Anglo-Saxon England: Volume 37

Anglo-Saxon England 37

Her mon mæg giet gesion hiora swæ«

ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND 37 Edited by MALCOLM GODDEN University of Oxford

M A R K B L AC K BU R N University of Cambridge

ROBERT BJORK Arizona State University

R I C H A R D DA N C E University of Cambridge

RICHARD GAMESON Durham University

MECHTHILD GRETSCH Universität Göttingen

PA T R I Z I A L E N D I N A R A Università di Palermo

KATHERINE O’BRIEN O ’ K E E F F E , University of California, Berkeley PA U L R E M L E Y University of Washington

SIMON KEYNES University of Cambridge

JOHN BLAIR University of Oxford

M A RY C L AY T O N University College, Dublin

ROBERTA FRANK Yale University

HELMUT GNEUSS Universität München

MICHAEL LAPIDGE University of Cambridge

R O S A L I N D L OV E University of Cambridge

A N DY O RC H A R D University of Toronto

D O N A L D S C R AG G University of Manchester

PA U L E . S Z A R M A C H The Medieval Academy of America

Published by the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, United Kingdom 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473, USA 47 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarcón 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa © Cambridge University Press 2008 First Published 2008 Typeset by Servis Filmsetting Ltd Stockport, Cheshire Printed in the United Kingdom by the University Press Cambridge ISBN 978 0521 767361 ISSN 0263-6751

copying

This journal is registered with the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Organizations in the USA who are also registered with C.C.C. may therefore copy material (beyond the limits permitted by sections 107 and 108 of US copyright law) subject to payment to C.C.C. of the per-copy fee of $15. This consent does not extend to multiple copying for promotional or commercial purposes. Code 0263-6751/2008 $15. Organizations authorized by the Copyright Licensing Agency may also copy material subject to the usual conditions. For all other use, permission should be sought from Cambridge or the American Branch of Cambridge University Press. subscriptions: Anglo-Saxon England (ISSN 0263-6751) is an annual journal. The subscription price (excluding VAT) of volume 37, which includes print and electronic access, is £100 for institutions (US$165 in the USA, Canada and Mexico), £53 (US$82 in the USA, Canada and Mexico) for individuals ordering direct from the Press and certifying that the annual is for their personal use. EU subscribers (outside the UK) who are not registered for VAT should add VAT at their country’s rate. VAT registered subscribers should provide their VAT registration number. Japanese prices for institutions are available from Kinokuniya Company Ltd., P.O. Box 55, Chitose, Tokyo 156, Japan. Orders, which must be accompanied by payment, may be sent to a bookseller, subscription agent, or direct to the publishers: Cambridge University Press, The Edinburgh Building, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK. Orders from the USA, Canada or Mexico should be sent to Cambridge University Press, Journals Fulfillment Department, 100 Brook Hill Drive, West Nyack, New York 10994-2133, USA. Prices include delivery by air. Back volumes: £95.00 (US$155.00 in the USA, Canada and Mexico) each available from Cambridge or the American Branch of Cambridge University Press. A catalogue record of this book is available from the British Library.

Contents

List of illustrations Record of the thirteenth conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists at the Institute of English Studies, University of London, 30 July to 4 August 2007 mary swan University of Leeds The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus matthew s. kempshall University of Oxford

page vii

1 7

King Edgar’s charter for Pershore (972) peter a. stokes University of Cambridge

31

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield gifford charles-edwards† University of Wales, Bangor and helen mckee Englefield Green, Surrey

79

The Old English Promissio regis mary clayton University College, Dublin

91

Viking invasions and marginal annotations in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162 kathryn powell University of Manchester Re-evaluating base-metal artifacts: an inscribed lead strap-end from Crewkerne, Somerset ga bor thomas University of Reading, naomi payne Somerset County Museums Service and elisabeth okasha University College Cork

151

173

Contents Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) helen foxhall forbes University of Cambridge mathhias ammon, elizabeth boyle, c ona n t. d oyle, peter d. evan, rosa maria fera, paul ga zzoli , helen imhoff, anna matheson, sophie rixon and levi roach University of Cambridge Bibliography for 2007 paul g. remley, University of Washington, Seattle martha bayless, University of Oregon carole p. biggam, University of Glasgow mark blac kburn, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge felicity h. clark, University of Oxford fiona edmonds, University of Cambridge carole hough, University of Glasgow simon keynes, University of Cambridge rebec ca rushforth, University of Cambridge Abbreviations listed before the bibliography (pages 234–6) are used throughout the volume without further explanation. The editorial assistance of Clare Orchard and Debby Banham is gratefully acknowledged.

vi

183

233

Illustrations plates I II III IV V VI VII

Lichfield, Cathedral Library, Lich. 1, p. 141 Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 198 (detail) Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 174 (detail) Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 107 (detail) Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 423 (detail) Inscribed strap-end from Crewkerne Inscribed strap-end from Crewkerne. Illustrated by Jane Read figures

1 2 3 4

Variation in a, d and s in Augustus ii. 6 Examples of altered hidages in Augustus ii. 6 Examples of underlines and the ‘caret’ symbol in Augustus ii. 60 Lichfield dry-points

page 35 37 38 79

tables 1 2 3 4 5

Sample collation from AD1D2 Structure of the Orthodoxorum charters List of estates in Augustus ii. 6 and Vitellius D. vii Order of boundary clauses in Augustus ii. 6 and Vitellius D. vii Annotations in Augustus ii. 6

page 39 60–1 62 63 72

acknowled gement s By permission of the trustees of the British Museum the design on the cover is taken from the obverse of a silver penny issued at London in the early 880s, reflecting Alfred’s assumption of political control over the city. Permission to publish photographs has been granted by the Chapter of Lichfield Cathedral (pl. I); the Master and Fellows of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge (pls. II–V); Somerset County Council (pls. VI–VII).

vii

c ontributions for future editions are invited Material should be submitted to the editor most convenient regionally, with these exceptions: an article should be sent to John Blair if concerned with archaeology, to Mark Blackburn if concerned with numismatics, to Richard Gameson if concerned with art history, to Simon Keynes if concerned with history or onomastics, and to Michael Lapidge if concerned with Anglo-Latin or palaeography. Whenever a contribution is sent from abroad it should be accompanied by international coupons to cover the cost of return postage. A potential contributor is asked to get in touch with the editor concerned as early as possible to obtain a copy of the style sheet and to have any necessary discussion. Articles must be in English. The editors’ addresses are: Dr M. A. S. Blackburn, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge CB2 1RB (England) Professor W. J. Blair, The Queen’s College, Oxford OX1 4AW (England) Professor R. E. Bjork, Lattie F. Coor Building 4438, 975 S. Myrtle Avenue, Arizona State University, Tempe AZ 85287-4402 (USA) Professor M. Clayton, School of English, Drama and Film, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4 (Ireland) R. Dance, St Catharine’s College, Cambridge CB2 1RL (England) Professor R. Frank, Department of English, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520 (USA) Professor R. Gameson, Department of History, Durham University, 43 North Bailey, Durham DH1 3EX (England) Professor H. Gneuss, Institut für Englische Philologie, Universität München, Schellingstrasse 3, D-80799 München (Germany) Professor M. R. Godden, English Faculty, St Cross Building, Manor Road, Oxford OX1 3UQ (England) Professor M. Gretsch, Seminar für Englische Philologie, Universität Göttingen, KäteHamburger-Weg 3, D-37073 Göttingen (Germany) Professor S. D. Keynes, Trinity College, Cambridge CB2 1TQ (England) Professor M. Lapidge, Clare College, Cambridge CB2 1TL (England) Professor P. Lendinara, Dipartimento DANAE, Facoltà di Scienze della Formazione, Viale delle Scienze (edificio 15) 90128 Palermo (Italy) Dr R. Love, Robinson College, Cambridge CB3 9AN (England) Professor K. O’Brien O’Keeffe, Department of English, 322 Wheeler Hall, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1030 (USA) Professor A. Orchard, Trinity College, 6 Hoskin Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1H8, (Canada) Professor P. G. Remley, Department of English, Box 354330, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195–4330 (USA)

ix

Contributions for future editions are invited Professor F. C. Robinson, Department of English, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520 (USA) Professor D. G. Scragg, Centre for Anglo-Saxon Studies, School of Arts, Histories and Cultures, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL (England) Professor P. E. Szarmach, The Medieval Academy of America, 104 Mount Auburn Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 (USA)

x

Record of the thirteenth conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists, at the Institute of English Studies, University of London, 30 July–4 August 2007 I The general theme of the conference was ‘Anglo-Saxon Traces: Her mon mæg giet gesion hiora swæe ’. The conference was attended by 196 people. The following papers were delivered: Anton Scharer, ‘Objects of Royal Representation (in England and on the Continent)’ Jennifer O’Reilly ‘The Topography of Islands in Bede’s Historia ecclesiastica’ Diarmuid Scully, ‘Among the Ruins: Bede and his Sources on the Geography and Built Environment of Roman Britain’ Joshua Westgard, ‘Traces of Bede?: the Moore Continuations and the Transmission of Bede’s Historia ecclesiastica’ Richard North, ‘Revenue and Real Estate: Archbishop Wulfred and the Strange Case of Cynehelm’ Juan Camilo Conde-Silvestre and Mª Dolores Perez Raja, ‘Language, Landscape and Social History in Medieval Lincolnshire: traces of the Anglo-Saxon past in ME dialectology’ Lesley Abrams, ‘People of the Danelaw’ Hafed Walda and Martyn Jessop, ‘Gaining a Sense of Place in Anglo-Saxon England’ Joy Jenkyns ‘Walking the Trail: the Westminster Surveys’ Peter A. Stokes, ‘A Previously Unnoticed Version of the Pershore Orthodoxorum Charter (S 786)’ Carol Farr, ‘Irish Pocket Gospels in Anglo-Saxon England’ Catherine Karkov, ‘Tracing the Anglo-Saxons in the Epistles of Paul: the Case of Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M. p. th. f. 69’ Peter Dendle, ‘Exorcisms in A-S Liturgical Manuscripts: Problems of Context and Application’ Scott Smith, ‘Latin Diplomas and the Turn to Verse in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ Patrick W. Conner, ‘Five Anglo-Saxon Guilds and How They Grew’ Lisa Weston, ‘Enclosing the Space of Miracle’ 1

Record of the thirteenth conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists Vicky Bristow, ‘Elene, the Anonymous Homily on the Invention of the Cross and the Acta Cyriaci: their Dramatic Structure and Style’ Samantha Zacher, ‘Locating Andreas: its Place in the Book, and the Book in its Place’ Andy Orchard, ‘How Anglo-Saxon is Andreas?’ Orietta Da Rold, ‘Making the Book’ Elaine Treharne, ‘Writing the Book’ Mary Swan, ‘Using the Book’ Frederick M. Biggs, ‘The Demise of Joint Kingship in Anglo-Saxon England’ Christina Lee, ‘Body Talks: Disability in Anglo-Saxon England’ Josh Davies, ‘The Reverse Chronology of St Alfege’s Church: a Suitable Monument for Anglo-Saxon England?’ Jacqueline Stodnick, ‘Her Again: Deictic Syntax in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ Margaret Scott, ‘Scottish Place-Names and Anglo-Saxon England’ Antonette diPaolo Healey, ‘Searching for Words: DOEonline: A to G’ Debby Banham, ‘ “ Here You Can See Their Tracks”: Ridge and Furrow, Open Fields and Anglo-Saxon Farming’ Sue Hirst, ‘Mucking-East Tilbury: Meeting Place and Mart in the Early and Middle Saxon Periods?’ Bruce Watson, ‘The Southwark Domesday Entries: an Enigma Reconsidered’ Gabor Thomas, ‘Excavations at Bishopstone 2003–5: a Late Anglo-Saxon Manorial Settlement in its Regional and National Context’ Richard Mortimer, ‘Excavations at West Fen Road, Ely, Cambridgeshire 1999: Exploring Conceptions of “Rural” and “Urban” Space in the Anglo-Saxon Settlement Record’ Michael Drout, ‘The Invention of Cynewulf: Albert S. Cook, Philology, Romanticism and English Studies in America’ Julia Crick, ‘Script and the Sense of the Past in Pre-Conquest England’ Robin Norris, ‘A Three-Dimensional View of Anglo-Saxon Saints’ Lives’ Juliet Hewish, ‘From Alcuin to Ælfric: Tracing the Dissemination of the Life of St Martin in late Anglo-Saxon England’ Erika Corradini, ‘The Use of Ælfric’s Homilies in Secular Cathedrals: Exeter, 1050–1072’ Malcolm Godden, ‘Reading the Consolation of Philosophy in Anglo-Saxon England’ Nicole Guenther Discenza, ‘Following in the Tracks of Bede: Science and Cosmology in the Benedictine Reform’ Daniel Anlezark, ‘Learning about the Jews in BL MS Harley 3271’ Emily V. Thornbury, ‘Building with the Rubble of the Past: Three Case Studies in Anglo-Saxons’ Use of Flawed Texts’ 2

Record of the thirteenth conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists Karen Jolly, ‘Scribal Tracks: Aldred’s Bilingual Colophons’ Chris Fern, ‘The Importance of Horse Symbolism and Equestrianism in Early Anglo-Saxon Society’ The following Project Reports were given: ‘The Old English Newsletter Online: Present State and Future Plans’ ‘The Lexis of Cloth and Clothing in Britain c. 700–1450: Origins, Identification, Contexts and Change’ ‘The Alfredian Boethius Project’ ‘Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England’ ‘Leornungcræft: Manuscripts and Texts Used for Instruction in Anglo-Saxon England’ ‘Early English Laws’ II General Business Meeting held in Senate House on 4 August 2007, at 12.00 noon, President Jane Roberts presiding. A The President reported on behalf of the Executive Committee: 1 The fourteenth conference of the Society is to be held at the Memorial University, Newfoundland, 27 July–1 August 2009, hosted by William Schipper. Its theme will be ‘The Maritime World of the Anglo-Saxons’. 2 The fifteenth conference of the Society will be held at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, hosted by John D. Niles. 3 Gratitude was expressed to all those who had assisted in making the conference such a success. B The Executive Director reported on behalf of the Executive Committee: 1 Membership dues and related interest have generated revenues of $11,204.09. The total assets as at 31 June 2007 were $59,881.58. Of this amount, $32,224.39 is retained in mutual funds. 2 Officers of the Society. In accordance with the Society’s constitution, Jane Roberts completes her term as President on 31 December 2007, after which William Schipper will assume the post of President. John D. Niles will assume the post of First Vice-President. David Johnson completes his term as Executive Director on 31 December 2007, after which Stacy Klein will assume the post of Executive Director. 3 Membership of the Advisory Board. The term of office expires on 31 December 2007 for the following members: Mary Blockley, Rolf Bremmer, Jr, Thomas N. Hall, John Hines, Éamonn Ó Carragain and Joanna Story. 4 Honorary Membership of the Society. The Honorary Membership consists of George Hardin Brown, †Peter Clemoes, Rosemary Cramp, André Crépin, René Derolez, Helmut Gneuss, †Edward B. Irving Jr, 3

Record of the thirteenth conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists Matti Kilpiö, Tadao Kubouchi, †Henry Loyn, Bruce Mitchell, Sigeru Ono, †John Pope, Barbara Raw, Matti Rissanen, Jane Roberts, Fred. C. Robinson, Ute Schwab, Donald G. Scragg, Nicholas Brooks, Joyce Hill, Kevin Kiernan, and Joseph B. Trahern. Margaret Clunies-Ross, Alger N. Doane, Michael Lapidge, Richard Pfaff and Leslie Webster were accorded honorary membership. 5 The Advisory Board has established procedures for the publication of themed volumes arising substantially from ISAS conferences. The first, edited by Matti Kilpiö, will be based on the 2001 Conference at the University of Helsinki; the second, edited by †Nicholas Howe and Catherine Karkov and published in 2006, is based on the 2003 Conference at Arizona State University. The third, to be edited by Hans Sauer and Joanna Story, is based on the 2005 conference at Munich. The fourth, to be edited by Jane Roberts and Leslie Webster, is to be based on the 2007 conference. The Executive Committee will oversee and monitor the production of the volumes. The membership package includes the ISAS publication based on, and emerging substantially from, the Conferences, with the exception of the first volume. 6 ISAS Publication Prizes, 2007. The panel, consisting of Thomas N. Hall, Elaine Treharne and Barbara Yorke, and chaired by Elaine Treharne, announced the winners of this cycle’s awards. Best First Book: shared by Daniel Anlezark, Water and Fire: the Myth of the Flood in Anglo-Saxon England (Manchester UP, 2006) and Martin Foys, Virtually Anglo-Saxon (University Press of Florida, 2007). Best Edition/ Translation: Scott DeGregorio, translation, Bede In Ezram (Liverpool UP, 2005). Best Article: Joyce Hill, ‘Authority and Intertextuality in the Works of Ælfric’, Proceedings of the British Academy 131 (2005), 157–81 (The Sir Israel Gollancz Memorial Lecture for 2004). C The Executive Director reported on behalf of the Executive Committee: 1 The thanks of all participants for a very successful conference. III The conference included receptions hosted by the IES and the Institute for Historical Research and the British Library. At Lambeth Palace, participants enjoyed a reception and an exhibition of Anglo-Saxon manuscripts curated by Professor Roberts, Michelle Brown and David Ganz. The conference dinner was held at King’s College London, with a reception sponsored by the Centre for Late Antique and Medieval Studies and the Departments of English and History, King’s College London. A mid-week excursion to Sutton Hoo, guided by Lesley Webster, James Graham-Campbell and Angela Evans, allowed participants to see some of the most powerful Anglo-Saxon traces. A 4

Record of the thirteenth conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists post-conference excursion took members on a tour of Anglo-Saxon sites that included Brixworth, Breedon-on-the-Hill, Lichfield Cathedral and Repton. IV Registration forms for the ISAS conference to be organized by and held at Memorial University, Newfoundland, will be mailed to all paid-up members of the Society. The conference theme will be ‘The Maritime World of the AngloSaxons’. Membership dues payments may be made by cheque or postal money order for $50.00 or £30.00 sterling (regular members) or for $35.00 or £20.00 (student and retired members) and should be sent to Professor Stacy S. Klein, Executive Director, ISAS, Dept. of English, Rutgers University, 510 George Street, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1167, USA. E-mail [email protected]. Payment may be made to the Executive Director by Visa or MasterCard or by personal cheque. For members outside the US transfers in sterling may be sent to the ISAS account, HSBC Bank plc, City Office Cambridge Branch, Cambridge, CB2 3HZ; sorting code 40–16–08, account no. 21241605. Members may arrange to pay dues for more than the two-year cycle. Payment forms are available from the Executive Director.

5

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus matthew s. kempshall abstract Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus has traditionally posed problems of interpretation in terms of both form (its apparently bipartite structure) and content (as a digest of the rules of rhetoric combined with an exposition of the four cardinal virtues). However, a close reading of the sources from which Alcuin was drawing his argument (Cicero, Julius Victor, Fortunatianus, Marius Victorinus, Cassiodorus and, above all, Augustine and Quintilian) suggests why he should have chosen to emphasize the connection between rhetoric and the virtues in this particular way.

Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica invites an attractively simple line of interpretation. Written in the form of a dialogue between Alcuin and Charlemagne, it opens by declaring its intent to set down the precepts of the discipline of rhetoric (rhetoricae rationis praecepta), suggesting that it will thereby act as a natural corollary to the teaching which Alcuin had already communicated on the subjects of dialectic, arithmetic and astronomy.1 What follows might therefore reasonably be regarded, on this basis, merely as one more example of an Alcuinian compilatio, an assembly of authoritative texts – in this case as a digest of Cicero’s De inuentione and Julius Victor’s Ars rhetorica (itself a fourth-century distillation of Cicero’s De oratore and Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria which enabled Alcuin to turn Cicero’s treatise on invention into a general treatise on rhetoric by providing a summary of its other four elements, namely arrangement, style, memory and delivery).2 In and of itself, such a characterization goes at least some way towards explaining both the nature and purpose of Alcuin’s text. The Disputatio de rhetorica does indeed appear to be a basic primer designed to serve alongside similar introductions to dialectic and grammar as a tool for the study of the liberal arts, themselves propaedeutic to the study of Scripture. Such a characterization would also seem to be confirmed by the manner, and extent, of its subsequent circulation – the Disputatio de rhetorica survives in at least eighteen 1

2

Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus [henceforth Disputatio de rhetorica], ed. and trans. W. S. Howell, The Rhetoric of Alcuin and Charlemagne (Princeton, 1941, pp. 66–155), p. 66, lines 17–22. Julius Victor, Ars rhetorica, ed. R. Giomini and M. S. Celentano (Leipzig, 1980); for his selection and fusion of Cicero and Quintilian, see pp. xvii–xviii and, for the early manuscripts, p. xxviii.

7

Matthew S. Kempshall ninth-century manuscripts and is often bound together with Alcuin’s De dialectica. Likewise by its shelf-life and waning influence, once complete versions of the original texts of Cicero and Quintilian on which it was based began to be sought out, and copied, in their own right.3 However, the Disputatio de rhetorica is neither as basic nor as straightforward a ‘textbook’ as such a summary would imply. While Alcuin’s work can be credited with an important role in the history of the transmission of the techniques of classical rhetoric, and while individual precepts which are contained within the treatise can be mined, and mined successfully, for what they recommend about, say, imitatio as a source of auctoritas, or about the relationship between grammar as the ars recte loquendi and rhetoric as the ars bene loquendi,4 difficulties arise as soon as the text is studied as a whole, as a work which might have been designed to do more than just provide a scissors-and-paste synthesis of the rules of classical rhetoric. Two aspects in particular have proved problematic. First, there is the apparent concentration of the purpose and value of studying rhetoric in an explicitly ‘political’ sphere. The very first line of Alcuin’s versepreface states that the person who reads its precepts is the person who wants to learn about ciuiles mores.5 Indeed, in the opening statement in prose, the entire scope (tota uis) of rhetoric is said to revolve around what are called ciuiles quaestiones, a phrase which is subsequently repeated two times at the beginning of the treatise and twice more at the end.6 Second, there is the set-piece discussion of the four cardinal virtues with which the treatise closes – an analysis of how prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance serve as the roots (radices) of all the other virtues, followed by an exposition of their relationship to the specifically Christian life of love of God and love of neighbour.7 What has so perplexed modern commentators about both of these features is that in neither case do Alcuin’s definitions and discussion find much of a warrant in 3

4

5

6

7

Clavis scriptorum Latinorum medii aevi: Auctores Galliae II, ed. M.-H. Jullien and F. Perelman (CCCM, Turnhout, 1999), pp. 160–1. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 132, lines 994–1010. cf. P. Godman, Poets and Emperors: Frankish Politics and Carolingian Poetry (Oxford, 1987), pp. 59–60; M. Irvine, The Making of Textual Culture: ‘Grammatica’ and Literary Theory 350–1100 (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 309 and 325–6; J. J. Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages: a History of Rhetorical Theory from Augustine to the Renaissance (Berkeley, 1974), pp. 80–2. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 66, line 1: ‘qui rogo civiles cupiat cognoscere mores, haec praecepta legat quae liber iste tenet’. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 66, line 13: ‘totam eius artis uim in ciuilibus uersari quaestionibus’; p. 68, line 57: ‘in ciuilibus . . . quaestionibus’; p. 70, lines 84–5: ‘in causis et quaestionibus ciuilibus’; p. 142, line 1150: ‘causis ciuilibus et negotiis saecularibus’; p. 154, lines 1357–8: ‘ciuilium quaestionum’. For definitions of causa and negotium, together with their relation to a quaestio, see Quintilian, Institutionis oratoriae libri duodecim [henceforth Institutio oratoria], ed. M. Winterbottom (Oxford, 1970), III.5.17–8, p. 142. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, pp. 142–54, lines 1159–356.

8

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus the texts of Cicero and Julius Victor which Alcuin had followed so closely in the remainder (some four-fifths, in fact) of his treatise. Indeed, the net effect of these two idiosyncracies has been that few modern commentators seem to know quite what to make of Alcuin’s text. Much the boldest interpretation of the Disputatio de rhetorica was proffered by Liutpold Wallach, for whom Alcuin’s combination of ‘political’ subject-matter, prescription of the cardinal virtues and formal dialogue with Charlemagne made it nothing less than a treatise on kingship, a speculum principis. ‘The De Rhetorica’, he wrote, ‘is made up of rhetorical doctrine, not because Alcuin wanted to write a rhetorical textbook, but because he wished to describe the mores of Charlemagne as those that ought to serve as examples to his subjects’.8 Wallach’s interpretation has proved (and, in some cases, continues to prove) influential, even though a more systematic study of Carolingian Fürstenspiegel would suggest that Alcuin’s treatise does not, in fact, fulfil the criteria necessary for it to be categorized in this genre.9 But if this littera exhortatoria is not a speculum principis, what is it? Michael Wallace-Hadrill was prompted to confess bafflement: ‘whether we really have from him the earliest example of a Carolingian speculum principis is doubtful: it depends on what one thinks was the purpose of his rhetorical exercise known as the Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus’.10 Indeed it does. Even if Wallach’s interpretation is no longer as persuasive as it once was, the problems it was originally created to solve still remain. Why does Alcuin define the entire scope of rhetoric as ciuiles quaestiones? Why does he then conclude his treatment with an analysis of the cardinal virtues? Neither one of these features would seem, at first sight, to sit particularly comfortably with the view that Alcuin simply wanted to produce a digest of the rules of Ciceronian rhetoric. Yet, if it is precisely those aspects of a text which seem to a modern reader to be either alien, difficult or incongruous that often reveal most about why that text was written and what it was trying to say, then such departures clearly need explaining. Generally speaking, when Alcuin does choose to deviate from the authoritative model he is otherwise imitating and emulating, then it is through these differences that his interpretative originality is often revealed. To have tied the 8

9 10

L. Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne: Studies in Carolingian History and Literature (Ithaca, 1959), p. 71. For the equation of the personal virtue of a ruler with the prosperity of his kingdom, see, for example, Alcuin, Epistolae, ed. E. Dümmler (MGH Epistolae IV, Berlin, 1895), 18, p. 51. H. H. Anton, Fürstenspiegel und Herrscherethos in der Karolingerzeit (Bonn, 1968), pp. 87–8. J. M. Wallace–Hadrill, Early Germanic Kingship in England and on the Continent (Oxford, 1971), p. 101; compare Wallace–Hadrill, ‘The Via regia of the Carolingian Age’, Trends in Medieval Political Thought, ed. B. Smalley (Oxford, 1965), pp. 22–41 at p. 30; idem, Early Medieval History (Oxford, 1975), pp. 181–200, at p. 189: ‘. . . the one composition of . . . Alcuin that can fairly be termed a consistent statement of political theory, the Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus’.

