte, Jahrgang 1976, Heft 5. Munich: Bayerischt Akademie der Wi.ssenschaften, 1976


The Battle of Maldon 89: Byrhtno6's ofennod Once Again


Studies in Philology 73. Chapel Hill, N.C.: The University of North Carolina Press, 1976


Giraldus Cambrensis und die Geschichte der englischen Sprachwissenschaft im Mittelaltcr


Language and Civilization: A Concerted Profasion of Essays and Studies in Honour of Ono Hietsch, ed. C. Blank. Franlifurt-on-Main-BerM-New Yor/c-Paris: Peter Lang, 1992

XII William Hereberts Obersetzungen


Anglia 78. TUbingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1960

Index of Manuscripts

1- 3

Index of Old English Words


General Index


This volume contains viii + 324 pages

FOREWORD The papers in this volume deal with the language of the Anglo-Saxons, its use in a standardized form, its contact with foreign languages, and with the lexicography of Old English (I, Il, V, VI, X). Three essays are concerned with the study of language in early England (Ill, IV, XI). Historical subjects treated in three papers are the Battle of Maldon and a recently discovered Anglo-Saxon regnal list (IX, X, Vll). The Rule of St Benedict and bishop £thelwold's translation of the Rule, and the verse translations in William Herebert' s sermon handbook form the subjects of the remaining papers. Eleven essays relating primarily to books and libraries in medieval England are to appear in a companion volume. All the papers are reproduced in their original form, followed by brief addenda where appropriate, intended to cover recent wok in the respective fields. Paper VI has not previously been published. I wish to thank Professor Michael Lapidge, who first suggested that the articles in the present volume might appear in the Variorum Collected Studies Series, and Dr John Smedley for including it in this series. Munich


April 1996

PUBl.TSHER'S NOTE: The articlu in thi3 volume, tu In all othen in the Collected Studie.1 Serie.1, have not been given a new, contin11oru pagination. In order to avoid confiuion, and to facilitate their ue where the.1e .Jame .Jtudiu have bem refe17wJ to euewhere, the original pagination ha.J been maintained wherever po.uible. Each article ha.J been given a Roman number in order ofappearance, tu li3ted in the Content.r. Thi3 number i.1 •Ypf!tlted on each page and q110ted in the Inda entrlu.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgement is gratefully made to the following for permission to reproduce the essays in this collection: Cambridge University Press (I); John Benjamins Publishing Co., Amsterdam Cm; The John Rylands University Library of Manchester (Ill); The British Academy (V); Bayerische Alcadelhle der Wissenschaften, Munich (VII, IX); Wissenschaftliche Bucbgesellschaft, Darmstadt {VIII); The University of North Carolina Press (X); Peter Lang Publishers, Frankfurt-on-Main (XI); Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tiibingen (XII). Acknowledgement is also made to the Syndics of the University Library, Cambridge, for permission to reproduce the plate in article XI, p. 168.


The origin of Standard Old English and JEthelwold's school at Winchester 'In literary culture', Sir James Murray has sai~ 'the Normans were about as far behind the people whom they conquered as the Romans were when they made themselves masters of Grccce.'1 Indeed when the Normans set foot on English soil Anglo-Saxon England was in possession not only of a remarkable literature but also of a highly developed written standard language, known and used in all regions of the country. 2 Most of our Old English manuscripts were written in the late tenth century and in the eleventh in a form of English - although not always quite pure - which the grammarians call late West Saxon. This form of the language is by no means just a dialect, any more than its literature is merely the literary product of a dialect. This fact is first brought home to us when we examine the negative evidence - the rareness before the end of the tenth century of texts in dialects other than West Saxon and their almost complete absence after this time, a state of affairs for which various explanations might be found, historical factors among others. Considerably more important, however, is a positive criterion: texts in this late West Saxon were written and read in other parts of the country too, in Kent (Canterbury), in Mercia (Worcester) and indeed even in Northumbria (York).l Moreover, texts which had originally been written in Anglian were transcribed into late West Saxon, as was a large part of Old English poetry. There can be no doubt: in our Old English texts of the eleventh century we arc dealing with a standard literary language which, although based on a dialectal foundation, had extended its domain beyond the borders of this dialect. I

J. A. H. Murray, Thi &om/ion of &glish uxitograpby (. pp. 271-2. a Cf. Dorothy Whitclodt, 'The Old English Bede', Pr«. of lbt Brit. AuJ. 48 (1962), S7 and n. s, and Schabam, Sttptrbia, pp. 4s-8 and n. 50. J EIP.abcthM. Liggin.a. 'The Authorship of the Old English Oroaius', Alfglio 88 (1970), 28cr-522, and Janet M. Batcly, 'King Alfred and the Old English Tnoslatioo of Oroaius ',ibid. pp. 43 3-fu. Cf. also Gunter Bochner, 'Vier altcngliscbc Bcuichnunac:n fiir Vergchcn und Verbrcchcn(FJrt1S, Gylt, Ma, St.J/4)' (Ph.D. thcail, Berlin, 19')8), pp. 184-5. 1


admirable article by Dr Sisam.' At least each of the ten Anglo-Saxon bishops was to receive a copy of the work. A scriptorium capable of mastering this kind of book production within a short time must have been rare in the early Middle Ages; Alfred certainly did not have one. What he did therefore was to send the first copies to other scriptoria, where they were copied in tt1m. Then the first copies and their transcripts were sent back to him, the preface which he had in the meantime composed was added to each of them and finally they were sent to their destinations. The whole procedure was obviously carried out in a great hurry and undoubtedly in places so far away from each other that there could be no question of achieving any 11niformity of language. The only important criterion which remains is Alfred's vocabulary. If we were to assume that the Old English literary language originated with Alfred and his circle we would expect his vocabulary not to differ substantially from that of the numerous late West Saxon texts. But here we arc confronted with the same picture as Professor W reno presented in his examination of the phonological features: the diifercnccs arc quite considerable. A number of dialectal and semantic studies have shown that there can be no question of a more or less 11niform West Saxon vocabulary, and that King Alfred's use of words deviates, in many cases quite appreciably, from that of 1Elfric, the chief representative of late West Saxon prose.2 In view of these realities, the belief that King Alfred was the founder or at any rate the harbinger of standard Old English becomes not only dubious but downright 11nlikely. Neither the given situation nor the existing linguistic evidence found in texts dating from before the tenth century points to the existence of a language form, obeying certain norms, which was continued and developed in the late Old English period. Moreover it seems certain that there were hardly any schools or scriptoria which would have adopted and would have helped to spread some kind of standard which King Alfred might have envisaged. His achievement is not a whit the less great for that. With his translations and his cultural policy, as one is tempted to call it, he attained considerable results. His books were read right up to the early thirteenth century. Nevertheless there is no proof that they raised West Saxon above the status of a dialect. Our task, we must conclude, is to look for the origin of standard Old English elsewhere. Since we know that the West Saxon dialect served as its groundwork, and yet Alfred's time is too early for its genesis, there rctoaio only the tenth and eleventh centuries, the late West Saxon period. And, in point of fact, late West Saxon is simply equated with Standard Old English in some handbooks. But when, and how, did a mere dialect come to achieve 1 2

Kenneth Sisam, 'The Publication of .Alfred's Pastoral Care', Shltliu, pp. 140-7. Sec below, p . 7s, n. 4·


I The origin of Standard Old English such widespread diffusion and recognition? Was it political factors which gave it its impetus or did church organization exert an influence? Did someone somewhere consciously work towards the fixation and diffusion of certain linguistic norms? How do we account for the astonishing 11niformity of the phonological and morphological system, or at least of the orthography, in Old English manuscripts of the late tenth century and the dcventh? There arc no indications in the first half of the tenth century of any linguistic process such as might be expected preliminary to the formation of a literary language. The decades after Alfred's death are charactcrizcd-politically by the consolidation of West Saxon dominion and the recovery of territories settled by the Scandinavians. But intellectual and spiritual life seems to have been in a state of stagnation; there was nobody to take over where Alfred left off. There were still scarcely any regular monasteries. Not one work of even second-rate standing in Anglo-Saxon literature can be shown to date from this time. King Athelstan presented Latin books to ecclesiastical institutions; but we do not find a single mention of him, or of any other English king, taking an interest in works of literature written in English. Our attention is thus directed to the great Benedictine reform in the second half of the tenth century. It was only then that English monastic life was finally restored and that English culture and scholarship regained something of the brilliance which had once emanated from the Northumbrian monasteries, and only then that the conditions were created for the composition of the great Anglo-Saxon prose works at the end of the tenth century. It seems a logical step to presume further that this reform movement was also a driving force in the evolution and diffusion of a literary language. But one should not rest satisfied with seeing here just possibilities and general tendencies towards a linguistic development. One should at least make the attempt to discover some source of conscious language manipulation; one should ask oneself if there was not more involved in the beginnings of the Anglo-Saxon literary language than just the gradual expansion of West Saxon into other dialect regions. In order to rcaliz.e the significance of the reform movement for our subject it may be appropriate to recall a few facts and names - names which would perhaps be as well-known today as those of Alfred and Chaucer if the Norman Conquest had not put an end to a literary development so full of promise. D\1nstan, an Anglo-Saxon of noble descent, became abbot of Glastonbury in the year 940. Here he introduced monastic practices according to the Benedictine Rule, and so did his pupil lEthclwold when he became abbot of Abingdon around 9S4· They found their models on the continent: Dunstan was forced to spend some years as an exile in the reformed monastery of St



Peter in Ghent; 1Ethelwold summoned monks from Corbie to instruct the monks at Abingdon in plain chant and sent one of his own monks to Fleury to study the observances there. However, a real reform movement did not get going in England until the young and energetic King Edgar came to the throne in 959. Now the prime movers in the reform began to move up into key positions in the church. In 96o Dunstan was made archbishop of Oanterbury and in 963 JEthelwold became bishop of Winchester. They had the cooperation of Oswald, who had become bishop of Worcester in 961 and had himself lived in Fleury for a long time. It was under these three men, and with vigorous support from the king, that from 96o onwards monasteries, such as Malmesbury, Westminster, Shcrbome, Winchester, Peterborough, Ely and Ramsey, to mention but a few, were founded or restored, and cathedrals were transformed into monastic cathedrals, as in Canterbury, Winchester and Worcester. These foundations were confined to the south and Midlands, it is true; but here a new golden age of monastic life in England dawned and brought in its train a renaissance of culture, literature and art: in this connection one need only think of English manuscript illumination. The Benedictine reform in England had its origin in the West Saxon region. Dunstan and 1Ethelwold came from there; Glastonbury and Abingdon were situated there. The chancellery of the English kings, which, however, would scarcely have exercised much influence on the language of Old English literature, must also have been West Saxon. 1 So it is not really surprising that the standard literary language, common to all of England in the eleventh century, was also marked by West Saxon features. What is remarkable, however, is its linguistic uniformity, and what strikes us particularly is the relative consistency with which its exponents spelled their sounds and inflexional endings, a conformity which extends to and partly includes the use of vocabulary. No other Old English dialect exhibits a comparable regularity, and even late West Saxon must have been spoken in such a large area that we should not expect to find complete uniformity in the use of language. Finally, Standard Old English conceals from us the progress of certain developments in speech - such as the levelling of unstressed vowels in inflexional syllables - which were at quite an advanced stage in the eleventh century, as we can observe from occasional spellings. If one takes all these aspects into consideration, it is difficult to go on believing in a process of gradual growth in the influence of a dialect, due simply to the prevailing circumstances. On the contrary, a regulative and organizing element makes itself felt here, for which we should, as I have suggested above, tty to find some explanation. It seems that there must have been some leading scriptorium, some influential school behind Standard r But ace below, p. 8:, n. 4.

I The origin of Stamlard Old 'English Old English,1 and it is my opinion that this can only have been lEthclwold's school at the Old Minster in Winchester. There arc many factors which support this view: Winchester was a royal residence; it was one of the centres of the reform movement, the scat of three reformed monasteries, one of which was also a cathedral; and it was situated right in the heart of the West Saxon kingdom. It would thus seem quite feasible that this might have been the centre of a language reform too, and indeed with more likelihood than any other place in the Anglo-Saxon domain. But we must now seek to prove this by exact methods. After all, Dunstan's Canterbury is another possible candidate; and in Canterbury we find not only the oldest cathedral and the oldest monastery in England but also the scat of the primate of the English church. This primate, D11nstan, came from the West Suon region himself, bad close connections with the West Saxon court and had promoted the Benedictine reform for fifteen years from a West Saxon monastery. What, then, are the factors which speak in favour of lEthclwold, bishop of Winchester, and his school? We possess two different, but closely connected, accounts of lEthelwold's life, one written by lElfric and the other, in all probability, by Wulfstan, the prcccntor at the Old Minster, Winchester, who, like lElfric, was a personal disciple of the bishop.2 lEthelwold was evidently of noble birth. His parents lived at Winchester; as a young man he spent some time in King Athclstan's retinue, was later ordained priest by 1Elfhcah, bishop of Winchester, and entered Dunstan's monastery as a monk. When lEthelwold expressed his intention of leaving England to study monastic life in the reformed monasteries on the continent, King Eadrcd held him back and in 914 made him abbot of the then deserted and ruined monastery at Abingdon. He carried out his office there until the year 963 when he was entrusted by Edgar with the episcopacy of Winchester, a ministry which he held up to his death in 984. lEthelwold was thus a native of the West Saxon kingdom and, with the exception of some short trips (and perhaps a longer stay at Thomey late in his life?), he never seems to have left it during his lifetime. Winchester was his native place and he very probably spent the greater part of his life there. Where the monks in the cathedral 1


Cf. Robert P. Stockwell and C. Westbrook Barritt ('Scribal Practice: some Assumptions•, L41rptgt 37 (1961), 75-82), who even maintain 'that the England of.the eighth through the tenth c.cnturics ... could not have had anything but a rcaaooably thorough system of instruction for its scribes• (p. 77); they do not deal, however. with the apccific question of the origin of the late Old English customs of spelling. Cf. Dorothy Whitelock, EHD. pp. 851-2. More recently, R. N. Qyirk baa auggeatcd the poaaibility that A:Jfric waa the author of both Llvca; the ucription of the longer (and earlier?) Vita to Wulfitan ia in any cue not absolutely certain. Sec R. N. Qyirk. 'Winchester Cathedral in the Tenth Century'. Anh] 114 (1957), 5J-7· Thcte ia also a short account of lBthclwold•a Jife by William of Malmeabury, D1 Gu/is PMlijinl#I Allglonmt. ed. N. E. S. A. Hamilton. Rolla Series (1870), pp. 16J""9·


monastery at Winchester, the Old Minster as it was called, came &om is not known with certainty, and perhaps it is not so important for our line of inquiry. At any rate, .lEthdwold initially brought monks with him &om Abingdon to Winchester, and in Abingdon - which was also situated in West Saxon territory - most, if not all, of the religious were picsumably natives of those parts. Unfortunately we know as good as nothing about the places &om which the numerous monks came who peopled the newly founded or rcstoicd monasteries during the time of the Benedictine icform. Still, the few clues that we do have indicate that the members of any particular house mostly came from the neighbourhood. This question of the origin of the monks is of some importance in English philology, because our Old English manuscripts afford only insufficient evidence on the dialects of the Anglo-Saxon period. But thcic arc two other kinds of evidence for determining and differentiating between these, namdy place-names and Middle English dialects, for which the material is richer. Neither of these, however, is absolutely reliable. Thcic may, for instance, be shifts in the demarcation lines between dialects. Let me hcic cite, as an example, the claim that our only manuscript of the Old English ApoliMlitu of Tyr1 - or at the scribe who wrote it - must have come from Essex or Middlesex, because of the numerous examples of a for the i-umlaut of a before nasals which it contains. The origin and transmission of this text, which holds an important place in the history of Old English literature seeing that it is the first known English translation of a narrative prose work &om the late classical period, arc of some interest to us. The criterion which is used to locate the dialect is reasonably trustworthy with icgard to Middle English; but it fails in the case of Old English, a fact which can be proved by a number of texts and manuscripts, which, although they display this very same phonological or orthographic feature, quite definitely come &om other parts of England-Kent, for cx.ample. 1 So much for the method of dctcrn•ining Old English dialects by means of a comparison with Middle English or with place-names. Another method consists quite simply of taking the language of some manuscripts whose places of origin have been located with certainty by means of non-linguistic criteria and 11sing this as a starting-point for one's investigations. However, even hcrc we still have to contend with the source of error mentioned above: the scribe (or author) of a tat may come &om the region in which the manuscript has been written, but again this is not necessarily always the case. He may have adapted himself to the current usage prevalent in his scriptorium, but there is no guarantee of this either, and I Cf. Dil tlil- 111111 •il#t,./i1t"'11 ApollfllliNs-IJl'lltbstikla, ed. J. Raith (Munich, 19,6), pp. 8-16; Thi OU & Apol/Dllill1 of T.JrY, ed. P. Goolden (Oxford, 19,8), p. :nxiv; and H . Gncuu, Hprmar 111111 Hy1'11tm ;,,, mt.liithm Mi111/a/11r (Tubingcn, 1¢8), pp. 16o-1 and nn. 4 and ,. See also E. G. Stanley, ASNSL zo6 (1¢9), 137.

I The origin of Standard Old 'English Professor Campbell is probably right when he believes that 'consistent writing of a dialect could be achieved only by a scribe trained in a monastery where the dialect in question was the official language'.• Let us return to ..£thelwold. We may safely assume that he and his associates used the West Saxon dialect. But what was the situation as regards Old English language and literature? Was anybody actively, or even passively, occupied with them at the time of the reform movement? In chronicles, lives of saints and other documents we find quite detailed accounts of the activities of Dunstan, lEthclwold, Oswald and their assistants, of the support they received from King Edgar, of the foundation of new monasteries and the purchasing of land property for these, and of the expulsion of clerics who refused to become monlcs. Particular emphasis was always laid on the fact that the reformers were scholarly men of wide reading, but only in one instance do documents testify to an interest in the English language on the part of any of these men - namely in the case of ..£thelwold. His two biographers relate of him: 'He always took great pleasure in instructing the young men and boys, in explaining Latin books to them in the English language, in teaching them the rules of grammar and metre, and exhorting them gently to strive for greater things. And so it was that many of his pupils became abbots, bishops and even archbishops in England.'a Nor did he stop at simply explaining books in English. King Edgar and his wife called upon him to translate the Benedictine Rule into English. The king may have known that lEthelwold was the right man for the translation, or perhaps lEthelwold offered to undertake it himself, for the king rewarded him with land, which lEthclwold in tum gave to the monastery he had restored at Ely. In his translation of the Rule he shows himself to be a capable translator and, both in sentence structure and in the use of words, a skilful master of Old English prose. His style is lucid and easily comprehensible; and he seldom has to experiment in his choice of vocabulary. Where he found no suitable word in English, he either used a loan-word or created a new word himself. All this points to the fact that he had devoted many years to the study not only of Latin but also of English usage.3 It is worth mentioning too that the manuscripts of lEthclwold's translation show the form Thi VuptuUitt P1.Jw, ed. D. H. Wright and A. Campbell, EEMF 14 (Copenhagen, 1967). p. 82. 1 Tmnslated &om the veraioo of the Vita ascribed to Wulfatan, ch. xxxr, M.igne, Patrologia Latina 1~7. col. 91· , CT. H. Goeuu, 'Die . . in England und ihre altengliache Obenetzung', in Dit ""1'1sitbli11blll P~llllpl iw ~/, ed. A. Schr6c:r, Bibi. d. ags. Proa 2, 10d ed. (Darmstadt, 1¢-4). ..Elfric:. Wul&t2n of Winchester and William ofMalmeabury do not mention ..£thelwold u the translator of the Rule (although William of Malmeabury knew the Old English version; cf. Mlltlorilli1 of Sailll Dittuta, ed. W . Stubbe, RS (1874). p . 290). The translation wu mat attributed to .iBt.belwold by the twelftb Sec Gncuss, Hymtttzr 1""' HJl""e1r, p. 246.



The origin of Standard Old English to his Grammar where he declares that it may be used as a basic primer for both Latin and English. 1 £lfric's significance for the history of English prose is universally recogni~ nowadays. His stylistic skill and his efforts to achieve a certain linguistic norm~ are inconceivable without a thorough schooling - and this even more so in the case of his Grammar. His very fust work, the Catholic Homili1.1, exhibits a language form which exemplifies in every respect the late Old English standard language. It was written during his first at Ceme, that is to say directly after his move there which took place only three after .tEthelwold's death. With this evidence in mind we cannot fail to recognize the importance which the school at Winchester had for the first English literary language., But there is a further and still more convincing argument to support the claim that .tEthelwold's school aspiied, or at least contributed substantially, to a standard usage in language. A very restricted group of texts, which date from the end of the tenth century and the beginning of the eleventh and which were written in close connection with Winchester, display - as opposed to other West Saxon and non-West Saxon texts - a remarkable 11niformity in the choice of expression within certain groups of synonyms. It is, of course, not possible to give a detailed analysis of this material within the limits of an article such as this, but the relevant evidence can be found in a number of recent or forthcoming works. These include Hans Schabram's study of the Old English terminology for Latin mperbia (196j), a Berlin Ph.D. thesis on the Old English words for 'guilt' by G. Buchner (1968), a Munich Ph.D. thesis- not yet finished- on the Old English words for 'crown' and 'wreath', another Munich thesis - just finished - on the Old English Benedictine Rule, my study of the Old English hymn glosses (1968) and some earlier studies on Old English semantic fields, word geography and linguistic borrowing, among them the theses by Hilding Bick and Hans Kismann.• 1



£Jfrit1 Gram1'1alik ""'1 G!M1llT', ed. J. Zupitza, 2nd ed. with contr. by H . Gneusa (Berlin, 1966), p. 3 : 'ac: bco by!S swa !Scab sum angyn to tcg!Srum gercordc•. Cf. Peter Ocmocs, '.£1fric', C011tinlltlliatu flllll '&gilrttillg1: Shllliu i11 014 'f3Alli1h Limabtn, ed. E . G. Stanley (London, 1966), pp. 176-209, and John C. Pope, Introduction to HOlfliliu of £Jfri,: a SlljJp/ntlmtary OJl/1elifJll 1, BETS 2f9 (London, 1967). Numerous small revisions to the Gltholie Homilk.t show bow painstakingly and systematically lElfric sought to rcgularizc his use of English; sec Sium, Stwlit.!, pp. 183-s, and Peter Ocmoca. £/frit's First Swk.t ofGltbolie Homilk.t: BM Royal 7 C. xii, ed. Norman Eliason and Peter Ocmoca.

EEMF 13 (Copenhagen, 1#), p. 55. • Sec above, p. 66, n. 2, p. 67, n. 3 and p. 71, n. 1; Hilding Bick, Thi S.J"011.1'111 for 'CIJiU', 'Boy', 'Girl' in 014 &glish (Lund, 1934); and Hans Kliamann, 'Tugcnd und Laster im Alt- und Mittclcogliechen' (unpub. Ph.D. thesis, Berlin, 19s1). A number of studies of Old English semantic fields and dialect words arc listed by F. Holthauaeo, Alfm#isthu 1tymologisr1Hs W6rt""'1wh, z.nd ed. with new bibl. H. C. Matthes (HejdcJberg, 1963), pp. niii-nvii; A. Campbell, 014 'f3Allbb GrdlllflltlT' (Osford, 19s9). pp. 566-8; and 0. Funke, 'Altcoglilche Wortgeographle', A.ltglislistlH ShllliM: F111srhrifl f(,11111 70. G#Nllla8 """ Fri#rkh



This much can be said bricfiy: as is to be expected, the typical 'Winchester words' represent only a sma)l fraction of the entire vocabulary, but once a definitive Old English dictionary has been compiled they may well tum out to be more extensive than at present imagined. Further, they consist only of those words of which it can be proved from similar contexts in other contemporary texts - West Saxon ones too - that they could have been replaced by synonyms. In this case, it sccnis, we arc justified in disregarding to a certain extent the linguistic and non-linguistic characteristics which usually differentiate the members of any pair or group of so-called 'synonyms '. There is very little that can be said about the reasons which prompted the choice of one word rather than another in the various instances. Wc find some expressions from church usage, such as the translation for and expressions for 'altar', 'martyr' and 'disciple'; here the religious terminology may still have been in the process of formation, or rather, re-formation. In the main, however, the words arc taken from a great variety of spheres, as, for example, the words for 'son' and 'stranger', 'guilt', 'vice' and 'pride', 'aown' and 'path'. Vcxbal concepts, such as 'to drive away', 'to burn' and 'to cleanse', arc also to be found. So we see that it was not a case of some sort of new 'technical' vocabulary being laid down; stylistic considerations, rather, must have been the chief conccm in choosing the individual words. Thus our group of texts, which I shaJl caJl 'the Winchester group' from now o~ hasgelah1111g instead of ryri,e, where the people, not the buildings, arc meant; for Latin JUdp"""1 it prefers korningmihl to other loan formations and semantic loans; it employs rylllr1, but not jJro111ere and not normally the loan-word marl.Jr; it retains the old (pagan?) word 111eofoJ and has neither "11tr nor "11ar1; it prefers sllllM to beam and i:cplaces mihl in the sense of' boy' by ""'""; and it almost always has nit while Alfred and some late Old English texts usually have sry/J. The words for s11perb11.1 and S11ptrbi4 arc almost exclusively 1110Jig and 1110Jigness and occasionally the recent French loan pryte, but never oftr1110J and as in earlier West Saxon prose (and in Wulfstanl), nor oferhygdig and oferl!Jgd, the words of Anglian prose and of poetry. The word for 'vice' is kahtor and rarely 1111pea111, which is used by Alfred and in some late West Saxon texts. The increasing use of 111ih1 instead of 111agm, 'virtue', may go back to Winchester practice too. The Winchester group employs 11111/Jorbeag for 'orona, especially in a religious sense (' aown of life'), and in a concrete, secular sense 'Yflthe/111, but never Alfred's beag and hardly ever any of the other words for torona found in late Old


Fi/J, ed. K . Brunner, H . Koziol and S. Kominger, Wiener Beitrlge zur cngliachcn Philologie 66 (Vienna, 19,8), pp.


I have to dwnk Miu M . Grcttcb and Mr] • .Kinc:hncr for making available to me material and results of their work in progreu oo the Old Eoglilh Benedictine Rule and the Old Engl.iah words for 'crown' and 'wreath' rapectively.


The origin of Standard Old English English texts. For 'path' the preferred word seems pall, as opposed to .rtig and .silljBJI; instead of fremtk, 1Billeodig or 1/jr1m1d is used; 111erod is preferred to !111111 and myrig, (g1)b/irsiQ11 to (ge)fm!Pzn, Nllll!Jtkm to adrmfan, adrifQll (and possibly aftormiQll to (ge)e/8311Jian and forJ111mlan to forb1B111a11?). Other words that may belong in the Winchester vocabulary are g1dyr.rtlsan, 'to dare'; gmht/a&Qll, 'to correct, to mend one's ways' (but not in the sense 'to lead, to direct.'); g1ef111/zean, 'to emulate'; bzf111, hzfmha.r and h•fenka.rt, 'possession ','poor' and 'poverty'; and onhrop, 'importunity'. We 6nd a vocabulary, regulated in this way, used in a number of Old English texts or groups of texts with a degree of consistency unparalleled in any other Old English writings. First, there arc the works of Alli'ric; here, of course, personal style may have something to do with it. 1 Another text that belongs here is the Old English interlinear version in the Lambeth Psalter, Lambeth Palace Library 417, written in the first half of the eleventh century. The points of agreement which it has with JElfric's usage, and the points of disagreement which set it apart from eleven other Old English interlinear versions of the psalter, cannot be overlooked. It seems significant that the glossator of the Lambeth Psalter appears to have deliberately rejected words from the earlier psalter glosses he may have when such words did not agree with the usage of the Winchester group, while in many other cases he has combined a word from the earlier psalter glosses with a 'modem' or 'Winchester' word, thus producing numerous double or multiple glosscs. 2 Unfortunately the origin of this manuscript is not known; however, it is quite possible that it was connected with one or more Winchester manuscripts.3 The third text which displays the same characteristic choice of words is in BM ..Psa/11r, Acta Socletatia Scientiarum Fennicae 5s, no. I and 45, no. '(Hclaingfors, 1909-14). Llndelof{u, s6) liata a number of .rare words, which lBlfric and the Lambeth Psalter have in common; be also lists (u, 41-2) worda which arc characteristic of our Winchester group. In connection with correspondences of usage between the Lambeth Psalter and the Spelman Psalter, C. and K. Sium are thinking of 'some iofltk:lltial monutic school in which these stand1rd equivalents were taught', TIN Salisbmy P1alur, BETS 242 (London, 19J9), p. 74. For the dependence of the Lambeth glouator on earlier models see Scbabram, SllJJ#rbill, p. 27. J. R. Stracke. •Studies in the Vocabulary of the Lambeth Psalter GlOISel' (unpub. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pcnnsylv•ni•, 1970), who deals with the double glosses, does not eecm to recognize the real significance of many of thcee (esp. pp. 1 541J.). ' Tbc only Old English glossed which shows a number of ddinite linb with the Lambeth Pulter is BM Stowe i, the Spelm1n Psalter, written about the middle of the eleventh century. D. H. Turnet thinks that Stowe 2 and Le Havre an eleventh-century miaal from New Minster, Winchester, 'seem to have a scribe or llCrihes in common'. See TIN Missal of llN N1111 MiN1tr, Witltbultr, ed. D. H. Turner, Henry Bradahaw Society 95 (1962), pp. D-xiii. Turner's discovery might inclicate where we have to look for the 'influential monastic school' mentioned by C. and K. Siaam (see above, preceding note). i




Expo.titio l!J111110N1111. It is difficult to pin-point the place where these two manuscripts were written; they probably have some connection with Canterbury. However, an examination of the Latin Expositio soon makes it dear that - because of dift'crcnccs in liturgical observance - there can be no question of its having originated in Canterbury; its composition must be connected with Winchester, since it gives so exact an account of the practice, introduced there by 1Ethelwold and described by lEJfric.1 The fourth of the texts we arc interested in here was located by Max Forster. It is a translation of the Rule of Canons by Bishop Chrodcgang of Metz, containing an additional section in chapter two. This section explains, with the help of examples, how the religious in monasteries should be adchcsscd with titles. All the names mentioned in the examples arc to be found in a list of the monks at the Old Minster, Winchester, dating from the time of 1Ethclwold's successor. Partiailarly interesting for us, however, is the fact that among them there is mention of a Wlllfst1111 'antor; this can only be that same Wulfstan of Winchester who was a pupil of 1Ethclwold's and who has been referred to above. There can be little doubt that the translation of Chrodcgang's Rule was carried out at the Old Minster in Winchester, and this is of importance to us for its vocabulary is fairly close to that of the three texts, or groups of texts, already mentioned.a The fitting in of this last piece of evidence shows us where to look for the source of this standardized Old English vocabulary. We can also show that it was a specific and planncxl vocabulary, prevalent in one school and restricted to a certain area, and not just a modem trend in general usage. Even in .i£thclwold's own translation of the Benedictine Rule we find divergences; however, this translation was doubtless carried out at an early stage of his caieer as a teacher in Winchester, and the vocabulary which we have been dealing with here probably only crystallized gradually within his school. This would explain why 1Ethclwold's usage in many respects seems rather 'modern' and often corresponds to that of the Winchester group or that of late West Saxon te:s:ts in general; he has, for example, zlf>todig, mapa and wllldorblag and he uses kahtor, not 1111peaw, and gylt but never s&y/J, while out of seventeen Old English words for SlljJlrbia and its relations fourteen belong to the 111oJig f.amily (moJipss, moJig, modigian). But the remaining three point back to earlier usage - ojl1'1111tfll (twice) and of,,.moJ.3 Another example of a • For tat and introduction ace Gneuu. Hpaar 111111 HJlll""", esp. pp. 69-7'4 and 91-101 . 1 TIJI OU&,tub RMil ofBirbop Chrot#gt11111111(/ llJI C.pi""4 ofBirbop T"'°"111f, ed. A. S. Napier, BETS 0.1. 1,0 (London. 1916); Max Forster, 'l.obliaicrung und Daticrung dcr altcngli1ehco Version der Cluodegaog-Rcgcl ', Sil"(""lrlHrithl1 t#r IJdJn'. AiuMlnri1 t#r Wirmutbtl/1111, Pbil.-hisl. Abt., Jg. 1955, Schlnuhcft. pp. J-8. , Sec Schabram, Sllj>lrllid, pp. However, of the two instances of o/"11111111, one does not translate~ butlXd/t.lio(Schft)er'1 ed., 2.J.9) while tbcothcrocx:un only in BM Cotton Faustina A. x, in a chapter which ii not part of the actual Rule (Schrer, 1 J8.Jo).