9

Matthew S. Kempshall subject-matter of rhetoric so firmly to ciuiles mores and ciuiles quaestiones suggests, therefore, that Alcuin was intent on making a particular point from the outset. Was it a case of simply wanting to fashion rhetoric into ‘an instrument of civil and political knowledge’, to make it ‘the art of dealing with questions of government as moral issues’, ‘the [legal] settlement of civil disputes’, or even ‘civic affairs’ and the ‘customs of the State’?11 Or did the term ciuilis carry a particular significance for Alcuin which was at once more precise and more inclusive than a modern understanding of ‘political’ might imply? Likewise, to have displaced and expanded what Cicero had said about virtue in De inuentione so that this material could serve as a conclusion to his own work would also seem to reveal something about Alcuin’s intentions. The fact that he drew attention to this editorial choice by giving his treatise the title Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus seems to point in the same direction. Alcuin’s twentiethcentury editor and translator was of the opinion that the dislocation of Cicero’s discussion of virtue as if it were something separate from the nature of inuentio simply marked Alcuin’s lack of understanding, a ‘weakness’ in his abridgement which stemmed from his failure to grasp ‘the full connection between the subject of rhetoric and that of the virtues’.12 It is this judgment which has led to the prevailing view of the Disputatio de rhetorica as a treatise in two parts. However, once Alcuin’s careful and deliberate adaptation of Cicero’s scheme is set within the context of a developed theory of moral philosophy, a rather different picture begins to emerge.13 This picture becomes clearer still when fuller appreciation is given to the connection between Alcuin’s concluding emphasis on virtue and his opening concentration on questions which relate to ‘civil’ conduct. To explain why Alcuin himself might have thought that what he wrote about virtue would be just as integral to a proper comprehension of the discipline (ratio) of rhetoric as the actual rules (praecepta) of speaking and writing well is to explain why the Disputatio de rhetorica should be placed at the heart of Alcuin’s own understanding of the role of language and learning within a Christian society. 11

12

13

C. Leonardi, ‘Alcuino e la retorica’, Dialektik und Rhetorik im frühen und hohen Mittelalter: Rezeption, Überlieferung und gesellschaftliche Wirkung antiker Gelehrsamkeit vornehmlich im 9. und 12. Jahrhundert, ed. J. Fried (Munich, 1997), pp. 171–4, at p. 171 (‘scienza civile’) and p. 173 (‘uno strumento di consapevolezza civile e politica’); Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne, p. 70; D. E. Luscombe, ‘Dialectic and Rhetoric in the Ninth and Twelfth Centuries: Continuity and Change’, Dialektik und Rhetorik, ed. Fried, pp. 1–20, at p. 3; Howell, Rhetoric of Alcuin and Charlemagne, p. 67. Howell, Rhetoric of Alcuin and Charlemagne, pp. 31–2 and pp. 63–4. I have been unable to consult H. L. Zimmermann, ‘A Critical Text: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de virtutibus sapientissimi regis Karoli et Albini magistri’ (unpublished dissertation, St. Louis, 1968). S. Mähl, Quadriga virtutum: die Kardinaltugenden in der Geistegeschichte der Karolingerzeit (Cologne, 1969), pp. 83–125, esp. pp. 109–16.

10

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus So what are we to make, first of all, of the statement that rhetoric is entirely concerned with ciuiles quaestiones? Alcuin takes the precise formulation of this definition, not from Cicero or from Julius Victor, but from Cassiodorus’s Institutiones, the sixth-century educational handbook which had provided the basic, but essential, framework for the integration of classical learning into monastic schooling. The art of rhetoric, according to Cassiodorus, is the science of speaking well on civil issues, in ciuilibus quaestionibus, where ciuiles quaestiones are understood to refer to those questions which everyone can comprehend when they concern equity and goodness, de aequo et bono.14 Alcuin’s own gloss on this definition is that these ciuiles quaestiones are docti quaestiones – that is, they are issues ‘open to instruction’ because they are capable of being grasped by everyone through the natural capacity of their minds.15 Right from the start, in other words, it is clear that the so-called ‘political’ dimension to Alcuin’s definition of rhetoric is, in fact, shorthand for the breadth and accessibility which rhetoric gives to the operation of virtue within human society. On this basis, rhetoric is concerned, first and foremost, with two fundamental moral qualities, namely equity and goodness. This supplementary definition depends, in its turn, on Alcuin’s understanding of how rhetoric had originally brought humankind out of a state of nature and into ‘civilization’. This notion is, of course, originally a Ciceronian argument, versions of which appear in De inuentione and De oratore, as well as in Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria.16 Alcuin provides his own potted version right at the start of the Disputatio de rhetorica. It was, he argues, only by combining ratio with oratio, reason with rhetoric, that a great and wise man (magnus uir et sapiens) was able to persuade his fellow humans to abandon their lives as solitary, scattered and predatory beasts ruled by cupidity and physical strength. Gathering these people together into one place, this individual led them towards everything advantageous and morally virtuous (utile atque honestam) and thereby inculcated different principles of life, namely 14

15

16

Cassiodorus, Institutiones, ed. R. A. B. Mynors (Oxford, 1937), II praef., p. 91; II.2.1, p. 97: ‘ciuiles quaestiones sunt secundum Fortunatianum, artigraphum novellum, quae in communem animi conceptionem possunt cadere, id est quas unusquisque potest intellegere cum de aequo quaeritur et bono’. For Fortunatianus, see below, n. 22. Cf. P. Lehmann, ‘Cassiodorstudien’ in his Erforschung des Mittelalters: Ausgewählte Abhandlungen und Aufsätze, 5 vols. (Leipzig, 1941–59), II, 38–108 at pp. 91–5. The phrase was also used by Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, II.i.1, ed. W. M. Lindsay (Oxford, 1911). Cf. Hrabanus Maurus, De institutione clericorum, III.19, ed. D. Zimpel (Frankfurt, 1996), p. 470. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 68, lines 57–8: ‘in ciuilibus id est doctis quaestionibus quae naturali animi ingenio concipi possunt’. Cf. Alcuin, De dialectica (PL 101, 951–76), 953: ‘quid est inter dialecticam et rhetoricam? . . . dialectica siquidem ad inveniendi res acutior; rhetorica ad inventas dicendas facundior. illa raros et studiosos requirit, haec frequenter procedit in turbas’. Cicero, De inuentione, I.2.2–3, ed. E. Ströbel (Leipzig, 1915), pp. 2–3; De oratore, I.8.33, ed. K. Kumaniecki (Leipzig, 1969), p. 14; Quintilian, Institutio oratoria, II.16.9, pp. 112–13.

11

Matthew S. Kempshall divine observance and a sense of duty towards their fellow human beings.17 This is what Alcuin wanted to underline when he echoed Cassiodorus’s concentration on ciuiles quaestiones. Rhetoric is necessarily involved in everything which distinguishes humankind’s existence in communities, in everything which differentiates it from a purely animal existence. Rhetoric is based on the union of sapientia with eloquentia and, in each of its three branches, it comprises anything which involves equity and goodness – judicial rhetoric seeks what is equitable, demonstrative rhetoric what is morally virtuous, and deliberative rhetoric what is both morally virtuous and advantageous.18 This compass can be called ‘political’, in short, but only if the term is construed in the broadest possible sense, as everything which concerns life in a distinctively human society, and not if the term is restricted simply to those who exercise authority within that society. Alcuin found the same argument, with slightly different phraseology, in Julius Victor, for whom the duty of the orator was to concern himself with ciuilia negotia, where ‘civil affairs’ comprise those matters on which everyone with any intellectual capacity can speak and judge. They cover general opinion, laws or conduct (mores) – anything, in fact, which can be the subject of accusation, defence, or simply debate over its equity and utility (de aequo et utili).19 For Julius Victor, the foundation of eloquence, as indeed of everything else, is therefore sapientia.20 As such, rhetoric can be applied to people, events or texts, and can range all the way from universal abstract propositions to specific cases. True to the breadth of this definition, Julius Victor had run through all the component parts of ‘speaking well’ and exhorted his readers to put these rules into practice by immediate and constant exercise. He had then concluded his treatise by showing how rhetoric should be applied to the writing of letters, or rather to the writing of epistolae negotiales, that is, letters on public as opposed to personal issues. The gravity of this particular epistolary genre, he states, requires the deployment of all the precepts of rhetoric.21 17

18 19

20

Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 68, lines 33–51. For the identification of Cicero’s uir magnus et sapiens with Charlemagne, see Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne, pp. 51–2; Mähl, Quadriga virtutum, p. 114; for the phrase itself, see below, n. 44. For the suggestion that Alcuin saw in this myth a potent image for the ‘romanisation’ of the ‘germanic’ culture of the Franks, see Leonardi, ‘Alcuino e la retorica’, p. 172. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 72, lines 100–3. Julius Victor, Ars rhetorica, p. 1: ‘sunt autem ea demum ciuilia negotia quae nulla arte propria continentur . . . sed earum rerum tractatum habent quae perficiuntur ex opinione communi aut legibus aut moribus et de quibus omnes qui aliquatenus intellectum aliquem recipiunt et dicere et iudicare possint. omnes enim fere et accusare alium et purgare se ipsos possunt et de aequo et utili disputare uidentur sibi posse’. Cf. ibid. pp. 24–5; Quintilian, Institutio oratoria, V.14.28–9, pp. 312–13. Julius Victor, Ars rhetorica, p. 93: ‘sed est eloquentiae, sicut reliquarum rerum, fundamentum 21 sapientia’. See below, n. 95. Ibid. p. 105.

12

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus Familiarity with both Cassiodorus and Julius Victor may be enough, in itself, to account for Alcuin’s emphasis on ciuiles quaestiones right at the start of the Disputatio de rhetorica. However, Alcuin also seems to have been drawing directly on the fourth-century sources from which Cassiodorus had himself taken this argument, namely Fortunatianus’s Ars rhetorica and the commentary on Cicero’s De inuentione by Marius Victorinus.22 Alcuin was certainly familiar with the treatise by Fortunatianus.23 Indeed, coupled with the explicit personal endorsement of Fortunatianus’s authority which had been provided by Cassiodorus’s Institutiones, as well as by the fact that the treatise had subsequently circulated in conjunction with the pseudo-Augustinian De rhetorica,24 it may well have been the precedent provided by the unusual form of Fortunatianus’s treatise which prompted Alcuin to couch his own work as a dialogue of question and answer.25 ‘What is rhetoric?’ Fortunatianus had asked. ‘The knowledge of speaking well’ was the reply. ‘What is an orator?’ he continued. ‘The good man skilled in speaking. What is the function of the orator? To speak well on civil questions. To what end? In order to be persuasive, in so far as circumstances and audience allow, in civil questions. What are civil questions? Those which can fall into the common capacity of the mind, that is, those which every person can understand as an inquiry into what is equitable and good. How many kind of civil question are there? Three. What are they? Demonstrative, deliberative and judicial.’26 Alcuin’s conversance with Marius Victorinus is slightly harder to pin down than in the case of Fortunatianus but the circumstantial evidence remains considerable. Marius Victorinus’s commentary on Cicero’s De inuentione is extant in at least one late-eighth-century manuscript (Cologne, Dombibliothek, 166, a manuscript which appears to have been written ‘under insular influence’ and which also includes Fortunatianus and the pseudo-Augustinian De rhetorica),27 and the author is named in person alongside Boethius in the library described 22

24

25

26

27

Fortunatianus, Ars rhetorica, ed. K. Halm, Rhetores Latini minores (Leipzig, 1863), pp. 81–134; Marius Victorinus, Explanatio in rhetoricam Ciceronis, ed. Halm, Rhetores Latini minores, 23 pp. 155–304. Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne, pp. 44–5. Augustine, Liber de rhetorica, ed. Halm, Rhetores Latini Minores, pp. 135–51. See esp. p. 136 and (for discussion of ciuiles quaestiones) pp. 138–9. Cf. E. A. Matter, ‘Alcuin’s Question–and–Answer Texts’, Rivista di storia della filosofia 45 (1990), 645–56. Cf. Quintilian, Institutio oratoria, IX.2.31, p. 495. Fortunatianus, Ars rhetorica, ed. Halm, Rhetores Latini Minores, p. 81: ‘quid est rhetorica? bene dicendi scientia. quid est orator? uir bonus dicendi peritus. quod est oratoris officium? bene dicere in ciuilibus quaestionibus. qui finis? persuadere, quatenus rerum et personarum condicio patiatur in ciuilibus quaestionibus. quae sunt ciuiles quaestiones? quae in communem animi conceptionem possunt cadere, id est quas unusquisque potest intellegere ut cum quaeritur de aequo et bono. genera ciuilium quaestionum quot sunt? tria. quae? demonstratiuum, deliberatiuum, iudiciale’. For a description of the manuscript, see A. von Euw, ‘Lehrtexte zur Grammatik, Rhetorik und Dialektik (Dom Hs. 166)’, in Glaube und Wissen im Mittelalter: Die Kölner Dombibliothek (Munich,

13

Matthew S. Kempshall by Alcuin in his poem on the bishops, kings and saints of York.28 Moreover, when Alcuin cites Marius Victorinus’s anti-Arian theological works in Adversus Elipandum and De fide, he makes a point of describing his Ciceronian pedigree. Marius Victorinus, he writes, was a distinguished rhetor who, by moving from the school of Cicero to ecclesiastical controversies, became as firm an advocate of the faith as he had been outstanding as an orator.29 Although Alcuin does not mention Marius Victorinus or quote him verbatim in the Disputatio de rhetorica, it is therefore still probable that he was familiar with the work when he was writing his treatise. After all, as has been remarked of Alcuin’s corresponding ‘textbook’ on grammar, it is clear from his other writings that Alcuin had read much more widely in this field than the sources for this one ‘handbook for beginners’ would, by themselves, imply.30 At the very least, knowledge of Marius Victorinus would have strengthened Alcuin’s conviction that rhetoric should be given a very wide definition indeed, since Victorinus had opened his commentary on Cicero’s De inuentione by spelling out in some detail the necessary connection between rhetoric and wisdom. Wisdom on its own, he wrote, sapientia without eloquentia, is of little benefit compared to wisdom when it is joined with eloquence, since it is through eloquence that wisdom is able to exert its compelling power. Eloquence without wisdom, meanwhile, is very harmful; strictly speaking, it is not even eloquence but simply a mass of words. It is thus the combination of eloquence with wisdom which is central to Victorinus’s view of the ciuitas, that is, of every multitude of human beings which has been gathered together to live in accordance with law, since it is this combination which actually creates society by bringing wars to an end, establishing agreements, maintaining justice and supporting friendship. It is thus

28

29

30

1998), pp. 125–8. Cf. R. H. Rouse and R. M. Thomson, ‘Censorinus’ (ed. L. D. Reynolds, Texts and Transmission: a Survey of the Latin Classics, Oxford, 1983, pp. 48–50), p. 48; B. Bischoff, Manuscripts and Libraries in the Age of Charlemagne (Cambridge, 1994), ch. 5 ‘Libraries and Schools in the Carolingian Revival of Learning’, pp. 93–114 (at p. 96); ch. 7 ‘Benedictine Monasteries and the Survival of Classical Literature’, pp. 134–60 (at p. 147); idem, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts (2 vols., Wiesbaden, 1998) I, 402. For Alcuin’s quotation from Marius Victorinus’s commentary in De dialectica, see Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne, p. 37. Alcuin, The Bishops, Kings and Saints of York, ed. and trans. P. Godman (Oxford, 1982), p. 124, line 1548. Cf. R. Ray, Bede, Rhetoric and the Creation of Christian Latin Culture (Jarrow Lecture, 1997), p. 7; G. Knappe, ‘Classical Rhetoric in Anglo–Saxon England’, ASE 27 (1998), 5–29 at pp. 12–14; Knappe, Traditionen der klassischen Rhetorik im angelsachsischen England (Heidelberg, 1996), pp. 161–84. Alcuin, Adversus Elipandum IV.9 (PL 101, 231–300), 292. Cf. P. Hadot, ‘Marius Victorinus et Alcuin’, Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge, 21 (1954), pp. 5–19; idem, Marius Victorinus: Recherches sur sa vie et ses oeuvres (Paris, 1971), p. 21. See also J. J. O’Donnell, Augustine’s Confessions: Introduction, Text, Commentary, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1992) III, 13–15. Irvine, Making of Textual Culture, pp. 317–18.

14

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus through eloquence that the human soul is liberated from enslavement to the body in a life which would otherwise be solitary, brutish and short. This is the achievement of the ‘great and wise man’ (uir magnus et sapiens) who uses eloquence to gather his fellow humans into a community, persuading them to exchange the life of beasts for a life which is truly human. At the core of this uita ciuilis (and, for Marius Victorinus, ciuilis always means living according to law),31 is therefore the instilling into human beings of what is morally good and advantageous. For Marius Victorinus, this is the central function of eloquence. Human nature may be perfected by precepts discovered through wisdom but this can only be realized when eloquence is used to persuade the human will. Eloquence combined with wisdom, in short, establishes human communities by persuading people of what is good and advantageous and by teaching them what is just. Conversely, when eloquence is deployed without wisdom, society is destroyed by those who operate by force of words alone; wisdom then becomes the preserve of philosophers who retire from public affairs and simply write about sapientia rather than translate it into action. It is to forestall this fate that Marius Victorinus underlines Cicero’s exhortation to study rhetoric and wisdom together, since it is this conjunction alone which will enable public and private affairs to be administered and life to be made safe, good and beneficial, both to oneself and to one’s friends.32 If Cicero’s De inuentione convinced Alcuin of the central role of rhetoric in the transition of humankind from a bestial state of nature, then Cassiodorus and Julius Victor, but also Fortunatianus and Marius Victorinus, left him in no doubt as to its role in maintaining the fabric of that society once it had been established and, by extension, the comprehensive range of subjects on which it should be brought to bear. This role and this scope, in short, are what Alcuin was indicating in the definitions with which he opened the Disputatio de rhetorica by highlighting the phrases ciuiles mores and ciuiles quaestiones. Rhetoric is comprehensible to everyone because it covers everything which is open to question in a human society living under law. It is therefore concerned with everything which carries any consideration of moral goodness, advantage and equity. No more and, certainly, no less. Where, then, does this analysis leave the second of the two issues which have so frequently troubled modern commentators, namely the connection between a treatise on rhetoric and a concluding disquisition on virtue? Is this conclusion simply, as some have argued (and indeed as Charlemagne himself is made to say), an exercise in speaking (exercitatio sermocinationis), a practical 31

Marius Victorinus, Explanatio in rhetoricam, I.1, p. 158; I.2, pp. 162 and 164. Cf. Augustine, Quaestiones euangeliorum 46 (ed. A. Mutzenbecher, CCSL 44B, Turnhout, 1980, pp. 1–118), 32 pp. 109–11. Marius Victorinus, Explanatio in rhetoricam, I.1, pp. 155–60; I.4, pp. 168–70.

15

Matthew S. Kempshall demonstration of the sort of subject on which rhetoric could be brought to bear, ‘a good subject for practice in speaking’?33 Alcuin himself, after all, states that he could have said more on the subject of the virtues were his disputation not already hastening towards its conclusion and if it did not seem so superfluous a subject on which to engage Charlemagne given that he was already ‘adorned’, not just by knowledge of the virtues, but also by his practice of them.34 Cicero had originally included the cardinal virtues (prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance) under the heading of invention as a subject essential to the rhetorician who was engaged in demonstrative and deliberative rhetoric. In demonstrative rhetoric (that is, in display or epideictic rhetoric), the virtues provide the raw material with which individuals are held up either for praise or for blame; in deliberative rhetoric, they provide the basis for establishing whether a particular course of action is morally worthy (honestum) and advantageous (utile).35 Why, then, did Alcuin not do the same? Why did he postpone discussion of the cardinal virtues until after he had analysed all the other parts of rhetoric, that is, not just invention, but also arrangement, style, memory and delivery? Why did he treat the virtues as if they constituted a separate subject for debate? An interest in incorporating prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance into a more general discussion of virtue can be traced in many of Alcuin’s other works, not least De uirtutibus et uitiis where the classification from Cicero’s De inuentione once again provides Alcuin with his finale. In the struggle between virtue and vice, between Christian observance and diabolic impiety, Alcuin writes that wisdom, justice, fortitude and temperance are the four most glorious commanders.36 In this work, however, the reason why Alcuin should have given such prominence to the cardinal virtues appears to have a straightforward source of inspiration. Alcuin, after all, was not the first person to have seen that Cicero’s discussion of the virtues could be excerpted from De inuentione as a 33

34

36

Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 144, lines 1190–3: ‘paulo ante inter nos constitit sermocinationis exercitationem esse necessariam, in quo melius est habendum sermonis studium quam in uirtutum excellentia quae utrumque et scribentibus et legentibus multum prodesse ualet?’ Cf. G. A. Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric and its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times, 2nd ed. (London, 1999), p. 209; Anton, Fürstenspiegel und Herrscherethos, p. 88: ‘. . . der Exemplifizierung und Erprobung der rhetorischen Grundsätze’. For the importance of exercitatio, see Quintilian, Institutio oratoria, X.1.2, p. 567. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 144, lines 1182–6: ‘ideo uirtutes in medio sunt positae de quibus tuae uenerandae auctoritati plura dicere potuissem si non disputatio nostra ad finem festinaret et si non superfluum uideretur tecum de uirtutibus agere quem uirtutum non tantum scientia sed etiam ornat efficientia’. In view of the synonymous nature of rhetoric and ornamentum, Alcuin’s choice of ornare is, in itself, significant for the link between virtue and 35 rhetoric. Cicero, De inuentione, II.51.155–54.165, pp. 145–50. Alcuin, De uirtutibus et uitiis XXXIV–V (PL 101, 613–638), 637. cf. Mähl, Quadriga virtutum, pp. 97–101.

16

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus free-standing classification. Augustine had already done this in his De diuersis quaestionibus and had himself drawn attention to the fact in his Retractiones: ‘since I was responsible for making this part of Cicero known to the brothers’, he records, ‘they have written it among those things which they were collecting since they wanted to know how Cicero divided and defined the virtues’.37 Alcuin knew both these texts by Augustine and, once again, such familiarity may, in itself, underpin Alcuin’s interest in separating Cicero’s analysis and appending it as his own conclusion to the Disputatio de rhetorica.38 Augustine’s own approach to the list of virtues which he found in Cicero’s De inuentione, however, had been much more complex than treating it as a convenient classificatory scheme. Augustine’s real interest in the cardinal virtues, in De civitate Dei, for example, or in the Contra Iulianum (where the discussion is again prefaced by verbatim quotation from De inuentione), turned on two fundamental questions. In the first instance, Augustine was concerned whether true moral virtue could, in fact, be possessed by an individual who had not been illuminated with the grace of Christian charity, by a Scipio, that is, or by a Regulus.39 Second, Augustine insisted that, even if his first question were to be answered in the negative, Christians should nonetheless have no cause for complacency – if pagan Romans had been capable of performing outstanding and notable acts when motivated by glory, by self-love or by praise in this life, then surely Christians should be able to achieve so much more when motivated by correctly ordered self-love, by love of God and of their neighbour?40 It is precisely the import of these two questions from Augustine which Alcuin picks up at the end of the Disputatio de rhetorica, a point which is all too readily obscured if Alcuin’s text is characterized merely as a means of distilling and disseminating the rules of classical rhetoric. Alcuin, like Augustine, analyses the status of all those moral virtues which had been described by classical philosophers and rhetoricians, and which had been exemplified by noble Romans, when they were neither informed by revelation nor directed towards the goal of each individual human being in God. Alcuin opens his discussion in the Disputatio de rhetorica by observing that both Christianity and philosophy cultivate virtue, knowledge, truth and ‘good’ (that is, correctly ordered) love – things which are all sought for their own sake, as 37

38

39

Augustine, Retractiones, I.26 (ed. A. Mutzenbecher, CCSL 57, Turnhout 1984), p. 77; De diuersis quaestionibus, 31 (ed. A. Mutzenbecher, CCSL 44A, Turnhout 1975), pp. 41–5. E.g. Alcuin, Adversus Felicem III.12 (PL 101, 128–230), 156; Ep. 309, p. 474. For Alcuin’s knowledge of Augustine (including the Retractationes, De doctrina Christiana and De civitate Dei) in Northumbria, see D. A. Bullough, Alcuin: Achievement and Reputation (Leiden, 2004), pp. 261– 6. Augustine, De civitate Dei, eds. B. Dombart and A. Kalb (CCSL 47–8, Turnhout, 1955), V.19, pp. 154–6, XIX.4, pp. 664–9, XIX.10, p. 674, XIX.25, p. 696; Contra Iulianum IV.3.17–26 (PL 40 44, 641–874), 745–51. Augustine, De civitate Dei, V.17, pp. 149–50.

17

Matthew S. Kempshall ends in themselves, rather than for the sake of something else. The difference between Christianity and philosophy, in this regard, is the presence of faith and baptism.41 Having proceeded to excerpt Cicero’s classification of the virtues from De inuentione, Alcuin then turns to Augustine’s warning against Christian complacency. The cultivation of moral virtue (honestum) has the greatest worth (honor) among men and praise with God. If pagan philosophers had managed to maintain the cardinal virtues when motivated only by the worldly standing or praise that this gave to their lives, then is it not a matter for wonder, even pity, that Christians stray from these virtues in so many respects despite having been promised the reward of eternal glory if they were to observe these virtues in faith and love, or even out of fear of punishment?42 Alcuin accordingly concludes by setting out how each of the cardinal virtues should be understood and exercised within the Christian religion. Once again, he turns to Augustine, in this instance to book VI of De musica.43 Observance of these virtues is necessary for all human beings and its goal is love of God and of one’s neighbour. Alcuin quotes Matthew XXII.37–40 in order to reinforce the point: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind [Deuteronomy VI.5]. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbour as yourself [Leviticus XIX.18]. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments’. The only source of happiness, Alcuin explains, the measure of the correctly ordered soul, is that it loves God, rules what is inferior to it (namely the body) and supports its fellow human beings in love. It is thus only through combining these two loves – of God and of neighbour – with the exercise of the four cardinal virtues that an individual will be truly blessed (magnus uir et uere beatus) in the heavenly kingdom.44 This resolution accordingly provides Alcuin with his own closing summary of what he thinks he has been doing in the Disputatio de rhetorica: having started with the ever-changing character of ciuiles quaestiones, he has now ended with the goal of eternal changelessness. His exposition, he writes, has been aimed at the individual who is eager to learn about the morally worthy disciplines of this world and at the individual who scrutinises the higher virtues (aut . . . aut).45 It is in this sense that the Disputatio de rhetorica might, perhaps, be regarded as a treatise in two parts. In tying eloquence so closely to 41 43 44

45

42 Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, pp.144–6, lines 1199–1214. Ibid. p.150, lines 1287–98. Mähl, Quadriga virtutum, pp. 112–15. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 152, lines 1320–55. For the significance of this final phrase as an adaptation of both Cicero (see above, n. 17) and Augustine, De musica, VI.14.45 (PL 32, 1081–1194), 1187 (magnus uir et humanissimus), see Mähl, Quadriga virtutum, pp. 107, 114. See also Sallust, Jugurtha XLV.1, ed. L. D. Reynolds (Oxford, 1991), p. 92. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 154, lines 1357–63: ‘quis est qui nos frustra sermocinari audeat dicere si aut honestarum est saeculi scrutator curiosus artium aut excellentium scrutator uirtutum?’