I The origin of Standard Old F.nglish less 'modem' expression is magm, 'virtue', whereas miht is not used in this sense. Also 1Ethelwold has not yet settled on a translation word for Ji.rapllill.f: he tries six different ones, none of which occurs more than three times. Furthermore, whereas the Winchester group prefers S111111, he uses almost exclusively b111111. 1 The Old English Benedictine Rule thus clearly represents an intermediate, but rather advanced, stage between an older, partly unsettled usage and that of the Winchester group. There is another manuscript which seems to hold a similar position in the development of vocabulary usage; this is BM Royal 2. B. v, a Latin psalter with an Old English interlinear gloss, written about the middle of the tenth century, perhaps at the New Minster, Winchester, or at the N11nnaminster. The Regius Psalter, as it was ca.lled by its editor,a shows some striking correspondences with the 'modern' vocabulary of the Old English Benedictine Ruic and with the Winchester group; it has •/}eodig once, relfr1111"1 twice (besides fr1111hl) and mapa; among the words it shares with other late West Saxon texts arc 1ornos1n,,, gllilorf, 111111 and s"111initm, while the loan-word 'hor fust appears in this psalter and the Old English Benedictine Rule. There arc other close Jinks between these two texts: they havef orbrytan, whereas the Winchester group sce111s to prefer tobrytan; and they arc the fust Old English prose texts to employ '1111/i&, while the Winchester group has Jo/sang (e.g. eleven times in the Lambeth Psalter as against only one '1111/i&, in a double gloss together with Joftang). Wildhagcn thought that the Rcgius gloss was the first fruit of the Benedictine reform, but this fact seems to be obscured by the considerable number of early West Saxon and Anglian words in this translation, which may- or may not - point back to an Anglian exemplar. A detailed investigation of the Regius gloss is badly needed; it might tell us more about its role in the history of Old English vocabulary. What seems particularly important for our argument is the fact that even those contemporaries of 1Elfric who otherwise kept to Standard Old English felt themselves at liberty, in their choice of words, to follow their own inclinations or other models. This is the case with Wulfstan, archbishop of York and bishop of Worcester, who corresponded with 1Elfric and yet used a vocabulary which was not that of 1Ethelwold's school. Other cases in point are the widely read fust English prose translation of the gospels, dating &om 1


There will be a much fuller tmltmeot of the vocabulary of the Old English Benedictine Rule in the forthcoming thesis by M. Gtetsch. It ia interesting to note that the 'Aocount of King F.dgar's Establishment of Monasteries' (see above, p. 74 and n. 1) bolds about the same place u the Old English Rule in the development of word usage. Dff' alJm&/inlH R1gilu-P1al11r, ed. Fritz Roeder, Stuclien zur englischen Phllologie 18 (Halle, 1~). See also Karl Wildhagen, 'Studien zwn Psalterium Romanum in England und zu teinen Glllierungcn ', Fulnhrifl /llr Lor~ Mor.tbtri, ed. F. Holthausen and H . Spies, Stuclien zur engliac:hen Pbilologie 50 (Halle, 191 s), pp. 448-5': C. and K. Sisam, TIH Salitbwy P1al11r, pp. 51-6; and Ker, C.ltl/opf, no. 249.



of the tenth century,1 and the interlinear glosses to the &gN/4ri.r Conawtlitz, to the Rule of St Benedict, to the Canterbury hymnal (Durham, Cathedral Library, B. 3%) and to Dcfeosors LilHr Sti111i/'4nmt. Thus Wulfstao uses of1r111oJignu.1, of1r1111thl and pryt1, instead of lllOdips.1 in the Winchester group; he has 1111peo besides kahtor, employs eyrk1 (and forbM11411) and does not have 9/t. Similarly the West Suon Gospels have 11110fod as well as a/ttJT1; they have tyrk1 and !.'fm"11tlm, but not !!lah1111g; ".f10rllli4n is .rare, but tlan.timt {gltln.titm, atfn.titm) is frequent; fr11111d appears side by side with 11/fr1111"1 and 1/&; and the words for the .nlj>lrbill field are of1r111od and of1r111oJig111s.1. The pt'CSC1lt unsatisfactory state of Old English lcxicography2 docs not yet permit us to draw up a more or less complete list of genuine 'Winchester' words. The main problem we arc facing is that a considerable number of characteristic late West Saxon words are widely used in many texts of the period including those of the Winchester group. They are expressions like t111gS1UJ1, 'narrow, anxious• (and t111g.rt1111f1.1s); blhr10111.11111g, 'penitence•; blp11tt111, 'deceive,; besargi411, 'lament,; 1D1110stlit1, 'irgo,; g1dtorf, 'labour'; hlordrlllim, 'custody, care,; 11111rsitlll, 'praise'; 1111.11, 'table,; strlllinian, 'to examine, consider'; 11111'1 or l1arllit, 'sharp, severe'; pas/it, 'suitable'; and 11111ftis, 'dress, cloak'. How arc we to draw a line between these words and the 'Winchester' words defined above? Similarly most of the Winchester words also occur elsewhere, more or less frequently, in late Old English texts, for example in glossaries, in interlinear glosses, in Wulfstao's genuine works etc. In view of this overlapping of usages it might seem somewhat hazardous to try to establish something like our Winchester group. But there arc some fairly reliable criteria which we can apply when utilizing and interpreting studies like those mentioned abovc,3 namely the consistency with which a particular expression is employed in certain texts, the fact that these texts share quite a number of words consistently used, the fact that they avoid certain other synonymous words and the fact that they use some very .rare words, which occur only or mainly in their group. Finally, convincing evidence for the existence - and signi6cance - of the group or school here postulated can be found in the revision of Bishop Wcrfcrth's translation of Gregory•s DiakJ1.111s, preserved in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hatton 76. The text of this manuscript, written in the first half of the eleventh century, differs considerably in the use of individual words from that of the two other copies still extant, which, although approximately the



A reccot attempt to sec in the West Suon Gospels a product of the Al&edian movcmc nt which in tum goc:a back co an Anglian gloa bu not convinced me: M. Grilnbcrg. T1" F11l-St1X011 Gosplls: 11 Stlllly of 11" Gospll of SI MtJ/10,., lllilb T1x1of11" Ftllll' Go1Jlll.s (Amsterdam, 1¢7). pp. J66-71. a Cf., e.g., Hant &habram. Allglia 84 (1966), SJ-8. • P. 7' and n. 4. 1



Thi origin of Stantlard OIJ English contemporary with the Hatton manuscript, offer the original text. The corl'CSpondenccs between the vocabulary of the Winchester group and that of the Hatton manuscript of Gtcgory's DialogNU arc so close and remarkable that, more than sixty years ago, Hans Hecht did not hesitate to call the reviser of Werferth's work a member of lEthelwold's school. 1 Evctything therefore seems to point to the conclusion that the school at Winchester, represented by the texts mentioned above, was marked by a decided concern for language and style. But what about other centres which could possibly have been active in spreading a literary language after the Benedictine reform? When we survey the entire orgao.i%ation of the church in England there seem to be only two other possible candidates - the monastic cathedrals of Canterbury and Worcester, the scats of Dunstan and Oswald. We can e1iminate Worcester. for various reasons, but principally because it was situated in the dialect region of Mercia. Important points in favour of Canterbury would seem to be the personality of Dunstan, who was a brilliant organizer and scholar, and, as has been mentioned above, the fact that the primate of the English church had his residence there. But as in the case of Worcester, differences between the dialects make it almost impossible for us to assume that Canterbury was the cradle of the Old English literary language. Kcntish had phonological chuacteristics which in Canterbury, even in the eleventh century - as can be seen from the manuscripts written there - were not always successfully suppressed in favour of the standard language imported from the West Saxon region, at least in spelling; Canterbury may even have had certain features of vocabulary peculiar to itself, which will have to be examined more closely.a It is obvious that what I have said so &r about the Winchester origin of Standard Old English is, and may remain, a hypothesis. Above all I am well aware that far more work will have to be done on various aspects of the problem, and that some dct.ails of what I have said about the use of individual words may have to be modified in the light of future rcscarch and of new dictionaries, concordances, special glossaries and editions of Old English texts as yet unpublished. But more evidence for deliberate standardization may also be forthcoming. Why, for example, should most Old English scribes (from the tenth century onwards) carefully observe the distinction 'cntsprecheod dcm Spncbgebnuch der Schule ..£thelwoldt. dcr er angchOrt, enetzt er cine schr bctrlcbtlichc Anzahl •on Wonan des iltacn Tates durch andcrc ...', 'Bisrbof Warj1rlbs WIJf'#.l'/fr Olllr#lt""l Mr Dia/ogr Gt-1gors ills Gros.rm, Bihl. d. ags. Prosa J (Leipzig und Hamburg, 1~7) u, 131. Sec allo Hecbt'a 'Wottliaten' 11, 156-70, and Gunther Scherer,• Zur Geographic uad cr>datioos rdCttcd to above. p. 75, n. 3, regularize 1yntax. J Karl Wildhagco. who coined thi1 tctm (' Studico zum Paaltcrium Romanum in England', p. 43 7), seems to have been thinking of a kind of Minhsprt11bl, but ace A. Campbell, Thi V upa.ri4n Psalm-, EEMF 14. pp. 82-3. For the importaOC#' of Mm:ian as a prc-Alfredian 'literary dialttt' ICC Thi Lift of St CIHlll, ed. R. Vlcesluuycr (.A.mmrdam, 19s3), pp. 39-62. • Pierre Chaplaia has shown that before the rime of Edward the Confcaor, no central royal accrctariat ICCDll to have bcco in matcncc in England. Hia findings about the production of charten in .Anglo-Saxon England 1trcngthcn the case for a monutic, or at least ccclcaia1tical origin of Standard Old English. Cf. P. Chaplaia, 'The Origin and Authenticity of the Royal 2


I The origin of Standard Old &glish number of reformed monasteries on West Saxon territory and the popularity of 1Elfric,s writings. But it seems inconceivable that the late Old English standard language could have bad such a success without having been consciously regulated and cultivated: the source of this cultivation and care may well have been 1Ethelwold and his circle in Winchester - England,s first English philologists. 1 Anglo-Suon Diploma', ]nl of Jbt Sot. of Artbmstr m, no• .i (196s), 48--01, and 'The AngloSu:on Chancery: from the Diploma to the Writ', ibid. nr, no. 4(1966), x&r76. I owe the knowledge of these papen to Mr Peter Hunter Blair. For earlier views on the que&tion of an AngloSuon sccrctariat, sec R. Drogcrcit. 'Gab cs cine angclsilcbaiache KOnigskanzlci? ', Arehi, fiir Urlawlmforsehtmg 13 (1935), esp. 335-41 and 418, and Dorothy Whitelock, EHD, p. 34S· For the r61e played by the Abingdon aod Winchester scriptoria in the development of handwriting in tenth-century England, sec now T. A. M. Bishop, &glish Clll"O/i,,, Mifllmlll1 (Oxford, 1971), • •• pp. UJ-Dll. ' This paper waa fint delivered in 1966 aa an Alrlrittnoriutlllg in the Univcrsity of Munich. It was suhlcqucotly revised in the light of reocat work dealing with the vocabulary of Old English. In the summer of 1970, when I held a Visiting Fellowship at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, I waa given the opportunity to present the revision to apert audiences in the Universities of Cambridge aod London, and the version bcrc printed owes a number of valuable suggestions to colleagues in these universities, in particular to Professor Peter Clcmocs.


Addenda It seems important here to emphasize the difference between what is now generally called 'Standard Old English' and the usage obviously developed and taught at ..Ethelwold's

school in Winchester. The latter is marked by the consistent employment of deliberately


chosen tenns for certain concepts, especially by ..ElfHc and in a number of anonymous texts and continuous interlinear glosses. This has been studied and fully documented by Walter

Hofstetter, ·Winchester und tier spataltenglische Sprachgebrauch (Munich, 1987); see also his 'Winchester and the standardization of Old English vocabulary', Anglo-Saxon England, 17 (1988), 139-61.

'Standard Old English' is a written form of English based on the West Saxon dialect


(but not necessarily following Winchester school word usage) whose use appears to have spread to the other dialect areas since the later tenth century; the ecclesiastical centre at Winchester must have played a significant role in this development, to which, however, other factors will have contributed. For ..Ethelwold and his school see now Bishop £the/wold: His Career and Influence, ed. Barbara Yorke (Woodbridge, 1988), and the excellent Introduction to Wu/fstan of

Winchester, The life of St £the/wold, ed. Michael Lapidge and Michael Winterbottom

(Oxford, 1991); cf. also the recent work by Lucia Komexl (in Addenda to article V). For Mechthild Gretsch's work on ..Ethelwold (cf. note 4 on pp. 75-6, above), see the Addenda to article Vlll, below. - For the standardization of inflexional morphology in Old English see 1 , .. .


t~ wortW,;Y.,>:~f. ~b~ (arti~I~ ~· p. 9, below).

.• r·rJ...'. '

f . ..

• ; . .,.,, •

••' ' .:



;.. •l

.• . •. .,

.,• .• . . f . •• • 'I


,. ~ I


. 4!)· I!:arm•tadt, 1965), I. 212.13, 220.15, 220.22 in MSS. 0 and c, except C 212.13, which has ehpyrle. For the later borrowing of Old French fenestre see OBD and llED s.v. Por windows in Anglo-Saxon churches see B. M. Taylor and Joan Taylor, AnglO-Saion Architecture (Cambridge, 1965), I, 9-10.

7 But Bans Pinsker, Altenglisches Studienbuch (DClsseldorf, 1976), pp.20-21 seems to consider it as a very early loan in English. 8 Lindisfarne Gospels, Matthew 7.13 and 14, John 5.2J Rushworth Gospels (Northumbrian section), John 5.2 and 10.23. Cp. the use of duru and geat in the Lindisfarne and Rushworth glosses, and in the WestSax.on Gospels, and Maller-Frings, Germania Romana, II. 403-0.4. 9 Thomae Wright and Richard Paul W\llcker, Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies, 2nd ed. (London, 1884, repr. DaDD8tadt, 1968), I.

186.10, give an incorrect impression of the relevant section in the gloesary. See the di_s cussion by Lowell Kindschi, "'Die Latin-Old English Glossaries in Platin-Moretus .MS 32 and British Museum MS Additional 32 246,• Stanford University Ph.D. thesis (1955), p. 240, and cp. Max J.l'Orster, Der Pluan.tme Thetmse und se.ine Sippe, Sitzungsberlchte der Bayer. Akad. der Wiss., Phil.-hist. Abt., Jahrg • .1941, Bd. I, pp. 578-79, and MO.ller-Prings, Ger1Mnia Romana, II. 275-77. lO Cp. Helmut Gneuas, Lehnbildungen and Lehnbedeut.ungen iJll Altengliscben (Berlin, .1955), p. 67, and for the possibly Gex:man origin of

OB earmbeort, Werner Betz, Deutsch und Latelnisch. Die Lehnbildungen der althochdeutschen Bened1ktinerregel (Bonn, .1949), pp. 73 and 99.



11 •01e Bedeutung von 3il und 3ilscipe in der ae. Genesis a,• Beitrlge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur ('l'Obingen), 82 (1960), 265-74. Knowledge of Old Saxon texts in the later AngloSaxon period can also be assumed on account of the copy of the Reliand in 11.9. cotton caliqula A. vii, which seems to have been produced in Southern England in the late tenth century, although its script is difficult to place. 12 There is no coeq•rehensive survey of OE word-formation as yet, but there axe numerous studies of various types of co•q>Oundinq and derivation. They have conveniently been listed by Gabriele Stein, English Word-Formation over two Centuries ('l'Qbingen, 1973). 13 One of the wealcneaaea of existing dictionaries and glossaries is the fact that they indicate the gender, but not the inflexional class of Old English substantives; Martin Lehnert, Poetry and Prose of the Anglo-SaJCons: Dictionary (Berlin, 1956) is a notable exception. 14 (Springfield, Mass., 1961). Cp. James Sledd and Wilma R. Ebbitt, Dictionaries and that Dictionary (Glenview, Ill., 1962). 15 •Traces of Coloquial Speech in OE,• Anglia, 70 (1951), 22-42. 16 First by Henry SWeet, 7.'he Student's Dictionary of Anglo-Saxon (Ollford, 1896, and repr.), then by John Clark Ball in the second ed. of his Concise Anglo-Sazon Dictionary (camht'idge, l916) and in subsequent editions. Cp. also note 18. l 7 •studies in the Prosaic Vocabulary of Old English Verse," Neuphilologische llittei.1ungen, 72 (1971), 385-418. 18 Cp. the syst• of symbols employed by Friedrich Klaaber, Beottulf and the Fight at Finnsburg, 3rd ed. (Boston, 195-0), elr))lained on p. 293. 19 This has not been changed in Beotrolf. Iii th the Finnesburg Frag-

ment, ed.


L. vrenn, fully revised by W. F. Bolton (London, 1973).

20 Cp. Belim>t Gneuss, B~r und Rymnen :l.JD englischen llittelalter ('l'Obingen, 1968), pp. J80-8l, 198. 21 Andreas und Elene (Kassel, 1940), p. 100.

22 For critical surveys of the study of OE dialect vocabulary see Otto P'Unke, •Altengliscbe WOrtgeographie ve), nos. B.1, C.18.3, C.17.11, c.4. 30 This is the view held by Elmar Seelx>ld, "Die ae. EntsprechWiJWl von lat. sapiens und prudens," Anglia, 92 (1974), 291-333, esp. 330-31. 31 "The Proper Toil of Artless Industry" (cp. note 1 •lx>ve), pp. 152-53. 32 Cp. Helmut Gneuss, Die Battle of Jlaldon al.s htstorischelJ and literariscbes Zeugnis, Sitzungsberichte der Bayer. Altad. der Wiss., Phil.-hist. ltl. . , Jahrg. 1976: Beft 5, pp. 27-31. 33 Henry Loyn, Anglo-Saxon England and the NorJDllll Conquest (London, 1962), pp. 174-75. 34 Laws of F.dvard the Elder, II.2.1 (Liebermann, Gesetze I,140)1 Charter of King Aet-belberht of Wessex (Sawyer, Anglo-Suon Charters, no. 328), two inata.nces.J Will of ealdorman Alfred (Sawyer, no. 1509) 1 'l'be Wife•s Lament, l. 47. 35 For the earlier literature on the subject see Joseph Bosworth and T. N. Toller, An Anglo-Suon Dictionary (Oxford, 1982-98), pp. 'Bl99, and OED, a.v. folkland. Views around the turn of the century are represented by F. w. Maitland, Domesda9 Book and Beyond (C.ambridge, 1997, repr. London, 1960), pp. 261-306; PaulVinogradoff, Engl:Lsh. Societ9 in tbs Eleventh. Century (Oxford, 1908), pp. 255-62--preceded by the same author's "Folkland," English Historical Review, 8 (.1893), 1-17--J .Felix Liebermann, Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen (Balle, 190316), II. ii. 403. For recent views of historians see Henry Loyn, (note 33 above)J Eric John, Orbis Britannlae (Leicester, 1966), pp. 64-1271 F. M. Stanton, Anglo-Suon England, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1971), pp. 309-12.J Hanna Vollrath-Reichelt, .XOn.igsgedanke und Kl:Sn.igtwu bei den Angelsachsen (KOln, 197.1 ), pp. 65-68 1 1~2'!"2251 S.. P . Finberg, in 'l'he Agrarian Histor9 of England and liales I.11: A.D. 43-1042, ad. Pinberg (CAmhridge, 1972), p. 458.; Nicholas Brooks, "Anglo-Suon Charters: the Work of the Last Twenty Years,• Anglo-Suon England, 3 (1974), 222J Dorothy llh.ltelock, English Historical Documents c, 500-1042, 2nd ed. (London, 1979), p. 537, and Simn ICeynes, 'l'he Diplomas of JC1ng Aethelred 'the unread9~ 978-1061 (Cambridqe, 1980), pp. 3l-32. 36 ep. Laa of Ina, 19 (Liebermann, Gesetze, I.96-97), and AngloSaxon Chronicle, A 897 (ed. Pl1111M1ier, I.91. lQ). 37 Laws of Ine, 22 employed for a status which Liebe:cmann (Ge1 setze, II.1..96) distinguishes from that referred to in Rectitudines and the chartera (see note 38 below) •

II 168 38 Stenton, Anglo-Sazon England, p. 473. See Rectitudi.nes s1ngularum personarum, 2 (Liebermann, Gesetze, I.445) and two records of the late ninth and the eleventh century (Sawyer, noa. 1441, 1555), and cp. alao geneatribt in Rectitudi.nes, 2 and geneatland, geneatnMn, Laws of Badgar, II. 1 • 1. , IV. 1. 1 (Liebermann, Gesetze, I. 196, 206) • For discuaaions of the term O\arlea Pl•J11Der, 2"Mo of the saxon Chronicles (Oxford, 1892-99), II.1121 Loyn, Anglcr&azon England, pp. 189-90, 3531 Finherg, The Agrarian History, I.ii.439, 514-751 Whitelock, Bngl1sb. Historical DocwDenta, p. 401, n. 1.


39 Wright-WQlcker (cp. note 9 above), I.422.20 and 466.11, cp. w. G. Stryker, •The Latin-Old English Glosaary in MS. Cotton Cleopatra A. III,• Stanford university Ph.D. thesis (1951), pp. 243, 3541 WriqhtWlllcker, I.234.23, cp. Herbert Dean Meritt, Pact and Lore about Old English Words (Stanford, C&lifornia, 1954), p. 46. 4 0 Finberg, The Agrarian History, I.ii.4391 cp. Gneuss, Die Battle of lfaldon (cp. note 32 above) , p. 41. Robinson, •Lexicography and Literary criticiam: A caveat,• Philological Essays., ed. Rosier (cp. note 27 above), pp. 99-1101 Gneuss, The Battle of Jlaldon 89: •ayrhtlloO's ofez»Dd Once Again,• Studies in Philology, 73 (1976), 117-37. See also George Clark, "The Bero of llaldon: Vir pius et strenuus, • Speculum, 54 (1979), 257-82. 41 Fred


42 Tba Student's Dictionary of Anglo-S1aon, p. v. 43 An earlier version of this paper vaa ftrat read at the Annual Jl.leeting of the Medieval Academy of America 1n May 1977, in Toronto.


Addenda The original version of this paper was presented at the Annual Meeting of the Medieval Academy of America in 1977. Since its publication in 1982, five instalments of the

Dictionary of Old F.nglish, covering letters A, ..£, B, C and D have been published in 1986-

1994; letter Eis to appear in 1996. A recent, thorough analysis of what was achieved, and of the problems involved, is by Lucia Komexl, 'Progress in Historical Lexicography: The

Dictionary of Old F.nglish', Anglia, 112 (1994), 421-53 . On the treatment of loans see

articles V and VI, below, and Alfred Wollmann, U11tersuchungen zu den frlihen lateinischen Lehnw, xxxii, 1984 (Spoleto, 1986), 643-88, at 685-7; Dom ~vid Knowles, TM Monastic Order in England, second edition (Cambridae, 1963), 488-9; D.A. Bullough, 'The Educational Tradition in England from Alfml to £lfric: Teaching rariaaque lin/fuoe', Settimane di studio, xix, 1971 (Spok1o, 1972), 453-94, at 492-3. 7 Manin Irvine, 'Bede the Grammarian and the Scope of Grammatical Studies in Eighth-Century Nonhumbria', Arsglo-Saxon Ersg/and, 15 (1986), 15-44.

' a.




teaching of grammar and Latin in early England, namely to enable pupils to read intelligently both English and Latin works, panicularly the Bible, but also patristic writings, historical works, literature and Fachliteral.ur, and to equip them for active panicipation in Mass and Office. For all this a knowledge of the tei•ninology and categories of Latin grammar was indispensable. The Anglo-Saxon age spans almost five centuries from the introduction of Christianity, and requires of the historian of language and philology as discriminating an approach as of any historian. It seems helpful, not only for the present purpose, to distinguish three periods, though I am aware that this implies a drastic simplification and that a strict demarcation of the periods is not possible: (I) the seventh century (in particular the second half) and the eighth century, which in England are marked by a high standard of education ~d learning - one need only think of Theodore and Hadrian at Canterbury, of Aldhelm, Bede or Alcuin; (2) the ninth century - a period signalled by a general decline in culture and education, and with it a deterioration of Latin scholarship, a development which cannot be put down to the Scandinavian invasions and later senlement alone since it was clearly in progress before these events;8 (3) the tenth and eleventh centuries - from the time of King Alfred, and especially from che Benedictine Reform onwards, the revival of Latin scholarship was vigorously pursued, and this is also the period that produced the great Old English prose works. It goes without saying that, within the constraints of a paper such as this, no more than a fleeting sketch can be drawn of the vast area of study covering language and philology in Anglo-Saxon times. A more thorough treatment would demand more space and time, while a great deal of work on our subject still bas to be done. Nor must we forget that the evidence at our disposal is of a fragmentary nature. One cannot but recall here Dorothy Wbitelock's reminiscence about her student days in her inaugural lecture at Cambridge in 1958:' . . . how, when Professor Chadwick suggested that I should undenake research, I was afraid that before I could get going there would be nothing left to do.>9 Sixty years later this is still an ungrounded fear on the pan of anyone contemplating active participation in our field of studies, a field which is also closely linked with the research project Fonzes Ang/o-Saxonici now in progress. Much still waits to be done, and not a few discoveries will no doubt be made. As an indication of what still calls for scholarly anention we may note the comment of Michael Lapidge, in his report on 'The Present Set Helmut Gncuss, 'King Alfred and the History oC Anglo-Saxon Libraries', Modes of I~ in Old English Liuronrrt: Essay1 in H onovr ofSllZllky B . Grun/ield, ed. Pbyilis Rugg Brown, Georgia Ronan Cmnpioo, Fmi C. Robinson (Toronto, 1986), 29-49, and ·~Saxon Libraries', 672- 9. • Dorochy Whitdoclc, C/aani'int CttnmlS ill A._SarOll Stwlin (CamtJridee, 19S8), 2. 1


State of Anglo-Latin Studies', that 'For the later period, there arc numerous Latin-Latin glossaries and glossae collectae preserved in pre-Conquest Anglo-Saxon manuscripts, and these, by and large, have never been printed or studied. ' 10 Grammatical texts tell a similar tale. In a number of Anglo-Saxon manuscripts of the tenth and eleventh centuries there are pertinent anonymous texts which have as yet been neither edited nor identified. 11 Such is also the case with a text in a Paris manuscript (BN lat. 7561, fos. 1-11, s.xi) which is followed by a distich that even links it to IElfric: JElfrico monacho opus hoc super astra coruscet, Qui studuit templi sic decus hoc fieri. 12

Almost all of Priscian's grammatical writings were known in AngloSaxon England. The only work of which this could not be said with certainty is the Partitiones XII versuum Aeneidos, a grammatical and metrical commentary on the first verse of each of the twelve books of the Aeneid. A copy of this school textbook, written in England around the turn of the millennium, however, has recently come to light in a manuscript now in the Bibliotheque Municipale in Rheims (1097). 13 Similarly, only a number of continental manuscripts from the eighth century onwards were known to contain a glossary listing Greek grammatical, metrical and literary terms with Latin translations, but a copy of this glossary in an English manuscript - perhaps from Abingdon - has now been identified. 14 10

Michael Lapidge, 'The Present State of Anllo-Latin Studies', ln.ndar Lalin Sfvdin: Papm on l.atin Texts and Manuscripts of die Britisli Isles, 550- 1066, ed. Michael W. Herren (Toronto, 1981), 45-82, at 62 and n.141. On the significance of such glossaries for the teaching of Latin in England sec Michael Lapidge, 'The Hermeneutic Style in Tenth-Century Anglo-Latin Lltera· turc', Anglo-Saron England, 4 (1975), 67-111. 11 MSS B[ritish) L[ibrary) Cotton Cleopatra, Conon Julius A.ii, Harley 3271; St John's College, Cambridge, D.12 (87); Oxford, Bodleian Library Rawlinson C.697; St John's College, Oxford, 17; Salisbury Cathedral 88; Worcester Cathedral Q.5. lElfric's 0 - i s followed by a treatise on the declension of nouns in MSS BL Cotton Faustina A.x, Harley 107 and Durham Cathedral B.iii.32; a related text is in Harley 3271, fos. 5•-6'. On 'parsing grammars' in English manuscripts cf. Vivien Law, •Anllo-Saxon England: Aelfric's "Excerptioncs de arte gra.mmatica Anllice" •, Histoire Epistimologi.e Langage, 9.i (1987), 47-71, at 50, and Michael Lapidge, 'Surviving Booklists from Anllo-Saxon England', Leamillg and LitmUllre in Alfllo-Saxon England: Studies Presented to PeterClemoes on tlu Occasion of hisSixt;y-Fift/tBirtlulay, ed. Michael Lapidge and Helmut Gneuss (Cambridge, 1985), 33-89, at 52. u See Max Manitius, Gescltichu dtr laleiniscltm Liuralla' des Mitlelalt.m, ll (Mtinchcn, 1923), 680 n.5. n See Helmut GnaJSS, 'Eine angelsiichsiscbe KOnigsliate', Scirt Iiutras: Fonclrvngtn aum mitulalurlicltm Gtisttsleben, ed. Sigrid Kramer and Michael Bernhard (Bayeriscbe Akademie der Wisscnschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, Abhandlungen N.F. 99, Miinchen, 1988), 201-9, at 201-3. 1bc discovery was made by Dr Colette Jeudy. · 14 BL Harley 3826, fos. 150'- 152•, s.x/xi. Eighth-century copies of this glossary are in MSS Paris BN lat. 7530 (from Monte Cassino); Wolfenbtittel, Herzog-August-Bibliothck, Weissenburg 86 (from Tours); Berlin, Swtsbibliolhek Preuss. Kulturbesitz, Diez. B Sant.66 (from !he coun of Charlemagne). The Harley copy, of which I am preparing an edition, was mentioned by Georg Goetz, Corpru glossarionan Iatinonml, I (Leipzig, 1923), 102, who, however, says nothing about its date or provenance. About a third of the entries in Harley 3826 occur in the so-called first Corpus Gloaary, MS CCCC 144, fos. 1-3• (s.ix1, from St Augustine's, Canterbury).




The term grammazica as used in Antiquity and the Middle Ages goes beyond what we understand by grammar, coming close to our use of 'philology' or 'linguistics'. To begin with, I will here use 'grammar' to refer to a work that describes the phonology, morphology and syntax of a language. A considerable number of such grammatical works from the late Roman period were available in the early Middle Ages, and most of them seem to have been known to the Anglo-Saxons in the first period. Among them were (1) grammar books per se, from Donatus's short elementary grammar, the Ars minor, to Priscian's comprehensive lnstitutiones grammaticae; (2) grammatical commentaries such as those on Donatus by Servius and Sergius; (3) treatises on specific areas of grammar such as orthography and accent, and on prosody; and finally (4) treatments of grammar within the framework of encyclopaedic works - among them Martianus Capella's De nupciis Philowgiae et Mercurii (Book Ill), Cassiodorus's brief introduction in his lnstitutiones (Book II, ch.i) and, most importantly, the first book of the Etymologiae by Isidore of Seville. Quintilian's chapters on grammar in his Instilutio oralOria - which may not have been accessible in Anglo-Saxon England - deserve a special position in this group; they might today be described as an introduction to the problems of linguistic studies.15 Anglo-Saxon libraries from the late seventh century onwards are known to have been exceedingly well-stocked, and this applies not only to collections such as those at Canterbury, Jarrow, Wearmouth and York. 16 This is clearly attested by what we know of the scope of grammatical writings available to the monasteries and cathedrals. Our sources for this are not contemporary manuscripts, however, almost all of which were lost without trace in the turmoil of the ninth century. Our evidence is derived indirectly from the early glossaries (which

For the Roman grammarians and encyclopaedic writcn, see Vivien Law, 7711 /nsular Lalin GnzlllllfOrians (Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1982), 11-29, and 'Late Latin Grammars in the Early Middle Ages: A Typological History', 7711 Hinmy of Linguistia i1t tJit Clauical Period, ed. Daniel J. Taylor (Amsterdam, 1987); 191-206; Alfred Gudeman, 'Grammatik', Pfllllys Rll1lEw::yc/opiidU dn classUdim A · t, second edition, ed. Georg Wissowa and Wilhelm Kroll, 14 (1912), 178~1811, and the mtries on the individual grammarians in this work [hencefonh: RE); Manin Schanz, Gnc/richu dn riimiscJam Lilmurlr, rev. by Karl Hosius and Gustav Kriiger, Ill, third edition; IV.i. and IV.ii, second edition (Miinchm, 1922, 1914, 1920); Max Manitius, Geschichu dn /Ju.einirchen LJuraair des Miuelalten, I (Miincbm, 1911); Franz Brunholzl, Gesdtichu dn lazeinischni Lilmurlr zt is glesing, ponne man glescJ pa earfoaan word mid earan ledene' - 'when one glosses the difficult words with easier words in Latin'.58 Quite early on glosses in the vernacular began to appear beside the Latin glosses. 'The Anglo-Saxon glosses are part of the AngloSaxon literary heritage,' Professor Eric Stanley has aptly remarked. 59 More is the pity that the Anglo-Saxon glossaries have been passed over in literary histories and even in bibliographies of Old English literature, though one has to admit that they are among the more taxing subjects of English philology. This is partly due to the type of words they contain and partly to the way in which they were compiled. Unlike a copyist of prose or poetry, the compiler of a glossary was '1

For knowledge of Nonius Marcellus in early Anglo-Saxon England, see Manitius, 'Zu Aldhelm und Bacda', 599-600; W.M. Lindsay, The Corpus, Epirtal, Erfvrt and Leyden Glossaries (London, 1921 ), 8S-6; Pheifer, Old English Glosses, !vii. For the manuscript transmission of Paul the Deacon's Epiwme, see Sexri Pompei Fesri De verbmum signiji.carv quae supmuru cum Pauli Epiwme, ed. Wallace M. Lindsay (Leipzig, 1913), xix- xxi; Gemot R. Wieland, The Latin Glosses on Arotor and Prudmtius in Cambridge University library, MS Gg.5.35 (Toronto, 1983), 172, considers it possible that the F.pilorru was used by an eleventh-century English glossator. See also J. Tolkiehn. ' Lexikographie', RE, 23 (1924), 2432-82, at 2479-82, for Roman lexicography. 58 Grammar, 293.13-17; cf. Isidore,, l .xxx, who does not speaY. of 'difficult' or 'easier' words. 59 'The Scholarly Recovery of the Significance of Anglo-Saxon Records in Prose and Verse: A New Bibliography', Anglo-Saxon Englmul, 9 (1980), 223-62, at 249.



entirely free to adapt his source or sources, adding and deleting at will. This renders the investigatiop of the sources and interrelationships of the Anglo-Saxon glossaries a ··taborious task; even experts on Old English literature must occasionally be tempted to believe that we are here grappling with some esoteric science. Another problem involved has already been mentioned: so far only the predominantly bilingual glossaries from the Anglo-Saxon period have been examined in any detail, and we are sadly lacking in editions of Latin-Latin and Greek-Latin glossaries of English provenance. 60 The glossaries can be divided into two types: subject-based or alphabetical. Those arranged according to subject ('class glossaries') were designed largely for teaching and self-instruction, and drew on Isidore's Etym0logitu as their main source. The best example available is the Glossary which .lElfric appended to his Grammar. 61 The development of alphabetical glossaries, clearly meant for reference purposes, like dictionaries, has been repeatedly described.«>2 At first lemmata and glosses are excerpted from glossed texts. In this first stage they are listed separately in 'batches' from each text and in order of their appearance in the text (i.e. not alphabetically and often in varying infiexional forms). This stage we refer to as glossae colleccae. It is followed by the alphabetized stages, beginning with glossaries arranged according to the first lener (a-order), which still contain many 'batches' of glosses from the individual text sources; then come glossaries in ab-order, and finally those in abc-order. A detailed treatment of the Anglo-Saxon glossaries would be misplaced here. I shall restrict myself to a few points which are directly relevant to the topic at hand, and to glossaries in which the Latin lemmata are consistently or selectively provided with English glosses.63 It is notable here that the compilation of glosses and glossaries in England, and the interpretation of lemmata with the aid of Old English words, goes back as far as the seventh century and the 60

For manuscripts with Latin-Latin and Greek-Latin glossaries, see Lapidge, 'The Picsent State of Anglo-Latin Studies', n.141 . h should also be noted here that several existing editions of Latin-Old English glossaries are incomplete as they omit the lemmata that have only been gloacd in Latin; cf. note 72 below. 61 Latin-Old English class glossaries are included among the materials in MSS BL Conon Cleopatra A.iii, Brussels Bibliotheque Royale 1828-30, and Antwerp Plantin-Morctus Museum 47 with London BL Add. 32246; cf. note 63 below. The standard critical edition of Ailiric's Glmsary is by Zupitza, .£lfrics Grammalik und Glossar, 297- 322. For later medieval excerpts, and for copies of lost manuscripts of the Glossary, see Ronald E. Buckalew, 'Leland's Transcript of .£lfric's Glossary', Anglo-Saxon England, 7 (1978), 149-64, and note 43, above. A source study and annotated edition of IElfric's Glossary (based on MS St John's College, Oxford, 154) is by Robert George Gillingham, 'An Edition of Abbot tElfric's Old English-Latin Glossary with Commentary' (Ohio State Univenity Ph.D. thesis, 1981). 62 See James A.H . Murray, TM Eoolucion of English Lexicograplty (Oxford, 1900), 7- 12; Georg Goetz, 'Glossogflphie', RE, 13 (1910), 1433-66, at 1446; Michael Lapidge, 'The School of Theodore and Hadrian', Anglo-Saxon England, 15 (1986), 45-72, at 53-4. 6 ) A complete record of Latin-Old English glossaries and their printed editions is provided in Angus Cameron, 'A List of Old English Texts', A Plan for w Dictionary of Old English, ed. Robena Frank, Angus Cameron (Toronto, 1973), 248-54, section D.

III 20

school of Theodore and Hadrian at Canterbury. Here is the home of what Dr Lapidge, in a seminal essay, has called the 'original English collection of glosses'.64 Comprehensive selections of this material are to be found among the glossae collectae in the Leiden manuscript Voss. lat. Q.69 (written around 800 in St Gall), as well as in odrer manuscripts, mostly from the ContinenJ. 65 The earliest English glossaries also drew on this source - the Epinal glossary, wrinen in England in the late seventh century (and closely related to the Erfun glossary compiled in Cologne in the late eighth or early ninth century), and the Corpus glossary, wrinen in Canterbury in the first half of the ninth century. All three have very recently been published in an excellent facsimile edition.66 For rhese glossaries other sources besides the 'original English collection' were used, too, among them cenainly material that had come to England from the Continent. The sources and interrelationships of rhe early Anglo-Saxon glossaries have been treated in a number of authoritative studies. 67 We come to the bilingual glossaries of the third period. They are mainly preserved in five manuscripts written between the mid-tenth and early eleventh centuries, and in two twelfth-century manuscripts containing herbal glossaries. 68 From these we may conclude that all or most English libraries were equipped with glossaries not only in the early period, but in the tenth and eleventh centuries as well. It is unlikely, however, that there was one 'standard glossary', or several such, since-with one exception-the collections of glosses in the later manuscripts vary considerably. What is significant, though, is that almost all the glossaries in these manuscripts - including the lists of herbs - contain ,materials traceable to early English glossography and related to the Epinal, Erfun and Corpus glossaries.69 This would indicate that, among the books from the early period which had .. Lapidge, 'The School of Theodore and Hadrian', 57. 6 ~ A Lau Eiglult-Cnuvry Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary Prtsnwd in rite Library of rite Leiden Unitlnrity, ed. Hesscls; Lapidge, 'The School of Theodore and Hadrian', 54-72, which includes a list and bibliography of all relevant continental manuscripts. 66 Tiu Epinai, Erfim, Werden and Corpus Glossaries, ed. Bernhard Bischoff, Mildred Budny, Geoffrey Harlow, M.B. Parkes, J.D. Pheifer, Early English Manuscripu in Facsimile, XXJI (Copenhagen, 1988). Important annotated editions of the early glossaries are: The Corpus Glossary, ed. W.M. Lindsay (Cambridge, 1921); 'The Epinal Glossary', ed. Alan K. Brown (Stanford University Ph.D. thesis, 1969); Old English Glosses, ed. Pheifer. 7 " Most recently by Pheifer, 'Early Anglo-Saxon Glossaries' (see llOle 28, above), with references to earlier literature on the subject, and by the same author in the facsimile edition (quoted in note 66, above), 49-{)3. 61 Tenth- and eleventh-century glossaries: The manuscripts listed in note 61 above; MS BL Cotton Otho E.i (a fragmentary copy of the first glossary in Cleopeua A.iii); MS BL Harley 3376. The plant glossaries: MSS Durham Cathedral Library Hunter 100 and Oxford, Bodleian Library Laud misc. 567; for the latter, there is now the printed edition by J. Richard Stracke, Tiit lad Herbal Glossary (Amsterdam, 1974). "' For the sources and r.elationships of the later Anglo-Saxon glossaries sec lhe editions listed by Cameron; H. Liibke, ' Uber verwandtschaftliche Beziehungen einiaer altenglischer Gloaare', Archit1 for das Sllldium der neueren Spraclten und Lillm1lJD'tn, 85 (1890), 383-410; Old E,,,mli Glossts, ed. Pheifer, xxx.i-xxxix.



s,urvived into the third period, there were other manuscripts besides Epinal and Corpus that contained glossaries and could be put to practical use from the time of the Benedictine Reform onwards. If these books survived the ninth century, then so might many more texts than we have hitheno been led to believe. The tradition of general bilingual glossaries comes to an end in the early Middle English period. They are replaced by the great Latin dictionaries of Papias, Osbem of Gloucester, Hugutio and Johannes Balbus. Could the glossaries of the Old English period also have served as dictionaries, at least of hard words? Leaving aside the herbal lists, a typical English glossary manuscript at this time looked rather unlike a dictionary; it resembled a more or less haphazard collection of individual glossaries or elements of such, as is the case with MSS BL Cotton Cleopatra A.iii, Brussels 1828-30, and with the collection now divided between Antwerp Plantin-Moretus 47 and London BL Add.MS 32246. A very different picture emerges from BL Harley 3376, on which J.D. Pheifer has this to say: 'Harley is the fullest and most elaborate of the Old English glossaries, and the only one that treats its material at all intelligently, but its textual value is limited by the lack of coherent batches and the practice of combining material from different sources in a single interpretation. '70 This brings me to an important point. Questions concerning a glossary's textual value, its sources and relationships to ot.her glossaries are of course perfectly legitimate. But should we not also be asking about the practical purpose and use of a glossary? What were the principles guiding the choice of lemmat.a? Does it contain only rare or difficult words, or common vocabulary as well? Was it designed for the reader of demanding texts, such as Aldhelm's poetry and prose (which played an imponant role in the glossaries of the third period),71 or for the less ambitious user? Are there any developments which could point to the possible, later evolution of a full-fledged dictionary? I believe this last question can be answered in the positive, panicularly when one considers the Harley glossary. Its 'limited textual value' in fact constitutes its merit: for the contemporary user it was of little concern whether the sources of a panicular glossary were evident - he was primarily interested in the lexical information it provided. The Harley glossary- or rather what remains of it - gives 5,563 entries in abc-order for words beginning with the letters A-F. Extrapolating from this figure, the complete glossary would have contained roughly 12-14,000 entries, thus approaching the format of a dictionary. About a third of the surviving lemmata have English glosses, many have several Latin and Old English e~uivalents. Regrettably, the only complete edition is unsatisfactory. 2 I think we should welcome an 70

Old English G/Qsscs, ed. Pheifer, xxxvi. 71 Especially in the first and third glossaries in MSS BL Cleopatra A.iii, and in Harley 3376. ~1 The HarlLy lAlin-Old English Glossary, ed. Roben T. Oliphant (The Hague, 1966); see the

III 22

investigation of the Anglo-Saxon glossaries from the point of view of their value and use as practical linguistic handbooks. ETYMOLOGY

Since the nineteenth century etymological research has been determined by sound laws and the principles of semantic probability. Antiquity, the Middle Ages and subsequent eras up to the eighteenth century had to make do without such precise criteria, and have earned themselves enough reproaches on this count. But contemporaries of these eras, from Quintilian to Samuel Johnson, had themselves already expressed scepticism of this 'old-style' etymology.73 Only recently has it begun to be viewed with more sympathetic eyes again. The Anglo-Saxons were naturally familiar with the etymological methods of Roman Antiquity and the early Middle Ages, which sought to disclose the true meaning of a word by tracing it back to its origins. 74 This could be achieved (1) by analysis of a compound or derivative (which we would see as belonging to the study of wordfonnation - indeed, since the late Middle Ages the term 'etymology' could be used to refer to the morphological section of a grammar); (2) by explaining a word in terms of onomatopoeia or sound symbolism; and, perhaps most frequently, (3) by association with one or more other words, usually similar-sounding, which were felt to shed light on the meaning of the word in question, such as when Cassiodorus (lnscicutiones, 11.ii.17) writes 'disciplina enim dicta est, quia discitur plena'. The last technique was applied with a liberality that was to earn this style of etymology its less than positive reputation: letters were omitted, added and substituted as it suited the purposes of establishing relationships between various words.75 In the Middle Ages it then became an important aim to imbue words - particularly from the Bible - with a spiritual and allegorical dimension by means of etymological interpretation. This was frequently pursued where biblical names were concerned. It should also be mentioned here that this traditional etymological interest in proper names went back to

reviews by Rene Derolez, English Studies, 51 (1970), 149-51, and. Hans Schabram, Anglia, 86 (1968), 495-500. The edition in Thomas Wright and Richard Paul Wiilcker, Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies (London, 1884), l , 192-247, covers only the lemmata glossed in Old English and therefore just about a third of the whole glossary. 73 The lrutitutio oratorio of Quintilian, ed. H .E. Butler (London, 192~22),; Samuel Johnson, A Dictionary of the English language (London, 1755), 'Preface', 3. 74 For the history and methods of etymology in Antiquity and the Middle Ages sec Willy Sanders, 'Grundziige und Wandlungen der Etymologie', E:.'~, ed. Rudiger Schmitt (Dannstadt, 1977), 7-49; Ilona Opell, 'Etymologie', Reallexikon fiir Anlikt und Christmtum , vi (1966), 797- 844; Guy de Porck, 'Etymologia ct Origo a travers la tradition latine', ANAM· NECJC.· Gedmkboek Prof. Dr. E.A. Leemans (Bruges, 1970), 191- 228; Eduard Wolfllin, 'Die Erymologien der lateinischen Grammatiker', Archiv fiir laltiniscM Lexikographie und Grommalik, 8 (1893), 421-40 and 563-85; Roswitha Klinck, Die laltinischL Etymologie des Miuelaltm (Miinchen, 1970). 7 ~ For an instructive collection of examples see Wolfftin, 'Die Etymok>sien' .



Classical Antiquity. 76 The etymological knowledge and practice of the Anglo-Saxons can thus be traced to several sources: on the one hand there is the Classical grammatical tradition which had evolved from the times of Plato and the Stoa, and on the other the interpretation of biblical names. To this must be added a tradition that goes back to the ~scWiine of rhetoric: etymology could serve as an argument in an orauon. For the Anglo-Saxon reader there was no lack of etymologies; they were of course generously represented in Isidore's encyclopaedia and - for the biblical-onomastic tradition - in Jerome's Liber interpreuuionis Hebraicorum nominum. 78 As far as the methodological principles of etymology were concerned, the Anglo-Saxons knew Varro's name, but not his De lingua Latina. They could find, however, brief definitions of ecymologia in Cassiodorus's lnstitutiones (11.i.2) or in his commentary on the Psalms. 79 More imponantly, they could read the detailed treatment in Isidore's Ecymologiae (l.xxix) and in De dialectica, a work ascribed to St Augustine, which was available to them by the third period at the latest. 80 .tElfric, too, in his Grammar(293.5-12), follows Isidore. Anglo-Saxon authors were not slow to take up the etymological method themselves. Many, though by no means all, of the etymologies in their Old English and Anglo-Latin writings naturally went back to the Early Fathers. A comprehensive inventory and analysis of the etymological activities of the Anglo-Saxons has yet to be 1


Cf. Opell, 'Etymologie', 80-10 and 814-7. 77 This iradition is discussed by de Porck, 'Erymologia et Origo'. 71 Sanctus Hieronymus, Liber i1llel'pTtuuionU lltbraiconan nomilllDll, ed. Paul de Lagarde, in S . Himmyrni Presbyteri ()pera. I: Opera eugetica, CCSI. 72 (Tumhou1, 1959); the da1e of 1his edition is misleading; it is 1aken over from de l..agarde's Onomastica sacra, second edition (Gottingen, 1887), 57-161. This was no doubt a standard work of reference in Anglo-Saxon libraries. For the early period sec J .D.A. Ogilvie, Books Known to tllt English, 597-1066 (Cambridge, Mass.. 1967), 179; for the late period see the studies cited in note 81, below. A copy written in France (s.ix 1) came to Malmcsbury in the 1en1h century; ii is now MS Oxford, Bodleian Library Manhall 19. When 1he abbey of Pe1erborough had been restored (c.966), Bishop ...£thelwold supplied it with a number of books which included an Exposilio llel!reorum llOlllinrmt, probably Jerome's work; see Lapidge, 'Surviving Booklists', 53-4. La1e eleventh· century English copies of the work are in MSS Durham Cathedral B.ii .11 (from Durham) and Oxford, Bodleian Library Bodley 808 (from Exeter). 79 Magni A11relii Cassiodori Expositio Psalmmvm, ed. M. Adriaen, CCSL 97-98 (Tumhout, 1958), 1,30. This work also contains numerous erymological explanations; ii appears to have been well-known 1hroughout the Anglo-Saxon period. Cf. Ogilvie, Boo/ts KMWtl to the English, 108, and Lapidge, 'Surviving Booklis1s', 47 and 73. Fragments from two eigh1h-cen1ury Anglo-Saxon copies are St john's College, Cambridge, Aa. 5. I., fo. 67, and Oiisseldorf, Universita1sbibliothek a.n.; an eighthon he behelaO eall l>zt him beufan byo' - 'because it conceals everything that 11

Fred C. Robinson, 'The Significance of Names in Old English Literature', Anglia, 86 (1968), 14-58; Joyce Hill, '..£1fric's Use of Etym0logies', A111to.saxonE,,,land, 17 (1988), 35-44. Sec also Hanspeter Schelp, 'Die Deutungstradition in ..£1frics Homiliae Catholicae', Ardifti fiir das Stvdium der neueren SpraclrDa, 196 (1959), 273-95, at 289-92, and Joyce Hill, '.£1fric and the Name of Simon Peter', Nous and Queries, 233 (1988), 157-8. 12 The Old E111lish Vmion of the Heptateuch, n .46 (the same translation of Genesis is found in the Aldhelm glosses in MSS Digby 146 and Brussels 1650); Humilits of.£1fric: A Sllf'Plernnuary ColJection, ed. John C. Pope, EETS 0.S. 259-60 (London, 1967), 1.297 .20S-9. For 'etymological glosses', see the imponant treatment by Wieland, The Latin Glosses , 168-80. 83 Grammar, 293.S-12; Byrlitfmlt's Manual, 92.9--13; see also Wieland, The Lalin Glosses, 172-80. 84 See Nicholas Howe, 'Aldhelm's Enigmata and lsidorian Etymology', Anglo-Saxon England, 14 (1985), 37-59; Lawrence T. Manin, 'Bede as a Linguistic Scholar', American Benedictine Rttliew, 35 (1984), 204-17, at 213--4. as Felix's Life of Saint Gullalac, ed. Benram Colgrave (Cambridge, 1956), 79 (ch. XIV) and 174. The compiler of the Old English Manyrology thought it wonhwhile to include this eiymology ('belli munus') in his brief entry, cf. Das altenglische Manyrologium , ed. GU.nter Kotzor. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, Abbandlungen N.F. 88 (Miinchen, 1981), II, 53. See also Bede's doubtful etymology of Sfml1WShealh, Hist.eccl. 111.25. 16 Marvin L. Colker, 'Texts of Jocelyn of Canterbury which Relate to the History of Barking Abbey', Snulia Monastica, 7 (1965), 434, 437 and 435 n.230.



is above it'. 87 In JElfric's homilies the word family 114/md - M.Jan "4l is disculsed88 as well as the origin and meaning of the Old English godspell: 'Sume menn nyton gewiss, for heora nytennysse, hwi godspell is gccweden, ol>Jle hwzt godspell gemzne. Godspell is witodlice Godes sylfes Jar ... ' - 'gospel is certainly God's own teaching', clearly a 'false' etymology from a modem standpoint; but it is taken up again three lines funher on by a play on words that provides the 'correct' explanation: 'and 1>zt is swy 115, 122, 123. A different interpretation is given for item 74 (Harley 3376, item D 486). The glossary was edited by Robert T. Oliphant, The Harley Latin-Old English Glossary (The Hague, 1966); for the shortcomings of this edition sec Hans Schabram's review in Anglia, 86 (1968), 495- 500. For the manuscript and the glossary see especially N . R. Ker, Catalogue ofManuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon, , no. 240, and J. D. Pheifer, Old English Glosses in the Epinal-Erfart Glossary (Oxford, 1974), pp. xxxv-xx:xvi.

The Glossary The Grammarian's Glossary comprises 128 entries in the version of MS H. In this version, two original entries (44b and 643) may have been accidentally omitted, while seven entries appear to be a later addition (81-7). If we disregard faulty copying or individual alterations in the early MS S B D F LP SWX, or-in the case of MS D-loss of leaves, we may assume that the original glossary had 123 entries, and that MS H is a late but fairly rdiable representative of the original compilation. Eleven funher items occur in MSS OPTUVXZ, or in most manuscripts of this group (1u, 143, 28a, 35a, 44a, 743-c, 1043-b, 121a); these may have been added at some stage in the early history of the text. The Glossary is arranged according to subjects, as follows: (i) Poetry

1-14 1

The poet, poetry, its genres and elements

Two surviving fragments appear to be Oxford, Bodlcian Library, Lat.misc.a.3, fo. 49, and Lawrence, Kansas, University of Kansas, Spencer Research Library, Pryce MS. P2A:1.


(ii) Grammar 15-20 Grammar 21-28 The partS of speech 29-54 The noun: Gender Declension The cases 45-51 The number of formally different cases; comparison 52-54 Species (iii) Vmiftcation 55--60 The syllable; quantity 61--67 Prosody and accent 68-70 Aspiration and spiritus marks 71-74 Special marks; the digamrna 75-87 Types of feet according to the number of syllables 88-99 Types of feet 100-109 Metre, verse; further genres of poetry 110-113 Caesuras in the dactylic hexameter 114-117 Catalexis (iv) 118-128 Punctuation and tht stnttnct As can be deduced from the contents of most of the manuscripts in which our Glossary is extant, it was apparently meant as a supplement to one or more of the standard treatments of Latin grammar and versification. The arrangement of the entries is on the whole systematic, but completeness does not seem to have been the compiler's aim: we do not find basic concepts of grammar like vox (apparently later supplied in the ancestor of MSS OPTUVXZ), like vocaks and consonantts, and it is somewhat surprising to see that the categories of the noun have been treated rather fully, but the categories of the verb not at all. Each entry consists of a Greek lemma, transliterated in letters of the Latin alphabet (often with various spellings and misspellings, as is to be expected), and of a Latin gloss; the only exception, where the lemma is a Latin word, occurs in item 15 (ars). The gloss may be either a translation or a definition, usually rather brief. In a few cases (items 51-4), the definition has been illustrated by one or two examples, while two entries supply etymological explanations (15, 88); it seems doubtful, however, if that of ars (15) was understood by all the scribes.6 The Grammarian's Glossary combines two basically different types of 6

The derivation of an from Greek arrtl may explain why there is a Larin entry among the lemmata.