18

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus sapientia, however, in pairing Cicero with Augustine, Alcuin is also aiming to demonstrate just how intimately these two themes are connected. If Alcuin’s transcription of Cicero’s classification of the cardinal virtues from De inuentione is best understood in terms of the discussion with which it had been accompanied in De civitate Dei and De musica,46 then the influence of this Augustinian mediation on the Disputatio de rhetorica should not be limited to the virtues themselves. However important Augustine may have been to Alcuin’s closing analysis of virtue, his presence also extends to the broader assumptions about the relationship between classical learning and Christian faith on which the treatise as a whole is based. The crucial text here is Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana, a work which was fundamental to the entire Carolingian view of learning within a Christian society.47 Can this text too, then, help us understand why Alcuin might have regarded moral virtue as integral to the study of rhetoric? Written as a short reflection on the relationship between words and things and, as a result, on how the relationship between them is dependent on a proper understanding of signs, De doctrina Christiana set out to demonstrate how a basic knowledge of grammar, logic and rhetoric could, and should, be used to expound both the literal and the figurative meaning of the Bible. In expounding the utility of these branches of pagan learning, the ‘gold’ and ‘clothing’ of the Egyptians, Augustine also points out their limitations: some signs will remain ambiguous and obscure, some humanly instituted knowledge is self-indulgent and to be avoided. Rhetorical tropes and ornamentation, however, although they might seem to belong to the category of such suspect knowledge, are present in Scripture because they are natural, not artificial, to humankind. According to Augustine, therefore, as a means of understanding the divine truths which are contained in the Old and New Testaments and, equally importantly, as a means of communicating these truths to others, the disciplines of grammar, logic and rhetoric are fundamental to Christian teaching.48 De doctrina Christiana did not itself attempt to provide an introduction to the study of grammar, logic and rhetoric. Indeed, Augustine issues explicit 46 47

48

Mähl, Quadriga virtutum, pp. 115–16, 124–5. See M. M. Gorman, ‘The Diffusion of the Manuscripts of Saint Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana in the Early Middle Ages’, RB 95 (1985), pp. 11–24, reprinted in his, The Manuscript Traditions of the Works of St Augustine (Florence, 2001), pp. 265–78; and, more generally, De Doctrina Christiana: a Classic of Western Culture, ed. D. W. H. Arnold and P. Bright (Notre Dame, 1995). Cf. Alcuin, Ep. 19, p. 53; Ep. 31, p. 221; Ep. 291, p. 449. For Alcuin’s role in De litteris colendis, see Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne, pp. 204–11; T. Martin, ‘Bermerkungen zur Epistola de litteris colendis’, Archiv für Diplomatik 31 (1985), 227–72, at pp. 246–50. See, for example, K. Eden, ‘The Rhetorical Tradition and Augustinian Hermeneutics in De doctrina Christiana’, Rhetorica 8 (1990), 45–63 and, more generally, Augustine and the Disciplines: from Cassiciacum to Confessions, ed. K. Pollmann and M. Vessey (Oxford, 2005).

19

Matthew S. Kempshall disclaimers on this score. ‘This would not be the proper place’, he writes, ‘to present [figures of speech] to people not familiar with them; I do not wish to look as if I am giving a course on grammar.’49 Tropes are intrinsic to language and natural to human beings without a formal training in grammar but this is not to say that they should be excluded from closer attention. Far from it. In De doctrina Christiana, however, Augustine simply recommends that these tropes should be learned separately. Likewise with the study of rhetoric. Augustine writes: At the outset, I must curb the expectations of any readers who think that I am going to present the rhetorical rules which I learned and taught in pagan schools, and warn them . . . not to expect that sort of thing from me. This is not because the rules have no practical use, but because such practical uses as they do have must be learned separately – assuming that a person of good character (uir bonus) has the time to learn them on top of everything else – and not sought from me either in this or any other work.50

Augustine was clearly concerned by the amount of time that could be spent in learning all these rhetorica praecepta and he therefore suggested that, rather than occupy an individual’s mature or advanced years, they should be learned when young. As a result, the remainder of De doctrina Christiana is devoted, instead, to a demonstration of how the interpreter and teacher of divine scripture can use different styles of elocutio in order to defend the Christian faith and defeat error, communicate what is good and eradicate what is bad.51 With that proviso, however, Augustine’s recommendation is clear: As for the relevant observations and rules which, together with a skilful manner of speaking that uses an abundance of words and verbal ornament, constitute what we mean by eloquence, these should be learned independently of this work by those who can do so quickly, by setting aside an appropriate period of time at a suitable and convenient stage of their lives.52

Modern commentators who put De doctrina Christiana and the Disputatio de rhetorica side by side have tended to do so in order to point up the differences, rather than the similarities, between these two texts.53 It is certainly true that 49

50

52

53

Augustine, De doctrina Christiana, III.87, ed. R. P. H. Green (Oxford, 1995), p. 170: ‘sed hic eos ignaris tradere non decet, ne artem grammaticam docere uideamur’. Ibid. IV.3, p. 196: ‘primo itaque exspectationem legentium qui forte me putant rhetorica daturum esse praecepta quae in scholis saecularibus et didici et docui, ista praelocutione cohibeo atque ut a me non exspectentur admoneo; non quod nihil habeant utilitatis sed quod si quid habent seorsum discendum est, si cui fortassis bono uiro etiam haec uacat discere, non 51 autem a me vel in hoc opere vel in aliquo alio requirendum’. Ibid. IV.14, p. 200. Ibid. IV.6, p. 198: ‘sed quaecumque sunt de hac re obseruationes atque praecepta quibus, cum accedit in uerbis plurimis ornamentisque uerborum linguae sollertissima consuetudo, fit illa quae facundia vel eloquentia nominatur, extra istas litteras nostras, seposito ad hoc congruo temporis spatio, apta et convenienti aetate discenda sunt eis qui hoc celeriter possunt’. For example, Irvine, Making of Textual Culture, p. 326. De doctrina Christiana, however, can be seen to underpin the Disputatio de rhetorica in terms of the choice of De inuentione as its primary

20

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus Augustine’s main concern, unlike Alcuin’s (at least in the Disputatio de rhetorica), is Scripture. Yet, while Alcuin acknowledges that the wisdom he is expounding is indeed that of the rhetoricus rather than the evangelicus,54 he is still careful to intersperse his own digest of the praecepta rhetorica with scriptural examples. Demonstrative, judicial and deliberative rhetoric, for example, are all illustrated directly from the Bible – by Cain and Abel, Ahithophel and Hushai, Tertullus and Paul respectively.55 It is also true that Augustine registers profound concern over the potential abuse of eloquence when it has no goal other than pleasure and when it is placed in the service of falsehood rather than truth. Delight in words is, for Augustine, only ever a means to further the primary goals of persuasion, namely instruction in truth and inspiration to good action. Within these terms of reference, however, he still insists that it serves a useful purpose.56 Just because the rules of eloquence can be used to commend falsehood does not, for that reason, make them invalid. ‘Since they can also be used to commend the truth’, Augustine states, ‘it is not the subject itself that is reprehensible but the perversity of those who abuse it’.57 Truth should not stand unarmed in its fight against falsehood; rhetoric should not be left to those who serve iniquity and error. Oratorical ability, he concludes, needs to be acquired by good and zealous Christians in order to fight for the truth.58 Alcuin registers the same concerns and the same solution. Indeed, he cites (apparently via Boethius) the same piece of sophistical discourse as Augustine in order to make the point.59 Augustine’s concentration on scriptural exegesis and on the dangers of sophistry should not be allowed to obscure his conviction of just how useful a knowledge of rhetoric could be. Two points emerge from his line of argument which, when viewed from the perspective of Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica, deserve much greater emphasis than they are sometimes given. First, Augustine gives a list of the contexts in which rhetoric can prove a valuable instrument, a

55

56 57

58 59

authority since Augustine himself draws attention to the fact that no fewer than three of his own four books were specifically concerned with the subject of inuentio (Augustine, De doct54 rina Christiana, IV.1–2, p. 196). Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 118, lines 782–5. Ibid. pp. 70–2, lines 91–100. Cf. Ibid. p. 104, lines 603–6. For Alcuin’s illustration of the universe ruled by design, see pp. 118–20, lines 808–26. Augustine, De doctrina Christiana, IV.143–4, 149–50, pp. 272, 274–6. Ibid. II.132, p. 118: ‘sunt etiam quaedam praecepta uberioris disputationis quae iam eloquentia nominatur, quae nihilominus uera sunt quamuis eis possint etiam falsa persuaderi; sed quia et uera possunt, non est facultas ipsa culpabilis sed ea male utentium peruersitas’. Ibid. IV.4–5, pp. 196–8. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, pp. 128–30, lines 936–970; Augustine, De doctrina Christiana, II.117–18, p. 110. According to Wallach (Alcuin and Charlemagne, pp. 39–40; idem, ‘Alcuin on Sophistry’, Classical Philology 50 (1955), 259–61), Alcuin is quoting directly from Boethius’s commentary on Aristotle’s De interpretatione (PL 64, 293–392), 304–6, and Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, ed. P. K. Marshall (Oxford, 1968), XVIII.2.9, p. 540.

21

Matthew S. Kempshall list which extends far beyond the exposition of scriptural texts in sermons and homilies. It comprises entreaties (obsecrationes), rebukes (increpationes), rousing speeches (concitationes) and solemn admonitions (coercitationes),60 and it extends to the instruction and advocacy of things to be acted upon.61 Rhetoric can be deployed, Augustine argues, in public or in private, with one person or with several, with friends and opponents, in continuous speech and debate, in treatises and books, in letters of great length or extreme brevity; in other words, wherever, and in whatever form, instruction in Christian truths and exhortation to a Christian way of life is required.62 This is therefore the first point which needs to be underlined – the sheer range of non-Scriptural contexts in which Augustine considered classical rhetoric to be useful. This does not mean that Augustine wanted Christians to devote huge amounts of time to the study of rhetoric. Indeed, he actively discourages this. What he does imply, however, is that it would be helpful if there were a way of picking up the essentials of classical rhetoric briefly and quickly. What was needed, in other words, was a distillation of everything a Christian needed to know about rhetoric. This is therefore the second point – Augustine’s recommendation provides one very good reason why Alcuin might subsequently have thought it desirable, even necessary, to produce a convenient primer of rhetoric as the short-cut to a time-consuming and distracting preoccupation with the classical rhetoricians themselves. De doctrina Christiana, in other words, helps explain how Alcuin might have intended the composition of his Disputatio de rhetorica to fulfil a quite specific need within a Christian educational programme. What this still does not explain, of course, is why Alcuin considered the subject of virtue to have been an appropriate conclusion for the Disputatio de rhetorica. As it stands, the transition from the discussion of delivery (elocutio, the last of the five parts of rhetoric) is effected by the observation that, if honestas is absolutely essential in every aspect of life, then this is particularly true of words, because a man’s speech bears testimony to his character (mores).63 The importance of moral goodness to the orator is a point that had been made by Augustine in De doctrina Christiana (as, indeed, it had been made by Marius Victorinus, Julius Victor and Fortunatianus) but, in reinforcing the connection 60

62

63

Augustine, De doctrina Christiana, IV.15, p. 202. Cf. Cicero, De oratore, III.30.118, pp. 306–7; I Tim. II:1; Hrabanus Maurus quotes the same text from Augustine (De institutione clericorum, 61 III.28, pp. 489–90). Augustine, De doctrina Christiana, IV.79, pp. 230–2. Ibid. IV.102, p. 242: ‘cum uero de illius uiri disseramus eloquio quem uolumus earum rerum esse doctorem quibus liberamur ab aeternis malis atque ad aeterna peruenimus bona ubicumque agantur haec – siue apud populum siue priuatim siue ad unum siue ad plures siue ad amicos siue ad inimicos siue in perpetua dictione siue in collocutione siue in tractatibus siue in libris siue in epistolis uel longissimis uel breuissimis – magna sunt’. Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 142, lines 1162–4: ‘cum in omni parte uitae honestas pernecessaria est, maxime in sermonibus, quia fere cuiusque mores sermo probat’.

22

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus between eloquence and wisdom, Augustine had been noticeably equivocal on the need for virtue on the part of the orator himself. Eloquence must always be connected with wisdom, and it must be deployed by the individual who is himself of good character. In emphasizing the utility of elocutio in instructing an audience of the truth and in persuading them to put goodness into action, Augustine states that greater weight (maius pondus) is carried by the life of the speaker. The art of speaking both wisely and eloquently is defined as the use of elocutio to support things that are true and necessary. It is better to treat something wisely and not eloquently rather than the other way around but, if neither is possible, then an individual should simply live his life in such a way that he serves as an exemplum to be imitated by others so that the form of his life carries, as it were, the force of eloquence. Yet, although Augustine argues that it is accordingly much better to practise what one preaches, and that an exemplary life will benefit a greater number of people, he also concedes that a wise and eloquent speaker can proclaim the truth and yet still lead a wicked life in person.64 For an emphasis on moral virtue as an absolute precondition for eloquence, we have to turn elsewhere, in the first instance to Cassiodorus’s Institutiones, the text from which Alcuin derived his original definition of rhetoric comprising ciuiles quaestiones. As a demonstration of how the theory of De doctrina Christiana might be translated into practice, the Institutiones certainly showed Alcuin how Augustine’s strictures on uniting sapientia with eloquentia could actually be achieved through a Christian educational programme. In discussing the particular scope of rhetoric, moreover, Cassiodorus also demonstrated to Alcuin how ciuiles quaestiones should be understood as comprising everything which concerns equity and goodness, de aequo et bono. What makes these particular words so suggestive for the structure of the Disputatio de rhetorica is, in the first instance, the sanction these two terms could have given for a bipartite treatment of rhetoric – that is, one which separated discussion of its specifically legal and juridical aspects from the question of its relation to moral goodness, dealing with each one of them in turn. Cassiodorus’s pairing de aequo et bono may thus have provided Alcuin with sufficient justification for his decision to structure and entitle the Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus in the way in which he did – first as an exposition of predominantly legal rhetoric (that is, the judicial rhetoric which has equity as its goal) and then as a discussion of the cardinal virtues (which provide the goal of demonstrative and deliberative rhetoric). Still more suggestive, however, is the source from which Cassiodorus, and before him Fortunatianus, had themselves derived this phrase ‘equity and goodness’, namely Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria. 64

Augustine, De doctrina Christiana, IV.151–9, pp. 276–80.

23

Matthew S. Kempshall Whether Alcuin read Quintilian in extenso or simply in the form of the excerpts he had found in Julius Victor is, in many respects, the most tantalizing of all the questions to ask of the Disputatio de rhetorica. That Alcuin should have sought out Quintilian as the natural partner for Cicero’s De inuentione is explicitly indicated by Cassiodorus himself when, having recommended De inuentione and drawn attention to the commentary of Marius Victorinus, he credited Quintilian with having enriched Cicero’s work still further. As a consequence, Cassiodorus records his own decision to bind Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria into a single volume with Cicero’s De inuentione so that, notwithstanding the size of the resulting codex, both texts could be to hand when they were needed. For the convenience of those who wanted a brief (but still subtle and perceptive) guide, Cassiodorus further suggests the three books of Fortunatianus (a work which he had himself distilled so that a reader might derive the essentials of rhetoric without getting bored), but otherwise his recommendation of a combination of Cicero with Quintilian is clear.65 Although the earliest extant manuscript of all twelve books of Quintilian dates from the early tenth century (Bamberg M. 4. 14), a complete text was apparently copied in the mid-ninth century in a northern Italian scriptorium (this lost exemplar is reflected in the codex Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, E. 153).66 In addition, two letters of the ninth-century scholar Lupus of Ferrières request a manuscript from which he could supplement and correct the incomplete Quintilian which he already possessed.67 The second of these letters was written at some point between 855 and 858 to Pope Benedict III in Rome, but Lupus’s first target, in 852, had been Abbot Ealdsige of York. It is this letter which has prompted the suggestion that the exemplar for the complete ninth-century Quintilian came ‘conceivably . . . from York’.68 Even though it is unclear whether Lupus was successful in his quest (the one surviving manuscript of Quintilian which can be closely connected to Lupus, 65

66

67

68

Cassiodorus, Institutiones, II.2.10, pp. 103–4. Compare Isidore, Etymologiae, II.i.1, who warns that the art of rhetoric had been set down in Latin by Cicero and Quintilian so copiously and in such variety that, while it was possible for the reader to express wonderment, it was impossible to comprehend. On which, see M. Winterbottom, Institutionis oratoriae libri duodecim, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1970), I, v–xv; Winterbottom, Problems in Quintilian, Bull. of the Institute of Classical Stud. Supplement 25 (London, 1970), pp. 3–7; idem, ‘Quintilian’ (Reynolds, Texts and Transmission, pp. 332–4), pp. 332–3; Bischoff, Manuscripts and Libraries, ch. 6 ‘Palaeography and the Transmission of Classical Texts in the Early Middle Ages’, pp. 115–33, at p. 130; ch. 7 ‘Benedictine Monasteries’, p. 142. Servati Lupi Epistulae, ed. P. K. Marshall (Leipzig, 1984), Ep. 62, p. 68, Ep. 103, p. 101; Loup de Ferrières, Correspondance, ed. L. Levillain, 2 vols. (Paris, 1927, 1935), Ep. 87, p. 80, Ep. 100, p. 122; The Letters of Lupus of Ferrières, trans. G. W. Regenos (The Hague, 1966), pp. 106, 120. Winterbottom, ‘Quintilian’ (Reynolds, Texts and Transmission), p. 332. See above, n. 29.

24

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus Berne 351, is of an incomplete text),69 the letter is nonetheless revealing. In the early 830s, Lupus had written to Einhard asking for copies of De inuentione, De oratore, the Rhetorica ad Herennium and Marius Victorinus’s commentary on De inuentione – all of these he knew to be in the library at Fulda from an inventory of books he had seen.70 In the case of Quintilian, therefore, if it was Cassiodorus who provided Lupus with his desideratum, then it may well have been Alcuin who led Lupus to think that York was the most likely source for a complete text.71 Nonetheless, whether Alcuin knew Quintilian’s Institutio oratoria in its entirety or whether he simply knew it in the form of one of the various mutili (that is, manuscripts which lacked most or all of books V–IX, parts of books X–XI and the end of book XII), the possibility that (as with Fortunatianus) Alcuin was familiar with more of Quintilian than the excerpts available in Julius Victor is of considerable significance for the argument of the Disputatio de rhetorica. This is because of what is contained in books I and XII of the Institutio oratoria since it is there, at the beginning and end of his treatise, that Quintilian emphasizes the need for a rhetorician to possess not just eloquence but moral virtue. Quintilian makes it clear from the outset of his work that, in describing everything which contributes to the education (institutio) of the complete or perfect orator, he has a much broader agenda than simply to provide a technical manual on the laws of rhetoric. Excellence in the facultas dicendi will certainly constitute the core of his treatise as he outlines it – five books will thus be devoted to inuentio (III–VII), four to style, memory and delivery (VIII–XI)72 – but his primary concern, in books I–II and in book XII, is to wrest back from philosophy material which he believed to have been wrongly, indeed disastrously, separated from the study of rhetoric. In Quintilian’s view, restoring the correct relationship between eloquentia and sapientia means, first and foremost, reuniting expertise in rhetoric with the study of moral virtue, since it was precisely when these two disciplines were divorced that eloquence began to be put to evil uses and wisdom became a cover for vice.73 At the very beginning of book I, Quintilian accordingly announces his intention to reclaim for oratory the rules of virtue (praecepta uirtutis), a subject which is not just germane to rhetoric but actually constitutes its better part (melior pars).74 69

70 71

72

Bischoff, Manuscripts and Libraries, ch.7, ‘Benedictine Monasteries’, pp. 144–5; Winterbottom, Problems in Quintilian, pp. 22–3. Ep.1, ed. Marshall, pp. 1–3; ed. Levillain I, pp. 2–11; trans. Regenos, pp. 1–3. Cf. P. Lehmann, ‘Die Institutio oratoria des Quintilianus im Mittelalter’ (idem., Erforschung des Mittelalters II, pp. 1–28), pp. 4–5. Quintilian, Institutio oratoria, I proem. 22, p. 6. Quintilian actually recommends that people looking for a basic introduction to inuentio should go elsewhere (Institutio oratoria, VIII proem. 73 74 1, p. 419). Ibid. I proem. 13–15, p. 5. Ibid. I proem. 17, p. 6.

25

Matthew S. Kempshall Quintilian’s impassioned plea on the need for rhetoric to be united with virtue has two far-reaching consequences for the characterization of the orator whose training and formation is outlined in his treatise. Once again, these are made explicit right at the start of book I. The principles of moral goodness and eloquence are inseparable, he argues, not just because there is scarcely any subject which does not involve discussion of justice, fortitude, temperance, equity and goodness (aequo ac bono), but also because it is impossible to be a perfect orator without possessing all these virtues of character oneself, without actually being a uir bonus. The perfect orator can, in fact, be called the truly wise man (uere sapiens) because he is perfect, not just in the knowledge and practice of speaking, but also in his own moral conduct. This is therefore Quintilian’s first point and one to which he returns repeatedly in the course of book I – the orator is skilled in rhetoric but he is also morally virtuous;75 he is the uir bonus dicendi peritus.76 The second corollary which Quintilian elicits is the breadth of the subject-matter with which the perfect orator will have to be conversant and the scope of his activity within the human community. From the foundations laid in grammar and dialectic, he argues, the orator should be trained, not just in moral philosophy, but also in geometry, music, civil law and natural philosophy; in short, he will be educated in everything that falls within the term sapientia.77 The perfect orator will therefore be morally virtuous – a good man – but he will also be truly ‘civil’ (uere ciuilis), in the sense that he will administer public and private matters in the ciuitas, rule by counsel, institute laws and correct faults through judgement.78 The perfect orator, in short, will be not just the uir bonus but the uir ciuilis, an individual who is truly wise (uere sapiens) and is committed, not to secret disputations, but to the administratio rei publicae. This perfect orator pursues everything which makes the goal of rhetoric, not persuasion as such, but speaking well, that is, securing what is morally good and advantageous.79 Quintilian returns to these themes in the final book of his treatise. Indeed, book XII’s recapitulation of the principles already outlined in book I is, 75

76

77 78

79

Ibid. I proem. 9, 12, 16, pp. 4–5. Cf. ibid. I.2.3, pp. 14–15; II.2.5, p. 76; II.3.12, p. 80; II.15.1– 2, p. 105; II.16.11, p. 113; II.17.31, 43, pp. 118–19, 121; II.21.12, p. 126; VI.2.18, p. 332. Ibid. XII.1.1, p. 692. Cf. Fortunatianus, Ars rhetorica, p. 81; Cassiodorus, Institutiones, II.2.1, p. 97; Isidore, Etymologiae, II.iii.1; Hrabanus Maurus, De institutione clericorum, III.27, pp. 488–9: ‘quem antiqua diffinitio affirmat uirum bonum et dicendi peritum esse debere. si ergo haec definitio in oratoribus gentilium obseruabatur, multo magis in oratoribus Christi obseruari conuenit, quorum non solum sermo imo etiam tota uita doctrina uirtutum debet esse’. Ibid. I proem. 18, p. 6; I.10.1–7, pp. 58–60; II.21.14–23, pp. 126–28. Ibid. I proem. 10, p. 4. Cf. ibid. XII.7.2, p. 714. Quintilian’s insistence on the adverb uere is significant here, given his concerns over the otherwise potentially restrictive nature of the phrase ciuiles quaestiones (II.15.15–22, 33–36, pp. 107–8, 110–11; II.21.2–4, pp. 124–5). Ibid. XI.1.11–14, 35, pp. 624, 629.

26

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus according to Quintilian’s own description, the most weighty (grauis) part of his work. One of the reasons for this is his explicit acknowledgement that its contents have moved his own discussion of rhetoric well beyond what Cicero had provided. For all the praise which he bestowed on Cicero,80 Quintilian wished to go further – whereas Cicero had simply discussed the component parts of rhetoric (genus dicendi), Quintilian wanted to establish principles both for the moral conduct (mores) of the perfect orator and for his public responsibilities (officia).81 Quintilian accordingly proceeds to underline the significance of each of these two categories – the orator as uir bonus and the orator as uir ciuilis – in the conclusion to his work. Moral virtue is a prerequisite for the orator; in fact, it provides the more important of the two pairings in the phrase uir bonus dicendi peritus.82 This is not simply a case of saying that the orator should be a good man but an insistence that no one can ever be an orator unless he is a good man first. Quintilian furnishes both negative and positive reasons for such a prescription. Given the capacity of speech to cause harm, there is, he argues, nothing more dangerous to public or private matters than eloquence without virtue. More constructively, the subject-matter of rhetoric is such that the aim of every speech is to convince a judge of its truthfulness and moral worth (uera et honesta), just as it is fundamental to demonstrative and deliberative oratory to consider what is morally good (honestum). According to Quintilian, the greatest part of rhetoric therefore deals with what is equitable and good; indeed, there is hardly a case which does not at some point deal de aequo et bono.83 The perfect orator is thus the uir sapiens, an individual who is perfect as much in his moral conduct as in his power of speech and who draws on the precepts of wisdom (praecepta sapientiae).84 This moral goodness derives from the nature of his character but also from instruction. It is for this reason that the primary concern of the orator’s studies will be the cultivation of moral conduct and the inculcation of everything good and just – because, without this knowledge, the orator can be neither uir bonus nor dicendi peritus.85 As a result, even though knowledge of these subjects must be sought from their sources in sapientia and therefore from philosophers, rhetoric retains the intrinsic role of discussing everything which is equitable, just, true and good. This does not mean the orator should be a philosopher himself, since that would remove him from his ‘civil’ responsibilities in the administratio rei publicae, but it does mean that he should be a uir sapiens. Only then will the orator be a true uir ciuilis, engaged, not in hidden disputations, but in action.86 80 81

83 86

E.g. ibid. I.6.18, p. 44; X.1.108–12, pp. 589–90. Ibid. XII proem. 4, pp. 691–2. Cf. M. Winterbottom, ‘Quintilian and the uir bonus’, Jnl of Roman 82 Stud. 54 (1964), 90–7. Ibid. XII.1.1, p. 692. Cf. XII.1.27, p. 697. 84 85 Ibid. XII.2.15–16, p. 704. Ibid. XII.1.28, p. 697. Ibid. XII.2.1, p. 701. Ibid. XII.2.6–7, pp. 702–3.