IV A Grammarian's Greek-Latin Glossary lcmmata: the majority arc Greek words that had been taken over as loanwords into Latin, especially those employed in prosody; they had become household words in the teaching of the trivium. In contrast to these, about three dozen of the lemmata, especially those denoting grammatical concepts (items 21-44), arc words that had not been received into Latin because the Roman grammarians very early had chosen to render them by means of semantic loans and loan-formations (like nomen for onoma, coniunctio for syntksmos), which then became the standard terms in their language and also in the modern languages to our own day. To identify the sources of a glossary is notoriously difficult, and it must become even more difficult when we realize that the Grammarian's Glossary largely consists of such terms as form the core and common stock of the technical vocabulary of grammar and versification in the early Middle Ages. The entries of our Glossary could have been excerpted from numerous grammars, grammatical commentaries, and treatises on metre, or could have been taken over from glossaries such as may be well known and accessible to scholars today, or may remain unpublished, or may have been lost. While it is impossible, then, to produce a rdiablc and complete analysis of our Glossary's sources, a few points seem clear. If we recognize that a genuine source of an entry can only be established where lemma and interpretation arc the same, or nearly the same in source and glossary, then it is evident that the compiler of the Grammarian's Glossary made extensive use of Isidore's Etymologies. It appears certain that nearly fifty entries arc based on this work, and early readers of the Glossary will have been well aware of this, as is shown by the rubric in MSW (sec the 'Notes' section, below). As for the remaining entries, it is doubtful whether another, single source was utilized, or whether the compiler could build on a wider range of materials. It would seem, however, that most of these entries were supplied from glossaries rather than from grammars; for quite a number of entries, especially 21-44, this is likely because-as was mentioned above the Roman grammarians had devdoped their own, vernacular terminology for the basic concepts of grammar and so did not normally employ, or explain, the corresponding Greek terms. I have found more than thirty items that can be traced back to glossaries of the Ht1mmeumata type, collections that arc based on an original Greek-Latin compilation of the second century AD. 7 Also, I have found more than a dozen entries whose sources seem to 7

The Hnmmn1ma11t glossaries have been printed in vol. III of G. Goetz, OJrpus Glos111riorum Uiti1111rum, 7 vols. (Leipzig. 1888-1913) [ = CGLJ; cf. A C. Dionisotti, 'Greek Grammars and Dictionaries in Carolingian Europe', in Tk Sacrrd Nectar ofthe Gree/ts: The Stutly ofGreelt in the Wt'St in the Early Milldk Ages, ed. M. W. Herren and S. A Brown, King's College London Medieval Srudics, I I (London, 1988), I-j6, at 16-31. The bilingual glossaries


be glossary materials going back to a sixth-century compilation ascribed to one Placidus, printed in volume V of the Corpus G/,ossariorum Latinorum. References to these sources will be found in the 'Notes' section; but I do not claim to have examined or exhausted all possible sources, whether they arc glossaries or grammars. When one considers the complicated and often confusing textual history ofmedieval glossaries, the manuscript versions ofthe Grammarian's Glossary appear remarkably uniform.' Yet there arc numerous individual peculiarities and cross-connections between the various manuscripts that make it impossible for us to reconstruct the history of its transmission, let alone to establish a stemmatic relationship. However, an examination of the variant readings, of common errors, additions, and omissions yields some interesting results. Already in the eighth century, presumably in France, the textual transmission split into three branches or hyparchetypcs: A branch represented by the French MSS BLW; because of the date of MS W, this must have come into existence in the first half of the eighth century. The branch is marked by the omission of items 8-38 and 76-80, and by ordering items 56-73 as in the manuscripts of branch 3 (except MS D). The late Italian MS Y belongs in this group; it is very closely related to 1.

MS B. 2. A branch represented by MS S PX , which is characterized by a number ofadditional items (see above, p. 67), and by ordering items 56-73 differently from all the other manuscripts. Items 8-35 are present, but 36 and 37 have been omitted. Apart from MSS PX, this branch includes all the later Italian manuscripts (OTUVZ) except Y, and as MS P was written at Monte Cassino, branch 2 might be considered a specifically Italian text. But, as is clear from MS X, which shares most of this group's peculiarities, here too we witness a development that must have taken place in France, and not later than the third quarter of the eighth century, because of the date of MS P, which may well be the ancestor of all the later Italian manuscripts. Among these, MSS U and Z show close affinities. 3. This branch is represented by MS S D F S, which do not form a textual 'f.unily' in the strict sense, since each of them has individual readings or shares some readings with branch 1 and some with branch 2. However, the members of this group appear to be closer to the original glossary than the other hyparchetypes: they do not omit items 8-38 (but F leaves out 36-8), ascribed to Philoxcnus and Cyrillus-both printed in CGL, vol. II- may also have been available to our compiler; in any case, a considerable number of entries in the Grammarian's Glossary arc found in the H~meum4ta collections and in Philoxenus or Cyrillus. 1 For the evidence underlying the following discussion, sec the 'Notes' section, below.


IV A Grammarian's Gretlt-Latin Glossary as does branch 1, and they do not include the innovations (items 12.a etc.) of branch 2. On the other hand, MS S D and F omit items 76-80, as docs branch 1. The later MS .M is closely connected with MS S, but M omits items 36-44'1. Of the Anglo-Saxon copies and excerpts of the Glossary, C-thc oldestcannot be derived exclusively from one of these three hyparchctypcs. It docs agree, however, in a few significant variant readings with B (116, 117, 120, 121); equally important seems the fact that a number of readings in C differ from those in H (cf. items 6¥, 68, 69, 117, 120, 121). Even if we take into account the selective character of C, it is clear, therefore, that an 'English' branch of the Glossary text cannot be established on the basis of significant common readings of C and H, nor can the items in E and K that are probably derived from the Grammarian's Glossary throw more light on its transmission in Anglo-Saxon England, with the exception perhaps of item E 65 in MS K ( = our item 5), whose peculiar spelling Edu/ion may link K with C. Although it was written about three centuries after the compilation of its ultimate ancestor, H is a remarkably full and reliable copy of our Glossary and appears to belong in the third branch of its transmission: it neither has the additional items of the PX group, nor docs it omit the items missing in the BLW group (8-38, 53, 76-80), while in ordering items 56-73 it agrees with F S and the BLW group. It shows individual readings shared by none of the other Continental manuscripts or by C (items 6, 13, 42, 6o; 6,.a omitted; 81-7, 93, 117) but has a number of significant variants in common with MS D or groups of manuscripts that include D, a member of the third branch: 5, 31, 32, 36, 37, 61, 69, 94, 95, and cf. the omission of 44b and 6¥ only in D and H. This docs not mean, however, that H and its presumable exemplar point back to a pwe D-type ancestor or even a manuscript closely related to D. For D orders items 56-75 differently and omits a considerable number of entries contained in H that-with the exception of 81-7-must have been part and parcel of the original compilation: 17, 45-55, 60, 62, 63, 66, 67, 70, 71- 3, 76-87; moreover, D and H differ clearly in nine readings (13, 24, 38, 56, 68, 74, 88, 91, 93), while nothing definite can be said about entries from 96 onwards, which are lost in D. It may seem idle to speculate about the date and place of origin of the anonymous Grammarian's Glossary. As to the date, we have as a terminus a quo the time when Isidore's Etymologies became available outside Spain,9 and Sec 8. Bischoff, 'Die curoplische Verbreitung der Werke lsidors von Sevilla', in his MitttWtnlicht StutJim, I (1966), 171-94> and M. lapidge, 'An lsidorian Epitome &om Early 9

Anglo-Saxon England', in S""1i su/Ja culturtz Gtrm411ica Jn s«oli IV- XII in ono" Ji Giuli4 Mauuq/i Porru, ed. M. A. d'Aronco ~t al, Romanobarbarica, 10 (1988-9), #3-83.



as a te1 minus ad qunn we can fix the dating of the earliest manuscript (W) which, however, on account of its gap between items 7 and 39, must be considered a copy of the ancestor (or a member) of the BLW family, which itself is at least at one remove from the original compilation. As a consequence, we should place the origin of the Glossary at some time in the second half of the seventh century, or in the first half of the eighth century, preferably early rather than late. To determine the country, region, or place of origin of our Glossary may seem a hopeless task. Was it possibly a place where there was some interest in Greek studies? One might then be tempted to suggest Canterbury in the later seventh century, where, as we know, Greek as well as (Latin) grammar and metrics were taught in the school of Archbishop Theodore (669 90) and Abbot Hadrian (670-709/710).'0 But there is some weighty evidence against such a seemingly attractive hypothesis: (1) The provenance of nearly all the extant manuscripts, particularly the early ones, points to an origin on the Continent, probably in France. (2) If the early school of Canterbury, perhaps Theodore himself, had had a hand in the compilation of the Glossary, one would expect a reflection of this in what has been called the 'original English collection' of glosses, or in one of the glossaries derived from it, or related to it." But there is no trace of this. The famous Leiden ' Glossary, the Epinal Glossary (and its copy, the Erfurt Glossary), and the second Corpus Glossary 11 all include a number of lemmaca that occur in the Grammarian's Glossary, but their interpretations in nearly all cases differ essentially from those in ow compilation, while the few closely corresponding entries-like the three13 entries in the second Corpus Glossary For Greek taught at Canterbury, see M. Lapidge, 'The School of Theodore and Hadrian', ASE 1s (1986), 4s- 72; fur grammar, W. Berschin, Grtttlt Letttn and tht Lalin MitlJ/t A.ftS: From }tr0me to Nicholas of Cusa, rev. edn., trans. J. C. Frakes (Washington, DC, 1988), 121-s; for meuics, see N. Wright, 'Introduction to Aldhdm's Prose Writings on Metrics', in Aldhtlm: Tht Pottic WO'*s, trans. M. Lapidge and J. L Rosier (Cambridge, 198s), 183-9· For the history and sources of this early glossary material in England, see W. M. Lindsay, Tht Corpus. EpinaJ, Erfort and ltytkn Glossarm, Publications of the Philological Society, VI 11 (London, 1921); J. D. Pheifer, Olti English Glossts in tht Epinal-Erfon Glossary (Oxford, 1974), 'Introduction', esp. p. !vii; Lapidge, 'The School of Theodore and Hadrian'; J. D. Pheifer, 'Early Anglo-Saxon Glossaries and the School of Canterbury', ASE 16 (1987), 17- 44. " A Lau Eighth-Cmtvry Latin-Anglo-Sttxon Glossary Prtstrvtlf in tht Lilmtry oftht Leidm UniWTJity , ed. John Henry Hessels (Cambridge, 196}; 'The Epinal Glossary Edited with Critical Commentary of the Vocabulary', by A K.. Brown (unpublished diss., Stanford University, 1969); CGL V. 337- 401 [the (first) Erfurt Glossary); TM Corp11S Glossary , ed. W. M. Lindsay (Cambridge, 1921). 1 ' Epinal has 18 lemmata in common with the Grammarian's Glossary, but only two interpretations are identical; Leiden has IS such lemmata, with twO common glosses; the second Corpus Glossary shares 29 lemmata with the Grammarian's Glossary, of which three show the same glosses. io



IV A Grammarian's Grrelt-Latin Glossary (epigramma E 242, brachus 8 184, dactylus D 7)-may wdl go back to other sources. Moreover, an interest in Greek grammatical terminology may have been more general than we arc inclined to think.' 4 In MS Cotton Cleopatra, an English manuscript ofthe second(?) halfof the tenth century, of unknown provenance and origin, the only known Anglo-Saxon copy of Donarus's An maior is followed by thICC anonymous grammatical treatises. The second of these (fos. 37v-47') is an introduction to the grammar of Donarus in question-and-answer form, in which gramma, grammatice, and prohnnium arc interpreted as in the Grammarian's Glossary, and where the Greek names of the parts of speech-with the exception of that for the article arc supplied in one of the answers: 'Quomodo nominabant panes orationis apud Grccos?' 'lta nominantur: onoma, antcnoma, rcma, cpircma, metoche, sindesmos, prothcsis, parenthesis.' (fo. 42} We should conclude from these considerations that the Grammarian's Glossary must have found its way to England in the course of the eighth century, or very early in the ninth. It was then drawn upon by the compiler of the first Corpus Glossary, unless we are to assume that this glossary as a whole was copied from a Continental exemplar. That C and possibly one or more near relatives survived the vicissitudes of the ninth century and were then again utilired might appear from the spelling Edu/ion in K. The version of the Glossary in H follows another line of transmission; the exemplar of H or one of its forerunners may have been a prc-Alfrcdian English copy, but it seems more likely that it came to England as part of one of the numerous French books imported in the course of the tenth century.'1 More may be known about this when all the glossary material in H has been thoroughly studied. Apart from K, the glossaries produced or copied in England in the tenth and eleventh centuries do not seem to have used the Grammarian's Glossary. '6 .. For the study of Greek in the early Middle Ages, see especially B. Bischoff, 'Du gric:chische Element in dc:r abc:ndlandischen Bildung des Mittc:Wters', in his MituWmlic~ SIUllim. I I (Stuttgart, 1967), 246-75; Bcrschin, Grrtk Uturs and 1'" Llltin Middk Aga, M. C. Bodden, 'Evidence for Knowledge: of Greek in Anglo-Saxon England', ASE 17 (1988), 117- 46. '' Cf. H. Gneuss, 'Anglo-Saxon Libraries from the Conversion to the Bcnedietinc Rtfonn', Smi11111M Ji sn.Jio tie/ Cmtro it4/imw Ji stwii nJJizlto rMtli«VO, XXXII (1986). 678 and n. 110, and 'King Alfred and the History of Anglo-Saxon Libraries', in Modn oflnmpmalWn in O/J English Litmuurr: Essays in Honour ofSlanky B. Grrmfo/J, ed. P. R. Brown et al (Toronto, 1986), 37.

'' For the later English glossaries see A. Cameron, 'A List of Old English Texts', in A P'4n for the Diaio1111ry ofO/J English, ed. R. Frank and A. Cameron (Toronto, 1973). 2'41-s4, and Pheifc:r, Olti English Glosm, pp. xxxi-xxxix.



The textual history of the Grammarian's Glossary suggests an origin in France. From there, at an early stage, copies were ta.ken not only to England but also to Italy: the exemplar of MS P must have been available at Monte Cassino in the later eighth c.cnrury. Was it possibly Paulus Diaconus himself who procured the Glossary for his monastery? The Grammarian's Glossary was fust published by Johann Friedrich Hcusingcr in 1766, from MS W, and again by Thomas Gaisford in 1837; Heusinger also knew the version in MS P. In 1876, Gustav Loewe mentioned the Glossary (he knew MSS Wand X), and in 1913 Georg Goetz included a paragraph with remarks on the manuscripts and sources in his monumental De glossariorum Latinorum origiM etfatis. More recently, attention has again been drawn to our Glossary by Bernhard Bischoff, Simona Gavinelli, and Walter Berschin. 17


The edition reproduces the text of MS Harley 3816 as faithfully as possible, but is arranged in columns, while in the manuscript the Glossary is written in run-on lines. Abbreviations are indicated by means of italics. No emendations have been made; where these would be called for, the peninent information will be found in the 'Notes' following the edition. Entries in one or more of the Continental versions of the Grammarian's Glossary that may have been omitted in H (or its exemplar), or may have been added in those versions, arc enclosed in square brackets. Lemmata with glosses corresponding to entries in Harley 3816 that occur in other Anglo-Saxon manuscript glossaries arc recorded by the respective sigla (C, E, K, see above) to the right of the Harley entry. (fo. 1501 GRAMMATIC~



Pocta. i. uates. Pocticus. libcr. Pocma. i. unius libri opus. Pocsis. i. opus multorum librorum. Ydillion. paucorum uersuum. Disticon. duorum locutio. Monosticon. unius umus. Epodon. clausulam in pocmate.



c c CE CE


c c

For Heusi.ngcr and Gaisford~ p. 65 above; G. Loewe, Protlromus CArpori.s GloSS11rio"'m Lltti111JTMm (Leipzig. 1876), 231-2; Goetz. CGL I. 102; Bischoff and Gavinelli, ~ p. 62 above; Bcrschin, Grttlt lntnJ arui tht Llttin A~ 1o6 and 110. '



IV A Grammarian's Greek-Latin G/,ossary 9

12 12.a


IS 18


27 28a 28b 30


35a 36



Epigramina. ciculus. Proemion. diccndi initium. Prologus. sequentis opms praefatio. Problema. qwustio. [Prothesis. proposicio] Thema. norma siue macma. Tragocdia. luctuosum carmm. [Comoedia. laus in canticis dicta] Ars. apo tcs. aretis .i.... disciplina siue scientia. Grami11a. littera. Gramrnatica. litterarura. Grami11aticus. doctor libnalium uel litterarum. Profora. intmogatio. Antifora. responsio. Onoma. nomm. Antenoma. pronomen. Rema. unbum. Epyrema. adunbium. Methoche. participium. [fo. 1501 Arthron. articulus. Sindesmos. coniunctio. Protesis. pratpositio. [Parathesis. intericctio] [Schcdiasmos. intericctio] Genos. genus. Arsenicon. masculinum. Tdicon. fcmininum. Deteron. neutrum. Kynon. comrnune. Epikenon. promiscuum. Piptosis. declinatio. [Ptosis. casusJ Anomala. inzqualia. Analogia. comparatio. Euphonia. suauicas bene sonandi. Onomastike. nominatiuus. Genike. genitiuus. Dotike. datiuus. Eutikc. accusatiuus. Cletikc. uocatiuus. Afferetike. ablaciuus. 75





c c CK




.. '.



441> 45






63 643 66


71a 72

743 74b 74C 74d

[Plithynticc. pluraliter] [Aptota. in quibus nulla est inflexio casuum] Monoptota. eiusdem casus. Diptota. in quibus similirudo duorum tantum casuum. Triptota. trium casuum uarietas. Tctr.aptota. iiii. casuum uarietas. Pentaptota. u. casuum inffexio. Exaptota. ui. casuum declinatio. Anomala. nomina quae in compar.atione mutantur. ut bonus. melior. optimus. Thetica. posscssiua. ut euandrius a possidendo dicta. Patronomica. a paren[fo. 1511tibus dicta uocabula. ut eacides. agamemnonides. Epitheta. adiectiuaqu~ nominibusapponuntur. ut magnus homo. docrus philosophus. Syllaba. comprthcnsio littcrarum. Macra. longa. Brachia. brcuis. Monocronon. uni us tcmporis. Dicronon. cominunis temporis. Diptongon. uocalis duplicatio. Pr~odia. acccnrus. uel son us. Arsis. eleuatio. Thesis. positio. Oxia. accuta. [Baria. grauis] Pmstomcne. circumffexus. Cronos. longirudo uel temp us. Tonus. acccntus. Crisesma. crassirudo. Dapsia. sipidum uel aspnum. Psile. lene uel purum. Apostrophos. regressio. [Yphcn. copulatio] Diastole. separ.atio. Ypodiastole. subseparatio. Digramn1os. duplex littna. [Phoni. uox] [Aphona. sine uoce] [Phonienta. uocales] [Imiphonas. semiuocales]






IV A Grammarian's Grrek-Latin Glossary 75








98a 99



104b 105



Pos. pcs. Monosyllaba. una syllaba. Dyssillabos. duarum syllabarum. Trisillabos. trium. Tetrasillabos. iiii. [fo. 1511 Pentasyllabos. u. syllabarum. Exasyllabos. u. syllabarum. Eptasyllabos. ui. sillabarum. Ogdosyllabos. uiii. Niasyllabos. uiiii. Diasyllabos. x. Vndecasyllabos. xi. Dodecasyllabos. xii. Pyrrichius. a pyrro filio achillis. Spondeus. tractus. Trochew. celer. Iambus. maledicus. ~/ libidus. Dactilus. digitus. Anapcstus. dactilo contr.uius siue repm:ussus. Arnphimacrus. hinc inde longus. Arnphibrachis. hinc inde breuis. Tribrachis. trium breuium. Corios. coris aptus. lonicos. inequalis. [Bacchios. conueniens baccicis cantibus] Palimbachius. contr.uius bachio. Metron. mensura. Rithmos. numerus. Heroicon metron. uirorum fortium carmm. Monometron. umus unius pedis. Bucolicon. pastorale carmm. [Georgica. agricultura uel rusticana] [Epos. carmen] Dimetron. duorum pedum uersus. Trimetron. trium pedum. Tetrametron. iiii. pedum. Pentametron. u. pedum. Examet.ron [fo. 1521 .i. scnarium. Pentimemeren. syllaba remanens post duos pedes. Eptimemeren. syllaba remanens post tmium pedem. Tritos trocheos. syllaba post .iiii. pedes remanens. 77





c c CK

c c CE CE

c c c c




120 121a 123



Tetobucolicos. syllaba postquintum pedem remanens. Catalecticos. ubi in pede unsuum una syllaba detst. Brachiacatalectos. ubi du~ minus sunt. Acatalectos. ubi unsus legitimo fine concluditur. Aspm:atalectos. ubi super legitimos pedes syllaba crescit. Thesis. positur~. Telia. distinctio. Ypostigme. subdistinctio. Mesi. media distinctio. [Stigmi. i. distinctio seu diastixis] Cola. membrum. Com111a. incisum. Pmodos. clausula siue circuitus. nam cola totus umus tst. comn1ata auttm ipse incisiones pedum. pmodos uem • tota sentent1a. Mo.nocolon. unimtmbris sententia. [fo. 1521 Dicolor. bimembris. Tricolon. trimembris. Tetracolon. quadrimtmbris. [Pentacolon. quinquemembris]


c c c c c c



Notes The following notes include all significant variant readings from MS S BCDEFKLPRSVWX, references to corresponding interpretations in Isidore's Etymologies, in grammars and glossaries, and references (marked 'c£') to pas.sages that help to explain terms and concepts of the Grammarian's Glossary. Among the variants, minor variations in spelling and scribal errors have not normally been recorded, but I have tried to give the reader an idea of how the scribes managed to cope with difficult Greek terms transliterated into Latin. The variant readings are also meant to provide corrections where the scribe of H-or one of his forerunnerr-has obviously blundered, as in items 18, 42, 52, 113, 117, 126. Variant readings from the later MSS M OTUYZ have not been recorded except where these add or omit a whole item (i.e. lemma and gloss). References to grammars and glossaries have had to be selective; 18 the Roman grammarian's name is always followed by " Full to the grammars can now be found in the computer concordance by V. Lomanto and N. Marinone, /ru/cc Grammaticus: An /Nkx to Latin Grammar Tce11, 3 vols. (Hildesheim, 1990); for the glossaries, sec the index in vols. VI and VI I of CGL. With few exceptions, all to the grammarians arc to the edition by H. Keil, G111mm11tici Latini, vols. I- VI I (Leipzig, 1856-80), even though a few texu arc now available in more recent

IV A Grammarian's Greelt-Latin Glossary volume, page, and-in most cases-line in Keil's Grammatici Latini. 'Etym.' refers to the edition of Isidore's work by W. M. Lindsay (Oxford, 1911), while 'CG L' stands for Goetz, Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum (sec n. 7); 'Beda AM' refers to De aru metrica, ed. C. B. Kendall, in &ti# Vmerabi/is Opera. Pars I: Opera didasca/ia. CCSL 12}A (Turnhout, 1975). For 'Byrhtferth', see Byrhtfmh's Manua4 ed. S. J. Crawford, EETS 177 (1929). The best systematic treatment of the grammatical terms (items 15-55) is still that by Ludwig Jeep, Zur Geschichte tier ulm von tkn &tktheikn bei tkn /auinischm Grammatiltern (Leipzig, 1893). Rubric


INCIPIUNT GR.; WES/DORI /UN/ORIS PALESTINENSIS EPISCOPI GR. (with PALESTINENSIS no doubt as a copyist's error for HISPALENSIS); NOTATAJ D pramotata; Rubric in X: lncipiunt glosae.

1-14 Poetry and its genres 1 om. P; uau:s] om. V; .i. ( = id est) in 1, 3 and 4 only in H; Etym. VIII. vii. 13, CGL V. 93. 17. 2 S fiber ue/ cantus; c£ CG L V. 93. 18. 3-9 Etym. I. xxxix. 21-3. 3 BR pomza: opus unius /ibri (R adds metrict).

5 6 8-38

8 9

10 11 12

DH Ydi/lion, R ydilion, F id/ion, LVWX edi/ion, S edy//ion, P edilyon, CK edulion, B di/ion; CGL V. 104. 2. locutio) BVX uerruum, P uerrurum. R uerrum. om. DFLSW; in 0 PYX, 6 follows item 7. om. BLWY. DH R Epodon, PV ephodon, X epodhon, F ypodon; c/awulamJ DRS clausu/a, X c/ausa:, in) om. X. C( Diomedcs I. 485. titulus] 0 super litteras titulus (TV similar), cf. Etyrn. I. xxxix. 22. H reads at end of line 7 titulus. Promzi, but begins again line 8 Promzion. PV proymion, X proymon; c£ E pronnium: praefatio /ibri prologum (sec item 11), and CG L V. 323. 10, Etyrn. VI. viii. 9. om. F; CG L IV. 148. 42, 556. 16, V. 137. 48. F quaestio siue materia ue/ forma, c( item 13. CG L II. 416. 33, V. 137. 8 and 12; cf. E probkma: parabola. migma. questio, Ecym. VI . •••




only in PUVXZ; UV prtpositio.

editions. I am grateful to Profes.sor Patrizia Lcndinara for reading a draft of chis aniclc and for a number of valuable suggestions.




norma] DPS V and CG L V. 101. 22 norma r«I forma sir« matnia, X norma r«I forma; for F sec item 12. Items 13 and 14 precede 12 in



Etym. XVIII. xlv, CGL V. 426. 50.


only in OPUYXZ.

15-10 Grammar 15 H c. five letters erased at end of line 11 and five letters at beginning of line 12; arrtis .i.] FPV arrtes (V arrstes) id est uirtus; D reads: An apo tes sir« scimtia; X reads: Apo tes. an. Arrtes. uirtus discipli~ sir« scimtilu; apo tes is written as one word in all MSS; Etym. I. i. 1-2; cf. Oiomedes I. 421. 8 f., Cassiodorus, lnstitutiones, ed. Mynors (Oxford, 1937), ii. 4, etc. 16 om. F; CGL III. 71. 4; Ecym. I. v. 1. 17 om. FD; cf. Ecym. I. v. 1. 18 om. F; r«/] om. DPSVX; CGL IV. 84. 1, 521. 14; cf. E grammati: litteratT, cf. Diomedes I. 421. 9-13. 19-20 PY prophora-, PRY antiphora. These entries may refer to a grammar of the question-and-answer type, like the An minor of Donatus, or the Excerpta of Audax. 11-18 The pans of speech Corresponding lists in Charisius, ed. Barwick (Leipzig, 1964), 470, and CGL Ill. 327£., 375. 72--9; also, numerous occwrences of individual items in CG L I I and I I I . 22 D FPS V antonoma, X ontonoman. 23 rima. 24 om. F; YX epirmna, PS epyrmna. X expirrmza. 25 PSV metoche, 0 methoct, X !nethoche. 26 MS archo1r, in 0 UYX follows after 28a, in P follows after 28b. 27 cf. Quintilian, Inst. orat. I. iv. 18. 28 FPYX prothesis; om. UZ. 28a only in 0 PTYX; 28b only in PT.


19-34 The noun: gender 29-32 CG L I I I. 376. 2, 8-10, etc. 31 DFS the/icon, Y thilicon, PX thylico1r, CGL V. 101. 17. 32 D McmJn, F daheron(?), OPY uMteron, MS untktheron, X uMthero1r, in X follows after 33. 33-4 CGL Ill. 147. 38, 461. 23; etc.; cf. Priscianus II. 140, Donatus I I I . 375, etc. 33 S chynon. 80

IV A Grammarian's Grttlt-Latin Glossary 34

D tpyltmon, S tpychmon, P tpicynon, V tpiltynon, X E PKI NW N; in X follows after 35.

35-s1 The noun: declension, the cases 35 FPX pipthosis. 35a only in 0 PTVX. 35-6 om. FOPUVXZ; for the position in chis section see Etym. I. xviii, Probus IV. 48 f. In T, 36-8 follow 50. 36 CGL III. 488. 73. Items 36-44a om. M. 37 Etym. I. xxviii. 1, Pompeius V. 197. 24. 38 om. FOPUVZ; D tophonia: suauitas sonorum; X eufonia: bmt sonans oratio-, in X follows after 75; for the relation to analogia (item 37), see Clcdonius V. 47. 12-18, etc. 39 ff. BLW resume again. 39-44 For corresponding lists of cases see CGL III. 376 and 382; also, individual entries in CGL. nominatiuus] C gmitiuus. Xgeratict. D doctict. BDPSVX ttiatict (V ttiatict), F tpiatict, C tthiantiltt, LW atiatilte, LW accusatiuum. V cktici, BX tktict; LW uocatiuum; 43 om. UZ. 43 DSW aferttilte, PX aphtrttict, V aphtrttici, L afarttiltt, F afmtict, 44 C aftrtict, B auestict. only in OPTUVXZ; CGL III. 376. 13. cf. Etym. I. vii. 33, Donatus IV. 377. 23-5. not in DH; tst] om. W; follows 45 in BFLMSTWY. om. D. FPVWX casu~ L causa. in ... casuum] 8 FR t.Uwrum casuum; casu1'm] V casuum uarittas, SW casuum est. uarittas] om. F 0 RX; cf. E tetraptota: nomina tantum in quatuor casibus tkclinantur. infkxio] B uarittas, om. FR. 49 ui. casuum] BLPSVWX omnium casuum uaria (8 om. 50 uaria); tkclinatio] om. FOR. nomina] B nomina intqua/Ut. . . . optimuS] om. D F; in 51 comparationt] om. 8; optimus] BLPSVWX add ma/us. prior. pmimus-, R reads anomaiia nomina sunt inatqualitt. Pompeius V. 154. 24-6, etc. 81


51-54 The noun: species 52 Thetica] B Dt tlitica; S posstssiui;




ut . . . dicta] om. F 0 R W; tuandrius] BPSVX(L?) tuandrius msis, correctly, see Etym. I. vii. 21, Donatus IV. 374. 1, Priscianus II. 68. 16; dicta] BLPSV utiqut dicta, c( Priscianus I I . 68-82. om. BLWY; Patronomica] FHPSVX; a ... uocabula] Sparmtibus uoc. ducta; dicta . . . agammznon«ks] om. F; dicta ... tacidts] X uocabula ducta ut a/citks; agamtmnonitks] V agammznon, X agamtmnon qui et herculus, in OPUVZ follows after 54; cf. Priscianus 11. 62-8 (kacitks: 62.17). aditt:tiua] id tst aditctiua BLPW; q~] S id tst quat; q~ ... philosophus] om. FORW; ut) BPSV utputa; doctus] PV doctor; philosophus] BLPSV add magnus tt doctus tpithtta (V tpithtu, B aphittta) sunt; in X 54 precedes 52; Etym. I. vii. 22, CG L V. 19. 10, 65. 6; cf. E: Epittta: nomina a/iis nominibus adicta. The order of entries in OPUVXZ differs: 55-7, 64, 6¥, 65, 6973 (72 om. PYX), 66, 58-63, 67, 68, 74. The order of entries in D is: (45-55 om.), 74, 75, 61, 51>-9, 64, 65, 68, 69, 88-9s (60, 62, 63, 66, 67, 70-3, 76-87 om.)

ss-60 The syllable; quantity 55 BFLPSVWX litterarumcongrtgatielfria an, 6./7.Jh. (Beda, iii. 6, vgl. Searle, S. 302), so wiirde sich eine Emendation eriibrigen. Da aber sonst keine Frauen in der Liste vorkommen, und da Ealhmund (64) unmittelbar vorhergeht, darf man wohl auf einen Fehler fur Eafa rechnen (ASC 855 und vgl. die westsachsische Genealogie). Eanfrip (70): Konige von Bernicia, 633 (oder 634)-634, der Hwicce (Beda iv. 13) und von Lindsey (Anglische Genealogie) kommen in Frage. Egfera (72), Egfria (74): wohl der nordhumbrische Konig, 670-85 (Beda, iv. 5 etc.) und der mercische von 7% (ASC 794) . Eadberht (75): Konige dieses Namens sind aus Kent, 72S-?762 (ASC 748) und aus Nordhumbrien, 737-58 (ASC 768) bezeugt. Zu Eadbriht Przn vgl. Anm. 21. Offa (76): Zweifellos der mercische Herrscher von 757-% und nicht sein Vorfahre Offa vom kontinentalen Angeln, oder der Ostsachsenkonig, nach 694-709 (Beda iv. 19), oder andere sicher oder unsicher bezeugte Angelsachsen gleichen Namens. Oswine (79): Wegen der Position in der Liste sicher dcr Konig von Dcira, 644 51 (Bcda iii. 14), und nicht der kentische Konig, ?688-?690. Irie (81): Die bei Searle, Onomasticon, genannten Trager des Namens Irie, Yric scheiden cbenso aus wie der Kenter Alric (Beda v. 23) ; es hat offenbar an dieser Stelle, wegen des Anlautvokals der Gruppe 76-85, urspriinglich der kentische Konig Ocric, 488-?512 (Beda ii. 5) gestanden, der aber mit seinem cognomen Oesc, Aesc (vgl. ASC 488) auch noch unter Nr. 26 unserer Liste erscheint. Osric (85): Vermutlich der Konig von Deira, 633-34 (Beda iii. 1) oder der nordhumbrische Konig, 718-29 (Beda v. 23; ASC 716, 731), weniger wahrscheinlich der Konig der Hwiccc seit 675/6 (Beda iv. 23) . II. Namen, die nicht auf Angelsachsen weisen. AuBer Artur und Wyrtgeom sind hier zu nennen Aedan (34), Dzgfera (45) und Hygelac (59). DaB es sich bei Aedan um den Bischof Aidan von Lindisfarne handelt, ist unwahrscheinlich; vielleicht_ist der westschottische Konig dieses Namens gemeint (gest. 606) 23 , vielleicht liegt aber cine verderbte Textstelle vor. Dzgfera ist als angelsachsischer Name sonst nicht belegt; der Eintrag diirfte sich ziemlich sicher auf einen der Merowingerkonige, Dagobert I. oder Dagobert II., beziehen, zu denen im 7.Jahrhundert Verbindungen vom angelsachsischen England bestanden. Das Erscheinen des Namens Hygelac in unsercr Konigliste diirfte fur den Literarhistoriker von besonderem lnteresse sein, denkt man doch sogleich an den Gautenkonig im Beowulf, der auch als historischc Gestalt cinwandfrei bczcugt ist. In der Tat ist dcr Name Hyglac in England nur noch fur zwei oder drei nordhumbrische Geistliche des 8. und 9.Jahrhunderts belcgt24, aber 23

Vgl. Plummer zu Historia tccltsiastica i. 34 (Bd. II, S. 64 66). 24 Vgl. Michael Lapidgc, ,,&owulf. Aldhclm, the Libn Monstrorum and Wessex", StuJi Mtditvali, 3. Ser., 23 (1 982), 166-67, und Erik Bjorkman, StuJim ubn dit EigmMmm im &owulf, Studien zur Englischcn Philologie 58 (Halle 1920), s.7fr..n.

VII Eine angdsachsische Konigsliste


nie fur einen angelsachsischen Konig; iiberhaupt wird das Element hyg(e)- als Bestandteil von englischen Konigsnamen nicht verwendet25. Doch ehe man vorschnell an cine Reminiszenz aus dem Beowulfglaubt, sollte man sich daran erinnem, daB iiber Hygelac auch der Liber Monstrorum berichtet, der nach Michael Lapidgc wahrscheinlich etwa zwischen 650 und 750 im angelsachsischen England entstand 26. Von hier, oder aus anderen miindlichen oder verlorenen schriftlichen Quellen, mag Hygelac bei den Angelsachsen bekannt geworden seir.. Wie er aber in cine englische Konigsliste geraten ist, wird damit noch nicht erklart. Zurn SchluB kehre ich zur Frage nach dem Aufbau der Liste zuriick. Besteht der Eindruck zu Recht, daB es sich um cine weithin willkiirliche, wo nicht chaotische Verzeichnung von Namen aus den verschiedenen angelsachsischen Reichen handelt? Bei genauercr Betrachtung wird, scheint mir, ein Ordnungsprinzip deudich, das allerdings erst nach dcm zweiten Abschnitt einsetzt, also fur die Eintrage 24-85 gilt. Der Kompilator kannte zweifellos den angelsachsischen Usus, Nachkommen iiber Generationen hinweg Namen zu geben, die mit denen ihrer Yater und Vorfahren alliterierten oder die - da es sich ja meist um zweiteilige Komposita handelte ihren ersten oder zweiten Teil aus dem Namen des Vaters oder der Mutter iibemahmen 27 • Ein entsprechendes Verfahren hat nun der Kompilator hier angewendet, indem er jeweils die Namen mit gleichem Anlaut, aber bei ganz ungeniigender Beriicksichtigung von Chronologie und Geographic zusammengefaBt hat: 24-34 : Ae 35 44 : C (K) 45-51 : D, P, I 52-58: s 59-61 : H 62-63 : T 64-75 : E, Ea, Eo 76-84: 0 86 :A Dabei fallen kleinere Abweichungen kaum ins Gewicht, so die Einordnung von Ealdre3 (28); das Nebeneinander von VerschluBJaut und Affrikata bei den mit anlautenden Namen, entsprechend dem Alliterarionsgebrauch im altenglischen Vers; die Zusammenfassung von ea, ea, eo und e in einer Gruppe; schlieBiich die Tatsache, daB im Abschnitt 76-85 den mit langem o anlautenden Namen einer mit kurzem Vokal, Offa, vorangestellt ist28• So erklaren sich die zusammenhangenden Gruppen der ostsachsischen und nordhumbrischen Konige, so erklart sich aber z. B. auch, warum der Nordhumbrer Hereric (61) dem Kenter HloJ>here (60) unmittelbar folgt oder weshalb der Mercier Offa und der Kenter Octa (76, 77) in einer Gruppe mit den nordhumbrischen Herrschem stehen. Dennoch muB manche Frage bei dieser wohl antiquarischem lnteressc zu verdankenden Konigslistc offenbleiben 29• Hygtb4ld in der Chronik E 710 konnte ein westsachsicher Adliger sein, doch ist der Name dort sicher falsch. s1att Sigt""1d. lr> Lapidge (Anm. 24), S. 162-179. ?7 Vgl. Henry Bosley Woolf. Tht Old Gmnanic Principles of Namt-Gi11ing (Baltimore 1939), und Hilmer Strom, Old English Pnsonal Namts in &dt's His1cwy, Lund Studies in English VIII (Lund 1939), S. xxxiv-xxxvii. 29 Die Quantitat des Anlautvokals von Oc"2 (= Ohta, Nr. n) ist nicht sichcr; vgl. Strom, S. 72 . .,.. Dank schulde ich Professor Bernhard Bischoff fur den Hinweis auf die Handschrift, und Dr. Michael Lapidge fiir seine ausfuhrliche Srellungnahme zu Schrift, Darierung und Lokalisierung der Texre in Reims B.M . 1097. Dr. Colette Jeudy plant cine Studie iiber die gesamre Handschrift. Fiir die frcundliche Erlaubnis zum Druck von Text und Abbildung dankc ich Monsieur Roger Laslicr, Conscrvatcur en chef der Bibliothequc municipalc de Rcims. :is



Seit dem Erscheinen von Schr0ers A nge'laiicksiBchen Pr()8(Jbearbeitungen der Bemdiktine"egel 1 sind fast achtzig Jahre vergangen. Fiir eine durchgreifende t.Jberarbeitung des Buches ist die Zeit noch nicht gekommen, zumal noch immer eine kritische Ausgabe der aus England stammenden lateinischen Hss. der Benediktinerregel fehlt. Im folgenden soll vor allem SchrOers Einleitung erginzt und auf den neuesten Stand der Forschung gebracht werden.

I. Die engli8cke Bemdiktine"e/orm Neben der Regul.ari8 Concordia ist die ae. Prosaversion der Benediktinerregel eines der bedeutendsten Zeugnisse der angelsichsischen Benediktinerreform des 10. Jahrhunderts. Entstehung und Verbreitung der Regeliibersetz11ng konnen nur im Zusammenhang mit der Reformbewegung und dem Wirken von Dunstan, Aethelwold, Oswald und Konig Eadga.r recht gesehen und verstanden werden. Ob es um die Mitte des 10. Jh. in England KIO&ter gab, ist eine Streitfrage der Historiker. Sieber ist, da.6 echtes kl08terliches Leben nach der Regel vollig oder fast vollig erloschen war. Was Konig Alfred ein halbes Jahrhundert friiher vergeblich versucht hatte, gelang dann den Reformem des 10. Jh.: die Wiederbelebung der monastischen Tradition Englands. Die ae. Benediktinerregel ist dabei zweifellos ein wichtiges Werkzeug gewesen, wenn sie auch in den Anfangsstadien der Reform wohl noch nicht zur Verfiigung stand. Fiir die Geschichte der Reform sei bier auf


Erginzt durch die Selbstanzeige in Engl. StudW., 14 (1890), 241-253.

VIII 264

die ausgezeichneten Darstellungen englischer Theologen und Historiker der letzten J ahrzehnte verwiesen 2 • II. Die Bene.dilctine"egel in Engf.and Die ae. Pros&version ist die erste und einzige "Obersetzung der Benediktinerregel in ae. Zeit, wenn man von Interlinearglossen des 11. Jh. absieht. Zwar hatte schon Alkuin den Monchen von Jarrow und Wearmouth in einem Briefe aus dem Jahre 793 empfohlen: Saepiusque regula Sancti Benedicti legatur in conventu fratrum et propria exponatur lingua, ut intellegi possit ab omnibus•,

aber hier war zweifellos nur an miindliche Auslegung gedacht. Wann die la.teinische Benediktinerregel nach England kam, ist neuerdings umstritten. Bisher gait allgemein als sicher, daB bereits Augustin von Canterbury die Regel in England einfiihrte'. Das ist jedoch aus zwei Griinden sehr zweifelhaft : 1. Augustin war Prior des von Gregor dem GroBen gegriindeten Andreasklosters in Rom. Gregor kannte neben anderen Regeln auch die Benedikta. Sie hat aber nachweislich fiir ihn und fiir sein Kloster keine oder nur eine unbedeutende Rolle gespielt 6 • 2. Das Stundenoffizium von St. Augustine's, Canterbury, ist, zumindest in der ersten Halfte des 7. Jh., wahrscheinlich nicht der Benediktinerregel gefolgt, denn das alteste Hymnar von Canterbury setzt fiir 1

J . A. Robinson, The Timu of St. Dunstan (Oxford, 1923); Dom M. D. Knowles, The Moruutic Order in England. A Hiatory of its Development from the Times of St Dunstan to the Fourth Lateran Council 940-1216, (Cambridge, 1 1963); F. M. Stenton, Anglo.Saxon England (Oxford, 1 1947), S. 427-462; Regularia Concordia, ed. Dom T . Symons (London, 1953), S. ix-xxviii. I MOH, Epp. IV, 54 . .22f. ' Vgl. Verf., ,,Englands Bibliotheken im Mittelalter und ihr U ntergang", Fuuchrift fur Walter Hilbner, hrsg. von D . Riesner und H. Gneuss (Berlin, 1964), S. 94 Anm. 8. Die angeftihrten Stellen lieOen sich leicht vermehren. 6 Vgl. K. Hallinger, ,,Papst Gregor der GroOe und der hl. Benedikt", Commentationu in Regulam S . Benedicti, hrsg. von B. Steidle. Studia Anselmiana, 42 (Rom, 1957), S. 231-319, bes. 236£., 265£., Bmedicti Regula, rec. R. Hanslik. CSEL, 75 (Wien, 1960), S. xxii; Knowles, The Mona8tic Order in England, S. 750-752 (nur in der .2. Aufl.).

VIII 265 die Nokturn den liturgischen Gebrauch voraus, den Caesarius und Aurelianus von Arles beschreiben, nicht den der Benediktinerregel 8. Sieber ist, da.B die Regel in der zweiten Hilfte des 7. Jh. durch Wilfrid und Benedict Biscop im Norden Englands bekannt wurde. Wilfrid diirfte sie um 661 in Ripon, spiter in Hexham und vielleicht auch anderen K10stern, nicht nur in Nordhumbrien, eingefiihrt haben. Da.B er die Regel als erster in den Norden gebracht hat, sagt er spiter (703) selbst von sich: ,, ... vitam monachorum. secundum regulam Benedicti patris, qua.m nullus prior ibi invexit, constitueram 7 .'' Benedict Biscop hatte die Regel Benedikts in seinen Neugriindungen Wearmouth (674) und Jarrow (685) eingefiihrt; kurz vor seinem Tode (689) ermahnte er die Monche ausdriicklich, sich bei der Wahl eines Abtes an sie zu ha.lten 8 • Bed.a kannte selbstverstindlich die Regel. N ach Lindisfame kam sie . spa••ten 7 . Jh . 9 . 1m Fiir den Siiden und da.s Mittelland liBt sich die Einf1ihrung der Benediktinerregel nicht so genau datieren wie fiir den Norden. In St. Augustine's, Canterbury ( noch St. Peter und Paul), wird sie spitestens, seitdem Benedict Biscop (669--671) und Hadrian (seit 671) dort als Abte wirkten, iibemommen worden sein. Aus dem siidlichen England oder dem Mittelland stammt ' V gl. Verf., .,Zur Geschichte des Ms. Vespasian A. I.", Anglia, 75 ( 1957), 126 (und demnachst ausfiihrlicher). Es handelt sich um einen kleinen, aber bedeutsamen Unterschied bei den Hymnaren des Type I: Benediktinerregel und ambrosianisches Hymnar zeigen th>ereinstimmung, CanterburyHymnar und die Regeln von Arlee weichen gemeinsam ab. - Die neueste hymnologische Literatur gibt noch immer ein ganz unzutreft'endes Bild von Bau und Entwicklung des friihen Hymnars, vgl. J. Szc>verft'y, DH Annalen du ZMeiniachen Hymnendichtung I (Berlin, 1964), S. 213-216. 7 Vw Wiljridi I. Epiacopt Eboracenria auctore Stephano, hrsg. von W. Levison, MGH,Scf'iptoru VI (1913), S. 242.23, vgl. auch S. 209.12. Ausg. m. tlbers. von B. Colgrave, Eddius Stephanus, Life of Bt.ahop Wilfrid (Cambridge, 1927), Kap. 47 u. 14. • Beda, Ht.ak>ria Abbatum, § 11, § 16, ed. C. Plummer, in Venerabilis Baedae Huk>ria Eccluiaatica Gentu Anglorum (Oxford, 1896), s. 375, 381; Ht.Iorio Abbatum auctore anonymo, § 16, § 25, ibid., 8. 393, 396. • Two IAvu of St. Cutlwert, ed. B. Colgrave (Cambridge, 1940), S. 94 96, s. 206-212.


jedenfalls die ilteste Hs. der Regel iiberhaupt, Bodleian Hatton 48, wohl im epiten 7. oder im 8. Jh. entstanden. Die Hatton-Ha. mit ihren Korrekturen eetzt aber bereits zwei noch friihere Hu. der Regel in England voraus, die als Vorlage gedient haben miiuen ie. Die engliechen Miseionare dee 8. Jh. haben den Text der Benediktinerregel von England aus auf dem Kontinent eingefiihrt. Bonifatius machte die Regel auf frinkischem Gebiet alleinverbindlich; in Fulda wurde eie eeit der Griindung dee Kloster& befolgt 11 • Eine vielleicht von dort etammende Hs. dee epiten 8. oder frihen 9. Jh. geht nachweislich auf eine angelsichsische Vorlage zuriick 11• Ee eei ausdriicklich bemerkt, daB hier nur von der friihen "Oberlieferung dee Te xtee der Benediktinerregel in England die Rede war. Ob und wann in den einzelnen K.lOstem dem Bekanntwerden dee Textes auch die Lebensfiihmng etreng nach der Regel folgte oder ob neben ihr zunichet noch andere Regeln galten, sind Fragen, deren Behandlung hier zu weit fiihren wiirde 11• Mit der 11 E.

A. Lowe, Regula S. Ben«lidi. Spuimina aekcla e eodiu anliqui&rimo O:umtenai (Oxford, 1929); ders., Codicu Lalim .Anliquioru Il (Oxford, 1935), Nr. 240; ders. Engluh Uncial (Oxford, 1960), S. 20,Nr. XX. Zur Berkunft: N. R. Ker, ,,The Provt'IDance of the Oldest Manuacript of the Rule of St. Benedict" , Bodleian Library Record, 2 (1941 ), 28f.; zur Datierung: D. B. Wright, ,,Some Notes on English Uncial", 'l'raditio, 17 (1961), "9£.; zu den Vorlagen : P. Meyvaert, ,.Towards a History of the Textual TranamiMion of the Regula S. B~i', Scripeorium, 17 (1963), 97-99. Eine F · · be in den Early Engluh Manuacriplain Jl'auimtle iat in Vorbereitung. 11 Vgl. K. Hallinger, ,,ROmische Vorausaetzungen der Bonifatiuischen Wirk•mkeit im Frankenreich", Sankl Bonifet- ElknN, ed. E. 0. Blake, Camden Third Series, 92 (London, 1962), S. 111, ll. 37.; Anm. 7 dazu ilt irreftihrend. Zu Quellen und Glaubwttrdigkeit vgl. D. Whitelock und E . 0. Blake, ibtd., S. ix f., xmv, Ii f. SohrOers abweiohender Text (oben S. xiii f.) atammt aue einer stark verkttrzten Fa1111mg dee Ltl>et- .BlieMia, die H. Wharton, Anglia Sacra (London, 1691) nach der Ha. Lambeth Palace '48 gedruckt hatte, vgl. Blake, S. xxv-xxvii. 11 Alftre& = Aelfthryth, Gemablin Eadgara eeit 966. Zu Sudbourne (in Suffolk) vgl. Blake, Ltl>et- ElknN, S. 11•, •1•, dlf.; iiber Soule•· Blake, 8. 111, Anm. 2, und D. Whitelock ibtd, S. xiv. ,,unote Ae&ldre&e" = der Abtei Ely, 970 von Aetbelwold wiedergegrilndet. "Aelfrice Vtla S. AUMlwoldi i1t hng. von J. Stevel180n, Olwomoott M~i de Abingdon, Rolla Series, 2 (London, 1868), ll. 263-266; iibera. vqn D. Whitelock, EngliM H~ Docu'IMftU I (London, 1956), S. 832 bis 839. Die JA.ngere Vtla gedr. in MPL 137. 81-108; Uber ihr Verh&JtniB zu Aelfrice Darstellnng aowie Datiernng und Verfuaer vgl. Robil180n, TM Timu of Se. Dunnan, S. 106-108, 168-171; D. J. V. Fisher, ,,The Early Biographers of St. Ethelwold", Eng. Hial. Rev., 67 (1962), 381-391; D. Whitelock, EngliM Hialoncal Documettla, I. 831!. In Vorbereitung iat eine neue Textauagabe: D. J. V. Fisher, TM Earliue Livu of SI Duuan, 81 BIMlwold and SI Oawald (Nelaon•s Medieval Texts). 11 Olwon. Mon. de Abingdon, II. 263 {Kap. 20); MPL 137. 95B (Kap. 31). Der eingeklammerte Text nicht bei Aelfric.

VIII 271 DaB Aethelwold in der Tat der tJbersetzer der Benecliktinerregel war, darf als Bieber gelten. Er war einer der fiihrenden Kopfe der Reformbewegung; er hatte durch Osgar das Leben nach der Regel in Fleury studieren und in Abingdon lehren lassenn; er war der mutmaBliche Verfasser - wenn auch nicht der alleinige Inspirator - der Regula"8 Ooncordia18• Durch all dies diirfte die Anssage des Liber Elienaia gestiitzt werden. Fiir die Frage nach tJbersetzer und Datierung der ae. Prosaversion ist auch der kurze historische Anhang (Hi81orical, PoatBCript) herangezogen worden, der in der Hs. Faustina A. X der ae. Benediktinerregel folgt". Den Kem dieses P08l8cript bildet ein Bericht iiber die Klosterreform des 10. Jb., in dem die Rolle Konig Eadgars besonders hervorgehoben wird. Er sei es auch gewesen, der die tJbersetzung der Benecliktinerregel befabl. DaB Aetbelwold das P0818cript verfaBt babe, glaubten schon Schroer, Tupper und Liebermann; H. W. Keim bat es durch eine Stiluntersucbung beweisen wollen, Dorothy Whitelock hilt es fiir wahrscheinlich, J. A. Robinson bestreitet es entschieden 16• SchrOers These, dem Inbalt des PoatBcript gehe hervor, daB Aethelwold nicht nur Vgl. u. s. 278. u Symons, Begtdaria Concordia, S. li f., deM., ,,The Regularis Concordia e d the Council of Winchester", ~ BetMw, 80 (1962), 140-156. 'Ober Aethelwolds Bedeut11ng fdr die ae. Lit.eratur und das Urkundenwesen vgl. E. John, ,,The Sources of the English Monastic Reformation: A Comment", &ti. Bm., 70 (1960), 200f. "Ker, Ccdalogw, Nr. 154. B. 4. Vgl. SchrOer, S. xiv-xviii. Abgedruckt mit 'ObeM. bei T. O. Cockayne, Lucladoma, Wortcu"ning and Starer-aft of Early England. Rolls Series, 35 (London, 1864-66), m. 432 445; Kollation bei SchrOer, oben S. xiv f. ; der Text fehlt in dem bibliographiach verantwortungaloeen Nachdruck der ~ von 1961 (mit Einleitung von Charles Singer). Neue 'Obersetznng ( = .Luchdoma, III. 434 444) mit Ein. leitnng und Anmerkungen von D. Whit.elool:, Engluh Hutorical Docummll, I. 846-849. u SchrOer, S. xvii; F. Tupper, ,,History and Texts of th~ Benedictine Reform of the Tenth Century", MLN, 8 (1893), S. 172-184, bes. 175; F. Liebermann, ,,Aethelwolds Anhang zur Benediktinenegel", .Arch.iv, 108 (1902), 375--377; H. W. Keim, ,,Aethelwold und die Monchreform in England", Anglia, 41 (1917), 405 443; Whit.elock, Eng. Hiat. Doe. I. 846; Robineon, 'I'he 'I'imu of St. Dunata", S. 159-168. II


VIII 272 der Verfwer dieses Anhanges, sondem auch der 'Obersetzer der Benediktinerregel gewesen sei, hat vieles fiir sich; wenig iiberzeugend ist dagegen Keirns Stilvergleich M. Jedenfalls kann daa P08Ucript - wenn von Aethelwold - nicht die urspriingliche Fwung der ae. Regeliibersetz11ng begleitet haben, denn diese war eigens fiir Nonnen bestimmt, daa PoaUcript sagt aber, sie sei ,,niedbehefe ungelEredum woroldmonn11m'', fiir den Laien (,,ungecyrred woroldman''), der in ein Kloster eintritt•7 • Diese Stelle hat wohl auch - wie noch zu zeigen sein wird - Schroer zu der ganz unwahrscheinlichen Hypothese einer Urfwung der ae. Regel fiir Monche veranlaBt.

VI. Die Datiero1UJ der ae. Pr08aversion Beim Datieren der ae. Regel ging Schroer (S. xvii f.) von der Entstehungszeit des Postacript aus: Dieses sei verfaBt, bevor Aethelwold Bischof von Winchester wurde (29. November 963). Da Konig Eadgar, der den Auftrag zur 'Obersetzung gab, seit 959 regierte, fillt die Abfassungszeit der ae. Prosaversion nach Schroer zwischen 959 und 963 - ,,etwa in da.s Jahr 961, a.lso um 960". Diese Datierung ist in viele Handbiicher noch der neuesten Zeit iibernommen worden 18 • Nun ist aber die Abfassungszeit des PoaUcript nmstritten 11 - von der Verfa.sserfrage ganz abgesehen; sicher ist, daB es nicht vor 965 geschrieben worden sein kann, denn es erwihnt die Konigin Aelfthryth. Deren Heirat mit Konig Eadgar wird von der Age. Chronik(Hs. D) im Jahre 965 berichtet 11•. Bei dem Versuch, die Entstehungszeit der Regeliibersetz11ng abzugrenzen, sollte da.s Postscript unberiicksichtigt bleiben. " Keim wollte au Hand einee Stilvergleicha auch die eog. Oanona of Edgar ala ein Werk Aethelwolde nachweiaen (Anglia, 41. 440-442); dieee Theorie ist erledigt durch K. Jost, ,,Einige Wulfetantexte und ihre Quellen", .Anglia, 66 (1932), 266-316, bee. 301. I I Luchdoma, III. «O 442. 11 Zum Beiepiel K. Malone in A Literary Hs.tory of England, ed. A. C. Baugh (New York, 1948), I. 100; R. Hanslik, B~i Regula, S. lrv. at Tupper (MLN, 8. 176) hAlt 970 f"dr wahrecheinlich, Liebermann (.Archio, 108. 376) gibt 976-84 an, Robinson (The Timu of St. Dunatan, 8. 168) dae 11. Jh. na Florence of Worcester: 964.

VIII 273

Ter1ninua a quo ist 965, denn im Liber Elie1'8ia II. 37 heiBt es, da8 ,,Aeadgarus rex et Alftrea'' Aethelwold den Auftrag gaben - also nicht vor ihrer Heirat im Jahre 965. Terminus ad quem ist fiir den Auftrag 975, das Jahr, in dem Konig Eadgar starb (8. Juli 97lS; Konigin Aelfthryth starb um 1000); fiir die Ausfiibrung des Auftrages 984, Aethelwolds Todesjahr (l. August 984). Zieht man in Betracht, daB die ilteste erhaltene Hs. der ae. Prosaversion - die schon mehrere Textredaktionen voraussetzt - moglicherweise in den achtziger Jahren des 10. Jh. geschrieben worden ist•undda8 Aethelwold die Ausfiihn1ng seines Auftrages ka11m iiber viele Jahre hinausgezogert haben winl ai, 80 liBt sich die Entstehungszeit auf 965-980 ziemlich Bieber eingrenzen; sie diirfte wahrscheinlich in die erst.en zehn Jahre (965-975) dieser Periode fallen: die Zeit, in der die groBen NonnenklOster gegriindet oder reformiert wurden, die Zeit, in der auch die Regularia Cera Hi.storica, ed. Charles Plum· mer (Oxford, 18 Wilfrid by Eddius Stephanus, ed. B. Colgrave (Cambridge, 1927), Kap. 13 und 24; fiber Bischof Eanbald vgl. Alcuins Brief, ubs. in EHD I, 797. - Ober N

IX Die Battle of Maldon als historisches Zeugnis

Konigs Eadberht haben selbst wieder comites (d. h., nach Stenton, 'military households of their own'), die mit ihren Herren eine Urkunde im Jahre 738 bezeugen.67 Wohl das beste Zeugnis fur das Vorkommen personlicher K.riegergefolgschaften in dieser politisch instabilen Periode fi.nden wir im Leben des hi. Guthlac, von dem sein Biograph, Felix von Crowland, in der ersten Halfte des 8. Jahrhunderts berichtet, er habe als junger Mann (vornehmer Abstammung) tunnae sate/litum um sich gesammelt, und zwar undiegn und der Entwicklung des manor erkannt ist,87 wird auch die Rolle des hlaford vor allem als Guts- und Gerichtsherr deutlich, ebenso wie die Annahme oder Forderung - der Gesetze verstandlich wird, daB jedermann einen Herrn hat oder findet, als Gutsherr, Gerichtsherr und Biirgen. 88 Auch hier ist der N achweis eines militirischen Gefolgschaftsverhiltnisses also kaum zu fiihren. 81 Nicht zu vergessen sind schlieBlich die - dauernd oder zeitweise - zu Hof und Haushalt von Konigen und ealdormen Gehorigeri. DaB zumindest die Konige eine persnliche Leibwache gehabt haben miissen, wird man nicht bezweifeln, doch scheint die Funktion solcher Krieger schon zur Zeit Konig Alfreds von Verwaltungsfunktionen kaum sauberlich zu trennen zu sein. So werden in Assers Leben Konig Alfreds die Bezeichnungen /Jellatores, m·inistri, satellites offenbar unterschiedslos gebraucht, doch wird die Aufgabe ihrer Trager iibrigens wechselweise durch jeweils nur eine von drei cokortes am • Vgl. Liebermann, Geselze, II. i, 11 S f., 'hlaford'. • Vgl. Dorothy Whitelock, ed., Senno Lupi ad Anglos, third. ed. (London, 1963), S. SS zu Z. 73; Liebermann, Gesetze, II. ii, 507 f., 'Herrenverrat'. 17 Dazu s. jetzt Loyn, Anglo-Saxon England and tlu Norman Co111JUnl, S. 163-170; Finberg, Agrarian His/Qry, S. 446-448. 11 II Aethelstan 2, Liebermann, Gesetze, I, 150. 19 Vgl. dazu Liebermann, Geselze, II. ii, 423-427 ('Gefolge'), 5o6 f. ('Herrensuche'), 577 f. ('Mannschaftseid1 ).