27

Matthew S. Kempshall According to books I and XII of the Institutio oratoria, the study of wisdom will give the orator a complete knowledge of what has been written on virtue, enabling him to combine knowledge of the divine with knowledge of the human.87 It is this final observation which prompts Quintilian to set out just how central to eloquence is the study, not just of ethics, but of dialectic and ‘matters divine’ (de rebus diuinis), matters which comprise the origins of the soul, religious observance and the governance of the universe.88 What greater subjects are there for the orator, Quintilian asks, than virtue, the res publica, providence, the origins of the soul and friendship?89 Nor does the list end there. Quintilian also advocates the study of history, of the sayings and deeds of antiquity,90 and of poetry,91 as well as knowledge of the ius ciuilis, both written and customary.92 The orator, Quintilian concludes, is involved in giving judgement, delivering counsel, engaging in disputes, participating in assemblies and discharging every officium of the good citizen.93 This is why the primary goal of rhetoric is for humans to be boni uiri. Quintilian worries that he will be criticized for having thereby set too high a standard with his insistence that skill in speaking must be exercised by the morally good man, or for having included too many subjects with his insistence, not just on the rules of rhetoric, but on the precepts of virtue and knowledge of law as well. However, he remains convinced that the education of the orator consists, above all, in cultivating a life which is morally good and blessed (institutio uitae honestae beataeque).94 So, where does this leave Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus? In the first instance, it leaves the treatise entirely coherent as an introduction to rhetoric, but in terms both of its technical components and of its wider role in human society. In defining its scope as ciuiles quaestiones, Alcuin’s conception of rhetoric includes everything which prevents human society from reverting to a state of nature – this is what he had gleaned from reading De inuentione and Julius Victor through Cassiodorus, Fortunatianus and Marius Victorinus. In establishing the necessity of the connection between eloquentia and sapientia, Alcuin was driving home a point which had been fundamental to Cicero, Julius Victor, Marius Victorinus and Cassiodorus, but also to Augustine. Indeed, it is worth noting that, when Alcuin quotes Julius Victor on wisdom as the foundation of eloquence, he inserts a characteristically Augustinian emphasis with 87

88 90 91 92

Ibid. XII.2.8, p.703. Cf. Marius Victorinus, Explanatio in rhetoricam, I.24, p. 216: ‘ac diuina quidem natura ad rhetoricam non pertinet, et ideo hanc omisit. sciri tamen debet, quia loco argumenti saepe rerum diuinarum inducitur disputatio . . . sed hoc ad rhetoricam non tamen ex rhetorica descendit’. 89 Institutio oratoria, XII.2.20–1, p. 705. Ibid. XII.2.28, p. 707. Ibid. XII.2.29–30, p. 707. Ibid. XII.4.1–2, pp. 710–11. Cf. I.8.10–2, p. 56; X.1.27–9, pp. 572–3; X.5.4, pp. 607–8. 93 94 Ibid. XII.3.1–10, pp. 708–10. Ibid. XII.11.1, p. 740. Ibid. XII.11.11–12, p. 742.

28

The virtues of rhetoric: Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus his own comment that this is, in fact, the most important point of all.95 It was Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana, moreover, which had highlighted the need for an epitome of the rules of rhetoric in order to save the student from the sheer volume of classical writing on the subject. Last, but not least, in establishing such a firm connection between eloquentia and moral virtue, Alcuin argued that rhetoric could not, and should not, be exercised except by the uir ciuilis, by the individual who was perfect in the exercise of the cardinal virtues. In a purely formal sense, therefore, it is possible to find complete coherence in the way in which Alcuin’s Disputatio de rhetorica is put together, from the breadth of the definition with which it opens to the discussion of virtue with which it concludes – a digest of the precepts of classical rhetoric, certainly, but one which is arguing a particular point by demonstrating the dependence of human society on the connection between eloquence and wisdom, between rhetoric and the four cardinal virtues. This broader argument is reflected in the particular definition with which it opens and the particular connection with which it concludes – and, indeed, in the particular title which is given to the whole work. Alcuin’s knowledge of classical rhetoric left him acutely aware of what happened when philosophy withdrew from society, when sapientia did not have eloquentia to translate it into action, and not just by an elite but by all those who could exercise the natural capacity of their minds to understand equity and goodness. He was also aware of how extensively rhetoric would therefore need to be deployed, serving sapientia by enabling wisdom to be communicated and acted upon through a variety of channels – in letters, in treatises and in personal exhortations. Only then would ‘the multitude of the wise be the wellbeing of the world’ (Wisdom VI.26).96 Alcuin’s understanding of rhetoric, in short, was central to his understanding of how wisdom should be applied by individuals within human society. Read in these terms, the Disputatio de rhetorica is much more than just a textbook. It provides a profound insight into how Alcuin put together the instruments of his own public and literary activity, as a means of discharging his own duty as a uir ciuilis, his own responsibility as a servant of sancta sophia. Read in these terms, indeed, the Disputatio de rhetorica et de uirtutibus suggests one final possibility with which it might be appropriate to conclude. If the list of books in Berlin Diez B. 66 does, in fact, indicate the contents of the court library under Charlemagne, then the presence on this list, not just of Julius Victor (a rare text, after all, which Alcuin clearly did know), but also of Horace’s Ars poetica throws up a very striking parallel to the view of rhetoric expounded 95 96

Alcuin, Disputatio de rhetorica, p. 136, lines 1059–61: ut ad summum ueniamus. Alcuin, Ep. 31, pp. 72–3: multitudo sapientium sanitas est orbis; Ep. 129, pp. 191–2: multitudo sapientium salus est populi.

29

Matthew S. Kempshall in the Disputatio de rhetorica. According to Horace, poetry had wisdom (sapientia) as its source and foundation (fons et principium), just like rhetoric. It, too, had an heroic figure who led humankind out of the state of nature. Indeed, like the uir magnus et sapiens, the poet (uates) had the responsibility of taming humans, of leading them away from a bestial life of bloodshed in the forest. Like the orator, therefore, the poet used his wisdom to separate the public from the private, to build cities, to institute laws; in short, to set out the path of life, the uia uitae.97 If Cicero and Quintilian had demonstrated to Alcuin just how central the functions of rhetoric should be in the service of wisdom, then Horace had set out comparable claims for poetry. It may be no coincidence, therefore, that Alcuin’s own works reveal such a similar combination. In Alcuin, too, rhetoric and poetry formed an intellectual, moral and social union.98 97 98

Horace, Ars poetica, ed. C. O. Brink, Horace on Poetry (Cambridge, 1971), p. 69, lines 391–407. I would like to thank David Ganz, Mary Garrison and Elizabeth Tyler for their valuable comments on the original version of this paper which was delivered in 2001 at the Quodlibet Conference on Alcuin held at the Centre for Medieval Studies in York; for its publication, finally, and in its present form, I am grateful to Katy Cubitt, David Ganz and Gillian Hargreaves.

30

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) peter a. stokes

abstract S 786 is one of the so-called Orthodoxorum charters, a group of documents which provide important evidence about the Anglo-Saxon chancery, the development of charters in the tenth century, and the history of Pershore Abbey and the tenth-century Benedictine reforms. The document has therefore received a great deal of attention over the past century or so, but this attention has been focussed on the surviving tenthcentury single sheet, and so a second, significantly different version of the text has lain unnoticed. This second version is preserved in a copy made by John Joscelyn, Latin Secretary to Archbishop Matthew Parker. Among the material uniquely preserved in this copy are Old English charter bounds for Wyegate (GL), Cumbtune (Compton, GL?) and part of the bounds probably for Lydney (GL), as well as a reference to a grant by Bishop Werferth of Worcester. In this article both versions of the document are discussed and are published together for the first time, and a translation of the single sheet is provided. The history of the two versions is discussed in some detail, and the text of a twelfth-century letter which refers to the charter is also edited and translated.

The so-called Orthodoxorum charters have long played an important role in our understanding of the tenth-century Benedictine reforms. They form a group of six charters, all purportedly issued between 959 and 993, and all surviving in multiple copies.1 They are usually considered as a group because they share many similarities in formulation, most notably the proems which are all very long, approximately the same, and in the same style of elaborate (and quite difficult) ‘hermeneutic’ or ‘poetic’ Latin.2 They are interesting with respect to the tenth-century Reforms because they all claim rights for their monastic beneficiaries such as the right to elect their own abbot from within their own 11

12

The charters are S 658 (Abingdon, dated 959), S 673 (Abingdon, dated 958 for 959), S 876 (Abingdon, dated 993), S 786 (Pershore, dated 972), S 788 (Worcester, dated 972), and S 812 (Romsey, datable 967 ⫻ 975). In references to Anglo-Saxon charters, S ⫽ P. H. Sawyer, AngloSaxon Charters: an Annotated List and Bibliography, R. Hist. Soc. Guides and Handbooks 8 (London, 1968), followed by the number of the document. For these terms see M. Lapidge, ‘The Hermeneutic Style in Tenth-Century Anglo-Latin Literature’, ASE 4 (1975), 67–111, and M. Lapidge, ‘Poeticism in Pre-Conquest Anglo-Latin Prose’, in Aspects of the Language of Latin Prose, ed. by T. Reinhardt, M. Lapidge, and J. N. Adams, PBA 129 (Oxford, 2005), pp. 321–37.

31

Peter A. Stokes 3

community. They are also important for the debate over the production of royal charters.4 And they are of further interest because their authenticity has been debated for over a century. This latter debate is long and complex and can only be summarized briefly here. Two of the more recent protagonists are Simon Keynes and Susan Kelly; other important contributions include that by Eric John, and useful summarydiscussions have been published by both Charles Insley and John Hudson.5 In short, Simon Keynes (among others) has argued that only the latest of the group, S 876, is genuine and that the rest are forgeries, whereas Susan Kelly is one of several to argue that the earlier charters are genuine (with the exception of S 788, to which we shall return shortly). Both scholars have drawn on a long series of discussions which can be traced back nearly a century.6 The purpose of this article is not to solve the question of authenticity, although that question will certainly be in the background. Instead, the focus of this discussion is on one of these charters: the one from Pershore. This document, S 786, is unusual even by Orthodoxorum standards. It survives in an apparently original single sheet, the text of which is mostly legible but with patches of relatively extensive wear. The text is unusually long: the surviving single sheet is one of the largest to survive from Anglo-Saxon England and still the scribe could not fit all the text on the face despite his small hand but had to continue onto the dorse as well. The charter purports to be a pancart, namely a single document confirming a very large number – presumably all – of the estates held by the abbey. This format of the pancart was relatively common on the Continent but very few survive from Anglo-Saxon England, and all of the ones from there which we do have are questionable in some way; the very format is therefore grounds for suspicion.7 Given all these difficulties, the purpose of this paper is to compile and reevaluate the evidence which can be 13

14

15

16

17

For the significance of this group see especially C. Insley, ‘Where did all the Charters Go? Anglo-Saxon Charters and the New Politics of the Eleventh Century’, ANS 24 (2002), 109– 27, at 117. For this debate see especially S. Keynes, The Diplomas of King Æthelred ‘the Unready’, 978–1016: a Study in their Use as Historical Evidence (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 98–104, and Charters of Abingdon Abbey, ed. S. E. Kelly, Anglo-Saxon Charters 7–8, 2 vols. (Oxford, 2000–1) I, cxv–xxxi. Keynes, The Diplomas, pp. 98–100; Charters of Abingdon, ed. Kelly I, lxxxiv–cxv; E. John, Orbis Britanniae and Other Studies, Stud. in Early Eng. Hist. 4 (Leicester, 1966), pp. 199–206; Insley, ‘Where did all the Charters Go?’, pp. 112–13 and 116–17; Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis: the History of the Church of Abingdon, ed. J. Hudson, 2 vols., OMT (Oxford, 2002–7) I, cxcv–cciv. For a full bibliography, see The Electronic Sawyer: Online Catalogue of Anglo-Saxon Charters <www.esawyer.org.uk> (last accessed 21 May 2008) under the Sawyer numbers listed above, n. 1. For pancartae, see especially John, Orbis Britanniae, p. 203; S. Keynes, ‘Regenbald the Chancellor (sic)’, ANS 10 (1988), 185–222, at 203–4; S. Keynes, ‘Giso, Bishop of Wells (1061–88)’, ANS 19 (1997), 203–71, at 237.

32

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) gleaned from close examination of all the surviving manuscripts of S 786. The hope is that such a compilation will allow a better understanding of the Orthodoxorum charters in general and the Pershore one in particular. Indeed the importance of the manuscripts can readily be demonstrated as one of them, one which has long been known but apparently not closely examined, is not a copy of the surviving single-sheet charter as scholars have assumed but instead contains a significantly different version of the text, including three ‘new’ charter bounds which have not previously been studied. It is also of great importance for our understanding of Pershore Abbey, the transmission of documents, and the authenticity and larger context of the Orthodoxorum charters in general. the manuscript s Peter Sawyer’s Annotated List gives five surviving copies of S 786, and this list is essentially unchanged in the Electronic Sawyer.8 There is a sixth manuscript: a modern transcript of Sawyer’s MS 2 made before the original was damaged in the Cottonian fire; this copy is generally very accurate and thus provides some readings which have otherwise been lost. The six manuscripts are therefore as follows: A London, British Library, Cotton Augustus ii. 6 (s. x2) T London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius A. xiii, 163v–164r (s. xi2; contains only the bounds of Acton Beauchamp) V London, British Library, Cotton Vitellius D. vii, 29r–30v (s. xvi) D1 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Dodsworth 10 (S.C. 4152), 66r–67r (s. xvii; direct descendant of A; no bounds or witnesses) D2 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Dodsworth 78 (S.C. 5019), 2r–3v (s. xvii; direct descendant of A; no bounds or witnesses) R Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawlinson B. 445, unfoliated; the text is labelled as from fol. ‘B. 160’ of exemplar (s. xvii; direct copy of T) These six manuscripts fall into three distinct textual groups, and these groups will now be discussed in further detail. The ‘Single Sheet’ Version (AD1D2) The earliest surviving copy of the document is Augustus ii. 6.9 This is a single sheet and is ostensibly original but, as noted above, its authenticity is by no means certain. It is unusually large: it is not perfectly square but measures 18 19

Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, pp. 250–1; Electronic Sawyer, no. 786. For another discussion of this manuscript see S. D. Thompson, Anglo-Saxon Royal Diplomas: a Palaeography, Publ. of the Manchester Centre for AS Stud. 6 (Woodbridge, 2006), pp. 142–5. An edition of the text and translation of the Latin is given below, pp. 43–53 and 73–6.

33

Peter A. Stokes approximately 635 ⫻ 530–40 mm, with a writing-frame of approximately 590 ⫻ 495 mm;10 it is written in fifty-six long lines on the face and has an additional seventeen lines on the dorse.11 The text is quite badly damaged in places, particularly along the horizontal folds, in the lower right-hand corner, and about two-thirds of the way up the right-hand side of the face. The parchment was repaired at some point after the charter was reproduced in the facsimileedition of 1877.12 Unfortunately these repairs have obscured letters, so the facsimile is still a valuable witness. The scribe wrote the boundary-clauses in a smaller script than that of the main text, as was normal from about 940 onwards,13 but he used the same Insular letter-forms for both Old English and Latin; this practice of script was common up until about the start of Æthelred’s reign, after which charters were normally written in Anglo-Caroline for Latin and either Square minuscule or Vernacular minuscule for Old English.14 There is some influence of Caroline script in this scribe’s hand, however, and he did admit Caroline forms, though very infrequently: the phrase coapostolo paulo dedicatum habetur monachis in the middle of line 11 was written with three of the four occurrences of a and the first d all Caroline, as shown in Figure 1. Indeed, Caroline d and a are evident elsewhere in the document, although the round-backed ‘uncial’ d and singlecompartment a are both much more common. Similarly, tall essentially Caroline s is found before t, but the round majuscule s was normally used elsewhere, although low Insular s was also used occasionally.15 Finally, the 10

11

12 13

14

15

Thompson has noted that this is one of the two largest single-sheet charters to survive from Anglo-Saxon England, the other being BL Cotton Augustus ii. 38 (S 876), also from the Othodoxorum group. My measurements of Augustus ii. 6 are rather different from hers, however, and agree with Susan Kelly’s. See Thompson, Anglo-Saxon Royal Diplomas, p. 20, and S. E. Kelly, ‘S 786’ (unpubl. material in preparation for her volume on the Midlands archives in the Anglo-Saxon Charters series). I thank Dr Kelly for generously providing me with a draft of her text well before publication. As noted by Thompson, Anglo-Saxon Royal Diplomas, p. 145, no are rulings visible but, pace her, it is unlikely that the parchment was never ruled. Prickings are clearly visible on the left and occasionally on the right, and the scribe consistently maintained a very straight and horizontal baseline despite the extremely long lines of text, a feat that would require extraordinary skill if the sheet was not ruled. Much more likely is that the ruling was light and is no longer visible due to the poor condition of the parchment. Facsimiles of Ancient Charters in the British Museum, ed. E. A. Bond (London, 1873–8) III, 30. P. A. Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script, ca 990 – ca 1035’, 2 vols. (unpubl. Ph. D. dissertation University of Cambridge, 2005) I, 201–2; D. N. Dumville, ‘Specimina Codicum Palaeoanglicorum’, Collection of Essays in Commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of the Institute of Oriental and Occidental Studies (Suita, Osaka, 2001), pp. 1–24, at 8–9. For this distinction see especially D. N. Dumville, ‘English Square Minuscule Script: the MidCentury Phases’, ASE 23 (1994), 133–64, at 161–4. For these different forms of s in Anglo-Saxon script see N. R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957), pp. xxx–xxxi.

34

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) proportions are not obviously square in the way that one might expect for Square minuscule, and in particular the distinctive flat-topped a is entirely absent, the letter-form instead being more rounded and somewhat tear-drop shaped.16

Fig. 1 Variation in a, d and s in Augustus ii. 6

It is perhaps for these reasons that the script used to be dated to the eleventh century, but more recent palaeographers from T. A. M. Bishop onwards have tended to prefer the tenth century, and indeed the script seems not inconsistent with the claimed date of 972.17 In particular, as Dumville has shown, some Square minuscule which can be securely dated to the early 960s is unusually tall and narrow in its proportions and entirely lacks the flat-topped a, sometimes showing the Caroline form; it therefore has much in common with script of the early eleventh century.18 The hand of our single sheet is not so clearly tall and narrow as this form of Square minuscule, but it is written quite consistently 16

17

18

For the development of a at the end of the tenth century, see ibid., p. xxviii, and Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’, passim; for some other examples of tenth-century script showing non-Square a see Dumville, ‘English Square Minuscule: Mid-Century Phases’, pp. 151–6 and plate VI. See The Victoria History of the County of Worcester, ed. J. W. Willis-Bund and H. A. Doubleday, Victoria County Hist., 5 vols. (London, 1901–26) IV, 151 and note (‘written in a hand about a century after its nominal date’, citing Frank Stenton); W. H. Stevenson, ‘Yorkshire Surveys and Other Eleventh-Century Documents in the York Gospels’, EHR 27 (1912), 1–25, at 6, n. 17 (‘about the middle of the eleventh century’); but then see P. Chaplais, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Chancery: From the Diploma to the Writ’, Prisca Munimenta: Studies in Archival and Administrative History presented to Dr A. E. J. Hollaender, ed. F. Ranger (London, 1973), pp. 43–62, at 49 (‘the script is contemporary’); John, Orbis Britanniae, p. 199 (‘nothing inconsistent . . . with its alleged date’, citing N. R. Ker); Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, p. 250 (no. 786: ‘s. x2’). For a reproduction, see Facsimiles, ed. Bond III, 30. This script is Dumville’s Anglo-Saxon Square minuscule, Phase IV: see his ‘English Square Minuscule: Mid-Century Phases’, pp. 151–5. For the relationship between Phase IV Square minuscule, Anglo-Caroline, and the English Vernacular minuscule which emerged in the 990s, see especially Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ I, 200–8, as well as D. N. Dumville, ‘Beowulf Come Lately: Some Notes on the Palaeography of the Nowell Codex’, ASNSL 225 (1988), 49–63, and Dumville, ‘Specimina’, pp. 8–9.

35

Peter A. Stokes throughout, probably too consistently to be an eleventh-century imitation. Furthermore the forms of tall æ and e in ligature, as well as the mixture of round, tall and low s, are paralleled quite closely in some hands which were certainly or possibly written at Worcester Cathedral around the time of Oswald’s episcopacy, although those hands are otherwise quite different from this one.19 Unfortunately a full history of Anglo-Saxon Square minuscule is still to be written for the period from 960 until its demise in the early years of the eleventh century, and so dating a hand from this time at all closely is a perilous exercise.20 Nevertheless, the similarity in letter-forms and appearance with other single-sheet charters dated to the 960s is striking.21 A later date is still possible, but the short stints of Caroline script, as illustrated in Fig. 1, show none of the features which are characteristic of Anglo-Caroline minuscule from about the second quarter of the eleventh century.22 If this document is a forgery, then, it was surely written not long after the purported date, and the script suggests no more than thirty-five or perhaps forty years later at most. The single sheet received a relatively large number of alterations. Some of these are minor changes in Old English orthography which seem to have been made by the original scribe and which do not seem particularly significant except to indicate that some care was taken in writing and correcting the document.23 Perhaps related are some erasures of the Latin text, most of which are short and of little obvious significance. However, one erasure is much longer 19

20

21

22

23

The hands are in BL Additional Charter 19792 (S 1326: Worcester, dated 969 and reproduced in Facsimiles, ed. Bond III, 28); Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, latin 10575 (Worcester?, probably s. x/xi), and Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 12 (Worcester provenance; s. x2). For the dating of BN lat. 10575, see D. N. Dumville, ‘On the Dating of Some Late Anglo-Saxon Liturgical Manuscripts’, Trans. of the Cambridge Bibliographical Soc. 10 (1991–5), 40–57, at 51; for CCCC 12 see Ker, Catalogue, pp. 41–2 (no. 30); for this form of Square minuscule, termed Phase VI by Dumville, see his ‘English Square Minuscule: Mid-Century Phases’, pp. 155–6, and Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ I, 95–6. For now see Dumville, ‘Beowulf Come Lately’, and D. N. Dumville, ‘The Beowulf Manuscript and How Not to Date it’, Med. Stud. Eng. Newsletter (Tokyo) 39 (1998), 21–7. As well as BL Add. 19792, for which see above, n. 19, other examples include those by ‘Edgar A’, specifically BL Cotton Augustus ii. 40, Cotton Augustus ii. 39, BL Harley Charter 43. C. 3, BL Cotton Charter viii. 28, and BL Stowe Charter 29 (S 687, S 690, S 703, S 706, and S 717, reproduced in Facsimiles, ed. Bond III, 22, 23, 25, 24, and Facsimiles of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts, ed. W. B. Sanders, 3 vols. [Southampton, Ordnance Survey, 1878–84] III, 30 respectively). All five charters are apparently original and dated 960–3. Similarities between the script of Augustus ii. 6 and that of ‘Edgar A’ have also been noted by Kelly, ‘S 786’, and Chaplais, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Chancery’, p. 49. For this script, called Style IV Anglo-Caroline by Dumville, see his English Caroline Script and Monastic History: Studies in Benedictinism, A.D. 950–1030, Stud. in AS Hist. 6 (Woodbridge, 1993), pp. 128–31. Features characteristic of this style include the form of a and s, wedges on minims, and tapered ascenders, none of which are present in the script of Augustus ii. 6. For a full account of these alterations, see the edition of the text below, pp. 43–52.

36

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) than the others: it comes immediately after the list of estates and covers the space of about 125–30 letters or just over half a line of the charter.24 Erasures cannot usually be dated with any confidence, but this may be an exception: the last letter of the word which precedes the erasure, libertatis, seems to have been added or freshened-up: indeed, it looks as if this letter was accidentally erased along with the following passage and then written in again. Interestingly, this s has the same round form which is found elsewhere throughout the document and which is common enough in the tenth century but dropped out of use fairly quickly in the eleventh.25 The letter may have been written by a later scribe in imitation of the main hand, but if so then it was done with some sensitivity and skill; an alternative and perhaps more likely possibility is that the erasure and ‘freshening up’ were by the original scribe. One set of alterations seems to be quite different in character from the others. These are all found in the list of estates and hidages included in the grant. Several of the hidages have been altered, and these alterations do not seem to have been made by the main scribe: however, the hand looks Anglo-Saxon, insofar as one can tell from such a small sample, and so the changes were presumably made not long after the original document was written (although even a century later would be possible on palaeographical grounds, if not historical ones). In some cases, numbers were erased and different numbers were clearly written over the top. In other cases one cannot be certain of erasure but the spacing strongly suggests that this has happened. For example, the hidage for Sture now reads as ten (‘x’), but there is a gap after the numeral which suggests that the number was once longer. Similarly, the document does not specify the total number of hides, but there is a space where the number may once have been, and the letter immediately preceding the space looks like it was partially erased along with the hidage. Another possibility is that the hidages were left blank and filled in later, but most of the numerals do seem clearly to have been entered by the main scribe at the time of writing and so later erasure is the most likely explanation.

Fig. 2 Examples of altered hidages in Augustus ii. 6 24

25

This gap is very clearly an erasure, as noted also by Kelly, ‘S 786’, pace Thompson, Anglo-Saxon Royal Diplomas, p. 143. Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ I, Chapters III–IV, passim, and p. 197.

37

Peter A. Stokes Finally, one other set of interventions is visible in the document. These are sporadic underlines and one large caret-shaped symbol in the proem, one vertical stroke in the list of estates and another after the end of the first boundaryclause, and perhaps also a red bracket before another boundary-clause which is now almost entirely lost due to damage in the parchment. These marks may well have been added at different times, but the underlines and the caretsymbol appear to be in similar or identical ink, and this ink is noticeably darker than that used elsewhere in this document. These underlines and their significance will be considered shortly.26 For now it needs only be said that the charter which now survives as Augustus ii. 6 received careful attention, both when it was first written and possibly for quite some time thereafter.