IX 34

Hofe wahrgenommen - ausdriicklich als 'administratio' bezeichnet.90 Das von Asser beschriebene Rotationsprinzip schlieBt iibrigens auch hier die Vorstellung einer Hausgefolgschaft aus. Was wir vom spateren witenagemot der angelsachsischen Konige wissen, gibt uns - vor der Zeit der kuscarlas - keine sicheren Anhaltspunkte fiir ein besonderes, stehendes militarisches Gefolge des Konigs; es diirften aber die zu den witan gehorenden f>egnas (und wohl auch die ceorlas am Hofe), soweit ihnen Schutz- und Wachdienste zugekommen sein konnen, gleichzeitig administrative Funktionen wahrgenommen haben; dies laBt sich sogar fiir die spateren kuscarlas zeigen. 91 Es bleibt dann als moglicherweise zuverlassiges Zeugnis fiir die militarische Hausgefolgschaft im angelsachsischen England die Dichtung. Die christlichen Dichtungen - ebenso wie der Heliand - bieten fiir irgendwelche zuverlassigen Schliisse eine zu unsichere Grundlage.91 Soweit sie in der Tat Gefolgschaftsverhaltnisse spiegeln, konnen sie an Dichtung und Wirklichkeit friiherer Jahrhunderte anschlieBen. Von den weltlichen Gedichten sind vor allem vier im Zusammenhang mit unserem Thema genannt worden. Von ihnen weisen zwei - Beowulf und das Ft."nnsburg-Fragment - nach Stoff und Herkunft auf eine Entstehungszeit, in der eine Institution von der Art des comi'tatus in England noch bestanden haben mag. Ein wohl spateres Gedicht ist der Wanderer, 90

Asser's Life of King Alfred, ed. William Henry Stevenson, with article on recent work on Asser's Life of Alfred by Dorothy Whitelock (Oxford, 1959), 86 f., 337. 11 Vgl. dazu Liebermann, The National Assem!Jly in the Anglo-Saxon Period (Halle, 1913), bes. S. 36, sowie Larson, The King's Household in England before the Norman ConI Lilwahln, XIV (1962),


See also Heinrich Beck, "Zu.r literatu.r-

x 120

The Battle of Ma/don 89: Byrhtno• Sec note 21 above. J2

Cark, pp. 68-70.

as Mkh•el

J. Swanton, "Tbl&tt/10/ Maldotl: A Literary Caveat,'' ]BGP, LXVll

(1968), 44S· u W. F. Bolton, "Byrhtno~ in the Wildemcu,'' MLR, LXIV (1969), 483.

x 126 The Battle of Ma/don 89: Byrhtnoa's of1r111oJ Once Again references in another paper with the subtitle ''Toward a Definitive Ofermod. '' But the only reference to occurrences of ofermod that we find in this ''definitive'' paper is a quotation from a footnote in an earlier article by Professor Tolkien: ''In verse the ~oun occurs only twice, once applied to Beorhtnoth, and once to Lucifer.'' In addition, the author of ''Toward a Ddinitive Ofermod'' speaks of cc an etymological argument'' and ''discounting etymology,'' although what really matters here, and what he means, is not etymology, but semantics.35 As I said, it seems unbelievable that this should be our philological basis for the study of ofermod,· it seems even more unbelievable, however, that for more than ten years a book has been available which lists every occurrence of all Old English translation words for mperbia in Old English texts as far as they have been printed, and yet not a single writer about Ma/don has taken any notice of it. This book is the first volume of Hans Schabram's Sllj>lrbia;36 a second volume, containing a semantic study of the words and passages listed, has been promised by the author. It is to be expected that this will also include the final word on ofermod in Ma/don. Until it has appeared, whatever is being written about our problem will necessarily remain incomplete and provisional; this should not be forgotten in what follows here. Ofermod as a noun occurs four times in OE texts, in The Battil of Ma/don, the Later Genesis (line 272), in the lnslrtl&tions for Christians(ed. Rosier, Anglia, LXXXII [1964], 1. 130), and in an eleventh-century glossary. Except in Ma/don, the meaning in each case is ''pride,'' cc superbia''; the OE word is used in connection with Lucifer '' se engel ofermodes '' in Genesis B,31 and >s F. J. Battaglia, "Notes on 'Maldon': Toward a Dc6nitive Oj,,...,,,d,'' BLN, 11 (196s>. 247~· J6 Hans Schabram, S11pn-bia. Stllllin t""' •ltmglistbm Wortnbdlf.. Tell I: Du iidk/Ud/1 llM t.1itlitbe V,,.,,,.,ihlllg t#s Wortgllls (Miinchcn, 1!)6s). The author baa published addenda in "Das altenglische 111/Jn'bia-Wortgut. Eine Nacblcsc,'' in F1slstbrif1 Prof. Dr. H,,.,,,,.t Kl>z.iol t""' silbz.igs/111 G"""lslllg, ed. G. Bauer 11 di., Wiener Beitrige zur engliscben Philologie, LXXV (Wien, 197,), pp. 272~. ,., For various interpretations of the syntax of this passage, see Bright's &g/is/J Gr11111111t1r llllll Ruiw, 3rd ed., ed. by Frederic G. Cassidy and Richard N. Ringler(New York, 1971), p. ,01.


x 1z.7 denotes the quality of a proud man in the Inslrll&tions (1z.9 f.; cf. Luke 16:15): Ac se 8c sylfne to swi8c ahefa for his ofermode, he bi& earm for Gode.

In the glossary,38 the OE word stands for Latin co/111'111'1 and was translated ''a high style(?)'' in Bosworth-Toller, but medieval glQssaries and dictionaries of medieval Latin leave no doubt that cot(h)111'11m could be employed in the sense of'' 111perbia,'' and this would also explain the use of ojermod in our OE glossary. The Bosworth-Toller Supplement and Professor Cross have another instance of ojermod as a noun, from the Uber Scinti/larum (ed. Rhodes, 82.9), where a/t11m sapere is glossed ofermod witan; it seems uncertain whether the OE word here is an adjective or a substantive,3o but the meaning of a/t11m sapere is ''to be proud.'' All instances of ofermod as a noun are from southern OE texts. Among the words that stand in a close semantic or etymological relationship to ofermod, its equivalents in the West Germanic dialects (there are no such equivalents in Gothic or Old Norse) and the OE adjective ofermod may also throw light on the possible meanings of the OE noun. In Old Saxon, o!JarmM is found as an adjective; it occurs three times (He/iand 3992, 4169, 5296), always in the sense ''proud, s11perbm'' (of the Jews); the two instances of obarmodig (referring to the two Herods, He/iand 775 and .i705) have the same meaning. Behaghel and Sehrt-40 Thomas Wright and Richard Paul Wtilcker, AAglo-Sax011 llNl OU/ &glisb Vou""'4ri11, z.nd ed. (London, 1884), l.111.37; Lowell Kindschi, TIH Lalitl-OU/ &glisb Glossari11;,, Pkmtitr-Mor11111 MS.J.z llNl British M.#1111111 MS AtlJitioNJ J.z,241, Diss. Stanford 195 j, p. j6 and note 13. In the S11pp/11111111 to Bosworth-Toiler's Di&liONll:J, this example of of1r111oJ is considered an adjective, no doubt erroneously. J9 There is a similar instance in a homily edited by Rudolf Brotanek, T1xl1 111111 U1111rswhtatgm ZJIT altmglis&hm Li11rahlr 111111 Kir&/Jengls&huh11 (Halle, 1913), p. 18, 1. 10: "111111 pi11g of1r111otks"; it seems likely that this is also an adjective. 40H1/iaJ111111 G1111sis, ed. Otto Behaghcl, 8th ed., rev. by Walther Mitzka (Tilbingen, 196,), p. 277; Edward H. Sehrt, Vollslillliigts WiirterbtKh ZJ1111 H1/ilnu/ "1111 z.w allsi&hsis&hm Gmesis (Gottingen, 192,), p. 420. Schabram (SllJ>lrbill, p. 128) rightly points out that the noun used in the Helilnul is obarhugJ (1. 42j4), but there is also a noun ol>ar1114Ji, which occurs once, in the sense of"pride, superbill," in an early 10th century C011f111UI from Essen; sec KJ1iMn allsi&hsis&IH Spra&hJnilu#i/1r, ed. Elis Wadstein(Norden, 1899),p. 16,ll. 12f. JI

x The &ttle of Ma/don 89: Byrhtnoa's ofer111od Once Again translate ''iibermiitig '' except for obar111Mig, . where Sehrt has '' iibermiitig, stolz ''; there is obviously a parallel here to the rendering of ofermod in Ma/don by German ''Ubermut. '' Old High German llber111110I, 11bar11111ati and their derivatives are all used in the sense of ''pride; proud. ''• 1 But Professor Betz believes that the noun is a native West Germanic word, which has acquired the meaning s11perbia through semantic borrowing. Its old meaning, he says, '' wird etwa dem 'hohcn Mut' entsprochen haben '' and re-emerges in written Middle High German.42 The OE adjective ofer111od, according to Schabram's book, occurs 123 times, including six instances in poetry, fifty-eight in interlinear glosses to psalms and canticles, and at least twenty in the works of King Alfred. Very often the word can be shown to render Latin s11perbm, while its meaning is everywhere ''proud, haughty.'' Before we try to draw some conclusions from the necessarily limited evidence presented so far, we must have a look at the twelfth-century Uber Eliensis which gives an account-generally thought to be unreliable as an historical source4J-of two battles fought by Byrhtnoa against the Danes at Maldon. When the Danes return for the second battle, the Ely chronicle reports that Byrhtno3 ''cum paucis bellatoribus, spe victorie et ni111ia ductus ani111ositate, iter ad helium suscepit ....''44 It has been suggested that one of the compilers of the Uber Eliensis may have known the OE poem, and that ni111ia ani111ositate may correspond to for his 118


a. Rudolf Schiltuichcl, A/1/Jo&IN/nl1tht1 Wiirlwbt«h (Tubingcn, 1969), p. 20j;

E.G. Graff, A/lhotlH/111/sthtr Sprathsthalz. (Berlin, 1834-42), II. col. 688-90. Schiltzcichcl has "Hochmut" (= pride) for OHG llb11'1'111tJI and all related words except an adverb Nb1t'1'111t>llihho "ObermOtig" in Notkcr. Apparently this is the translation of Latin 111J>1rb111 in Boethius, D1 CDtU. Philos. III mctr. 4.1 (Di1 Stlwif1111No/Jurs111111 11i111r Sth11u, ed. P. Piper [Freiburg, 1882-83), I. 1j3.J), which clearly has the sense "proud." 4 2 Werner Betz, D111l1th 111111 La11i#i1th. Di1 Ubllhi""'1ig111 t#r a/Jho&IH!llllsthm &ll#liJ:Ji111"'g1/(Bonn, 1949), p. 127. 43 But sec Eric John, Orbis Brilfltlllial llllllOllHr SltulUs(Leiccstcr, 1966), pp. 222-+ 44 Libtr Elinuis, ed. E. 0. Blake, Camden Third Series, vol. XCII (London, 1962), bk. II, chap. 62, p. I 3j.

x 129

ofermode in line 89.•s But Uber Fliensis II.62 seems to represent a garbled version of an earlier historical accoun~ (our poem?), and nimia animositate refers not to a leader who opens up to the enemy a ford or bridge, but to one who hurriedly marches to the battlefield. Even if the two passages in Ma/Jon and the Uber Fliensis were to tally, this would not help, since animositas in medieval Latin could have a very wide range of meanings, including ''courage,'' ''boldness,'' ''confidence,'' ''hostility," ''excitement,'' ''pride,'' ''arrogance,'' ''magnanimity,'' and these arc just the various terms from which we will have to choose the appropriate one for ofermod in The &tt/e of Ma/Jon. It is interesting to compare two translations of the passage in the Uber FJiensis; one renders nimia animositas by ''an over confidence'' (Conybeare), the other by ''his own adventurous spirit'' (Sedgefield).46 What, then, are our results so far? For a responsible philologist, it seems impossible to assign one definite sense--or a range of closely allied senses-to our OE word with absolute certainty. But all the evidence we have points to ''pride''; in particular:

ofermod(noun) can only mean ''pride'' in Genesis B, Instrwtions for Christians, and a glossary, i.e., wherever it occurs;•1 2. the phrase for his ofermode is found in Ma/Jon and Instrwtions,· 3. the OE adjective ofermod denotes ''proud'' in more than 120 1.

instances; nowhere can it be shown to have a sense like ''bold, courageous, magnanimous,'' etc.; 4. the Old Saxon and Old High German equivalents of OE See F. Liebermann, "Zur Geachichte Byrhtnoths, des Heiden von Maldon,,, Artbi11 f .i/.S1"'1i""' tl.11. Spr. 11. Lil., (1898), 27 f. and note 74; and E. 0. Blake•a note 4 to Libtr Elinuis, pp. 134 f. But cf. Gordon, &Ith of MIJtlq,,, pp. 8 f., the same author's "The Date of Aethelrcd•s Treaty with the Vikings: Olaf Tryggvason and the Battle of Maldon:• MLR, XXXII (1937), 31 f., and Ashdown, pp. 3 f. 46 J. J. and W. D. Conybearc, 11/#.ltralK»u of A#glo-SllXOff PHtry (London, 1826), p. b:xxix; TIH &11/1 of A£Jtlq,, tlllli Sborl P011111fro•11H Saxot1 Cbrotlit/11 ed. Walter John Sedgefield (Boston, 1904), p. xix. 47 For some examplea of the word (noun and adjective) in Early ·Middle English texts, with the same meaning, ace NBD, s. v. ,,,,,,.,,,otl. 45


x The Battle of Ma/Jon 89: Byrhtno8's ofermod Once Again ofermod (noun and adjective) always used with the sense


''pride; proud'' in extant written records; 5. there is no evidence whatsoever to prove that ofermod (noun) could have a signification like ''recklessness,'' ''over-courage,'' ''great courage,'' ''magnanimity''; 6. the context in which ofermod appears in The Battle of Ma/Jon makes it likely that the word is a term of criticism, if not of reproach; !Jtegian (1. 86) and a!Jfan lantks lo fela (1. 90) clearly point to an error of judgment committed by Byrhtnoa.48 On the other hand, one has to admit that there a few facts we ought to consider carefully before we make our final decision in favor of ''pride'': almost all our numerous instances of ofermod (noun and adjective) occur in religious contexts,49 whereas The Battle of Ma/don is a Christian, but not a religious, poem; we cannot be certain if ofermod is an old native word which has borrowed one of its meanings from stptrbia/stptrbm, or if it is perhaps a loan-formation in the West Germanic dialects; we should not ignore the polysemy to be found in some closely related 0 E words : modig and its derivatives (''brave'' : ''proud''), mod (''mind, courage'': ''pride''), and at least one or two cases in which OE oferl!Jgd is used in a ''good'' But on the whole, ''pride'' with its various shades of meaning seems the best solution to a philological puzzle that had its origin almost a thousand ago. Thomas D. Hill, "History and Heroic Ethic in MIJ/Jtm,'' N10p/lilo'°1"', LIV (1970), 291, and see note sS below. .o a. Croes, "Mainly on philology,'' p. 2+4. who, however, points out that there is a case of ofmwoJ (adjective) in prognostications from the moon's age; there is another example of the adjective in the same text; both translate Latin ntjHrlnu in an OE interlinear gloss and so do not supply exactly the kind of evidence that their earlier edition-without the Latin text-by Cockayne would suggest (~1, For1'1lllllilig 111111 Sltlnrofl of FArly Bllg'4NI, Rolls Series, XXXV [London, 1864~). ill.190.14 and m.192.22). See Max Forster," Vom Fortleben antiker Sammellunare im Englischen und in anderen Volkssprachen," Aliglia, LXVll/LXvm (1944), 110.6 and 116.1, and Schabram, S#J'lrllia, pp. 107 f. so The suggested .meanings are "superior thought, wisdom. bigh-mindedneu, magnanimity"; "hoher Mut, edler Stolz." CT. Croes, "Mainly on philology,'' pp. 246 f., and Schabram, pp. 39 f., who points out that ofwb.Jgtl is so used "1usn1hmsweilc.'' 41 CT.

x 131

H, then, we can agree on cc pride'' as the meaning of ojtr111od in Ma/don, we can also draw two further conclusions: in lines 84-90 the poet is obviously censuring the hero of the poem, and if this is so, we have a weighty piece of evidence relating to the vexed question of the historicity of Tht&ttle of Maldon. This is not the place to go into all the pros and cons of this point, and I certainly do not imagine the poet as cc a kind of battlefield correspondent. ''s1 But why should a poet invent a serious and even fatal mistake made by a man who throughout the first half of the poem, apart from lines 84-90--is presented to us as a model of courage, patriotism, and leadership? The only explanation for this seems to be that the poet had this detail-and presumably a great deal of what he recited or wrote down-from eyewitness accounts of the fight, or from local tradition ultimately going back to the reports of people who knew what they were talking about. Once we think, however, that we can regard Ma/don as essentially historical, we might as well ask what exactly Byrhtnoa's mistake was (or what our poet considered it to be), and why the battle was lost. Once again, I can only briefly refer to the various suggestions and hypotheses that have been put forward. Some scholars have considered Ma/don as a political poem, or even as political propaganda, meant to denounce the contemporary policy of cc appeasement'' and to stir up resistance against the Viking invaders in some of the darkest years of Anglo-Saxon However that may be, there is certainly no indication that the poet should have considered it advisable for Byrhtnoa and his men to avoid fighting against the Vikings at all. Nor does it seem likely that he considered Byrhtnoa inexperienced in military It seems very doubtful to me that !Jtegian in II '--1:. r~ 1D--' ~mger. p.

2.7. sa See. e.g.• Daniel Abegg. ZllT &lnldlltlg lw bisloriH""' DidJ111111 bli iM Allgf/SM.bmr (Strusburg. 1894). p. 8; Brandl. pp. 1076 f.; Elliott. p. 69; von See. pp. 80-1; GOller, pp. 128. 186; Cross... Mainly on philology.•• pp. 247 f. But cf. Swanton, p. and Beuinger, p. , •. •> c.f. A. D. Milla, .. Byrbtno&•a Mistake in Gcnerahhip.•• NM. LXVII (1966). 24Warren A. Samouce ("General Byrbtnoth.'' ]EGP. LXII [1¢,). p. 1,0) refers to the opinions of ealier authorities on MiJJoti. Would it not be more useful to examine


x The "Battle of Ma/Jon 89: Byrhtnoa's ofermod Once Again line 86 is intended to suggest that Byrhtnoa was gullible.s• Most commentators are silent. on this point. Perhaps the Liber FJiensis may give us a hint as to what happened; it reports that the 132

Vikings after having returned to Maldon for the second battle (they had been defeated in the first) statim mandant sc ad ulciscendos cos [i.e., their comrades who had been killed in the first battle] adventasse ipsumquc inter ignavos habcndum, si non audeat cum cis conferrc manum ["that they should rank him among cowards ifhc declined an engagement'' (Conybeare)].ss

Is Byrhtnoa being criticized in the poem because, as Professor Tolkien says, he treated a desperate battle as a sporting match, throwing away the lives of his men ?s6 Did Byrhtnoa do this because cc he allows his sense of honour to override his real duty'' ?s1 We do not know. It has been assumed for quite some time that he committed cc a traditional heroic fault,''s8 whereas he ought to have kept the Vikings on the island, where he could even have starved them out.59 But it seems doubtful if they would have waited for this to happen. I think we should very seriously consider the-probably more realistic-assessment of the situation by Professor Whitelock and Captain Samoucc :6o Byrhtnoa could easily have blocked the ford, but it seems safe to assume that in this case the Vikings would have sailed away in the r6le and function of tenth-century 1a"1onlt1t1 in military operations, even if one docs not believe in the historicity of our poem? s• As is claimed by Mills, p. As regards the conttovcny about lyt1gia, however, I believe with Professor Cross ("Mainly on philology,'' pp. 236-40) that Dr. Clark has failed to produce convincing evidence for "a good sense,, of the word; cf. his arguments in Sj>1"'1t1111, XLIII (1968), 68. SS Lilm E/inuis, p. 1,5; J. J. and w. D. Conybeare, p. lxxxix. a. Elliott, p. 59: "Perhaps there was as in the Hi/Mbrtlllllslid some taunt of cowardice.'' 56 J. R.R. Tolkien, "The Homecoming of Bcorhtnoth Bcorhthelm's Son,'' ES, N.S., Vl(1953), 15. 57 C. M. Bowra, Htr0it POltry (London, 1952), p. 123. s8 Bessinger, p. 31; Samoucc, p. 134; Kemp Malone, "The Old English Period,'' in A Litwary History of &glallll, ed. A. C. Baugh (New York, 1948), l.58. 59 Thus Irving, p. 462, and cf. Bessinger, p. 3 1. 6o Sweet's Allglo-Saxot1 RuMr ;,, Prost llllli V1rs1, rev. by Dorothy Whitelock (Oxford, 1967), pp. 266 f.; Samoucc, p. 131; cf. also Macrae-Gibson, pp. 100 f.


x 133

order to ravage a part of Byrhtno3's earldom, or of the country, that might have been without military protection. This may well be the reason why Byrhtno3 decided to draw the Vikings into pitched battle. But he was defeated--and posthumously criticized by our poet. A possible explanation for this-actually the only one I can think of61-seems to be the fact that Byrhtno3 was employing the right tactics but did not, or not yet, have a fighting force sufficiently strong to carry through his plan.62 A treatment of this issue should certainly be left to a professional historian, but a few relevant facts might perhaps be mentioned here. The number of Vikings present at the battle of Maldon has been estimated by Professor Vinogradoff; they cc represented the crews of 390 ships, that is, not less than 15 ,6oo men, on the average of 40 men per ship.''63 Eric John objected to this because cc We now know enough about the site of the battle to be certain that nothing like this number could have occupied the space available. ''64 But we need not worry about the space available; Vinogradoff apparently misunderstood the entry for 991 in the Parker Chronicle,6s which has cc mid prim 7 h11111inigentigon scip11m,'' i.e., with ninety-three ships, and these, according to E. V. Gordon, would have held a fighting force of 2000 to .i 5oo men. 66 Professor Hollister ascribes Byrhtnoa's defeat to "the ambiguous loyalties of Anglo-Danish leaders": C. Warren Hollister, A11g/o-Saxo11 Military I111tit11tiotu 011 the &1 of the Nor111a11 C~st (Oxford, 1962), p. 146 and n. 2, but without sufficient evidence. One should not ignore, of course, what we arc told about the effect of Godric's Aight (11. 19j, 2'9-4,), yet one would not expect the poet to criticize Byrhtnoa in 1. 89 f. for not having foreseen what might happen after bis death. 62 Two attempts have been made to reconstruct Byrhtnoa's plan and tactics, in the articles by Captain Samoucc and 0. D. Macrae-Gibson. One would wish to sec their hypotheses examined by an expert in medieval military history. 6> Sir Paul Vinogradoff, 'English S«iely ill the EJnmth Cmtray(Oxford, 1908), p. 28. 64 Eric John, Lnu/Tltllll'1 in Early &gllllJtl(Lciccstcr, 196o), pp. 1'8 f., n. ,. 6S Such a misunderstanding seems to have occurred before; cf. Liebermann, "Zur Gcschichtc Byrbtnoths," p . 22, n. 48. 66 Gordon, The 'Battle of Ma/Jtm, p. 11, n. 1. For the types, sizes, and crews of Viking ships, sec Gwyn Jones, A History of the ViJ:ings (London, 1968), pp. 18,-94, especially p. 194, and the literature quoted on p. 18,, n. 2. For the size of Danish armies in ninth-century England, sec P. H. Sawyer, "The Density of the Danish 6r

x 134 The 'Battle of Maltlon 89: Byrhtno&'s ojermod Once Again

Unfortunately, there is some reason to believe that the Parker Chronicle has confused two separate Viking campaigns, and that the 93 ships may belong in the second of these.61 Also, it has never been established with certainty that Olaf Tryggvason was present at Maldon, as is stated by the Parker Chronicle.68 But Sir Frank Stenton thought of the Viking force operating in Eastern England in 991 that ''it was larger than any of the forces which had lately harried in England, and to some extent it had the character of an organized army.''69 May one assume that such an army was not considerably smaller than the one computed by Professor Gordon on the basis of ninety-three ships? There can be even less certainty about Byrhtnoa's AngloSaxon force. The problem of numerical inferiority or superiority at Maldon has rarely been mentioned even by those authors who would not question the historicity of our poem. ''Der Ubermathl erliegt die kJeine Sathsenschar,'' said Zemial ninety years ago; E. V. Gordon speaks of'' the smaller body of English troops''; ~iosse mentions Byrhtnoa's '' maigres forces''; George Oark suggests that the Vikings outnumbered and outclassed the English; while Captain Samouce assumes that they were ''approximately equal in strength of numbers.''10 How do we know? Here we are confronted with the controversial problem of Anglo-Saxon military Settlement in England," Vtliiwsily

of Binlilft,bui HUlllriul ]Ollnllll, VI (19s7-s8),


Sec Liebermann, "Zur Geachichte Byrhtnotbs," p. 22; Charles Plummer, T" of llH Saxon Cbrotlic/11 Parol/1/ (Oxford, 1892-99, rcpr. with a bibliographical note by Dorothy Whitelock, 1952). II. 173, and-for the dating of the entry in the Parker Chronicle-Dorothy Whitelock, &glisb Historiul Do&ttlllll '· 10~1042 (London, 195 5), p. 213, n. I, 61 Sec Gordon, "The Date of Acthcltcd's Treaty," but cf. Whitelock, BAglisb Hi11ori&al DM111111ill, p. 293. 69 Stenton, p. 376. 10 U. Zcmial, Du Litt/ Byrbhlolbs Foll. 991. Bill &ilrog tw ollgn•otlis&IHtt Vollupolsil, Wissenschaftlichc Beilagc zum Programm des Humboldts-Gymnasium, Ostcm 1882 (Berlin, 1882), p. 10; Gordon, TIH &11/1 of Mal"-, p. 28; Fcmand Mosse. Mam#/ th I' Angillis JM Moym Ag1 tks Origitlls"" XIV• Sik/1. I: Viii/ Aa,Ws (Paris, 1945), I.ii.422; Clark, p. s6 f. and n. 27; Samoucc, p. 132 f.; sec also Milla, p. 20 f. ; but Samoucc finds indications of a possible slight superiority of the fi7


x 135 organization~gain a subject for the expert historian, and not for the philologist. The most detailed recent study of military matters in late Anglo-Saxon England, by Professor Hollister,1 1 distinguishes between three different types of Anglo-Saxon fighting forces : 1. Mercenaries, or retainers, serving the king and other prominent men as professional soldiers; Byrhtnoa's heorbwerod must have consisted of such men; .i. The select.f.Jrd, a levy of trained warriors, for which each five-hide unit had to supply one man; this force is organized on the basis of shires and led by their respective ealdormen; 3. The great fyrd, a general levy of all free men, with an essentially local and defensive mission. What kind of force was at Byrhtnoa's disposal? Apparently, the literary critics (and a military specialist) cannot help us on this point. Captain Samouce thinks that Byrhtnoa's troops were untrained, and Professor Irving speaks of ''the crowd of untrained peasants who make up the fyrd.''12 On the other hand, N. F. Blake believes that the majority of the fighters belong to the heorbwerod and are Byrhtnoa's retainers, while Eric John~ historian-has repeatedly denied any distinction at all between fyrd and heorbwerod.13 Considering what we knew about AngloSaxon military institutions even before the appearance of Professor Hollister's book, none of these views seems tenable to me. Byrhtnoa's heorbwerod can only have been a small bodyguard,?• and it appears unlikely that these men, together with ''untrained peasants,'' should have attempted to oppose what must have Vikings. CT. also C. E. Wright: "a story of the defence of a narrow place against great odds" (Tl# C11/liM1io11 of Saga ill Aaglo-Saxot1 &g/J,,,J [Edinburgh, 1939], p. 2.3), and the Libw Elinuis, p. t 35 : "cum paucis bellatoribua.'' 1 1 C. Warren Hollister, Allglo-SaxOtl Military ltulihdiotu llH EH of llH N,,,.,,,1111 CONJWsl; cf. H. R. Loyn, TIH N°""'"" COlllJl#sl (London, 1965 ), pp. 77 f. n Samouce, p. 132 (criticlud by Mills, pp. 17 f.); Irving, p. 458; ICC also MacraeGibson, p. 101; and Hill, p. 2.93· 73 Blake, p. 338; Eric John, Orbis Briltlllllku llllll olbtr Shll/Us (Leicester, 1966), pp. 2.92. f., and LarJ T """' ill Early &glllllll, pp. 138 f., n. 3. I fail to ICC how one can possibly claim that in "ll. 2.55-63 the 'simple ceorl' addresaes the rest as binilllm,'' as is done by john in his note. 1• CT. Dorothy Whitelock, "The Anglo-Saxon Achievement,'' in Thi N°"""" CMlflllsl{London, 1966), p. 39.


x 136 The &tile of Ma/don 89: ByrhtnC>a's ofermod Once Again been a formidable Viking force. There was probably enough time to assemble the select fyrd of Essex, since the Norsemen had previously attacked Ipswich (and, perhaps, Sandwich and Folkestone).1s Professor Hollister, at any rate, thinks that the English army at Maldon was composed of the select fyrd and Byrhtno3's retainers, while he considers it uncertain whether there were also elements of the greatfyrd present.76 H we assume, then, that the · number of Byrhtno3's retainers was comparatively small, that the select fyrd of the shire of Essex was present at Maldon more or less in full strength, and that members of the great fyrd-if any were there-may not have been prepared well enough, if at all, for their task: if we assume all this, we might be able to estimate very roughly the number of trained warriors on the AngloSaxon side in the Battle of Maldon. In the Domesday Book, Essex is assessed at approximately 2,767 hides,11 which means that the shire fyrd, if complete, would consist of about 55o warriors.18 H this, or perhaps a rather smaller figure, is representative of the strength of the Anglo-Saxon fighting force at Sec the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, MSS. ACDEF for the year 991. I assume that Byrhtnoa was 1a/ior111a11 of Essex, and that only the forces of this shire would have been involved. But it is difficult to be certain about the territory under Byrhtnoa's administration, and there arc indications that he may have exercised jurisdiction or authority of some kind elsewhere; cf. Gordon, Batt/1 of Ma/Jtm, p. 16 f.; E. 0. Blake, Uber Elinuis, pp. xiii and 99, no. 2. Eric John even believes that Byrhtnoth may have been 1aliormtm of Northumbria, and that the battle of Maldon was more than a local engagement fought by the Esscxf:lrtl(Orbis 13rilalllliae, pp. 222-j). But how do we then interpret our poem's East1111X11111 ortl (1. 69)? 76 Hollister, pp. 127 f. and note 3. But sec Clark, pp. 63 f. and n • .f6. One important piece of evidence is the llllDr1fll t«>rl, l. 2 j 6. I shall deal with this as well as with the to111itahu at Maldon in a forthcoming paper. 77 Cf. H. C. Darby, TIH Do111Uliay G10graJ>b.J of Ear1"11 &g"1NI, 3rd ed. (Cambridge, 1971), p . 221. The figure given by F. W . Maitland, Do11111tlay Book lllli NJo"" (Cambridge, 1897, rcpr. London, 196o), p. 464, is 2,6jo hides. 71 Professor Vinogradoff's figure is j 30, but he thought that, in addition, members of the great f:lrtl must have been present at Maldon, because otherwise "the disparity would have been too overwhelming" (pp. 17 f.). One has to realm, however, that in the late tenth century thcfJrJ may have been recruited on a basis different from that suggested by Professor Hollister. Sec, e.g., King Athclstan's Laws, II. 16, ed. Felix Liebermann, Dil G1ntz.1 tkr Atlgllsatbsm (Halle, 1903-16), 7s




x 137 Maldon, then it seems quite possible that Byrhtnoa's men were in a very difficult, if not desperate, position as soon as the Vikings had been allowed to cross the brycg, and our poet's ofermod becomes understandable, even though the ealdorman may have seriously hoped to be able to defeat the Vikings and thus to prevent them from further attacks. I am only too well aware that a great deal of what I have been saying in this article has had to remain tentative, and often qualified by conditional clauses. One has to remember that our sources for Anglo-Saxon local history are scanty, and that our knowledge of Old English is and will remain limited. Nevertheless, we should patiently try to analyze the meaning of Old English words with the help of all available philological tools and all textual evidence, and we should try to avoid producing what Professor Robinson has very aptly called ''a bit of literary criticism posing as lexicographical fact. ''79

Fred C. Robinson, "Lexicography and Literary Criticism: A Caveat," Pbi/tJ.. logiuJ Esl".JI. Sllllli11 ill OU llllll MitU/1 &glisb '""IJlllU llllli Liln"allllY ill. HOllOw of H1rl>lrl D1a11 Mwill, ed. James L. Rosier (The Hague, 1970), pp. 99-110; sec also the recent di1CUSSions of the methodical approach to OE semantics by St•nley B. Greenfield, TIH J111trpr11a1ilm of OU &,Jisb POl1"1 (London, 1972), esp. chap. 2; Cross, "Mainlyonphilology,"p. 235 ;HansSchabram, ",•• Slllllim z.w mgJistbm 111111 tm1trilumi1tbm SpratlH 111111 Liltrahlr. FIHsillrlfl]lir H1l•ld Papaj1ai11ci, ed. Paul G. Buchloh 11 al. (Neumilnstct, 1974), pp. 70 f. 79

x Addenda For recent. important work on The Battle of Ma/don see the Addenda to article IX, above. For the use and distnbution of OE ofermod and other terms rendering Latin superbia

and related concepts see now the thorough study and documentation by Walter Hofstetter,

Winchester und der spataltenglische Sprachgebrauch (Munich, 19&7).


Giraldus Cambrensis und die Geschichte der englischen Sprachwissenschaft im Mittelalter Eine umfassende Geschichte der englischen Sprachwissenschaft - eigentlich: der Wissenschaft von der englischen Sprache - fehlt bis heute. Zahlreiche, z. T. sehr gewichtige Aufsatze und Monographien zur Geschichte von englischer Grammatik und Lexikographie (um our die am meisten bearbeiteten Gebiete zu nennen) liegen vor, sind aber nirgends systematisch in einer Bibliographie erfa6t, da Arthur G. Kennedys verdienstvolle Bibliography of Writings on the English Language 1 our bis 1922 reicht und bis heute leider keine Fortsetzung gefunden hat. Bedauerlich ist auch, da6 die wissenschaftshistorische Fachliteratur meist den Eindruck erweckt, als ob Sprachwissenschaft in England erst im 16. oder 17. Jahrhundert begonnen babe.

So etwa war das Bild zu Anfang unseres Jahrhunderts, als Ewald Fliigel vor der Association of the Pacific Coast in der American Philological Association einen Vortrag iiber ,,The History of English Philology and its Problems" hielt, in dem er anfangs bemerkte: ,,I can dismiss with a few words the earlier history of English Philology before the Reformation." 2 lmmerhin erw&hnt Fliigel aber u. a. Orm, Robert of Gloucester, Wycliffe, Chaucer und Caxton, iibergeht jedoch vollig die 1


Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Pre8a, 1927.

Ewald Flugel, "The History of English Philology", Fli1el MemorioJ Vol•me, Leland Stanford Junior University Publications, University Series (Stanford, CA: Published by the Univenity, 1916), S. 9-35, bier S. 9; vgl. Tran•oction1 of the Americon PAilolo1ic11l A11oci11tion, 33 (1902), lxxxv f.

XI 165

Zur Gesehichte der englischen Spracbwissenschaf't im Mittelalter

angelsichsische Zeit. Die Forschung der vergangenen Jahrzehnte macbt es nun moglich, dieses Bild zu korrigieren, wobei allerdings nicht vergessen werden darf, da8 englische Spracbwissenschaf't im Mittelalter nur im Zusammenhang mit Lehre und Beschreibung des Lateinischen gesehen werden kann: von dort kommt das Grammatikmodell, die Methode der Glossographie und vieles andere mehr. So ist auch die ,kontrastive Methode' nicht eine Erfindung des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts; sie hat in England zweifellos schon im siebten Jahrhundert Bedeutung gehabt. Eine historische Darstellung der Sprachwissenschaft im englischen Mittelalter kann nicht Aufgabe dieses Aufsatzes sein. Bier soll der Versuch gemacbt werden, eine Periodisierung dieses Abschnitts der Wissenschaf'tsgeschichte mit ganz knapper Charakterisierung der einzelnen Perioden zu entwerfen. Daran soil sich die Erliuterung eines bemerkenawerten Zeugnisses zum englischen Sprachbewu8tsein im 12. Jahrhundert schlie8en. Die Entwicklung der Sprachwissenschaft in England bis zum Beginn des 16. Jahrhunderts li8t sich in funf Perioden teilen, wobei diese Bilfskonstruktion natiirlich mit der notigen Vorsicht anzuwenden ist; Uberginge und Kontinuititen diirfen nicht iibersehen werden.

1. Periode: 7. und 8. Jahrhundert Einfuhrung von Schrift und Buch in England . Der gro8te Teil der spitantiken grammatischen Beschreibungen des Lateinischen wird in England bekannt und zuginglich. Angelsachsen schreiben Lateingrammatiken, die auf die Bediirfnisse ihrer Landsleute zugeschnitten sind: Bonifatius, Tatwine; dazu kommen Bedas sprachwissenschaftliche Lehrbiicher, De or11aograplaia und De aclaemati6aa et tropia; damit wird auch die Rhetorik bekannt, allerdings wohl our als elocutio, wie in den Grammatiken iiberliefert. Auch Alkuins grammatische und rhetorische Schriften sind ohne seine Ausbildung und Lehrtitigkeit in England nicht zu denken. Schon im 7. Jahrhundert beginnt die Gl0880graphie, z. T . zweisprachig; damit setzt auch die schriftliche Aufzeichnung des Englischen ein. Dazu kommt die Aneignung von lateinischem Wortgut in Form von Lehnwortern und Lehnbedeutungen.3

2. Periode: Das 9. Jahrhundert Ein Bildungsverfall setzt ein, der sich besonders in mangelnden Lateinkenntnissen iu8ert, dazu oft'enbar auch im Verlust des gr08ten Teiles der in England zuginglichen grammatischen Schriften. So bedient sich Konig Alfred bei seinem Reformunternehmen zu Ende des J ahrhunderts der englischen Sprache, mit wichtigen Konsequenzen fur den englischen Schrift-Prosastil.4 3

In den Fu8noten 3-7 konnen nur gam lmappe Hinweiee auf wich&ige weiterfiibrende Literatur gegeben werden. Zur 1. Periode: Vivien Law, T/ae la1•lar wtia Gnammari••• (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1982); Joeeph Donovan Pheifer, Oltl En1li1/a Glo11e1 ia t/ae Epinal-Er/-rl Glo•••rr (Oxford: Clarendon Preu, 1974), "Introduction". • Verf., ,.Anclo-Saxon Libraries from the Converaion to the Benedictine Reform", Settimane tli 1t•llio tlel Ceatro italiaao Iii •t•lli 1all' alto muioe•o, XXXll, 1984 (1986), 643-88, bier 672-79.

XI 166 3. Periode: 10. und 11. Jahrhundert Seit der Benediktinerreform des 10. Jahrhunderts wird der bewuBte Umgang mit der lateinischen und der englischen Sprache intensiv gelehrt und gelordert; der Grammatikunterricht nimmt eine wichtige Rolle in den KIO&tem ein. Von denen, die Grammatik lehren - und dabei ganz oft'ensichtlich auch den schriftlichen Gebrauch des Englischen - sind uns namentlich bekannt .JEthelwold in Winchester, Abbo von Fleury (und spiter sein Schuler Byrhtferth) in Ramsey, .JElfric in Cerne und Eynsham. Grundlage des Grammatikunterrichts sind jetzt vor allem die Schriften Donats und Priscians, aber die auf ihnen basierende Grammatik .JElfrics - wiederum eigens ftir Angelsachsen geschrieben (mit Betonung der Formenlehre) - ist am weitesten verbreitet; sie ist kontrastiv angelegt und kann und soil - in gewissen Grenzen - auch eine Grammatik des Englischen sein. Eine englische Hoch- und Schriftsprache bildet sich heraus. Die Lehre von den rhetorischen Stilmitteln (Tropen und Figuren) und die Glossographie werden weiter gepflegt . .. Ubersetzungen und Interlinearversionen lateinischer Texte sind zahlreich. Die etymologische Methode wird auch auf das Englische angewandt.15 4. Periode: 12. und 13. Jahrhundert Sie ist von der folgenden, 5. Periode our sehr bedingt zu trennen. Das FranzO&iscbe tritt neben Englisch und Latein. Das sprachwissenschaftliche und didaktische Interesse am Englischen geht zuriick (vgl. aber unten). Neben Priscian und Donat sind als Lehrbiicher des Lateinischen jetzt die Versgrammatiken, das Doctrinale des Alexander de Villa Dei und der Graecismus des Eberhard von Bethune verbreitet. An die Stelle der Glossare, die Sammlungen vornehmlich ,schwieriger' Worter waren, treten die einsprachigen Worterbiicher des Lateinischen von Papias, Osbern von Gloucester, Bugutio, Johannes Balbus von Genua. Auch Autoren englischer Herkunft tragen zu der sprachwissenschaftlichen und Sprachlehr-Literatur bei: Johannes von Salisbury, Roger Bacon, Johannes von Garlandia, Alexander Neckam. Die Verbreitung des Gedankengutes der spekulativen Grammatik beginnt.6 5

Michael Lapidge, ,.E&helwold u Scholar and Teacher", Bi.lop AJtleltuoltl: Hu Career atatl l•ff•e•ce, hg. Barbara Yorke (Woodbridge: Boydell, 1988), S. 89-117; Abbo Flori,.,,..,•ia, tio•e• fn1mmatiule1, hg. Anita Guerreau-Jalabert (Paris: Lea Belles Lettrea, 1982); Luke M. Rein'""&, AJlfric: A• A•notatetl Bi6liognapl1 (New York: Garland, 1987), S. 183-90 und 298; Donald A. Bullough, .,The Educational Tradition in England from Alfred to ..Elfric: Teaching Utn••t•e Li•1••e", SetCimaae ... , XIX, 1971(1972),453-94; Jadcaon J. Campbell, .,Adaptation of Clwical Rhetoric in Old English LiteralUR", Metliet1al El09aeace: Statlie1 i• tle Theo,., atatl Practice of Metliet1al RAetoric, hg. James J. Murphy (Berkieley, CA: University of California Plese, 1978), S. 173-97. 11 Eine Dantellung der Entwicldung der Spracbwiaeenachaft in England fiir dieae Periode (ehlt vollig. Zu den meiaten der genannten lateinivh-vhreibenden Autoren gibt nacb wie vor zuverliuige Auekunft Max Manitiua, Ge1cliclte tler latei•i1cleft Litentar tle1 Mittelalter1 (Miinchen: Beck, 1911-31 ); zur ape)rulativen Gramn>at.ik eiehe Michael A. Covington, .,Grammatical Theory in the Middle Ages", Statlie• i• t1e Hi1to,., of We1ten1 Li•1•i1tic1 i• Ho•o•r of R.H. &6i"'• hg. Theodora Bynon und Frank R. Palmer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Prw, 1986),


s. 23-42.

XI 167

Zur Geschichte der englischen Sprachwissenschaft im Mittelalter

5. Periode: 14. und 15. Jahrhundert Dieser Zeitraum ist, wie schon bemerkt, vom vorhergehenden in vieler Hinsicht nicht abzugrenzen und setzt desaen Entwicklungen fort. Ein wichtiger Einschnitt jedoch entstebt im Zusammenhang mit der Expansion des englischen Schulwesens und der zunehmenden Schreib- und Lesefabigkeit bei Laien: der Lateinunterricht wird nun in englischer Sprache abgebalten, und auch die Lehrbiicher hierfur bedienen sich jetzt englischer Erkl&rungen, einer englischen Terminologie und der kontrastiven Methode. Von den grammatischen Schriften mit dieser Methode sind die dem John Leyland zugeschriebenen am bekanntesten geworden; neben ihnen finden zweisprachige Vokabularien ( ,Nominale', ,Ver bale') Verwendung, und die ersten echten zweisprachigen Worterbiicher (Englisch-Lateinisch, LateinischEnglisch) entstehen. In diese Periode fallen auch die Anfinge eines neuen Standard

Engliala. 1


Dieser sehr summarische Uberblick mu8 noch fur die vierte Periode erganzt werden. Es ist dies der Zeitraum, in dem die sprachliche Konkurrenz des Franz0sischen zum Englischen zunichst besonders stark ist und in dem auch keine englische Hochsprache mehr existiert. So scheint es nicht verwunderlich, wenn das Englische - nach unseren schriftlichen Quellen zu urteilen - wenig Aufmerksamkeit erfihrt. Da8 aber auch jetzt die alte Landessprache bewu8t gehort, gelesen und gebraucht wurde, da.f'ur gibt es einige aufschlu8reiche Zeugnisse. Zu ihnen gehort, noch im 12. Jahrhundert, der - allerdings erfolgloee - Versuch einer Rechtschreibungsreform durch den Augustinerchorherrn Orm8 sowie die philologische Arbeit des Schreibers der sogenannten ,,tremulous hand" in Worcester wohl im zweiten Viertel des 13. Jahrhunderts, der altenglische Texte systematisch gl088ierte, um sie seinen Zeitgen088en verstindlich zu erbalten, und der ..Elfrics Grammatik und Gl088&r selbst kopierte. 9 Ein aufmerksamer Beobachter spracblicher Erscbeinungen ist in dieser Periode auch Giraldus Cambrensis, oder Gerald of Wales (1146-1223), gewesen, ein einflu8reicher und gebildeter Geistlicher normannisch-walisischer Abstammung, der 1

Nicholu Orme, Ea1li•1 Sc1oola ia t1e Mi,,/e A1e• (London: Methuen, 1973); den., Ed•calio• ••' Societr ia Mediewa/ ••' Reaai••••ce Ea1/aad (London and Ronceverte: The Humbledon Pre11, 1989); David Th()lll'°D, A De•criptiwe Cat&IOf•c of Mi,,/e Ea1li•1 Grammatica/ Tut• (New York: Garland, 1979); den., Aa E'itioa of Ile Mi,,/e Ea1lu1 Grammatica/ Tut. (New York: Garland, 1984). 1

EarlJ Mi,,/e Ea11i•1 Ver•e a•' Pro•e, bg. Jack A. W. Bennett und Geoft'rey V. Smithen (2. Auft., Oxford: Clarendon P1e11, 1968), S. 360 f.; sur Datienmg vgl. jetst Malcolm B. Parkes, ,.On the Presumed Date and Poaible Origin of the Manmaipt of the '011mulum': Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Junit111", Fiwe H••'re' Year• of Wonl• ••'So••'•: A Fe•t.c1rift for Eric Do6•o•, bg. Eric G. Stanley und Dougla1 Gray (Cambridge: Cambridge Univenity Pl'el8, 1983), s. 115-27. AUi der umfangreid.e:n LiterMur .a ttaWiNCll• au!: Homilie• of &IJrie: A s.,,1emnt•rr Colleelioa, bg. John C. Pope, Early Engliah Text Society, 259, I (London: Oxford Univenity P..-, 1967), 185-88. I

XI 168

das Walisische, das Englische, das Franzbt.bymne Olwi.C. ~ •


12. JJou i'IJftf of to0elt anc1 bit... (22) Freiere ttbenet&ung TOD Ven l'-IO dee 'l'•



13. Sot!IA}e "'°" Mal AoelilN toMCfe (23) Freiere tlbereet&ung TOD SU-. 1-4,8,9 einee angloDUto>r.nnieohen (TOD :SO.on 7)1). 1•. l..u owe t"CIUfUOtm (M) 'Obenet&ung der Himmelfabn.hymne lw no•ma ,... ~.

f. !08"-210

15. K'IJftl MM of all. i,,.,_ aiehe ant.en Nr. Il.


16. WAcd 11• Ae Jy. lordUftg (26) Ubenet&ung der Epiatel zum Mittwooh der Kvwoohe, QuN UI Mee (JN, 63.1-7).

f. 210"

17. Be .cM71 OJJOf' fie ~ liehe ant.en Nr. m.

f. 210"

18. mylde tDrOUAM 1iehe anten Nr. IV.

f. 211-211T

19. Sepl ~ ttt Ay• god.,,.z,,,.,,.,.. au. lo fltUftCle aiehe ant.en Nr. V.

Von diesen 19 Sttioken Bind gedruokt in: Th. Wright and J. 0. HaJHwell, Bdtquiae AMfua. (London, 18'1 '3), I, 8&-88, Il, 226-229: Nr.1-2, 3-8.

11'. A.. Pattenon, TM Mtddle Bngl"1A Pe..tee:Mial L1fric (New York, 1911), 8.67, 112, 117f.: Nr. 5, 7, 8. Texte naoh BeZtquioe Anliquae, niohtnM>b der Handeohrift.

1) Gedruokt von Brown, 8.2'9. Die oftim1iohtlioh fret etfundene Ge· IOhiohte war dama11 weit verbreitet. Vgl. C. Brown, ''The Priorw'1 Tale", in: W. F. Bryan und G. Dempeter, 8ouroe1 and A~ of O'ltauoer'• OanNrbury 'l'al# (Chicago, 19'1), 8 ...7 '85; 'l'Ae Woru of e rode, !>at baret belle olos; Ygurd he was wyth streng}>e, }>e prydde day a.roe. Nicht in Brown-Robbins, Index; in allen Besohreibungen der Handsohrift bisher ttbersehen. Ubersetzung einer Antiphon, die im Gebrauch von Sarum und York zwisohen Ostern und Pfingsten ale .Memoria de 0""'1Ce gee11ngen wurde1 ):

en.cem IOftdam .ubitl Qui infernum oo~t, Aocinotue • t potenti&, Surrexit die tertia. Alleluya. 1) G. M. Drevee und C. Blume, Bin J~ lai.iniacAer ByntMlidioAlung (Leipzig, 1909), I, 329; F. J.E. Raby, A Bialory o/ O~LaM P°*1/ (ODord, '1963), S.~2. - Vgl. zu Zeile 19 r.uch Jee. 27.13 und

Apooal. pawm. ') Hng. u. a. von C. Blume, Analeda B ymnica 61 (Leipzig, 1908), S. 9'. 1 ) Vgl. 8Gf'Vfft Bret1. I, DCOCLXII; Y orl: BMI. I, 4.27; Bret1. Bonaanu., 3. Mai, 2. Veeper (In I~ ...aa. OnllM).

XII 184

IV. (f. 2JQT)

.Atuli benigne conditor. Lustne mylde wrouhte oure b6nee wyth woepinge, In pys holy uastinge, vourti dawes lestynge. Holy sechere of monnes pouht, pou w6st oure brotelnesee; To h6em pat b6eth yturnd to pe graunte vor.syfnesee. 6

Moeche vorsoht woe habbeth agult; vor:syf hoem l>at knoulecheth, To worshype of l>yn oune nome to sunvol mon hoe leche. Graunt ous pyne wypouteuorth pe body wyth v88tinge, l>at oure gost wyl>ynneuorth veste vrom sunnynge.

Graunte ous holy trinite pat in godhede art 6n, 10 l>at pe :syft of leyntes vast notfol hoe to mon. Amen. 3] lddu e wn eechere · ; u wn }>ou • • 6] habbeth Ot'6 habben. 7] Graunt mu Graunte. 9] e tiori Graunte 3] broklnuae: frttheete Belege dee MED &WI Chaucer und Trev:iaa.

Brown-Robbins, Indez Nr. 1903. Eine z.T. fast wortliche tlbersetzung der Hymne .Atuli benigne conditor fttr die Laudea der ersten beiden Woohen in der Quadragesimalzeit im Gebrauch von Sarum und York. Text der Vorlage1 ): .Audi benigne oonditor

Mullum quiaungel gabriel vrom god pe trinite Into pe lond of galilee, to nazareth cite, To a mayde }>a.t hedde o mon ykald Ioseph to spouse, 10 l>at waa of grete kunne, of kyng dauidl>es house. l>e mayde to wh6m Gabriel yeend waa on hye, H6e rediliche to wysee ynemned was marie. And when }>aungel was inwend to speke wyth pe mayde, Hendeliche he grette hyre on }>ye wyse and eayde: 16 Rayle hoe }>ou vol of grace, oure louerd ye wyth pe; Among a.Ile wyrnmen }>ou ybleesed hoe. When hoe }>ye herde, a was yetured in paungles spekynge, And inwardlyche }>outhte, whuch was }>ye gretynge. l>oenne eayde paungel hryht: marye, dred }>ou nouht; !O l>ou haueet yuounde grace, touore god yeouht. Lo, in pe conceyue }>ou shalt and eone here, Whom }>ou shalt ieeu nemnen, pat englye ye helere. 1>es ehal hoe muchel and nemned worth }>e a.Ire hextes eone, And oure louerd hym ehal 3eue hey etoede uor to wone, 16 Hye oune uadree see, dauid, and he ehal hoe regnynge In Iacobes h6uee wythouten ey endynge, And hye kyneryche ehal boen ay laetinge. l>oenne epak marie to paungel anon: Hou may }>ye boen 1 uor knoulechyng ha.ue ioh of no wepmon. ao l>aungel hyre onsuerede and eayde to ryhte: l>e holy gost vrom bouenuorth in pe shal alihte, And pe shal hyehadewen pe hextes myhte.

XII 186

loo per elyzabeth, py oosyne on pe heelde, Haueth conceyued ane sone in dawes of hyre eelde, H Vor nopyng impossible nys to god, pat al may welde. l>oenne spak marye and moekelyche sayde: Loo me her alredy, my lordes hondmayde; To me hoe do vollyche also, ase pou raper saydeet.

(f.!11") And


Who so nule nouht lye, pat maketh troewe aaay; Of oure leuedy marie pys ye seynt lukes lay; To hoeuene hoe make us stye at oure endeday. Amen. l] Z.U-1-2 eingrid:l /fM' (fl'O/J• lnthale 8, die aber /eltll; ein J:law 1 ff>.r tMn lni4~ ala .AnleWng tl1ftter liraJ:... 10] n "°" kyng abel1"11Nii:Ari1!ben, 12] nacA wy886 tDOhl ein ~ eletJGIW ae11rucltm. 0

15] dM e

"°" Bayle tDOhl ~ auradierl.


16] n oon wycnmen 17] }>aunglee aua pe.nngelee. 23] e in pea ..,... oure • • 26] I oon In duttA Rill

deuflicA. 24] o "°" in H •· tlerlonm.

5] GfW11•: von den Bedeutungen, die MED gibt, kommt bier wohl nur 'learning, lore, tee.ching' in Frage. 17] a = ha, Aeo (in eildliohen und weatlichen Dialekten). 29] lmoul«:Ayng: daa Verbalaubate.ntiv im NED erat eeit dem 16. Jh. mit der Bedeutung 'cama.J. knowledge' belegt, Verb und Subate.ntiv (lo} lmowkdge e.ber ao echon im CurllOf' Mundi. 31] bouenuorfA: nicht in MED. 39] a11ay : vgl. MED e. v. asaai 6(1.) 'e.n e.ttempt, atriving, effort'. Friiheeter Beleg dort e.ue Ma.nnynga Chronik.

Brown-Robbins, Index Nr.2963. Eine Vershomilie; Zelle 7 bis 38 sind eine fast wortliche 'Obersetz11ng des Evangelientextes zur Verkiindigung Maria (25. Mirz), Lukas 1.26-38. Nur in 1.36 ist et hie menaia aextus eat iUi, quae vocatur Bterilia, wohl als unpassend f iir Hereberte Zweck, untibersetzt geblieben.

Die Sprache der 'Obersetzungen zeigt deutlich und konaequent die Dialekteigentiimlichkeiten des siidweetlichen Mittellandes. Dies, sowie Hereberte Verbindung mit Hereford, hat verschiedene Forscher veranlaBt, seine Sprachformen a1s reprisentativ fiir das siidliche Herefordshire im friihen 14. Jh.



anzusehen1 ). Abgesehen von der Frage, ob man mittelenglisohe Dialektgrenzen iiberha.upt so genau festlegen kann, wird dabei allerdings vergessen, da.B Herebert weder naohweislioh in Herefordshire geboren wurde noch dort sein ganzee Leben verbraoht hat; vielmehr soheint er weit umhergekommen zu sein und hat vermutlich einige Jahrzehnte lang in Oxford gelebt. So mull zumindest zweifelhaft bleiben, ob er den Dialekt von Herefordshire rein wiedergibt. Von den mittelenglischen Tex.ten, die einigerma..Ben sicher dorthin weisen, stimmt jedenfalls keiner mit Herebert in der Sprache vollig iiberein. Die Ancrene Wiue (Hs. CCCC 402) und die Katkerine-Grulppe (Bodley 34; Royal 17. A. XXVll), dem friihen 13.Jh., seien hier ala zu friih f iir einen genauen Vergleich beiseite gelassen, zumal auch ihre Lokalisierung in Herefordshire angezweifelt wird.1). B. D. Browns These, da.B die Harley-Handschrift des South English Lt,gen4ary (Harley 2277), um 1300, naoh Herefordshire gehort, ist von M. Setjeantson korrigiert word.en•). Die ins spit.ere 14. Jh. gehorende Romanze von WUliam of Pa'leme wurde zwar auf Veranlassung eines Grafen von Hereford dem Franz0sischen iibersetzt und ist deshalb friiher mit diesem Gebiet in Verbindung gebraoht word.en; den entsprechenden Dia.le.kt bietet sie aber keinesfalls'). Engere spraohliche Verwandtscbaft mit Herebert zeigen zwei etwa zur gleichen Zeit wie seine Ubersetzungen geschriebene Texte: die Handschrift Royal 12. C. XII der sogenannten

M. S. Serjeanteon, ''The Dialect.a of the West Midlands in Middle English", BES, 3 (1927), M-67, 186-203, 319-331; The SOtlthem Paaai: 16.9/12, 16.55f. (drttles]>Me), 16.3lf. (wttk-noede), 16.37f. (byse.cke-wre.che) Ae. ~1 (german. ai i-Umlaut) = ~: offen na.oh Ausweis von Kiirzungen, l,adde 15.4,8; ylM 13.l; toB'JWad 13.2 Ae. y = 1l, geschrieben u: vul 24.20; B'Unvol IV. 6; vorn auoh = i, a.her in einem Gedicht, das nicht eicher von Herebert stammt: wynne 17.12 (reimt auf B'Unne), sinne 17.19. Selten iet die Schreibung oe, moecke IV. 5, stoede V. 24 zu a.e. styde, vielleicht a.uoh umgekehrte Schreibung, zu ae.