Fig. 3 Examples of underlines and the ‘caret’ symbol in Augustus ii. 6

Turning from this manuscript, there are two others which need also to be mentioned here. These are Dodsworth 10 and Dodsworth 78, manuscripts four and five in Sawyer’s handlist, both of which are now in the Bodleian Library in Oxford; the former is described in the summary catalogue as ‘a first draft of Dugdale and Dodsworth’s Monasticon, wherein practically the whole of its contents are incorporated’, and the latter as ‘notes from chartularies and monastic collections in the Cottonian Library’.27 Both copies descend from Augustus ii. 6 and both stop at the beginning of the vernacular bounds. Their relationship to Augustus ii. 6 is evident not only from the identical content but also because Dodsworth 78 begins with a sketch of the 〈␻ which is found at the start of Augustus ii. 6, and both Dodsworth 10 and Dodsworth 78 contain notes referring explicitly to an exemplar in Cotton’s library.28 Furthermore, some illegible portions of the single sheet, including the long erased passage, are represented by dots in both copies. The copies are therefore of little use in establishing the text, particularly as Dodsworth 10 is extremely 26 27

28

See below, pp. 71–2. F. Madan et al., A Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, 7 vols. (Oxford, 1895–1953) II, 872 (no. 4152) and 912 (no. 5019) respectively. ‘Ex Carta Originali penes Thomas Cotton Baronettum’ (Dodsworth 10, 66r); ‘collecta . . . in bibliotheca Cottoniana mense Decembris 1639 per me Rogerum Dodsworthe eboracensem’ (Dodsworth 78, i recto: the passage is part of the heading of a table of contents which includes the copy of S 786).

38

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) inaccurate, often containing lectiones faciliores which are ungrammatical or entirely nonsensical. Many of these errors can also be found in Dodsworth 78 but were subsequently corrected there, apparently by comparison with the original. These common errors suggest that the two copies were not made independently, and indeed one might assume that Dodsworth 10 was copied directly from Dodsworth 78.29 However, original and legible readings in Dodsworth 78 are left as lacunae in Dodsworth 10, a detail hard to explain if either one is a direct copy of the other. A case of eye-skip in Dodsworth 10 might seem to confirm copying from manuscript 78, as the skipped passage in the former (‘necnon . . . coapostolorum Paulo’) corresponds exactly to a complete line of text in the latter. However, this same passage also fits exactly between two vertical folds in Augustus ii. 6 and so the copyist may have skipped from one fold to the next while he was copying, a mistake which is easy to understand in a large document with such long lines. Indeed examination of separative variants seems to demonstrate that both copies were made from an intermediate and that Dodsworth 78 was then checked against Augustus ii. 6 at a later date. A sample of these variants is listed in Table 1, below. Augustus ii. 6 (A)

Dodsworth 10 (D1)

Dodsworth 78 (D2)

liminibus

luminibus die tu preclarus congregatio . . . . . . . . . . (series of dots) iuste aregeind the et LEANE, NAA, SUTN, LONGAH LONTRESNAA vrinam . . . (series of dots) eroba barratri . . . (series of dots) cum Saphyra iugiter . . . (series of dots)

liminibus (altered from luminibus) dictu (altered from die tu or perhaps dic tu) præcluens (altered from præclarus) congregatio apto elegerit consilio . . . . . (series of dots) iuste (clear; not altered or inserted) a rege uidelicet (altered from ?tregeind the et) LEAHE, HAA, SUTH, LONGAH (clear, not altered) 7 on TRESHAA (clear; not altered) ueniam nec in theorica (clear; not altered or inserted) barathri incendiis trusus cum (last word altered from ?lugubris; incendiis unclear) Saphyra iugiter miserrimus cruciatur. (clear; not altered or inserted)

dictu præcluens congregatio apto elegerit consilio secundum [. . .] abbatem iuste a rege uidelicet LEAHE, HAM, SUTH, LONGAN 7 on TRESHAM ueniam nec in theorica (written across fold) barathri incendiis trusus cum (written across fold) Saphyra iugiter miserrimus cruciatur.

Table 1 Sample collation from AD1D2 29

A pencilled note on Dodsworth 10, 66r, has an O with a circle around it followed by ‘fol. 2’, a clear reference to the copy in Dodsworth 78; for these shelfmarks of letters within shapes see J. Hunter, Three Catalogues: Describing the Contents of the Red Book of the Exchequer, of the Dodsworth Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, and of the Manuscripts in the Library of the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn (London, 1838), pp. 76–82. Madan also noted that Dodsworth 10 was transcribed out of other Dodsworth manuscripts including number 78 but did not specify which parts were copied from which manuscripts; he cites as evidence a list on folio 6v of Dodsworth 10, but that list does not specifically mention Pershore. See Madan, Summary Catalogue II, 872 (no. 4152).

39

Peter A. Stokes ‘Hemming’s Cartulary’ (TR) The second manuscript given in Peter Sawyer’s Annotated List is ‘Hemming’s Cartulary’ which was compiled towards the end of the eleventh century at Worcester.30 This manuscript does not contain a copy of S 786, however: instead it contains the boundary-clause for just one of the estates in our document, namely that of Acton Beauchamp, an estate which was claimed by Pershore, Worcester, and also Evesham in the eleventh century.31 The compiler may have had a full copy of S 786 but selected only one boundary clause for inclusion, but this seems unlikely. Furthermore, the boundary-points are the same in all three versions but the phrasing of each version is different from the others, and it is hard to imagine why the phrasing would have been altered so significantly while the text was being copied. On balance, it seems more likely that the copy in ‘Hemming’s Cartulary’ was drawn from a different exemplar than that of either Augustus ii. 6 or the transcript discussed below.32 The cartulary was damaged in the Cottonian fire, and material towards the front and back of the volume (including the bounds of Acton Beauchamp) can be difficult to read. However, a copy of the entire manuscript was made before the fire and is now preserved at Oxford; it is listed as R above. A note on the first flyleaf of the copy states that it was made for one Richard Graves of Mickleton and was used by Hearne in his edition of the cartulary. Several of the boundary-clauses in this copy have been recently collated against the original by the author of the present paper, and the transcript has generally proven to be very accurate and a useful witness for readings that are now lost.33 The ‘Transcript’ Version (V) This leaves Vitellius D. vii, a paper manuscript written in the sixteenth century which was burnt during the fire at Ashburnham House in 1731. The manuscript was made by John Joscelyn, Latin secretary to Matthew Parker, and is generally referred to as ‘Joscelyn’s notebook’ as it contains his transcripts of 30

31

32

33

The manuscript is BL Cotton Tiberius A. xiii, fols. 119–200. For a full edition, see Hemingi chartularium ecclesiæ Wigorniensis, ed. T. Hearne (Oxford, 1723), for the manuscript, see N. R. Ker, ‘Hemming’s Cartulary’, in his Books, Collectors and Libraries: Studies in the Medieval Heritage, ed. A. G. Watson (London, 1985), pp. 31–59, and for the scribe of this portion see P. A. Stokes, ‘The Vision of Leofric: Manuscript, Text and Content’, Peritia (forthcoming). Victoria History, ed. Willis-Bund and Doubleday IV, 224–7; Hemingi chartularium, ed. Hearne, pp. 250–1. This has also been suggested by Kelly, ‘S 786’. For the texts see the bounds of Acton Beauchamp below, pp. 47, 54–5, and 57. For these collations, see LangScape: the Language of Landscape; Reading the Anglo-Saxon Countryside <www.langscape.org.uk> version 0.9 (last accessed 15 October 2008), boundaries for S 80, S 104, S 121, S 174, S 180, S 201, S 217, S 401 and S 1335.

40

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) charters, chronicles, and other historical and Anglo-Saxon texts.34 As a result of the fire the leaves are burnt all around the edges, usually with loss on all four sides, and comparison with descriptions in catalogues made before the fire reveals the loss of material at the start of the manuscript and the jumbled order of the leaves which remain.35 A few letters are lost at the edges of every page, and several lines are gone from the tops and bottoms. The pages are not ruled and the density of the writing varies significantly, but the leaves containing S 786 have between about forty-five and fifty-five long lines surviving on each page, with the remnants of several more lines visible at the bottoms of the pages. The text begins on a recto with the right-hand margin still visible, but the left-hand margin and the first few letters of each line are burnt away; similarly the right-hand edge of the text is lost on the following verso, and so on. The very end of the text has been burnt away but Wanley recorded a note which is now lost: ‘Habui ab Matthaeo Archiepiscopo Cant. et exhibita fuit per Parcivelum Creswel nomine Abbatis et Conventus de Parshoyer 15 Sept. an. 1537.’36 This seems to indicate that Joscelyn’s exemplar was at Pershore shortly before the abbey was dissolved in 1539 and that the original then came into the possession of Matthew Parker. The exemplar was not Augustus ii. 6, however, as Joscelyn transcribed a text significantly different to that of the surviving single sheet.37 The Latin proem is more or less identical, but the list of estates 34

36

37

For the activities of Matthew Parker and John Joscelyn with regard to Anglo-Saxon manuscripts, see especially R. I. Page, Matthew Parker and his Books: Sandars Lectures in Bibliography Delivered on 14, 16, and 18 May 1990 at the University of Cambridge (Kalamazoo, MI, 1993). For ‘Joscelyn’s notebook’ see especially The Recovery of the Past in Early Elizabethan England: Documents by John Bale and John Joscelyn from the Circle of Matthew Parker, ed. T. Graham and A. G. Watson (Cambridge, 1998), and J. S. Gale, ‘John Joscelyn’s Notebook: a Study of the Contents and Sources of B. L., Cotton MS. Vitellius D. vii’ (unpubl. M. Phil. thesis, University 35 of Nottingham, 1978). Gale, ‘John Joscelyn’s Notebook’, pp. 50–7. ‘I had it [the charter] from Matthew [Parker] Archbishop of Canterbury, and it was shown by Percival Creswell in the name of the Abbot and community of Pershore, 15 September 1537.’ H. Wanley, Librorum veterum septentrionalium . . . catalogus (Oxford, 1705), p. 240. This Percival Creswell seems likely to be the Catholic who worked for the financier Sir Richard Gresham and whose son was Joseph Creswell, a Jesuit exile during Elizabeth’s reign. See A. J. Loomie, ‘Creswell, Joseph (1556–1623)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, ed. H. C. G. Matthew and B. H Harrison, 61 vols. (Oxford, 2004) XIV, 157–8, and I. Blanchard, ‘Gresham, Sir Richard (c. 1485–1549)’, ibid. XXIII, 760–4, and also F. Edwards, ‘The Strange Case of the Poisoned Chalice’, Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 56 (1987), 3–82, at 14. The name also appears in London, The National Archives, E 159/310, the record of a suit of 1532 against the vicar of Acton in Chester enforcing the prohibition against clerics holding leases; the document is available online at (last accessed 17 April 2008) where it is listed as L55. This difference was noticed by Gale who has printed the texts in Augustus ii. 6 and Vitellius D. vii. However, she has provided no discussion, noting simply that Joscelyn’s exemplar no longer survives. See Gale, ‘John Joscelyn’s Notebook’, pp. 194–5 and her Appendix II.

41

Peter A. Stokes is quite different, and three boundary-clauses, one very incomplete, are also included which are not known from anywhere else.38 the text s All six witnesses were fully collated when preparing this edition; however, as noted above, the Dodsworth transcripts are direct copies of the surviving single sheet and so are omitted from the apparatus here except where they provide evidence for otherwise lost or uncertain readings. Augustus ii. 6, Vitellius D. vii, and Tiberius A. xiii have all suffered fairly extensive damage and thus portions of each are now illegible or burnt away, but in many cases these readings can be restored with some confidence. The photograph of Augustus ii. 6 which was printed by the British Museum in their series of facsimiles clearly shows a number of readings which have since been covered by repairs;39 these are provided in the text without comment, as are readings which have been recovered by examination and enhancement of a high-quality digital photograph of the single sheet. Similarly, if one or two letters are lost from the burnt edges of the pages in Vitellius D. vii, and if the reading is otherwise consistent with the remaining copies, then these losses are not noted. Alterations are generally noted, however, and the distinction is made between material which has been crossed out, represented here in strikethrough, and erased, represented here by a note in the apparatus. The vernacular boundary-clauses present additional problems to the Latin text. First, the charter bounds are only preserved in the Augustus and Vitellius manuscripts, so the Dodsworth copies are of no use in establishing lost readings. Second, although very many of the boundary-points are the same in the two versions, nevertheless the phrasing is significantly different, as often is the spelling. These differences are important and should be recorded but they are also too numerous and complex to include in an apparatus. For this reason the largely vernacular portion of Vitellius D. vii from list of estates through to the end of the boundary-clauses are not collated against that of Augustus ii. 6 but are printed separately afterwards. Where the two versions are printed separately, lost readings are supplied in square brackets where this can be done with some confidence, thus: ‘re[con]struction’. If lost text can be postulated by comparison with the other version but without any further evidence to support it then this text is again printed in square brackets but is also italicized to emphasize its more speculative nature, thus: [tentative reconstruction]. Ellipses ‘. . .’ indicate lost text which cannot be reconstructed, and angled brackets indicate supplied readings for which there is no space in the manuscript. 38

See below, pp. 57–65.

42

39

See above, p. 34.

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) Latin ę in Joscelyn’s transcript is silently normalized to e, as is j to i and v to u, but ę is preserved when used in Old English. In the portion of text which is common to the Augustus and Vitellius manuscripts, the Latin orthography of the single sheet is followed and minor variations in the transcript are not noted; these differences include ecclesia, ecclesiasticus, decussatim, proh, Saphira, Britannię and once dipinxi in Vitellius for æclesia, æclesiasticus, decusatim, pro, Saphyra, Brittanie and depinxi in Augustus. Similarly the practice of the single sheet in the use of æ, ę, and e is followed throughout the (Latin) portions printed in common, and variations in the transcript are not noted. Old English wynn (w) has been normalized to w in all texts, and all abbreviations in both Old English and Latin have been silently expanded except for the Tironian nota (7) when used in the vernacular; this last abbreviation has been preserved because the scribe of Augustus ii. 6 used both ond and and as well as the nota and so no consistent expansion can be provided. Crossed thorn (b) is silently expanded to  æt in the Augustus text and «æt in the Vitellius text in order to preserve the respective orthographies. No attempt is made to reproduce the punctuation or worddivision of either manuscript.40 BL Cotton Augustus ii. 6 + 〈␻ Orthodoxorum uigoris æclesiastici monitu creberrime instruimur utc illi oppido subiecti suppeditantes famulemur, qui totius mundi fabricam miro ineffabilique serie disponens, microcosmumd, Adam uidelicet, tandem quadriformi plasmatum materia almo ad sui similitudinem instinctum spiramine, uniuersis quę in infimis formauerate uno probandi causa excepto uetitoque preficiens, paradisiacae amoenitatisf iocunditate conlaterana Æua scilicet comite decentissimeg collocauit. Laruarica pro dolor seductus cauillatione, uersipellis suasibilisque tergiuersatione uiraginis pellectus anathematis alogiah ambro pomum momordit uetitum et, sibi ac posteris in hoc ærumnoso deiectus sæculo loetum promeruit perpetuum. Vaticinantibus siquidem profetisi et cælitus superni regis diuturna clandestino presagia dogmate promentibus, nitide orthodoxis eulogium ex supernis deferens, non ut Iudæorum seditiosa elingue fatetur loquacitas, sed priscorum atque modernorum lepidissimam ambiens facundiam, Arrianas Sabellianasque proterendo nenias anagogico infrustransj famine nosque ab obtunsi cæcitate umbraminis ad supernorum alacrimoniam patrimoniorum aduocans, angelus supernisk elapsus liminibus in aurem intemeratae uirginis ut euangelica promulgant a

40

b

Many of the texts have also been translated and more fully edited by D. Hooke, Worcestershire Anglo-Saxon Charter-Bounds, Stud. in Anglo-Saxon History 2 (Woodbridge, 1990), pp. 177–230 (no. 29) and D. Hooke, Warwickshire Anglo-Saxon Charter Bounds, Studies in Anglo-Saxon History 10 (Woodbridge, 1999), pp. 67–71 (no. 8). A full edition and discussion by Susan Kelly is also forthcoming as part of the British Academy series on Anglo-Saxon Charters, a draft of which is Kelly, ‘S 786’. At the time of writing the LangScape database contained information about the bounds in S 786 but the semi-diplomatic transcripts were not yet available for display or word searches. See ‘Archives’ in LangScape (under the ‘Resources’ submenu; last accessed 15 October 2008).

43

Peter A. Stokes famina stupenda cecinisse uidetur carmina, cui æclesia tota catholica consona uoce altibohando proclamat: ‘Beata es uirgo Maria que credidisti, perficientur in te quæl dicta sunt tibi a Domino.’ Mirum dictu incarnatur uerbum et incorporatur, scilicet illud de quo euangelista supereminens uniuersorum altitudine sensuum inquit: ‘In principio erat uerbum et uerbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat uerbum’, et reliqua. Qua uidelicet sumpta de uirgine incarnatione antiquæ uirginis facinus demitur et cunctis mulieribus nitidis præcluens taumatibus decus irrogatur. Intacta igitur redolente Christi diuinitate passaque ipsius humanitate libertas addictis clementer contigit seruulis. Hinc ego Eadgar altithrono amminiculante Anglorum ceterarumque gentium in circuitu triuiatim persistentium basileus, ut huius libertatis altithroni moderatoris clementia merear optinere consortium, coenobio loco celebri qui ab huius prosapie solicolis Perscoranm nobili nuncupatur uocabulo situm, genetricique domini nostri semper uirgini Mariæ, necnon beato Petro apostolorum principi eiusque coapostolo Paulo, dedicatum habetur, monachis regulariter degentibus monastici aeternam priuilegiin concedo libertatem, quatenus post decessum Foldbrihtio abbatis egregii cuius temporibus hæc libertatis restauratio Christo suffragante concessa est quem sibi uniuersap præfati coenobii congregatio qapto elegerit consilio rsecundum regularia beati Benedicti instituta abbatemq r iuste ex eodem fratrum cuneo eligens constituats Huius priuilegii libertas deinceps usu perpetuot a cunctis teneatur catholicisu, nec extraneorum quispiam tyrannicav fretus contumacia inw prædicto xmonasterio ius arripiens exerceatx potestatis, sed eiusdem ycoenobii collegium perpetuæ ut prædixi libertatisy glorietur a2priuilegio. Sit autem prefatum monasterium omni terræne seruitutis eodem tenore liberum quo a precessore nostro, a rege uidelicet Coenulfo orthodoxe fidei strenuissimo, fuerat uti uetusto continetur priuilegio (Beornotho duce optinente) solutum, agri equidem qui ad usus monachorum domino nostroz Iesu Christo eiusque genitrici Marie, priscis modernisque temporibus, a regibus et religiosis utriusque sexus hominibus et a me ipso restituendo iure concessi sunt,a2 b2 Id est in Perscoran uidelicet [. . . . . .] mansic2, in Brihtulfingtuned2 x mansi, in Cumbrincgtune x mansi, in Pedneshamme ve2 mansi, in Eccyncgtune xvi mansi, in Byrlingahamme x mansi, in Deopanforda x mansi, in Strengesho x, in Bettesforda xf2, in Cromban [. . .]g2, in Stoce x, in Pyritune x, in Uuadbeorhan iiiih2, in Ciuincgtunei2 iiij2, in Broctunek2 iii, in Piplincgtunel2 x, in Snoddesbyri x, in Niuuantune vii, in Eadbrihtincgtune iiiim2, in Uuihtlafestune v, in Flæferthn2 v, in Graftune v, in Deormodesealdtune v, in Husantreo 7o2 on Meretune v, in Broctune iii, into Hleobyrip2 ii, [in] Langandune xxx, in Poincguuic vii, in Beornothesleahe iiiq2, in Actune iii, in Suthstocer2 7 on Hilleahes2 7 on Tresham 7 on Cyllincgcotan 7 on Ealdanbyri 7 Dydimeretunet2 7 Badimyncgtun 7 Uptun xlu2, in Deorham x, in Longanege v, on Lidanege vi, in Uuiggangeate vi, in Beoleahe vv2, Gyrdleahe vw2, in Sture xx2, in Bradanuuege xx, in Cumtuney2 v, in Uuiguuennanz2 x, et ad usum conficiendi salis duobus in locis xviii doliorum situs, on middelwic x, 7 on neodemestan wic viiia3, et duarum fornacium statio on Uuictune, et uas quod dicitur west rincge cum uno manso et dimidium mansi in loco qui dicitur Hortunb3: eiusdem perpetualiter sint libertatis. [. . .]c3

44

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) Tempore siquidem quo rura quae domino deuoto concessi animo iniuste a sancta Dei æclesia ablata fuerant, perfidi quique nouas sibi hereditarias kartas usurpantes ediderunt sed in patris et filii et spiritus sancti nomine d3precipimus ut catholicorum nemo easdem recipiat, sed a cunctis repudiatę fidelibus in anathemate deputentur ueteri iugiter uigente priuilegio.d3 h3 Si quis uero tam epilempticus phylargirię seductus amentia (quod non optamus) hanc nostræ munificentiæ dapsilitatem ausu temerario infringere temptauerit, sit ipse alienatus a consortio sanctæ Dei æclesię, necnon et a participatione sacrosancti corporis et sanguinis Iesu Christi filii Dei, per quem totus terrarum orbis ab antiquo humani generis inimico liberatus est. Et cum Iuda Christi proditore sinistra in partee3 deputatus, ni prius hic digna satisfactione humilis penituerit quod contra sanctam Dei æclesiam rebellis agere pręsumpsit, nec in uita hac practica ueniam nec in theorica requiem apostata obtineat ullam, sed æternis barathri incendiis trusus cum Anania et Saphyra iugiterf3 miserrimus crucietur.g3 h3 Eis sindon ta lond gemæra tæra tun londa te into perscoran belimpae. [Pershore Estates] Ærest of piri forda on ta dic,i3 andlang dic on ta pyrigan, of tære pyrigan on tone long[an mapuldre, of  am mapuldre on ceap manna w]yllan, [of «ære wyllan] to tam hl[æwe, be] eære h[læwe to  am bænincges byrig, of b]ænincgesj3 byrig to wealh ge[ate], of we[alh gea]te to mæ[r] cnolle, of mær [c]nolle on lind hoh, of lind ho on clottes more, of clottes more on mær p[ul] , ondlongk3 pulles on afene, of afene on caldan wyllan, of caldan wyllan on wyre hlinc, of wyre hli[nce on hor p]yt, [o]f hor py[tte o]n culfran mere, of tæm mere on hag[an weg, of hagan wege on b]roc [h]rycg, of broc hrycge on ta ealdan dic, of e[ære dic] on swyne, of swyn[e] on reod dic, of eære dic on weorces mere, of tære mere on ta twycene, of tære twycenan on ta hæsel ræwe ondlong streames on hor wyllan, of hor wyllan ondlong dic on cymman le[a]h[e], of eære leahe on sæfern ondlong sæfern to ham stede, of ham stede on ropleah geat, of tæm geate ondlong dic tæt on east mor tær on ta rode, of eære rode on heaeeburhe weoreyg, of eæm woreige ondlong hrycges to bysceopes swyn hege, on[d]long heges on beartan weg, of beartan wege on calfan leahe, tæt ondlong dic to hæe halan, of hæe halan o[n] ta ealdan dic, ondlang dic on piddes meres weg, of tæm wege on ta ealdan dic, of eære dic on wad b[eor]gas, of wad beorgan to tam hlyp geate, of e[am] geate on sealtan mere, of tam mere on sue mæduan, of eære mæde ondlong sices tæt on yrse, ondlong yrse on hwitan dune, of hwitan dune on lus eorl3, of lus eorne on fulan pyt, of tam pytte on beornwynne den[e], ondlong dene tæt on hymel broc æt wudu forda, andlang broces on oxan ers, andla[ng] sices to tan stan gedelfe, of eam stan gedelfe on ta dic, ondlong dic on hunig burnan, 7lang burnan tæt on hymel broc, ondlang broces to beccan leahe, on ta ealdan dic 7lang mær weges on ceafor leahe, of tære leahe on ta heg stowe, of eære heg stowe on hennuc, a[ndl]ong hennuc tæt on ta eorn ræwe eastrihte tæt hit cyme to tan rah hege, æfter [t]amm3 hege a be tam ofre, tæt eft on ta dic, tæt on pidelan stream, 7lang streames on afene, andlang afene tæt eft on piri ford.n3 [Wihtlafestun (North Piddle), Abberton, Naunton and Ælflædetun (Flyford Flavell)] Wis sind tara feower tuna lond gemæra wihtlafes tun 7 eadbriht[i]ncg tun 7 niwan tun 7 ælflæde tun. Ærest of pidelan on ta eald[an dic, of] tære dic 7lang fura on

45

Peter A. Stokes t[a] heafda to winter burnan, of winter burnan on hina gemæran on tone ealdan weg, of tamo3 wege on tittan dune 7 of tittan dune on byligan fen, of byligan fenne on wixena broc, ondlang broces on pidelan, 7lang pidelan tæt eft on wihtlafes gemæra. [Flyford (Dormston?)] Eis sind ta lond ge<mæ>rap3 into fle[fere. Æ]res[t] of tam ealdan slæde on [wi]nter burnan, of tære burnan on tane swyn hege, 7lang heges on eomeres mæduan, of tam mæduan on hodes ac, of tære æc 7lang heges to tæm wege, 7lang weges on winter burnan, 7lang burnan on hereferees maduan, tonan in tæt sic, of tæm sice in tæne cumb, of tam cumbe on ta ealdan dic, 7lang dice in pidelan, 7lang pidelan to bradan hamme, a butan bradan hamm[e e]ft in pidelan, 7lang pidelan eft to tæm slæpe. [(Martin) Hussingtree] Wis sind ta lond gemæra to husan treo. Ærest of tære stræt 7long dic to bradan forde 7lang burnan onq3 seale weorpan, ondlang seale weorpan to col forda, of col forda 7lang tære miclan dic on alr broc, 7lang broces on eeornanr3 mor, of tam more 7lang dic on feower gemæra, of tæm gemæron to torn lehe, of torn lehe 7lang dic eft on ta stræt. [Longdon] Eis sind tæs londes gemæra into langan dune. Ærest of sæfern on wiferees mæduan hege, of tam heges3 on tone hricg, of tam hricge on tone wulf hagan midne of tam wulf hagan to tam erym gemeran, of tæm erym gemæran to pis brece, of pis brece to tidbrihticg hamme, of tan hamme on pyrt broc, 7lang broces to pyrtan heale, of peartan heal[e to ha]gan geate, of hagan geate to twy forde, of twy fyrde to luf bece, of luf bece betweonan dune, of tære dune on hwitant3 cumb, of tam cumbe on swyn geat, of swyn geate 7lang ecge tæt on hæe hricg, of hæe ricge on senet ricg, of senet ricge on sec mor, of secg more on alr, of alre on orices pul, of orices pulle efu3 on sæfern. [Chaceley, Eldersfield, Staunton, and Wynburh Edisc] Eis sindan ta lond gemæra into ceatewes leahe 7 to yldresv3 felda 7 to stan tune 7 to wynburhe edisce. Ærest of an burnan to cumbran weoree, of cumbran weorte to tære mæran æc, of eærew3 æc to stan hlincan, of stan hlincanx3 to reade burnan, of reade burnan to healrey3 mere, of healre mere to tære æc, of tære æc to hagan leahe, of tære leahe on secg broc, of secg broce to tan hean dore, ofz3 tan dore to bryd broce, 7lan[g b]roces tæt in glencincg, 7lang glencincg tæt in ledene, 7lang ledene to mær broce, of mær broce to brycg geleagan, of brycg geleagan on bradan ford on glencincg, 7lang glencincg to blacan mores forda, of blacan mores forda to tan halgan geate, of tan halgan geate to risc heale, of hrisc heale to tam ho, of tam ho a be wuda to tam [æsce], of tam æsce to tære ecge, of [tære ecge] to bradan leahe, of bradan leahe to fæles græfe, of fæles græfe to cram pulle to tam mær hege, of eæm hege on s[æ]fern, of sæfern eft on an burnan. [Powick] Wis sindon ta lond gemæra into poincg wican. Ærest up of sæfern on beornwoldes sætan, of beorwoldes sætan on hagan geat, of hagan geate on secg lages strod, of secg lahes strode on troh hrycg, of troh hrycge on tecles mor, of tæm [more] on baldan rycg, of baldan rycge on flotan rycg, of flotan rycgea4 on ta smeean ac, of eære æc on lin[d] rycg, of lind rycge on abban dunes wican, of abban dunes wican in baldan geat, of baldan geate on cust leahe, of cust leahe in eadwoldincg leahe middewearde of eadwolding leahe on steapan leahe, of steapan leahe in e[a] greatan lindan,