+ + +


ste,de A~

Englwh Metrical Romancu, ed. J. Rit.eon (Edinburgh, 1 1885), III, 20-41; An Anonymoua Slwrl Englwh Melrioal Chronicle, ed. E. Zettl, EETS 196 (1936). 1 ) Im weeentlichen die gleichen sprachlichen Ziige wie die 'Obereeuungen trigt allee, waa sich eonst noch in me. Sprache von Hereberts Hand in der Ha. findet: einige veratreute me. Venie, vgl. unten S. 191, Anm. 4: und die me. Glosaen zu Walter de Bibbesworths Gedicht fiber die franz&riache Sprache, vgl. John Koch, "Der anglonormanniache Traktat dee Walter von Bibbesworth in seiner Bedeutung fiir die Anglistik.", Anglia, 58 (1934), 30-77. 1)



Ae. g = fl, geeohrieben u: fur I. 3 Ae. eo = (geschrieben) oe: hoenne 23.1 ; eelten eo oder e: heortu 18.7, herte 13.6, ate"e 12.5, heuene 18.2, I. 2. Offeneichtlich Vbergang dee o-Lautes zu e Ae. w = (gesohrieben) oe: doere 14.1, 'JWOe8t V. 5; eelten eo oder e: vecmde 18.9, yse, tre 13.llf. (neben troe 13.13), dereWe-troe 15.4£., 15.33£., pe-l>oe V. 15f.) eowie 2 1 -w (wede-noede 16.31£.) deuten auf e-Laut eher ale auf o-Laut Ae. i,a, i-Umlaut = e: nede 23.2, 3eme IT. 20 Ae. f = v im Anlaut: vinger 18.5, vor3yf IV. 5, gladool 23.2; eelten / im Anlaut: fare 23.13, fur I. 3, not/ol IV. 10 n-Plural urepriinglich starker Substantive : lcnoen 20.16, II. 8 Persona.lpronomen: 3. Pe. Fem. Nom. Sg. hoe V. 12 3. Pe. Nom. Pl. hoe 14.9 3. Pe. Gen. Pl. hoere 13.28, here 12.4 3. Pe. Da.t. Pl. hoem 13.27 Verbnm: 2. Pe. Sg. Pris. Ind. -(e)st 3yfst 15.32, hauestV. 20 3. Pe. Sg. Pris. Ind. -eth reueth 12.3, bryngeth V. 1 Pl. Pris. Ind. -eth quaketh II. 9, aber woe habben IV. 5 Impera.tiv Pl. -eth lustneth V. 6 2. Ps. Sg. echw. Prat. -est otpenedest 22.11, [>orledest 24.12 Infinitiv: 40 Belege a.uf -e, 22 auf -en. Von den Formen a.uf -e etehen die meieten durch Reim gesichert (und bedingt ~)oder vor Wortem, die mit Koneona.nten beginnen, wie uare 23.18, 23.19. Die a.uf -en etehen am hiufigeten vor Wortem, die mit Vok&l oder h a.nlauten, wie demen I. 3 Pa.rtizip Pris. -inge: woninge 18.12, regn,inge IT. 11, a.her einma.l blowinde IT. 19 Partizip Prat.: Von 82 Belegen 40 mit Prafix y-, 42 ohne y- (davon aber 15 Prifixkompoeita). Von 30 sta.rken Partizipien enden 20 a.uf -e (davon 11 Typ ybore, 9 Typ uonge) und l 0 auf -en (davon 4 Typ yboren, 6 Typ 3yven)


XII 190

-i- der 2. schw. Konjugation erh<en: wonyen 23.3, [>olin 24.10; aber wane V. 24 Pris. Ind. Pl. von to be: boeth II. 9, beth 13.1, boen II. 71 )

Auch Hereberts Wortschatz stimmt zu diesem Bild; er zeigt einige Worter, die nach Kaiser nur in siidlichen Text.en belegt sind1 ): agilte IV. 5, arere 24.11, gre,de 14.2, lu?1de V. 33, hem 13.26, 14.5, 21.20, 25.21, heriing 14.1,13, 17.25, 20.25, nebsceft 24.21, tospre,de 13.2, dazu wohl auch brotelm88e IV. 4. Zur Schreibung: J steht f iir den palata.Ien Reibelaut im Anlaut, Jate, Jeue, Jong usw.; dazu gelegentlich beim CD-Laut, vlu3e, wa88Jen usw. und fiir den [x]-La.ut in lyjth 12.5. p steht im Anlaut und Inlaut, th immer im Auslaut. Hiufig werden t, th, ht verwechselt: ryth, brouth; voraoht, wyht ,· not.Ct, havet, und hierher vielleicht kallet 21.8 (aus kaUe verbessert); boeth, neben bod usw. Vgl. auch whrout, Bthey usw. Zur Schreibung der ound ii-La.ute siehe oben. Uber den dichterischen Wert und die Verwendung von Hereberts tibersetzungen seien hier einer spiteren, 11mfa.saenderen Untersuchung einige Bemerkungen vorausgeschickt. DaB die Nachdichtungen unter Hereberts Bemiihen gelitten haben, seine Vorlagen in den meisten Fallen so wortlich wie moglich wiederzugeben - "non multum declinando''' wie er selbst sagt - zeigt ein Vergleich mit diesen. Aber es wire ungerecht, seine Dichtungen nur zu bea.chten, weil sie in einem ziemlich gut datierbaren und lokalisierbaren Autograph iiberliefert sind. Herebert konnte ale Dichter auch mehr geben, wie er es z.B. zeigt in /Jou wommon boute uere (Brown 16) und Soethf>e mon ahal hoenne (Brown 23) oder in dem Zweizeiler He athey opcm f>e rode (Ill). Ober den Verwendungszweok der tibersetzungen bestand bisher keine Einigkeit. Carleton Brown und andere haben angenommen, a.her nicht bewiesen, daB Herebert seine OberEingehend unt.enuoht von G. Forutrf>m, The Verb 'To Be' in Middle Englwh, Lund Studies in Engliah XV (Lund, 1948). 1 ) R. Kaiser, Zur Gwgraphie dea m~liachen W~, Palwtra 206 (Leipzig, 1937), bee. S.27~291. Die unw "Nordw6rtem" aufgefiihrten hl (Kaiser, S.256, Herebert 14.4; 17.10) und gm (ae. ~ 'Sand, Erde', S.211, Herebert 23.20,43) waren jedenfaJJe auoh im Mittelland zu finden. 1)



aetzungen in aeinen Predigten verwendet hat1 ). Dagegen schreibt ihnen Patterson ''devotional purposes'' zu, wihrend A. G. Little sie sogar f iir den Gemeindegeeang bestimmt hilt'); aber Patterson hat da.s ''qui usum huius quaterni habuerit'' in Hereberts Kolophon miBverstanden, und Little iuBert eine blo.Be Vermut11ng. tTherzeugender hat kiirzlioh R.H. Robbins gezeigt, d&B wenigstens zwei der Sttioke (Brown 14; 15) die carol-Form haben und moglioherweiae ala Prozeesionshyrrtnen gesungen word.en sind1). Allerdings fehlt in Wele heri3yng (Brown 14) die Wiederholung des Reaponsoriums (dem Refrain enteprechend), und bei My vollc what habbt y do f>6 (Brown 15) spricht der unregelm&Bige Strophenbau gegen seine Verwendung zum Singen. Es bleibt aber da.nn immer noch die Frage, wozu der iiberwiegende Tell der 19 Nachdioht11ngen beetimmt war. Fiir die Anna.bme, d&B sie bei Predigten vorgetragen wurden, sprioht manchea: die Tatsache, daB sioh eingestreute Verse und tTheraetzungen liturgischer Texte nioht selten in Predigten der me. Zeit finden'); der tibrige lnhalt der He. Add. 46919, vor allem 1)

Brown, Religioua Lyriu o/ Ute XI Vth Omtury, S. XIV; G. R. Owat,

PllaCAing in Medieval Englmad (Cambridge, 1926), S.273; R. H. Robbins, Secular Lynea o/ Ute XIVth and XVth Otmtvriu (Oxford, 1962), 8.XXI; W. A. Pantin, The JCngluh Ohvrch in Ute P~ OeM.wy (Cambridge, 19M), S. 141. 1) Pattenon, a.a.O. 8.22; Little, The Lamporl P~, 8.302. Anm. l. Ahnlich Greene, der Brown mi8ventanden hat: R. L. Greene, TM Early Engluh aaroi. (Oxford, 1936), S.CXXIV, Anm. 4. Vgl. dagegen W. F., Guchtchte er her T }>e lyf her YI deY3e. What hope YI }>er her T of lyf uor deth dreye. What 111.we YI }>er her T Euer woep in eY3e. What skyl YI ):>er her Tpat sb&l prute wreY3e· Andere Verse ff. 160, 171v, 178v; 85, 132v.

f. I65v Zelle Sff. Die "triplex apparitio", die zum Epipbaniasfeet gefeiert wird, beeteht in der Anbetung Christi durch die Weisen aus dem Morgenland, der Taufe Christi duroh Johannee, der Verwandlung dee W•seers in Wein bei der Hochzeit zu Kana. In dieeer Reihenfolge nennt auch die Hymne die Ereignisse; "Ibant magi" ist der Anfang der zweiten Strophe, vgl. Anakda H !l""'ica M.68; Brown a. a. 0. Nr.12.4ff. 1)


Addenda Since this article was published, selections of Herebert's poems have been printed in several anthologies of Middle English lyrics, and they have all been included in the first full edition of his sermons and sennon outlines, The Works of William Herebert, OFM, ed. Stephen M. Reimer, Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, Studies and Texts 81 (Toronto, 1987). For studies see Helmut Gneuss, Hymnar u11d Hymen im englischen Mitte/o/ter {TObingen, 1968), ch. 10; Domenico Pezzini, ' "Velut gemmula carbunculi": Le versioni del francescano William Herebert', Contributi dell' lstituto di Filologia Modema, Serie Inglese, I (Milan, 1974), pp. 3-38; idem, ' Versions of Latin hymns in medieval England: William

Herebert and the English Hymnal', Mediaevistik, 4 (1991), 297-315; Siegfried Wenzel,

Preachers, Poets, and the Farly English Lyric (Princeton, 1986).

INDEX OF MANUSCRIPfS Antwerp, Planrin-Moretus MUICWD 47: m 12, 19, 21, 27; IV 61

Cantabury, C•hedral Ubrary

Ban::elooa, Archivo de la Corona de Arq6n Ripoll 74: IV 6S Basel, UniversiWsbibliothek F.iii.ISI : ID 26 Berlin, Stutsbibliotbet der Stiftung Pmlssischer Klllturbesitz Diez.B Sant.66: IV 62 Bologna, Biblioteca Universitaria 797: IV 62 Brusaels, Bibli~ue Royale 1650: IV Add. 1828-30: m 19, 21

Dw1wn. C:.lhednl Library

Cambridge, Corpus Christi Colleae s1: vm 269, 278, 280 144: IV 66, 71; V 124 153: m 12 178: vm 267, 280 206: m 12. 23 214: vm 269 221 : m21 330: m 12 356: IV 66; V 124 368: VDI280 402: XII 187 - Jesus Collqe 28: m 11 -St John' s Colleae Aa.5.l : ID 23 D.12(87): III 6 - Magdalene Collqe Pepys 2981(5): m 12 Pepys 2981 (8): m 11 - Trinity Colleae B. lS.33: Ill 12 0 .2.30: VIII 268, 279 0.2.Sl: 11111 - University Ubrary Ee.2.4: vm 221 Pf.1.27: XI Add. G&.5.35: m 27 u.1.14: vm 218, 280

Add.127/19: III 11 B.u.11: m 23 B.ii.30: m 23 B.ili.32: m 6; vm 269 B.iv.24: vm 267, 280 Hunter 100: m20 Dl!sseldorf, Univenit*""bliotbek K.15:Nr.28: III 12 s.n.: Ill 23

P.rfurt. Wissenscbaftlicbe Bibliochek der Stadt Ampl.8° 8: IV 65 El Escorial, Real Biblioteca B.1.12: IV 6S Exeter, Catbednl Library 3507: v 124 Aorence. Biblioteca Medicea Laum>ziana San Marco 38: IV 62

Gloucester, Catf!edlal Ubmy 35: vm268

Le Havre, Bibli~ue Municipale 330: 177 Hereford, C:.lhednl Library O.ili.2: DI 29 Leiden. Bibliotbedt der Rijksmriversiteit B.P.L67D: IV 6S .74: IV 62 m 20 London, British Library Add. 32246: ID 19, 21, 27; IV 61 Add. 46919: XDpas.rim Arundel 155: IX 60 Cotton Caligula A.vii: n 165; v 132 Cotton Claudius D.ili: VIII 268 Cotton Cleopatta A.iii: m 19-21 Cotton Cleopalra III 6, 11-2 Cotton Domitian i: m 12



London, British Library (continued) Cotton Domitian ix: V 124 Cotton Faustina A.x: m 6; vm 267 Cotton Julius A.ii: m 6 Cotton Julius In Cotton Nero A.ix: XII 171 Cotton Otho A.xii: IX 46-64 Cotton Otho E.i: W 20 Cotton Tiberius A.iii: 11160; Vffi 267-9, 278,280, 282 Cotton Titus A.iv: Vffi 267, 278, 280 Cotton Vespasian A.i: V 125 Cotton Vespaian D.xii: 177 Cotton Vespaian D.xiv: m 26 Cotton Vicellius A.xii: V 124 Cotton Vicellius E.xvili: V 125 Egerton 3133: XII 172 Harley 101: m 6 Harley 110: m 26 Harley 2253: XII 188 Harley 2277: XII 187 Harley 3271 : DI 6 Harley 3376: m 2~2; IV 67, 71 Harley 3826: m 12, 27; IV passim Harley S43 l : vm 278-9 Royal 2.B.v: 179; V 123 Royal 5.E.xvi: Ill 26 Royal 5.E.xix: m 26 Royal 6.C.i: ID 12 Royal 7.A.iv: XO 172 Royal 7.C.xii: VI 2-3 Royal 7.F.vii: XO 172 Royal 7.F.vili: xn 172, 174 Royal 12.C.xii: xn 187 Royal 15.A.xxxili: Ill 12 Royal 17.A.xxvii: XII 187 Stowe 2: 177; V 125 - Lambeth Palace Library 427: 177; D 160; V 125 Maidstone, Kent County Archives

PRC 49/la.b: W 11 Montpellier, Biblio~ue de la Facul~ de M~ine

H.212: IV 63 Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale V.C.22: IV Add. Oxford, Bodleian Library Add. C.144: IV 63 Ashmole 328: v 124 Auct F.2.14: DI 12 Auct. F.4.32: Ill 11; XI 172

Bartow 35: ID 27 Bodley 34: xn 1s1 Bodley 239: m 12 Bodley 391 : m 29 Bodley 808: m 23 Hatton 20: I 64 Hatton 48: vm 266. 2n. 279 Hatton 76: I 80 Junius 27: V 125 l..aud misc. 567: m 20 Marshall 19: DI 23 RawlinsonC.308: XII 172, 174 Rawlinson C.697: m 6 - Corpus Christi Collep 197: 174; vm 267 -St John's College 17: W6 IS4: m 19 -Queen's College 320: m 12 Paris, Bibli~ue Nationale lat. 4871: III 12 lat. 4883A: IV 65 lat. 7530: III 6; IV 63 lat. 7561: lll 6 lat. 7585: III 12 Rheims, Bibli~ue Municipale 1097: 016, 11; VOpassim Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica V8bcana 13S4: IV 64 Reg.181. 12: IX 60 215: IV 63 338: V 124 Reg.181. 1587: IV 64 Saint-Omer, Bibli~ue Municipale 279: Ill 26 St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek 237: IV Add. 914: vo12n St Paul in Carinthia. Stiftsbibliothet 2/1: 018 St Petersburg, Russian National Library 0 .v.XVI.1: m 11 Q.v.1.15: DI 26 Salisbury. Cathedral Library 88: m6, 29 106: W28 lt2: m12 125: W26 ISO: V 125 173: W26

INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS Savignano sul Rubiconc, Accademia Camera IV 6S Venice, Biblioceca Marciana LatZ.497: IV 64 Wells, Cathedral Library

s.n.: vm 268, 280

WolfenbUttel, Herzos-August·Bibliodd Weisseaburg 86: IV 64 Worcester, Cathedral Library P.174: Ill 13

Q.s: m 6, 11

Wllrzburg. UniVUJitlllbibliocbek ill 26 vm 266


INDEX OF OLD ENGLISH WORDS (Por pwsible I01Dwords from Preoc:b see V 135)

adneflD: In ldriflD: In afeormian: l77,80 altlr(e): 176, 80 .,,,..,m: I 80 upumnys: l80 el6~med : In, 79-80

el&orti1: 177-IJ

becere: v 139 bcq: 176 beam: 176, 79 bcom: IX40 belnownmg: I 80 bepec:an: I 80 bes.-gi1n: 180 biurm· III 16 biword: m 16 (&'e)bliui1°: In boclllld: IX 31

cantic: I 79 ClpUll: v 136 clSte.I: V 136 ceorl: D 162; IX 29, 34, 37, 41 cbor: 179 cn1.,.: I 76, 78-9 ariM; 176; IX 41 coitcmere: V Add. corona: 176 Creca: v 138 culc: v 136 cweartem: v 140 cynebclm: I 76 cyrice: 176, 80; v 121 cy&re: 176; V 119 c1e1: m 16

delnimcnd: m 16

dcclinung: m 16 depan: V 122 diht1n: V 140 ~: IX39

dyppan: v 122 ea,duru: ll 15S eqtlyrl: ll 1S5 Clldor: IX 40 eaulbeese: v 129

IJeslic: I 80 l>esn: D 162; IX 29, 33-4, 37, 40-1, 44 tJeodcn: IX 40 IJrc>were: I 76

uma· m 16

unt>eaw: I76,78,80 utanydan: I 77

ofearmian: V 123 ofetbypt: I 76; V 137 ofediyptig: I 76 ofeubCUU: I 78, 80 ofea1uod: 176, 78, 80; V 137; Xpanim ofennodigness: I76,80 onbrop: I 77

wefels: 180 w~: V 129 weofod: I 76, 80 werod: 177 wita: IX 38 word: DI 16 wuldoJbcaa: I 76, 78


GENERAL INDEX Abbo of Fleury: Ill 13, 17; V 134 Abbo of St Germain: V 147 Abinadon: 169, 12; vm 211 Agilbert, bishop of Wessex: V 132 Agroecius: m 27 Alcuin: m 8, 29 DialogWJ de rMtorica: ID 29 De onhographUJ: m 12 Aldbelm Enigma1a: m 24 De metri.r and De pedlun regulir: m 8 De virginitak: m 21; v 146 Alfml. king: 164 9; V 131-2; IX 2S-6, 33; XI 170-1 ADglo-Saxon Chronicle: 174; m 31 ApolloniWJ ofTyre, OE tmmlation: 172 Asset, I.ife of King Alfred: IX 48-9, 53-5 Atbelstan, king: 169, 71 Audax: Ill 9 StAupstine De diaktica: m 23 De doctrina Cluirtiana: m 28 St Augustine: of Canterbury: V 131

.£lfric,abbotofEynsbam: 168, 71, 74-5, 77-9, 83; m6, 12 Glossary: m 19 Grammar: Ill 13-8, 23, 26-7, 30; v 137 Homilies: Ill 24, 31; V 137; IX 26; XI 172 Vita s. £tMlwoldi: I 71; vm 210 .£!fbeah, bishop of Wincbeater: I 71 .Elfthryth. queen: vm 210, 272-3 ..£tbelwold, bishop of Winchester: 169-75, 78, 81, 83; m 12. 14; vm 210-6 Bacon, Roger: XI 170 Barking: IX 62-4 Bede: m 24, 29; v 118, 123 De ane nwtrica: ID 8; IV 79 Historia ecclesia.rtica, OE tnmslation: 167; Ill 31; XI 171 Letter to Eabert of Yodt: IX 2S De onhographia: m 9, 12, 27 De SCMmatiblU et tropis: ID 8, 30

St Benedic:t Regula: Vlll 276 84 in Anglo-Saxon &pnd: vm 264-7 OE glosses to Regula: I 80; VID 268-9 Historical Postscript: VJD 271-2 prose translation by A3tbelwold: 169, 73-4, 78-9; v t46; vm 267--82 Beowulf: Ill 32; IX 34-5, 6S Bjartamal: IX 65 Boniface: Ill 8-10 Bury St Edmunds: IX 59-60 Byrbtfertb of Ramsey: m 13, 16-7, 24, 30-1; IV 79; V 124, 139 Byrhtnotb. ealdonnan: IX pa∼ X pa&sim Canterbury:I71,81-2 St Augustine's: VID 264-5; IX 58-9 Christ Church: IX 61-2 libraries: Ill 7 (Pseudo-)Caper m 21 Cassiodorus lnstitutiones: m 7, 9, 23, 29 Expositio Psalmonun: ID 23, 28, 30; v 146 Caxton, William: XI 170 Cenwald, bishop of Worcester: V 132 Ccnwalh, king of Wessex: V 132 Ceme: 175 Charisius: m 9, 30 Chaucer, Geoffrey: XI 170 Chcrtsey: IX 58-9 Chrodegang, bishop of Metz, Regula: 178; v 137 Cicero De invenlione: ID 29 Synonyma (altrib.): m 27 Comitatus and Bank ofMaldon: IX 15-45 Consentius: m 9 Cursus: Ill 32 Cynewulf, king of Wessex: IX 24

Defensor, Uber Scintillanun: 180; V 146 Dialects, Old and Middle F.nglisb: XI 169-70 Dilferentia: see Synonymy Diomedes: III 9, 30 Donatus: ID 7-14, 30

GENERAL INDEX Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury: I 69-73, 81; XI 172 F.adberht, king of Kent: IX 25 Ealdsige, abbot (?) at Yort: DI 29 Eanbald, bishop of Yort: IX 24 Ecgfrith. king of Northumbria: IX 24 Edgar, king: 110-1, 73; vm 210. 212-3 Edith. wife of Otto I: V 131 Edwin, king of Northumbria: IX 24 Ely: 173; IX 60-1 Etymology, study of, in Anglo-Saxon England: Ill 22- 5 Eucherius of Lyon: V 124 Eutyches: Ill 9, 11 Excerptiones de Prisciano: ill 17 Expositio Hymnonun : 177-8 Felix, Life of St Gutblac: Ill 24; IX 25

Finnsburg fragment: IX 34 fyrd: IX 27- 31, 36-7; X 135-6

Genesis, Later: V 132 Giraldus Cambrensis: XI 167-8 Descriptio Kambriae: XI 169 and comparative philology: XI 168-9 Glastonbury: I 69 Glossing, interlinear, in OE: V 144 8 syntactic: V 146-7 Glossography, glossaries, in Anglo-Saxon England: m 18- 22; IV passim Goscelin of Canterbury: m 24 Gospels, West-Saxon: 180 Grammar and grammatical tenns: ID 10, 15-6; IV passim Greek, knowledge of, in Anglo-Saxon England: IV passim; V 118-23 St Gregory the Great Cura Pastora/is, Alfred's OE translation: 164, 67; v 132 Dialogi, Werfenh's OE translation: 167, 80-1 ; m 31 Moralia: DI 15 Grimbald of St Bertin: V 132 St Guthlac: IX 25

Hadrian, abbot in Canterbury: ID 20; V 118 Hebrew, knowledge of, in Anglo-Saxon England: v 123-4 Heliand: V 132 Herebert, William: XIl passim language: xn 186-90 life and worts: XII 169-72 translated texts: XII 17S-86, 190-2 Higden, Ranulph: XI 170


Hrabanus Maurus: XI 171-2 Hugutio: ID 21 Hygelac: VII 208-9 Hymnal with OE glosses: I 80; V 146 Isidore of Seville Etymologiae: DI 7, 11, 23, 28-30; Vll9,l22 Libri dijferentianun: DI 26 Synonyma: ID 26 Jarrow, library: Ill 7 St Jerome: m 23; V 123-4 Johannes Balbus: Ill 21 John the Old Saxon: V 132 Kenning: m 31 Kings, list of (names not indexed here): VII passim Lagamon: XI 171 Language, study of, in Anglo-Saxon England: m passim in medieval England: XI 164-7 Languages of the world: V 111-2 Latin, study of, in Anglo-Saxon England: ID passim Liber Eliensis: Vlll 269-70; IX 6 Liber Scintillarum: see Defensor Lindisfame Gospels: V 146 LupusofFeai~res: Ill29

Maldon, battle of: IX passim the event, sources: IX 5-7 OE poem: IX 7-15, 45-6; X 131-7 language of the poem: IX 55-8 OE ofermod: X passim Martianus Capella: m 7, 9, 12, 29 Nonius Marcellus: Ill 18 Old F.nglish, dialects and standard language: I passim; D 158-60 Old F.nglish language language contact and bo110wing: V passim; history of scholarship: V 108-11; loanwords: 11154-5; inflexion, gender, and loanwords: V 139, 141; VI passim; loan-fonnations and semantic loans: II 155; V 142-5; VDI 276; loans from British and Irish: V 125- 7; loans from French: V 134-7; loans from Greek: V 118-23; loans from Hebrew: V 123-5; loans from Latin: V 112-8; loans from Old High German: V 133-4; loans from



Old J!Aafisb ,.,,.,.,. (coorinued) Old None: V 127-31, 139; lolm from Old Saxon: V 132-3; loans from Wat Gea101ni-;: lanpaaes: v 131-4; pbl>nolo0. foreip influence in: V 138-9; syntax. fomp influeace in: V 1"40; word-fU1•n"ioa, romp inftucace in: v 139 Jexk:opapby: Upauint style and regiaeer: D 157-8 Old None and Old &1lisb. mat\111

intelligibility: v 129-31 Orolius, HutoriM, OE uwlabon: 167 Olbem of Gloucester: ill 21 Oswald. bishop of Wara:ster: 170, 73, 81 Olwi.De, lciq of Deira: IX 24 OUo I. emperor: v 131 Plpiu: ill21 Pmlus Diaconua: Ill 18 Pbocu: m 8-9, 11 Pblo: 0123 Poq!cius: m 9 Pri.a.o JrutMtiOfla groMlftalicM: ill 7, 9, 11, 14;

VII 201 lrutitulio tk nonsine: VII 201 Partitiorw1: ill 6; VD 201

Pnueurcitamina: m 30 Paalrer, m•v.scripu with OE sioaes: In. 79;

v 146

Quintili1n: DI 7, 22, 29

Rumey: IX60 Repal lilt: 1ee Kinp Regularis Concordia: 174, 80; V 146 Remigius of Auxene: m 12 Rhetoric, study of, in Analo-Saxon Enal•nd: ID 28-30

RMtorica ad Hermnium: m 28-9

Rushwonh Gospels: V 146

St Paul'a, London: IX 61 Scdulius Scouus: m 12 Sergius: DI 7, 9 Servius: lll 7. 9 Sextus Pompeius Fatus: m 18 Solomon and Salum (prole): m 24 Stob-by-Nayl1nd: IX ~ Synonymy, study of, in ~Saxon &g11nc1: m~1

Tacitus, Germania: IX 1~7. 20-1, 24, 6S Tetwine: m 8-10 Theodore, ercbbishop of Cl'Ulbmy: m 20; v 118 T11nslllioa, pr09C, in Anak>-Saxon P.naJ1nd: v 144

V11TO: 11123 Weannoutb, lilnry: DI 7 Werferth, bishop of Worcater: 167 Wilfrid. bishop of Yort: IX 24

Willi1m Herebert: 1ee Helebert Willi1m of Malmesbury: XI 169-70 Wincbestet, Old Mimlet: 171-2, 74-S, 78,81-3 Wmdatcr school: I panint; 0 160; v 137 Wonle1ller. 181-2; IX S3-S Wulfstan, 11Cbbishop of York and bUhop of Worcatcr: 179-80; m 29, 31 ; XI 172 Wulfte1n. preceDIOr of the Old Mimra, Winchcseer: 174, 78 Vita s. ..£1/selwoldi: 171; vm 210

York. libnry: DI 7


1111111111111111111111111 3 9015 04269 7832



, ,








' r




• •



, •

• c