46

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) of eære lindan on cardan stigele, of tær[e] stigele in wearman dene to hreod broc geate, of tam geate on wæee burnan, 7lang wæee burnan tæt wieutan tone snæd hege tæt to scir hylt geate, of scir hylt geate on codran ford, ondlang codran on c[r]om[a] tæt to eære ealdan stræt, ondlong eære stræt t[o] maw pul, 7lang pulles on temedan, 7lang temedan eft in s[æfern]. [Leigh] E[is sind]b4 t[a] land gemæra into beornoees leahe. Ærest of eadwoldincg leahe an æcer, of tæm æc[ere on mer he]ge, 7long mer[e hege]s on sceanp[an] h[y]l, [of scean]pan hylle on wæee burnan, of tære burnan on g[undenli]ng rycg, of tam rycge on codran, of codran to syl beame, of syl beame to crome, of crome to hwitan wyllan, of tære wyllan to hagan geate, of hagan geate to tæ[re grea]tanc4 æc, of eære æc on ta sand seaeas, of eam seaean in temedel, of temedel on ta lytlan becas tanan [on grindles bec]e, of grindles bece swa tæt gemære lige in tem[eda]n, of temedan onbutan eldres ege tæt eft in temedan, andlang temedan tæt eft in maw pul. [Acton (Beauchamp)] Wis sind ta lond gemæra into ac tune. Ærest on horsa broc, of horsa broce in heafoc rycg, of heafoc rycge on bilincg brocd4, of byling broce in at leahe geat, of at leahe geate in ta hlydan, of tære hlydan in bycera fald, of bycera [fal]de on sand ford, of sand forda in scotta pæe, of scottan pæee in gyslan ford, e4of gislan forda on sond burnan, of sond burnan on scead wællan, of scead wellan in lam seatane4, of lam seaean in ledene, of ledene in lin leahe, of lin leahe in saltera weg, of sealtera wege in hean ofer, of hean ofre in sue broc, of sue broce in we[st broc, of] west broce in clæg wyllan, of clæg wyllan in æeelstanes graf, of æeelstanes graue on hengestes healh, of h[en]gestes heale eft in horsa broc. [South Stoke] Eis sind tara vii land gemæra into sue stoce. Ærest of mæddene westeweardre on beaduc hyl 7lang dene on badan pyt, of tam pytte on æsc wyllan broc, 7lang broces on afene, 7lang afene on broc hardes for[d, of tam] forda on swyn burnan, of swyn burnan on funtnes burnan, of funtnes burnan on bremer leah, of bremer lea 7[l]ang dene on stan leah, of stan lea on seonecan dene, 7lang dene on ehan feldes geat tonne on gate wyllan, of gate wyllan on cyncges crundlu, of cyncges crundlan 7lang dene on risc mere, of risc mere on æsc [de]ne, of æsc dene on hord dene, of hord dene on tone holan weg on luhinc wudu on filee leahe, of filet leahe on æeelan wyllan, of tæm wyllan adune on stre[am], 7l[an]g streames up on hyrde wyllan, of hyrde wyllan on cyninga crundel, of cyninga crundele on rycg weg, 7lang weges on tone stapol, of tam stapole on ta hlydan, of tære hlydan up andlang streames, of eæm streamef4 be heafdan tæt on mihan lea easteweardne on tone garan up 7lang weges, of tam wege be heafdan tæt eft on mæd beorh. [Dyrham] Wis sind ta land gemæ[ra i]nto deor hamme. Ærest of sulan forda on lodd[ra] wellan, tonon on byd yncel bi abban grafe to b[ry]de wyllan, tæt swa on eccan treo, tonon on miclan mædua tæt on byd, eonne on hy geredincgg4 æceras 7 swa bi clop æcere ufa on sulig cumb, tonon on mus beorh tæt swa to æeeredes wellan, eonon on clæg weg be ciric stede tæt swa bi sadol hongranh4 on fearn beor[h . . . . . .]i4 wuda on gemær broc tæt eft on sulan broc. [Beoley] + Eis sind ta land gemæra into beo leahe. Ærest of beo leahe on cundincg æceras, of cundincg æceran on fearn healas, of fearn healan on burh leahe, of burh leahe on geahes ofer, of geahes ofre on stan geat, of stan geate on wulferes wyllan, of

47

Peter A. Stokes tære wyllan on deawes broc, of tæm broce on mapoldren [geat], of tæm geate on beardi[n]cgj4 ford, of bearding forda eft on beo leahe. [Yardley] Wis sind ta land gemæra into gyrd lea. Ærest of gyrd lea on colle, of colle on mær dic, of mær dice on blacan mearcan, of blacan mearcan on to[n]e hæe garan on dagarding weg, of dagarding wege on ac wyllan, of ac wyllan on bradan apoldr[e, o]f eære apoldre on mæres eorn, of ean eorne on smalan broc, of smalan broce on cinc tunes brock4, of tæm broce on dyrnan ford, of dyrnan for[da] on brom halas of brom halan on hwitan leahe, of hwitan leahe on leommannincg weg eonan on colle, of colle on meos mor, of meos more on ciondan, of ciondan on spel broc eonan on bulan wyllan, of bul[an] wyllan on ta langan æc, of eære langan æc [on] mundes dene, of mund[e]s dene on colle, of colle eft on gyrddl4 leahe. [Alderminster] Eis sind ta land gemæra tæs londes te lympem4 to sture, tæt is eonne, æt ærestan denewaldincg hommes ende scyt on sture, tonne scyt se dic [tæt hit] cyme foran to byrnan scylfe, tonne tonan 7lang tære ealdan stræte tæt hit cyme on mær bro[c], 7lang mær broces tæt hit cyme to langan dun[es e]nde tonon tæt hit cyme to po[s] hliwan, tonne of pos hliwan to sealt mere, of sealt mere on fugel mere, of fugel mere on steapan hlinc, of steapan hlince on bara broc, of bara broce ymb wydan cumb, of widan cum[be to h]æe hyll[e], to[non] on stan hlinces ende, tonon on r[u]m beorgas, tonne eonan to cealc seaean, of cealc se[ae]an to tileegnes triowan, tonan to meox b[eor]hym, tonan to pehtun[e]s triowan, fram pehtunes triowan to pioles clifan, tæt 7langn4 pioles clifes middeweardes to clop hyrste, tonne of clop hyrste on ta dic te lige on sture. [Broadway] Wis sind ta land gemæra to brada[n wege]. [Ærest] of mær cumbeo4 on pes broc, tonon on ta heafda æt west mæduwan, of west medwan on ta heaf[da] tæt on tistel me[re, of] tæm me[r]e 7lang slædes on pincan dene, of p[incan dene] tæt up on beornap4 dune ufew[ea]rde tonon on tone stapol, of eæm stapole ofe[r] tone ealdan feld tæt on fugel hlæw, of tæm [hlæwe] on egsan mor, of ean mor[e] up andlang dune tæt [on] bæddes wellan, of bæddes wellan on brer hlæw, of tæm hlæwe on nore ham onbutan nore ham 7lang tære ealdan dic tæt on sand broc, of sand broce on bord rieig, of bord rieig on hor pyttes ritig, of hor pytte 7lang fura tæt on cadan mynster tonon on ta ecge tæt on ta sealt stræt, 7lang stræt on ta ealdan dic æt nanes mannes lande, of eære dic onq4 [vii] wyllan, of [seo]fanq4 wyllan on tristlinga dene, of eristlinga dene ufeweardre tæt on ta ealdan dic æt wad beorhe, 7lang dic eft or4 mær cumbe. s4 Anno dominicæ incarnationis dcccc lxxiit4 scripta est huius munificentiæ singrapha his testibusu4 consentientibus quorum inferius nomina secundum uniuscuiusque dignitatem utriusque ordinis decusatim domino disponente caraxantur: v4 Ego Eadgar Brittannię Anglorum monarchus hoc taumate donum agie crucis roboraui. Ego Dunstan Dorobernensisw4 æclesie archiepiscopus eiusdem regisx4 beniuolentiam confirmaui. Ego Oswold Eboracensis basilicæ primas huic regali dono adsensum prebui. Ego Aeelwold Wintoniensis presul edis canonica subscriptione manu propria depinxi. Ego Ælfstan Lundoniensis cathedre pontifex signum sanctæ crucis lætus impressi.

48

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) Ego Alfwold Scireburnensis cathedre antistes hoc intepidus donum corroboraui.y4 Ego Brihtelm plebi Dei famulus huius regis dapsilitati lætabundus aplausi. Ego Alfwold legis Dei catascopus testudinem agie crucis iussu regis impressi. z4 Ego Ælfstan Rofensis sedis archimandrita tau[ma]z4 crucis agie hilaris imposui. Ego Eadelm commissarum plebium speculator hoc eulogium gaudens firmaui. Ego Wynsige Dei allubescente gratia spiritalis ouilis opilio hanc largitionem consolidaui. Ego Aeulf domino codrus amminiculante hoc donum tropheo sancte crucis confirmaui. Ego Ælferyea5 præfati regis conlaterana hoc sintahma cum sigillo sancte crucis subscripsi. b5 Ego Ælfric abbas subscripsi. Ego Æscwig abbas conscripsi.c5 Ego Osgar abbas dictaui.d5 Ego Æeelgar abbas impressi. Ego Cynewearde5 abbas depinxi. Ego Foldbriht abbas descripsi.f5 Ego Ælfeahg5 abbas confirmaui. Ego Sideman abbash5 corroboraui. Ego Osweard abbas con[sensi].i5 Ego Brihteah abbas impressi. Ego Godwine abbas cons[ensi].j5 Ego Brihtnoe abbas ass[ensi].k5 Ego Germanus abbas firmaui. l5 Ego Ælfere dux. m5 Ego Oslac dux. Ego Æeelwine dux. Ego Brihtnoe dux.m5 Ego Æeelweard minister.n5 Ego Wulfstan minister. Ego Ælfweard minister. Ego Ælfsige minister. Ego Æeelsigeo5 minister. Ego Wulfricp5 minister. Ego Ælfwine minister. Ego Wulfgeat minister. Ego Wulfstan minister. q5 Ego Æeelmær minister. Ego Eanulf minister. Ego Eadwine minister. Ego Æeelweardr5 minister. Ego Ælfric minister. Ego Aeelwold minister. Ego Alfwold minister.

49

Peter A. Stokes Ego Wulfmær minister. Ego Ælfweard minister. Ego Ælfelm minister. Ego Ælfrics5 minister. Ego Leofwinet5 minister. Ego Leofric minister. u5 Ego Ælfelm minister. Ego Leofsige minister. Ego Wulfric minister. Ego Godwine minister. Ego Ælfric minister. v5 Ego Ealdred minister. Ego Ælfeah minister.v5 Ego Leofstan minister. Ego Ælfric minister. Ego Æeelweard minister. Ego Brihtric minister. w5 Ego Leofa minister. Ego Brihtric minister.w5 Prefatax5 quoque [. . .] trium iugerorum quantitas et duo predia, in famosa urbe quæ ab accolis dicitur Wygorneceastre accidunt, quæ sub eiusdem condicione libertatis perpetualiter in nomine domini nostri Iesu Christi haberi precipio. [Endorsement] y5[XP] EIS [IS SE FREOLSE] 7 TARA LANDA BOC [EE] EADG[AR] CINING GEUEE INTO PERSCORAN SWA HIS

YLDRAN HIT ÆR GESETTAN GODE TO LOFE 7 SANCTA MARIANy5 a

b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s

Fundacio Abbathiae de Persor per Regem Edgarum Ex Carta Originali penes Thomas Cotton Baronettum heading in D1 Edgari carta originalis de Abbatia de Persor heading in D2 . . . 7 sce Benedicte . . . heading (mostly lost to fire) in V + 〈␻] om. VD1 ut] perhaps two letters lost at start of line V microcosmum] micocrosmum A formauerat] primauerat [fo]rmauerat V amoenitatis] e inserted A decentissime] ss underlined in pencil A alogia] alogie V profetis] prophetis V 6–8 letters erased after profetis A infrustrans] u altered from ?o V supernis] supernus V quæ] que tibi V Perscoran] Perscoram V c inserted A priuilegii] altered from priuilegium V Foldbrihti] Foldbrinti V quem sibi uniuersa] illegible A written as que . . . universa D1D2 apto . . . abbatem] illegible A written as a series of dots D1 secundum . . . abbatem] written as a series of dots D2 eligens constituat] eligens c lost to fire V

50

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) t u v w x y z a2

b2 c2 d2 e2 f2 g2 h2 i2 j2 k2 l2 m2 n2 o2 p2 q2 r2 s2 t2 u2 v2 w2 x2 y2 z2 a3 b3 c3 d3

e3 f3 g3 h3 i3 j3 k3 l3 m3 n3 o3

deinceps usu perpetuo] usu perp lost to fire deinceps written twice V catholicis] lic lost to fold A extraneorum . . . tyrannica] neorum quispiam ty lost to fire V in] illegible A monasterio ius arripiens exerceat] lost to fire V very unclear A coenobii . . . libertatis] lost to fire V nostro] nostri D1 priuilegio . . . concessi sunt] lost to fire but passage seems to be followed by Tempore siquidem clause (see note d3 and pp. 60–1, Table 2) V large ^ added in black ink after sunt A Id est] collation against V ends here; for text of V see below, pp. 53–7. mansi] erasure before mansi in A Brihtulfingtune] i inserted, l on erasure A v] probably on erasure A x] possibly on erasure A . . .] numeral erased A iiii] on erasure A Ciuincgtune] g unclear; looks like c in A but clearly g in D1D2 iii] on erasure A Broctune] tune illegible in A but clear in D1D2 Piplincgtune] followed by illegible note in right-hand margin? A iiii] on erasure A Flæferth] l inserted A 7] om. D1 cl (but very unclear) D2 Hleobyri] h probably inserted (parchment damaged so unclear) A iii] perhaps altered A Suthstoce] S underlined A Hilleahe] second l inserted A Dydimeretune] second e perhaps on erasure A xl] very faint; perhaps partially erased or written in different ink A v] on erasure A v] unusual form; probably altered from x A x] probable erasure after which was part of numeral A Cumtune] first u unclear but fairly certain; perhaps o A Uuiguuennan] g unclear and perhaps c A Wicwennan D1 Uuicuuennan D2 viii] vertical line added after numeral A Hortun] underlined A Approximately 125–130 letters erased A precipimus ut catholicorum nemo . . . priuilegio] comes immediately before list of estates; first half of sentence (tempore siquidem . . . precipimus) lost to fire: see above, note a2 and below, pp. 57–8, 60–1, Table 2. V priuilegio underlined in brown ink A parte] ar illegible in A but clear in V, om. (rows of dots) in D1D2 iugiter] text ends here (with line of dots) D1 crucietur] underlined; remainder of line blank, perhaps erased A Si quis . . . crucietur] comes after bounds (see below, pp. 57–8, 60–1, Table 2) V dic] text ends here D2 bænincges] c inserted A ondlong] d inserted A eorn] eor A eam] inserted A ford] thin vertical line added after ford A tam] tan A

51

Peter A. Stokes p3 q3 r3 s3 t3 u3 v3 w3 x3 y3 z3 a4 b4 c4

d4 e4 f4 g4 h4 i4 j4 k4 l4 m4 n4 o4

p4 q4

r4 s4 t4 u4 v4 w4 x4 y4 z4 a5 b5

c5 d5 e5

f5 g5 h5

gemæra] gera A on] inserted A eeornan] cross-stroke of e extremely faint, probably added, but ascender long like that of e rather than d A hege] ge inserted A hwitan] h inserted A eft] ef A yldres] letter erased before y A of eære] of altered: letter before o erased, o formed from minim, f added; e perhaps also an alteration A hlincan] h inserted A healre] e inserted A of] inserted A rycge] e inserted A Eis sind] lost, but top of e visible, as is top of a red bracket which precedes it A greatan] Birch and others printed blacan but greatan seems more likely given evidence of V and probable traces of g. See Stokes, ‘Rewriting the Bounds’. broc] c inserted A of gislan forda . . . seatan] written in a smaller and more compressed hand A streame] a inserted A geredincg] c inserted A hongran] first n clumsily altered from ?r A beorh] approx. 5–6 letters lost after beorh; next word perhaps swa A beardincg] Bond and others printed beardyncg; obscured in manuscript but i clear in facsimile A broc] c inserted A gyrdd] perhaps on erasure; second d inserted A lympe] e inserted A 7lang] 7l probably on erasure A cumbe] first two letters unclear but pretty certainly cū, pace Bond and others, although suspension-stroke extremely faint and perhaps added A beorna] first letter unclear but pretty certainly b, pace Bond and others A vii . . . seofan] both extremely unclear; Bond printed asan for both, but V reads vii and this fits better for first word here; -san or -fan seems clear for second word; note also Seven Wells near modern Broadway at SP1235. A on] o A Text collated with V from here. dcccc lxxii] 972 (in ‘Arabic’ numerals) V his testibus] h inserted and est cramped; scribe first wrote iste for his te[stibus]? A Witness-list in five columns A Witness-list in long lines V Dorobernensis] altered from Dorbbernensis A regis] g inserted A corroboraui] conprobaui V (S 788 reads corroboraui) Ego . . . tauma] illegible in A Ego Ælftan [sic] . . . archimandrita tau[. . .] V tauma from S788 Ælferye] illegible; Bond printed Ælferye A Second column of witnesses begins here A New line begins here V verbs of subscription heavily abbreviated and sometimes ambiguous AV conscripsi] cons A coscrip V (so not consensi, pace Birch) dictaui] lost to fire V Cyneweard] y unclear but pretty certain; i unlikely, pace Bond, Birch and others A (S 788 reads Cineweard) Y clear in V abbas descripsi] lost to fire V Ælfeah] lfeah illegible; Bond and Birch printed Ælfhæh A Ælfhaeh clear in V Ego Sideman abbas] go . . . abbas illegible; Bond printed Ego Sideman abbas A clear in V

52

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) i5

j5 k5

l5 m5 n5

o5 p5 q5 r5 s5 t5 u5 v5 w5 x5 y5

Ego . . . consensi] Ego Osweard abbas illegible; verb written as con so ambiguous A con[sensi] lost to fire V consensi] cons A cos V (abbreviations ambiguous) abbas assensi] abb ass A abbas assensi lost to fire V Abbreviation ambiguous; Birch printed assensim [sic] prebui, presumably supplied from Oswald of York’s attestation, but assensi not uncommon in witnesslists. (S 788 reads assensi) Third column of witnesses begins here A New line begins here V Ego Oslac . . . Brihtnoe dux] Ego Oslac, Æeelwine, Brihtnoe duces V Ego Æeelweard minister] begins new line; minister omitted; all occurrences of Ego and minister omitted or lost from here on V Æeelsige] sige illegible (but printed by Bond) A Wulfric] lost to fire V Fourth column of witnesses begins here A No new line here V Æeelweard] lost to fire V Ælfric] lfric lost to fire V Leofwine] lost to fire V Fifth column of witnesses begins here A No new line here V Ealdred, Ælfheah] lost to fire V Leofa, Brihtric] lost to fire; end of page so further material may be lost V prefata] sic; V reads praefato (see below) XP eis . . . Marian] badly worn; for reconstruction see below, pp. 66–7 A

BL Cotton Vitellius D. vii, 29v–30v The following is only the portion of text which is significantly different from that of Augustus ii. 6, namely the list of estates, the bounds, and the appurtenances. The first three paragraphs of the document, the dating-clause and the witness-list are therefore omitted here but are included in the apparatus for Augustus ii. 6 above. [Hec] sunt nomina terrarum quę ad Perscoram pertinent: Brintulfingtona, Cum[brincg]tun, Æccingtun, Byrlingaham, Depaford, Strengeshoh, Cromban, Pyrigtun, Wadbeorhas, Cyfington, Broctun, Piplingtun, Snoddesb[yri], Graftun, Deormodestunb, Broctun, Fleferth, Wihtlafestun, Eadby[ri]tingtun, Niwantun, Langandun e(Tresham, Cyllingcotan, Ealda[n]burh, Dydemeretun, Badymingtun, Guthbrihtingtunc, Deorham, H[. . .]tund, Langaneg, Lidaneg, Wiggangeat, Cumbtun)e Mortun, Wy[.]landf, Stithaneg, Ceatewesleh, Yldresfeld, Stantun, Wynbur Ediscg, Bettesfordh, Poingwic, Wicereshami, Beornothesleh, Hohisylan, Actun, Husantreo, Meretun, Beoleah, Gyrdleah, Tæflanlæh, Greotan Cwelaleahj, Sture, Bradanweg, Wicwynnan, Stoce, Uptun, Hyldesle[h]. Prefato quoque coenobio trium iugerorum quantitas et duo predia in famosa urbe quę ab accolis dicitur Wigornaceaster accidunt, quę sub eiusde[m] conditione libertatis perpetualiter in nomine domini nostri Iesu Christi haberi p[reci]pio, et ad usum conficiendi salis duobus in locis xviii doliorum situ[s] on middelwic x, 7 on neoeomestan wic viii, et duarum fornacium st[a]tio on Wictune et uas quod dicitur Westringe, cum uno manso e[t] dimidium mansi in loco qui dicitur Hortun, et dimidium mansi i[n] loco qui dicitur æt Westwuda; eiusdem perpetualiter sint libertati[s]. Hęc sunt termini illarum terrarum, quę in circuitu monasterii ualen[t] 150k manentes.

53

Peter A. Stokes [Pershore Estates] Ærest of pirigforda 7lang dic on ea pyri[gan], eanan on eane langan mapolder, eæt on ceap manna wyllan swa to n[. . .]l hlawe a be eęre ecge on mær cnol, eanan on lind hoh, eæt on clott[es] mor swa on mær pul, eæt on afene swa on caldanm wyllan, eæt on w[yr«]n hlinc, eanan on hor pyt, eæt on culfre mere swa on hagan weg, [eæt on] broc hricg, eanan on ea ealdan dic, eæt on swine swa on reod dic, eæt [on] weorces mere, eanan on ea twycene, eæt on ea hæsel ræwe swa [7]lang streames on hor wyllan, eanan on ea langan dic on cym[man] leahe swa on sæfern up 7lang streames to hamstede, ea[nan] 7lang stræt east to wuda, eæt on heaee burge weorei swa on hricges on bisceopes swyn hege, eæt on beartan weg, eanan [on calfan] leahe, eæt 7lang dic to hæe halan, eft 7lang dic on piddes meres w[eg on] wad beorhas, eanan on sealtan mere swa 7lang sices on yrs[e], 7lango yrse on hwitan dene, eanan east on eæne fulan py[t] on byrn wynne dene, eæt on hymel broc æt wuda forda, up 7lan[g bro]ces on oxan ears, eæt to ean stan gedelfe, eanan 7lang dic on [hunig] burnan, eæt eft on hymel broc, 7lang broces to beccan leahe [on] ea dic swa 7lang mære weges on ceafor leahe, eæt on ea hege sto[we, ea]nan on hennuc, eæt on ea eorne ręwe, eonan east on eone rah [hege], eæt be eam ofre eft on ea dic, eæt swa on pidelan stream up 7[lang] streames on ea ealdan dic, eæt 7lang fura on ea heafdu æ[t win]ter burnan swa on hereferees meduwan, eæt in eæt sic, eana[n on] eane cumb swa on ea ealdan dic, eæt in pidelan, eanan ymb [. . .] swa on pidelan, eæt on afene up 7lang afene eft on py[rig] ford. [Flyford (Dormston?)] Eis sint eæra fif hida land gemæra to flefere. Æ[rest] of eam ealdan slæpe on winter burnan, eanan on eone swyn [hege], eæt on et meres mæduan swa on hodes ac, eæt 7lang heges on [«one] weg, eonan on winter burnan swa on hereferees m[æduan, eanan] in eæt sic, eanan in eane cumb swa on ea ealdan di[c in pidelan], eanan ymbutan bradan hame eft in pidelan, ea[nan eft to eam] slæpe. [?, Chaceley and Longdon] Eis sind eæra xxx hida land gemæra [. . . . . . . . . .]p 7 to ceatewes leahe into langa[n] d[u]ne. Ærest [of sæfern on wi]ferees medua hege, [of «am hege . . .] to erim [. . .]q [Powick (including Leigh)] [Eis sind «æra . . . hida land gemæra to poincg wican. Ærest up of sæfern on beornwolde]s sæt[an «æt on hagan] geat, eæt on secg leah[e]s s[trod, «æt on troh hricg, «æt] on tecles more, eæt on baldan ricg swa on flotan ricg, eanan on ea [sme «an ac on l]ind ricg swa on abbandunes wican, eæt in baldan geat, eonan 7lang dune on Ea[dwoldi]ncg leahe middewearde 7 an æcer into beornoees leahe, of eam æcere on [. . .]r mær hege, eanan on scearpan hyl swa on wæee burnan, eæt on gundenling [ricg], eana on codran swa to syl beame, eæt in crame eanans on hwitan wyllan swa [on h]agan geat, eæt on ea greatan ac, eanan on ea sand seaeas swa in temedel, eæt on [ea l]itlan becas, eanan on gryndles bece, of eam bece swa eæt gemæra ligee, eæt on [tem]edan 7lang streames to eldres ege ymbutan yldres ege eæt eft in temedan, [7la]ng streames eft on sęfern. [Acton (Beauchamp)] Eis sind eæra iii hida land gemæra æt ac [tun]e. Ærestt of horsa broce on heafoc ricg, eanan on bylingu broc, eæt in at leahe [geat] swa in ea hlydan, eanan on bicera fald swa on sand ford, eæt on scotta [pæ]e, eanan on gislan ford, eæt on sand burnan swa on scead wyllan, eæt on ea lam [sea]eas, eanan on ledene, eæt in linleahe swa on saltera weg, eanan on hean ofer [in] sue broc, eonan in west

54

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) broc swa in clæg wyllan, eanan on æeelstanes graf, [eanan] in henxtes halh, eæt eft in horsa broc. [Martin Hussingtree] Eis sind eara v hida land gemæra [æt] husan treo 7 æt mere tune. Ærest of eære stræt 7lang dic to bradan for[de 7]lang burnan on sala werpan 7lang streames to col forda, eanan 7lang [eær]e miclan dic on alr broc, eanan on dyrnan mor swa on ea dic, eæt on feower [gem]æra, eanan on eorn leahe swa on ea dic, eæt eft on ea stræt. [Beoley] Eis sind [eara] x hida land gemæra to beo leahe. Ærest of beo leahe on cunding æce[ras], eanan on fearn healas swa on burh leahe, eæt on iahes ofer, eanan on [stan] geat, eæt on wulferes wyllan swa on deawes broc, eæt on mapoldren geat, [eanan] on beardincg ford swa 7lang dic, eæt on arewe up 7lang streames on [. . .]v burnan, up 7lang burnan on febban leahe, eonan on beadegyee wyllan [. . .]stv rihte on byric æcer, eæt on blacan pyt, eanan on fos geat swa on [. . .]nv mere, eæt on fugges treo swa eft on beo leahe. [Yardley] Eis sind eara x hida [land] gemæra æt gyrd lea on colle. eanan on mær dic swa on blacan mearc[an eæt] on eane hæe garan swa on dægarding weg, eonan on ac wyllan, eæt on ea bra[dan a]poldre, eanan on mær eorn swa on smalan broc, eæt on cyng tunes broc, [eanan] on dyrnan ford swa on brom halas, eæt on hwitan leahe, eanan on Leof[mann]incg wic swa on colle, eæt on meos mor ufewearde eanan on deope dæl, eæt [cio]ndan swa on spel broc, eanan on bulan wyllan swa on ea langan æc, eæt on [mund]es dene, eanan on colle, eæt eft in gyrd leah. [Alderminster] Eis sindw eara x hida land ge[mæra] æt sture. Ærest of sture æt denewalding hemmes ende 7lang dic forn[on byr]na scylfe 7lang stræt on mær broc, swa on langan dunes ende, eæt on pos [hliwan, e]anan on sealt mere, eæt on fugel mere, swa on baldreding æceras, eanan on [steapa]n hlinc, eæt on horpyttes sic, eanan on baran broc, swa ymbe widan cumb [on hæ«] hylle, eanan on stan hlinces ende, eæt on rum beorhas, swa eonne on eone cealc [sea«an, ea]nan to tileegnes treowan, swa on meox beorh, eæt on peoles dene 7lang [. . .]nx clop hyrste, eanne 7lang dic in sture swa eæt ealde ea den beligee. [Broadway and (Childs) Wickham] Eis sind [eara ]xy hida land gemæra æt bradan wege 7 æt wicwennan. Ærest of mær [cumb]ez on pes broc, eanan on ea heafdu, eæt on west meduwa, swa eft on ea he[afdu], eæt on eistel mere 7lang slædes on pincan dene, eanan upon beorna [dune] ufeweard, et swa on eone stapol, eæt on fugel hlaw, eanan on egesan mor, [eana]n on langan dune, eæt on bæddes wyllan, eanan on brer hlaw, swa ymbutan [nor« h]am 7lang dic eæt on sand broc, of eæm broce on bord rieig, eanan on hor [pytte]s rieig swa up 7lang fura eæt on cadan mynster, eanan on ea ecge, eæt on [ea sea]lt stræt swa on ea dic æt nanes manes lande eæt on vii wyllan, eanan [on «ri]stinga dene up 7langa2 dene, eæt on ea dic æt wad beorgeb2, swa eft on hor [cumbe].z [(South) Stoke] [Eis sind] eara xc2 hida gemæra æt stoce. Ærest of mæddene westeweardre [on bead]o[c] hil, eæt 7lang middere dene on badan pyt swa on æsc wyllan, eæt on afene swa [on broc] heardes ford, eanon on swyn burnan, eæt on funtnes burnan swa on bre[mer lea]h 7lang dene on stan leah,d2 eanne 7lang seonecan dene middere [on ehan fe]ldes geate swa on gate wyllan, eæt on cynges crumblu 7lang dene on [risc mere s]wa on æsc dene, eæt ord dene, eæte2 on eone holan weg on luhhing [wudu on fil]ee leahe swa

55

Peter A. Stokes on sceortan graf, eonan on æeeling wyllan 7 [adune on stream] up on hyrd wyllan swa on cynges crundelf2, eæt on ricg wegg2, eanan [on «one stapol, «anan on] ea hlydan, of eam streame be eam heafdon on mihan leah [easteweardne on «one garan up 7lang weges, «anon] be eam heafdon, eæt on mæd be[orh.] [Dyrham] [Eis sind «ara . . . hida] land gemæra æt deor [hamme. Ærest of sulan forda on loddra wellan, «onon on by]d micel swa be abban [grafe to bryde wyllan, «æt swa on eccan treo, «onon on miclan] mæduwan, eæt [on byd, «onne on Hygeredincg æceras 7 swa bi clop æcere ufa in sulig cumb, «onon on mus beorh, «æt swa to æ«eredes wellan, «onon on clæg weg be ciric stede, «æt swa bi sadol hongran on fearn beorh wuda on gemær broc, «æt eft on sulan broc.] [Lydney] [. . .]anh2 bæce, eæt on mær broc, swa on neowern, eæt eft on sæferni2. [Wyegate] [Eis sind] eæra vi hida land gemæra æt wiggan geat. Ærest of weg on clor br[. . .]j2 on clor leah, eanan on preoste wyllan, eæt on grenan hlaw, swa on [. . .] eæt on smalan broc, eanan on mylen broc, eæt eft in weg. [Cumbtune] Eis sin[d eara] v hida land gemæra æt cumb tune. Ærest of besewe springe 7[lang] broces on ræges slæd up 7lang dune on cumbtunes broc, swa y[mb] ea fif æceras eæt on wad beorh, eanan on eneda mere, swa on ea [. . .] æt rudan ofre, eæt on holan cumb ufeweardne eanan on mot hyl[le 7]lang weges, on cycggan cumb ufeweardne swa eft on bes wyl sp[ringe]. 7 Wærfere bysceop gebocede anne hagan Æeelune into Cumbr[incg]tune on Wigorneceastre . lxx . p . xlv . p .k2 ¯ ¯ a b c d e f g

h i j k l m n o p q

r s t u v w x y

Brintulfingtune] for Brihtulfingtune Deormodestun] letter deleted after n (probably e) Guthbrihtingtun] prob. C altered to G H. . .tun] Approx. two or three letters lost to fire. (Tresham . . . Cumbtun)] sic: parentheses are in MS Wy[.]land] one or two letters lost; perhaps Wynland for Wenland (=Welland) Wynbur Edisc] two letters deleted after Wynbur (perhaps he?); fire-damage after Edisc but probably nothing lost (unless perhaps an e) Bettesford] + in left-hand margin before Bettesford Wiceresham] or perhaps Piceresham Cwelaleah] perhaps one letter lost after Cwela 150] sic (in Arabic numerals); cl deleted before number Approx. 2–3 letters lost. caldan] or perhaps ealdan (A reads caldan) wyre] x in left-hand margin before hlinc 7lang] 7land Approx. 12 letters lost. One line lost from medua hege to to erim, then approx. 15–16 lines lost. Lost text is approximately the same length as the bounds of Longdon in the single sheet. Approx. 5–7 letters lost. eanan] banan Ærest] æres byling] perhaps altered from byinig Approx. 3 letters lost. sind] snid (very clear, with no confusion of minims) Approx. 6–8 letters lost. eara x] letter immediately before x illegible and could be part of numeral or preceding word.

56

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) z

a2 b2 c2 d2 e2 f2 g2 h2 i2 j2 k2

cumbe] first boundary-point in A is unclear but probably cumbe; last boundary-point in A is cumbe 7lang] 7land beorge] messy deletion of one letter after this word x] space initially left blank, x inserted in pencil or very faint ink stan leah] stan stan leah tæt] bonne crundel] crumbel weg] altered from wæg Approx. nine lines of manuscript lost. Last lost line perhaps ‘. . . weg swa . . .’ sæfern] fæfern br. . .] letters lost due to fire, but first letter after b probably r Text followed by anathema (si quis uero), dating-clause and witness-list as in A; see above, pp. 48–50.

Tiberius A. xiii, 163v–164r The text below is the portion of S 786 which is preserved in ‘Hemming’s Cartulary’, namely the bounds of Acton Beauchamp, as it appears in that manuscript but with lost readings supplied from the Rawlinson copy. [Acton (Beauchamp)] tis synd tara iii hida land gemæra æt ac tune. Ærest of horsa broce on heafoca hrycg, of heafoc hrycge tanon on byling broc 7 swa in at leahgesb geat 7 swa onc ta hlydan, of eære hlydan on bikera fald, of dbikera falde ond sand ford, of sand forda tæt on scottae pæe 7 swa on gislan ford, of gislan forda tæt on sand burnan, of tære burnan on scead wyllan 7 swa on ta lam seaeas, of tam seaean tæt on ledene, 7 of ledene in lin leahge, of lin leahge on saltera weg, of tam wegie on hean ofer 7 swa in sue broc, of sue broke on west broc, of west broke in clæg wyllan, of tære wællan on Ælfstanes graf, 7f of tam grafe in Henxtes halh, 7 of tam hale tæt eft in horsa broc. a b c d e f

heafoc] e inserted T leahges] h inserted R on] illegible due to fire-damage; probably inserted by original scribe T bikera falde on] illegible due to fire-damage T scotta] otta illegible due to fire-damage T 7] inserted T

Comparison of the Texts The larger structural differences between the two versions of S 786 are summarised in Table 2, along with the other charters in the Orthodoxorum group. There are many more differences in phrasing and detail than are listed here, but the similarities between them are still evident, and both versions of the Pershore charter belong clearly in this group. Comparing the two versions of S 786 shows that they have essentially the same content as each other but that the order of this content has been reworked. Both have the same core and are based on the same model, the primary difference being the position of the list of estates and the block of boundary-clauses, as well as the section beginning 57

Peter A. Stokes tempore siquidem. Indeed the transcript and S 788 are unique among the Orthodoxorum group in the way they position this section and this suggests that the transcript might be a reworking of the single sheet. Specifically, the structure of Augustus ii. 6 shows some influence from the model of S 658 but is otherwise almost identical to that of S 673, except for the added list of estates and section ‘prefato quoque coenobio’. One might therefore speculate that the single sheet was drawn up from a model very much like that of S 673 and that the list of estates was inserted and the ‘prefato quoque coenobio’ added at that time. Perhaps, then, this text was subsequently reworked to produce the transcript version, with the list of estates updated, some boundary clauses added and reworked, the ‘tempore siquidem’ clause moved, the bounds placed before the anathema, and the ‘prefato quoque coenobio’ integrated into the list of estates. This order of material seems more logical and is more consistent with the usual structure of Anglo-Saxon charters and so is more likely to be the result of revision than the other way around. Moving from structure to detail, one important difference between the two versions is the list of estates claimed by Pershore, as noted above and summarized in Table 3. The two lists share a common ancestry as blocks of names are identical or very similar in the two versions. However, the differences are not simply the result of scribal omission or uninformed alteration as two estates are included in the single sheet which are not in the transcript, and fourteen estates are in the transcript but not the single sheet.41 The differences have proven difficult to explain and do not seem to correspond with obvious patterns in location, organisation, or holdings before or after a given date. A full discussion of the complexities of Pershore’s land-holdings is beyond the scope of this article and so I simply note the differences here and observe that both lists seem to reflect a fairly thorough knowledge of the community’s holdings, presumably at two slightly different dates. The boundary clauses are also different, as shown in Table 4: the order of the bounds is different and each version has details (and indeed entire bounds) which are missing from the other, but the versions are nevertheless not entirely independent. Most bounds do appear in both versions, and most of those common bounds have identical boundary-points. Kelly has noted that the phrasing in the bounds of the single sheet is very homogeneous and probably reflects some degree of standardization by the copyist, and indeed the same applies to the transcript. Such homogenisation is particularly evident in the 41

The two estates are Pensham and Libbery, and the fourteen are Guthbrington, H[.]ton, Meretun (probably Castle Morton), Wy[.]land (perhaps Welland), Stithaneg, Chaceley, Eldersfield, Staunton and Wynburgh Edisc, Wiceresham, Hohislan, Tæflanleh, Greotan Cwelaleah (Great Whitley?), and Westwood (Westwood Park).

58

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) single sheet where the first letter of each boundary-clause alternates between E and 2. The only exception to this is the combined bounds of Chaceley, Eldersfield, Staunton and Winburh Edisc, where E is used as in the previous bounds of Longdon. Although there is no clear evidence that the combined bounds were inserted, it is perhaps significant that Longdon, Chaceley, and perhaps Eldersfield, Staunton and Winburh Edisc as well, were all incorporated into a single boundary-clause in Vitellius D. vii. Furthermore the E which begins the second boundary-clause in the single sheet is the smallest and least prominent of all the initials in that copy. Despite this homogenization in both versions, however, the phrasing in each is consistently different from the other. The bounds in Augustus ii. 6 almost always repeat the boundary-point, normally using the formula ‘of A on B, of B on C’. Those in Vitellius D. vii, on the other hand, do not normally repeat the boundary-point and usually instead use either  æt on, «anan on, or less often swa on. Although the boundary-clauses in the two versions are usually very similar, some show large structural differences. Perhaps the most notable of these is Powick and Leigh: these are given two separate bounds in the single sheet but are presented as a single combined estate in the transcript.42 Similarly, as noted above, the estates of Chaceley and Longdon seem to be combined in the transcript but are separate in the single sheet. Another interesting case is that of Acton Beauchamp: as discussed above, the boundary-clause for this estate survives in three versions. Even here, though, the boundary-points in the three versions are essentially the same, and even the spelling is quite similar, but again the phrasing is different. The third copy, that in ‘Hemming’s Cartulary’, is much less formulaic than either of the Pershore texts and does not seem especially close to either one of them. Other differences between the two main versions are relatively small but still significant. Della Hooke has argued from the single sheet that the estate of Broadway included Childs Wickham, and indeed the transcript version states this explicitly and so confirms her argument.43 The bounds of Beoley in the transcript contain some additional points which are not included in the single sheet: where the former includes only the southern and eastern boundaries, the transcript lists some ten further points.44 Some of these points can be identified relatively easily: the boundary follows the River Arrow (‘eæt on arewe up 7lang streames’), then probably runs along Dagnell Brook, as the modern boundary still does (‘on . . . burnan, up 7lang 42

44

For a full discussion, see P. A. Stokes, ‘Rewriting the Bounds: Pershore’s Powick and Leigh’, Anglo-Saxon Landscapes, ed. N. Higham and M. Ryan, 2 vols. (Woodbridge, forth43 coming). Hooke, Worcestershire, p. 229, referring to S 1174. For these southern and eastern boundaries, see Hooke, Worcestershire, pp. 219–21 (no. 291).

59

Peter A. Stokes

Table 2 Structure of the Orthodoxorum charters. The dotted boxes indicate sections only found in S 786 and S788.

60

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972)

61

Peter A. Stokes 6
!,-),(
6
%(
,%$./&"%(#./(!
2
'(-%
%(
/',%(#./(!
2
'(-%

 
#
 
$% #!
&.!,! 


%(
3(#./(!
20%
'(-%

%(
3,&%(#$''!
2
'(-%


%(
!)*("), 
2
'(-%


%(
.,!(#!-$)
2

%(
!..!-"), 
2
$% #!
&.!,! 


%(
,)'(
!,-!
(/'!,&





%(
.)!
2



%(
3,%./(!
2


%(
/ !),$(
%%%%
$% #!
&.!,! 




%(
%0%(#./(!
%%%
$% #!
&.!,! 

%(
,)./(!
%%%



%(
%*&%(#./(!
2



%(
() !-3,%
2


%(
%//(./(!
0%%



%(
 ,%$.%(#./(!
%%%%
$ #
&.!,! 

%(
/%$.&"!-./(!
0


%(
&5"!,.$
0

%(
,"./(!
0


%(
!),') !-!& ./(!
0

%(
/-(.,!)


)(
!,!./(!
0


%(
,)./(!
%%%



!
%



%(
(#( /(!
222



%(
)%(#//%
0%%



%(
!),().$!-&!$!
%%%
$ #
&.!,!




%(
./(!
%%%


%(
/.$-.)!




)(
%&&!$!


)(
,!-$'



)(
3&&%(#).(



)(
& (3,%




3 %'!,!./(!


 %'3(#./(


*./(
2&
$% #!
&.!,! 


%(
!),$'
2

%(
)(#(!#!
0

)(
% (!#!
0%

%(
/%##(#!.!
0%



%(
!)&!$!
0
$ #
&.!,!
",)'
2

3, &!$!
0
$ #
&.!,!
",)'
2



%(
./,!
2
$% #!
&.!,! 

%(
, (//!#!
22

%(
)'./(!
0


%(
/%#//!(((
2




!.

/-/'
)("%%!( %
-&%-
/)/-
%(
&)%-
20%%%
)&%),/'
-%./-
)(
'% !&1%
2

)(
(!) !'!-.(
1%
0%%%
!.
/,/'
"),(%/'
6
)(
/%./(!
!.
/-
+/)
%%./,
1!-.
,%(#!
/'

'(-%
%(
6
),./(



6
!,-),'
6

,%$./&"%(#./(!


/',%(#./(!
4%(./(
3,&%(#$'
!*"),
.,!(#!-$)$


,)'(
3,%#./(
 !),$-



3"%(#./(
,)./(!
%*&%(#./(
() !-!,%
,"./(
!),') !-./(
,)./(
&!"!,.$
%0!
$% !-
%$.&"!-./(
 3,%.%(#./(
%1(./(
(#( /(


-%,!-$'


3&&%(#).(
& (/,$
3 !'!,!./(
 3'%(#./(
"!!!"
!),$'

$% !-
!"
(#(!#
% (!#
%##(#!.
%2
$% !-


)'./(


-%
%0!
$% !-

!"
%
!!

!$ 
 
!!"
%"
 

!..!-"),

)%(#1%
 
!),().$!-&!$
 %
./(
$,!!
$% !-
/-(.,!)
!,!./(
)#!.$!,
.
"%0!
$% !-
!)&!$
!(
$% !-
3, &!$
!(
$% !-
&&
!
$
./,!
!(
$% !-
, (1!#
%13(((
!(
$% !-
1%.$
, (1!#
.)!
!(
$% !-
&.!,
 %.%)(
*./(


3& !-&!$
6
!"
""
"!!
!
"


!.

/-/'
)("%%!( %
-&%-

/)/-
%(
&)%-
20%%%
)&%),/'
-%./-

)(
'% !&1%
2


)(
(!)
)'!-.(
1%
0%%%

!.
/,/'
"),(%/'
6
)(
1%./(!

!.
/-
+/)
%%./,
1!-.
,%(#!

/'

'(-%
%(
6
),./(
!
"
 
'
&!
$ !$"


Table 3 List of estates in Augustus ii. 6 (left column) and Vitellius D. vii (right column).

62

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972)


!

!
!
!

! !
 
!

 







&



&










&
$$$


&
'


 #

 
 
 ! 




&



&


#'
'


&
 







&



&
&

! 





"


&
&
!


&

!







$


&








$


&
&
%








$


 &
&
 !





$


&
&

#

&
##





$

&
&
 









&
&




&

&

#

#
&


&





"


&
&
#




 
&
"


&
&
!
!


&
%



'
 
! 
!

 







&
&
!


 






#
!

&
# 
!

  
!

#
!

&&
!






 & 
 
 





&

!






&

&
 

!








&
 
 #





%



 
!


#%!






&
 

#




 

&
 








&
 

!





"

&
 
!
 






& 
  











&
 








&
 
%







&
&


%

 !





&

 
#


Table 4 Order of boundary clauses in Augustus ii. 6 (left column) and Vitellus D. vii (right column)

63

Peter A. Stokes burnan’). The ‘lea’ and ‘Beadgyth’s spring’ or ‘well’ (‘febban leahe, eonan on beadegyee wyllan’) could have been somewhere around SP061738, where the modern boundary leaves the brook, and ‘byric æcer’ seems likely to have been Birch Acre, which is on the modern boundary at SP069734. ‘Fos geat’ cannot refer directly to the Fosse Way, as that road ran some twenty miles south-east of Beoley, but was presumably a ditch in the area.45 The Ordnance Survey maps also show many pits in the area, any one of which could have been the ‘black pit’ (‘blacan pyt’). To establish the bounds more securely requires further investigation but it seems that at least some of these new points can be securely located. Three boundary-clauses are found only in Vitellius D. vii and are therefore ‘new’ insofar as they have not been studied before. One of these can be identified easily, namely Wyegate in Gloucestershire (‘Wiggangeat’). The second is Cumbtune, presumably the Comtune of Augustus ii. 6 which has not been identified but which Kelly has suggested should be near Broadway and Childswickham.46 Indeed it is striking that the bounds of Broadway and Cumbtune both include references to wad beorh, ‘woad barrow’. If these references are both to the same place, and if Hooke is correct in her reconstruction of Broadway’s bounds, then Cumbtune must be immediately south of Broadway in modern Buckland or Snowshill, Gloucestershire.47 The bounds of Cumbtune are not inconsistent with this as they contain several references to steep slopes which match the geography of that area (slæd, ‘valley’; beorgh, ‘barrow’; ofre, ‘bank’; cumb, ‘coomb’; hyll, ‘hill’), but locating specific features has not yet proven possible and the location of the estate is by no means certain. The third boundary-clause is very incomplete, with only the last four boundary-points surviving, and so it cannot be identified with absolute certainty. However, one of these points is neowern, a good candidate for which is modern Newerne near Lydney. As Kelly has pointed out, only three estates are named in the list of Augustus ii. 6 but are not covered by the boundaryclauses of that document, namely Longney, Lydney and Wyegate, all in Gloucestershire. Wyegate and probably Lydney have now been accounted for, and it is entirely possible that the bounds for Longney preceded those of Lydney in the transcript but are now lost to fire. Finally, a rather cryptic comment is included in the transcript after the bounds: ‘7 Wærfere bysceop gebocede anne hagan Æeelune into Cumbr[incg]tune on Wigorneceastre . lxx 45

47

Perhaps relevant here is a moat at SP084715, or perhaps Moss Lane at SP080695 if some cor46 ruption is allowed in the text. Kelly, ‘S 786’. The common points are ‘on ta ealdan dic æt wad beorhe’ and ‘swa y[mb] ea fif æceras eæt on wad beorh’ respectively; for the former, see Hooke, Worcestershire, pp. 226 and 229. The ‘besewe springe’ in the bounds of Cumbtune might also be a corruption of Broadway’s ‘seofan wyllan’.

64

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) 48

. p . xlv . p’. This ‘Wærfere’ was presumably Wærfrith, bishop of Worcester ¯ ⫻ 872¯⫺ 907 ⫻ 915, who appears in a number of charters and other 869 records from this time, but none of these refers to this transaction with Æthelhun.49 Indeed it is unclear who this Æthelhun was, as several possibilities are evident: perhaps the most intriguing is Wærfrith’s successor as bishop of Worcester (907 ⫻ 915 ⫺ 915 ⫻ 922), but other possibilities include three different abbots and a Mercian dux.50 S 788: Somers Charter 16 Given the similarities between the two main versions of S 786, and given the good Old English in both, it seems that the two versions’ boundary-clauses, like the lists of estates, were produced relatively close to each other in both time and place, and that both were produced with detailed knowledge not only of Pershore’s holdings but also of the landscape itself. The question remains how the two versions relate to each other and why two versions were produced, but to progress with this some further documents must be considered. The first of these, Somers Charter 16, is not a copy of S 786 but is integral to any discussion of the pancart from Pershore. The Somers charter is in favour of Worcester Cathedral and dated 972. The document is now lost but it was printed by Smith and also summarized by Patrick Young.51 It has long been recognized that this document is a forgery, and specifically that the text is based very closely on that of S 786.52 Indeed, much of the text is identical, and the few changes are very crude indeed, such as altering the name of the abbot from Foldbriht to ‘N’ (for nomen), presumably because the forger did not know what name to insert. Given that there are two versions of S 786, however, the question that naturally arises is which version was used when fabricating S 788. For once there is little doubt: examination of the documents’ structures makes it clear that the forger used the transcript-version, not the single sheet. S 788 has exactly the same structure as the transcript, including the relative positions 48

49

50 51

52

‘And Bishop Wærferth booked a haga to Æthelhune at Comberton in Worcester’. The numbers and abbreviations are obscure; possibilities include a sum of money (seventy pounds and forty-five pence) or an area of land (seventy perticae by forty-five perticae), but both of these seem much too large for a single haga. ‘Wærfrith 6’, Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England (last accessed 10 January 2007). ‘Æthelun 12’ through ‘Æthelun 18’ in Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England. Bede, Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, ed. J. Smith (Cambridge, 1722), pp. 775–7. Young’s text is preserved on 131r of Cotton Vitellius C. ix and has been described somewhat misleadingly as an incomplete copy of S 788; see Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, p. 252, and Electronic Sawyer, no. 788. E. John, Land Tenure in Early England: a Discussion of some Problems, rev. ed. (Leicester, 1960), p. 104; The Early Charters of the West Midlands, ed. H. P. R. Finberg, 2nd ed. (Leicester, 1972), p. 118 (no. 303).

65

Peter A. Stokes of the tempore siquidem and prefato quoque coenobio clauses.53 This means first of all that the forger was even less inventive than previously thought: his apparent changes to the structure of the single-sheet version are instead simply blind copying of the previously unnoticed transcript-version. More importantly, though, it suggests very strongly that a copy of the transcript-version was kept in the Worcester Cathedral archives. Indeed, to my knowledge the similarity of S 788 is the only evidence in favour of S 786 being described as from the archive of ‘Worcester (ex Pershore)’.54 The transcript-version might reasonably be described thus, but the cathedral archive may never have held a copy of the single sheet, let alone Augustus ii. 6 itself. The significance of S 788 in discussion of S 786 is manifold. It is important for questions of provenance, as has just been discussed. It is also useful for establishing the text of S 786 as it can supply lost readings, particularly given the extensive damage suffered by both Augustus ii. 6 and Vitellius D. vii. Of these lost readings, perhaps the most tantalizing is the endorsement. All but one of the Orthodoxorum charters has a rubric or endorsement of some sort, but for most this is the rather uninteresting Charta Eadgari Regis or similar. Those from Pershore and Worcester seem to have rather more to offer, but most of the evidence from Pershore is lost. Joscelyn’s transcript once had a heading of some sort but this has been almost entirely destroyed by fire; the only text to survive is the phrase 7 sancte Benedicte (‘and to Saint Benedict’). The single sheet had a lengthy endorsement but this was subsequently subjected to very heavy wear or erasure and has not hitherto been successfully read. However, new techniques in digital image-enhancement have helped significantly, and a large portion of the text can be recovered in this way.55 Furthermore, Smith printed 53 54

55

See above, Table 2. For this description see Electronic Sawyer no. 786, after P. H. Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters: An Annotated List and Bibliography, revised ed. by S. E. Kelly (Cambridge, 1994), p. 506. Most of the text was recovered from a digital photograph of the endorsement by mixing the red and blue channels at -56% and 100% respectively, then adjusting the levels and overlaying the result on top of the original image. For these and other techniques, see especially J. Craig-McFeely and A. Lock, Digital Image Archive of Medieval Music: Digital Restoration Workbook, Oxford Select Specialist Catalogue Publications (Oxford, 2006) (last accessed 5 June 2008), and P. A. Stokes, ‘Recovering Anglo-Saxon Erasures: Some Questions, Tools and Techniques’, Palimpsests and the Literary Imagination of Medieval England, ed. R. Chai-Elsholz and T. Silec (forthcoming). Much more sophisticated techniques are being developed by Hao Zhang and Nick Kingsbury in the Department of Engineering at the University of Cambridge but these were not sufficiently developed at the time of writing. For the principles involved, see especially N. G. Kingsbury, ‘Complex Wavelets for Shift Invariant Analysis and Filtering of Signals’, Jnl of Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis 10 (2001), 234–53 and I. W. Selesnick, R. G. Baraniuk and N. G. Kingsbury, ‘The Dual-Tree Complex Wavelet Transform’, IEEE Signal Processing Mag. 22 (2005), 123–51.

66

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) a vernacular clause at the end of his text of S 788, and the position and formulation of this clause suggests very strongly that it was the endorsement of the original charter. The note reads ‘eis is se freolse 7 eara landa boc ee Eadgar cyning geute into Wigera ceastre Gode to lofe 7 Sancta Marian 7 Sancte Benedicte’.56 That which can be read of the endorsement of Augustus ii. 6 suggests that its text is very close to that printed by Smith for S 788. Combining this assumption with image-enhancement, different lighting, and the sizes and shapes of otherwise illegible letters, a likely reconstruction of the text is ‘[XP] eis [is se freolse] 7 tara landa boc [ee] Eadg[ar] cining geuee into Perscoran swa his yldran hit ær gesettan Gode to lofe 7 Sancta Marian’.57 Interestingly there is no sign of any reference to St Benedict here, unlike both S 788 and Joscelyn’s transcript; such a reference may have been particularly thoroughly worn but this seems unlikely and there is no evidence to suggest it, although there is sufficient space on the parchment. On the other hand, Sancte Benedicte is the one phrase that does survive in the transcript, and this with the other similarities in text suggest that the transcript-version once had an endorsement which was very close or identical to that of S 788, mutatis mutandis. provenance There are two pieces of evidence which demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that at least one version of S 786 was at Worcester, probably by the late eleventh century and certainly by the mid-twelfth. The first of these is S 788, which was produced at Worcester and which draws very heavily on the transcript-version of S 786, as discussed above: this suggests very strongly that either Joscelyn’s exemplar or a descendent of it was at Worcester, and it may not be a coincidence that this version is the one which contains a note relating to Wærfrith who was bishop there.58 However, we must also remember Joscelyn’s note, which Wanley preserved and which implies that Parker obtained his exemplar directly from Pershore.59 This document may have gone from Pershore to Worcester and back again, but perhaps more likely is that another copy of the same version was held in the cathedral archives. The second piece of evidence is yet another document: BL Cotton Augustus ii. 7, the next in sequence after the single sheet from Pershore. Augustus ii. 7 is a comparatively small piece of parchment measuring approximately 56

57

58

‘This is the privilege and grant of lands which King Edgar gave to Worcester in praise of God and St Mary and St Benedict.’ ‘This is the privilege and grant of lands which King Edgar gave to Pershore just as his elders did previously in praise of God and St Mary.’ Letters in square brackets are postulated on the basis of S 788; all other letters have been read with a reasonable degree of confidence, either from the original manuscript or with the image-enhancement described above, n. 55. For the note, see above, pp. 64–5. 59 See above, p. 41.

67

Peter A. Stokes 240–5 ⫻ 72 mm. It is written in a hand of the twelfth century and consists of a letter from Godfrey, archdeacon of Worcester, to one ‘Pope A’.60 The archdeacon refers to a charter, specifically an ‘original of this copy’ which has three seals attached to it:61 although the evidence is circumstantial it seems reasonable to assume that the he was referring to Augustus ii. 6. Certainly the sequential numbering of the two documents in Cotton’s library suggests that they have been associated since the seventeenth century, but such an association may have resulted from early modern rather than medieval activity. There is somewhat stronger evidence to support an early connexion, however. One such piece of evidence relates to the seals which Godfrey described. These were apparently those of King Edgar, Dunstan archbishop of Canterbury, and Ælfhere earl of Mercia. They have presumably been lost or destroyed – they certainly have not been identified to my knowledge – but if they were attached to Augustus ii. 6 then one would expect evidence of this to remain in the parchment, and there are indeed slits at the bottom of the single sheet. The evidence is not entirely straightforward, however. Two slits are clearly visible, one about 20 mm long and starting about 45 mm in from the left-hand edge, and the other about the same length and starting about 175 mm from the same edge. The bottom of the charter is in poor condition around the middle and right-hand side, however, and it has been repaired in places; it is therefore difficult to tell where any further slits may have been. Fortunately the nineteenth-century facsimile was printed before the repairs took place but this clearly shows five slits, all of similar length.62 This evidence is further supported by some early descriptions of the document which also mention the slits, although the descriptions are not entirely consistent.63 None of the slits is 60

61 62 63

The text is edited and translated in Appendix II of this paper, and I thank Simon Keynes for bringing it to my attention. Godfrey was archdeacon 1144 –1156 ⫻ 7 and c. 1158 ⫻ 9 – 1167 ⫻ 8: see John Le Neve, Fasti ecclesiae Anglicanae, 1066–1300, ed. D. E. Greenway, J. S. Barrow and M. J. Pearson, 10 vols. (London, 1968–) II, 105, and English Episcopal Acta 33: Worcester 1062–1185, ed. M. Cheney, D. Smith, C. Brooke and P. M. Hoskin (Oxford, 2007), pp. 180–4. Unfortunately there were three popes in succession during this time with the initial ‘A’: Anastasius IV (1153–4), Adrian IV (1154–9), and Alexander III (1159–81). ‘Noverit . . . quod contrascripti huius scriptum originale . . . sigilla tria . . . commendant.’ Facsimiles, ed. Bond III, 30. For the fifth slit, see below, p. 70. G. Hickes, Dissertatio epistolaris, in vol. III of his Linguarum veterum septentrionalium thesaurus grammatico-criticus et archaeologicus 3 vols. (London, 1703–5), p. 71: ‘verum charta illa, cui in collectione Cottoniana, . . . non tres (quod pace Seldeni dictum velim) sed quinque . . . incisuras habet’ (‘but that charter in the Cottonian collection has not three but five slits, pace Selden’). Selden described S 786 unambiguously and referred also to the letter of Godfrey; he did not specify that the charter was Cotton’s but this seems clear in the context. See J. Selden, A Brief Discourse Touching the Office of Lord Chancellor of England (London, 1671), pp. 2–3 (Ch. 2). Finally, six slits were described by Stevenson, ‘Yorkshire Surveys’, p. 6, n. 17, but (judging from the facsimile) his sixth slit looks more like accidental damage than deliberate cutting.

68

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) particularly neat or straight, nor are they any more than approximately parallel to the bottom edge, and it is possible that they are simply splits in the parchment, as can certainly be found elsewhere on the document. However, the presence of five such splits, all between the writing and the bottom edge of the parchment, all approximately horizontal and all approximately the same length, suggests human agency rather than accidental damage. The second piece of evidence for the letter’s association with the surviving single sheet begins with yet another early-modern manuscript. This is a copy of the archdeacon’s letter which was made by John Joscelyn and which survives in Corpus Christi College in Cambridge.64 The copy has the heading ‘Hoc scriptum appensum fuit magnæ chartæ de cœnobio Parshorensi in testimonium eius chartæ’.65 This states unambiguously that Godfrey’s letter was physically attached to the ‘great charter’ when Joscelyn saw it, and indeed it was apparently still so in the eighteenth century when it was described by George Hickes as being attached to a charter in Cotton’s collection.66 Joscelyn did not specify which ‘great charter’ he was describing, and so the letter could conceivably have been attached to the exemplar of Vitellius D. vii, but this would require an otherwise unknown charter to have been lost from Cotton’s collection some time after Hickes saw it. However, if the letter was indeed attached to the single sheet then one might expect to see physical evidence of this attachment. Neither Susan Kelly nor I have been able to find any evidence of stitching on either the charter or the letter,67 but other physical evidence suggests that the two documents were indeed joined. The pattern of folds in the single-sheet charter is somewhat unusual in that it has a pair of vertical folds down the centre, rather than a single fold. The two folds are about 18– 20 mm apart; the one to the left is approximately vertical, but the one on the right angles slightly towards the left as it comes down. Similarly, the twelfthcentury letter also shows two vertical folds which are themselves about 18 mm apart and again with the right-hand one angled slightly in to the left. Indeed, careful comparison of the two charters together reveals that the folds match 64

65

66

67

The copy is Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 111, p. 135, part of a small section written by Joscelyn and now bound between a twelfth-century cartulary from Bath Abbey and a set of transcripts by the antiquarian Robert Talbot. See M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1909–12) I, 242–3 (no. 111). I again thank Simon Keynes for bringing this copy to my attention. ‘This writ had been attached to the great charter from the monastery of Pershore in witness to that charter.’ ‘Verum charta illa, cui in collectione Cottoniana, Godefridi litterae suffixae cernuntur . . .’ (‘But that charter in the Cottonian collection, to which Godfrey’s letter has been attached beneath . . .’): Hickes, Dissertatio epistolaris, p. 71. However, Wanley made no suggestion that the two documents were attached: see Wanley, Librorum veterum catalogus, p. 258. Kelly, ‘S 786’.

69

Peter A. Stokes extremely closely, and this indicates that the two pieces of parchment were once folded together. Specifically, the lower edge of Augustus ii. 7 was once aligned with the bottom line of text in Augustus ii. 6, and on the horizontal axis the letter was apparently placed approximately in the middle of the single sheet. The problem of stitch-marks remains, but even this can probably be accounted for. The letter has been trimmed, at least along the bottom edge, as the bottom of the letters in a sixteenth-century note on the dorse have been cut off.68 Much more significantly, Augustus ii. 6 has a slit on the bottom between the two vertical folds, and the letter also has a slit at the same point between its corresponding folds. Furthermore, the bottom five lines of writing on the single sheet seem to be slightly more smudged than those immediately above, and these lines correspond to the area that would have been covered by the letter if it had been attached as just described. This difference in smudging is very slight and may be due to any number of other circumstances, but it does match the other evidence very well. Finally, Hickes’s description of the letter as suffixa (‘attached below’), rather than the more general appensa (‘attached’) used by Joscelyn, also suggests attachment at the bottom, although Hickes may not have meant the word so literally.69 None of these points is conclusive in itself, but in combination it seems certain that Augustus ii. 7 was attached to Augustus ii. 6 before Joscelyn’s time and also that the document which Archdeacon Godfrey described was most likely our surviving single sheet. Some questions remain, however. Godfrey wrote that the seals were attached to ‘the copy of this charter’; this implies that his letter was referring to a copy which lacked seals rather than the original which had them, but it seems entirely reasonable that a copy of the letter would have been stored with the original charter. The evidence seems to suggest that Augustus ii. 6 was the original at Pershore; Godfrey’s copy was probably derived from this, unless it was a copy of the other version and he, like so many after him, failed to notice the difference. Another question is that if Joscelyn saw Augustus ii. 6 with the archdeacon’s letter attached, and if he thought that seals had been attached to 68 69

For the note, see below, p. 77. See above, note 66. It is perhaps relevant that surviving single-sheet charters with parchment attached seem to be stitched along the bottom, although this stitching need not have been (and in some cases was certainly not) Anglo-Saxon. Examples include BL Cotton Augustus ii. 98 (S 163; Facsimiles, ed. Bond II, 9), BL Stowe Charter 17 (S 293; Facsimiles, ed. Sanders III, 17), BL Cotton Charter viii. 16A (S 416; Facsimiles, ed. Bond III, 3), and perhaps BL Cotton Augustus ii. 29 (S 1171; Facsimiles, ed. Bond I, 2), although the holes in this last document look very different and seem to have served a different purpose. For these, including digital photographs, see S. Keynes et al., ‘A Classified List of Anglo-Saxon Charters on Single Sheets’ (last accessed 22 March 2008), nos. 33, 56, 91 and 2 respectively.

70

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) this document – indeed the seals may still have been in place at that time70 – then why did he chose to copy the other version? Although there are many possibilities, perhaps the simplest is that he made his copy before he was aware of Augustus ii. 6. Joscelyn’s comment in his notebook that he obtained the original from Matthew Parker suggests that he may have copied it in Cambridge or Lambeth before going to Worcester or Pershore.71 Although it is unknown when Parker obtained the exemplar which Joscelyn copied, the comment at least allows the possibility that it was acquired not long after the abbey was dissolved in 1537, at a time when Parker was still Master of Corpus Christi College in Cambridge and when Joscelyn was still a young child. Furthermore, Augustus ii. 6 may never have been at Worcester at all: Godfrey could have travelled to Pershore, or the document could have travelled to the archdeacon. Joscelyn may then have found Augustus ii. 6 some time during the period 1560–77 when he was prebend at Hereford and spent time at Worcester collecting manuscripts and making transcripts, as demonstrated not only by the number of Anglo-Saxon books from Worcester Cathedral which entered Matthew Parker’s library but also by the number of texts in Vitellius D. vii which he copied directly from manuscripts at Worcester.72 Joscelyn would therefore have had ample opportunity to find any document if it was at Worcester, and it is entirely likely that he would also have travelled the nine miles or so to Pershore to examine the holdings there, just as Leland had done a generation or so before.73 Whatever the case, someone at some time seems to have compared the two versions and to have recognized the differences between them. As discussed above, some words in the single sheet have been underlined in a dark ink, and a caret-symbol added.74 These annotations are not random, however: the ones in dark ink all correspond precisely to the points where the two texts deviate (see below, Table 5, and compare above, Table 2). There is insufficient evidence to date the annotations at all closely, but the darker ink is not typically Anglo-Saxon, and a possible candidate for adding them must again be John Joscelyn. There is little doubt that he saw both versions of the charter, given 70

71 72

73

The seals were missing by the time Selden described the document in the 1670s (A Brief Discourse, pp. 2–3), but they may perhaps have been present still in the sixteenth century. See above, p. 41. Catalogus Librorum Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Wigorniensis made in 1622–1623 by Patrick Young, ed. I. Atkins and N. R. Ker (Cambridge, 1944), pp. 9–11; see also N. R. Ker, Medieval Libraries of Great Britain, 2nd ed., Royal Hist. Soc. Guides and Handbooks 3 (London, 1964), p. 206; and M. Budny, Insular, Anglo-Saxon, and Early Anglo-Norman Manuscript Art at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge: an Illustrated Catalogue, 2 vols. (Kalamazoo, MI, 1997) I, xlv–xlvii. For Leland’s movements and acquisitions for King Henry VIII, see Catalogus Librorum, ed. Atkins and Ker, pp. 8–9, as well as J. Leland, De rebus Britannicis collectanea, 2nd ed., 6 vols. 74 (London, 1770) IV, 160. See above, p. 38.

71

Peter A. Stokes his copy of the one and his copy of the letter attached to the other. It may also be significant that dots are visible in the left-hand margin of Joscelyn’s notebook alongside the last three boundary-clauses. These dots appear to be in the same ink as the main text and are presumably Joscelyn’s. Unfortunately we cannot be certain if any other bounds had similar dots because the left-hand margins of most pages have been destroyed by fire. Nevertheless, it is a striking coincidence that the boundary-clauses which are so marked are precisely the ones which are not found in the single-sheet version, and this may also suggest comparison of the two versions. Perhaps, then, our early-modern antiquaries had noticed the difference in texts which most twentieth-century scholars had not.75 Annotation

Reading in Aug. ii.6

Reading in Vitell. D.vii

Pencil underline Ink ‘caret’ Ink underline Vertical line Ink underline Ink underline

decentissime collocauit concessi sunt. ^ Id est in Percoran Actun Suthstoce [Start of group] wic viii | et duarum fornacium Hortun: eiusdem perpetualiter . . . uigente priuilegio. Si quis uero . . .

Vertical line Red bracket

[Bounds of Whitlafston] [Between bounds of Powick and Leigh] crucietur. eis sindon ta lond gemæra

decentissime collocauit concessi sunt. Tempore siquidem Stock Upton [Not in group] wic viii et duarum fornacium Hortun, et dimidium mansi uigente priuilegio. [Hec] sunt nomina . . . [Bounds of Whitlafston omitted] [Powick and Leigh have single boundary-clause] libertatis. Hec sunt termini

Ink underline

Table 5 Annotations in Augustus ii. 6. Those in dark ink are given here with grey background.

c onclusion Many questions still remain from this discussion. The precise relationship between the two versions has not been fully elucidated, nor the question why they were both apparently produced at about the same time. Perhaps one hint towards an answer is the number of alterations to Augustus ii. 6; it almost looks as if this is an early working copy, although the script seems too careful and consistent for a simple draft, and even if it was first planned as such the seals clearly indicate that it was later deemed authoritative. However, Pershore’s land-holdings were very unstable during the first third or so of the eleventh 75

Another possibility is that these were added when the text was reworked to produce the transcript version, if this was the sequence of events; see above, p. 58.

72

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) century, as Edward the Confessor gave most of its estates to Westminster.76 This instability may explain the need for alteration, if Augustus ii. 6 was indeed kept at Pershore and updated as events unfolded. The threat to Pershore’s holdings could also help to explain the need for two early charters, as additional documentation may well have helped any attempts to retain the land. It also suggests that both versions were drawn up between the purported date of 972 and the irrevocable loss of estates to Westminster during the Confessor’s reign. An alternative factor may be the fire which burnt down Pershore Abbey, apparently in the first few years of the eleventh century;77 the original document could have been destroyed then and a new version drawn up almost immediately afterwards, and the palaeography and philology both seem to allow such a date. The monks at Pershore may have already lodged a copy at Worcester before the fire but need not necessarily have used this when recreating their archive, instead updating the text by use of other records. This is all speculative but it might explain the need for two different versions produced in such quick succession, and the number of erasures and alterations in the single sheet could also reflect a somewhat haphazard production. Certainly the Orthodoxorum charters remain a fascinating but complex source of evidence for Anglo-Saxon England during the tenth century, but it is also worth remembering that their importance and interest extended well beyond the Norman Conquest, with the two versions from Pershore demonstrably receiving attention at least once in almost every century from the eleventh to today.78

appendix i: the translation of augustus ii. 6

This translation includes all of the Latin text but omits the bounds and witness-list. It was first made independently of Hudson’s edition and translation of the closely related 76

77

78

S 1143–46; compare also 174v–175r of Domesday book: Domesday Book: a Survey of the Counties of England ‘Liber de Wintonia’ compiled by direction of King William I, ed. and trans. J. Morris et al., History from the Sources, 38 vols (Chichester, 1975–) XVI.8 (174c–175b). Leland, Collectanea I, 242 and 244; J. Leland, The Itinerary of John Leland the Antiquary, 3rd ed., 9 vols. in 5 (Oxford, 1770) V, 2. Note also the statements of witnesses recorded in an attempt to establish Pershore’s holdings after the monastery was again burned down and their register destroyed in the thirteenth century; the document is BL Add. Charter 42,605 and was printed by R. Dodsworth and W. Dugdale, Monasticon Anglicanum, 3 vols. (London, 1655–73) I, 205–8; see also Victoria History, ed. Willis-Bund and Doubleday II, 128 and 130. I thank Rosalind Love for her comments on the translations in this paper, and Simon Keynes for his assistance and comments; any errors that remain are, of course, entirely my own. I also thank the Isaac Newton Trust and the Leverhulme Trust for their financial support, without which much of this would not have been possible.

73

Peter A. Stokes Orthodoxorum charters from Abingdon.79 However, his translation was used to help correct and improve this one, and my debt to him will be evident to anyone who compares the two. By the counsel of orthodox men of ecclesiastical strength we are most frequently instructed that we, entirely subjected subjects, serve Him who, arranging the fabric of the whole world in a marvellous and ineffable sequence, set up the microcosm (namely Adam), most fittingly with Eve side by side (namely as a companion) with the joy of paradisiacal delightfulness. Adam was formed at last with four-formed material and inspired with nourishing breath to a likeness of Himself, and He placed him over all things which He had formed in the world below except for one thing forbidden as a test. Led astray – oh woe! – by diabolical sophistry, enticed by the chameleonic and persuasive virago’s subterfuge, with the prohibition silenced, the glutton bit into the forbidden fruit, was cast down, and fully earned perpetual death for himself and his descendants in this wretched world. Since the prophets were foretelling and disclosing with hidden doctrine the highest king’s eternal prognostics from heaven, a shining angel brought down from on high the good word to the orthodox, not as the factious loquacity of the Jews speaks ineptly, but encompassing the most agreeable eloquence of the ancients and moderns, rendering useless the Arian and Sabellian incantations by crushing them under foot with mystical speech, and calling us from the blindness of powerless darkness to the tearlessness of heavenly inheritances; the angel slipped down from the thresholds on high and is seen to have sung amazing songs into the ear of the undefiled virgin, as the evangelical utterances promulgate; the whole (namely catholic) church cries out to her by bellowing high with one voice: ‘Blessed are you, virgin Mary, you who believed; those things will be fulfilled in you which were told to you by the Lord.’ Amazing to say, the word is made flesh and is made body, namely that of which the evangelist, towering above with the height of all perceptions, says ‘In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God’, and so on. That is, after this incarnation was taken up from the virgin, the crime of the ancient virgin is removed and on all women is bestowed glory renowned in its shining marvels. Thus after the sweet-smelling divinity of Christ was left untouched, after his humanity had suffered, happily liberty came to the bounden servants. Hence I Edgar, by the support of the high-throned one ruler of the English and the other peoples living all around far and wide, so that I may deserve to obtain participation in this liberty by the mercy of the high-throned governor: to the monastery held to be located in that famous place which is named by the inhabitants of this race with the noble name Pershore, and dedicated to Mary the ever-virgin mother of our Lord and also to blessed Peter, chief of the apostles, and to his fellow apostle Paul; to monks living by the Rule I grant eternal liberty of monastic privilege, insofar as after the death of the exemplary abbot Foldbriht in whose times this restoration of liberty has been granted with Christ favouring it, let the whole congregation of the aforementioned monastery appoint as abbot him whom it will have elected for itself with a fitting council, choosing him rightly from that same troop of brothers according to the regulating institutes of blessed Benedict. 79

Historia Ecclesia, ed. Hudson I, 60–5 (S 658), 94–9 (S 673) and 140–50 (S 876).

74

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) Let the liberty of this privilege be held hereafter in perpetual use by all catholic people, and let no outsider, relying on tyrannical obstinacy and seizing the right of power, exercise it in the aforementioned monastery, but may the community of the same monastery glory in the privilege of perpetual liberty as I have said before. Moreover let the aforesaid monastery be free of all earthly servitude in the same way in which it had been freed by our predecessor, namely by King Coenwulf, the most vigorous in orthodox faith, just as is contained in an ancient privilege which Earl Beornoth obtained: indeed the fields which were granted to our Lord Jesus Christ and his mother Mary by me myself restoring that right, for use of the monks in times ancient and modern, by kings and religious people of both sexes, that is namely [. . .] hides belonging to Pershore: ten hides at Bricklehampton, ten at Comberton, five at Pensham, sixteen at Eckington, ten at Birlingham, ten at Defford, ten at Strensham, ten at Besford, [. . .] at Croombe, ten at [Severn] Stoke, ten at Pirton, four at Wadborough, three at Chevington, three at Broughton, ten at Peopleton, ten at Snodsbury, seven at Naunton [Beauchamp], four at Abberton, five at Wihtlafestune, five at Flyford, five at Grafton [Flyford], five at Dormston, five at Martin Hussingtree, three at Broughton [Hackett], two at Libbery, thirty at Longdon, seven at Powick, three at Leigh, three at Acton [Beauchamp], forty at South Stoke, Hillesley, Tresham, Kilcott, Oldbury, Didmarton, Badminton and [Hawkesbury] Upton, ten at Dyrham, five at Longney, six at Lydney, six at Wyegate, five at Beoley, five at Yardley, ten at Alderminster, twenty at Broadway, five at Compton; ten at [Childs] Wickham, and sites of eighteen vats in two places for the purpose of manufacturing salt, ten at Middlewich and eight at Netherwich, and a station of two furnaces at Witton and a vat which is called Westrincge, with one and a half hides at the place called Horton [Hampton Lovett]; let them hold the same liberty in perpetuity. Since, at the time when the lands which I have granted with devout mind to the Lord had been unjustly taken away from the holy church of God, some treacherous men, usurping the hereditary charters, issued new ones to themselves, yet in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit we have commanded that no catholic should accept these same charters but they should be considered as having been repudiated in anathema by all the faithful with the old privilege thriving continually. But if some madman is so led astray with the folly of avarice (which we do not wish) that he should try with impudent daring to infringe this abundance of our munificence, may he be estranged from the community of the holy church of God and likewise from participation in the sacred body and blood of Jesus Christ the Son of God through whom the whole orb of lands has been freed from the ancient enemy of the human race, and may he be numbered on the left side with Judas, betrayer of Christ, unless first he shall have humbly repented with due satisfaction that he presumed to act as an insurgent against the holy church of God; may the apostate not obtain any forgiveness in this active life nor rest in the contemplative one, but may the most miserable man be driven into the eternal fires of the Pit with Ananias and Saphira and tormented without end. [. . .]80 80

The charter bounds are given here but these are not translated; for further details see above, n. 40.

75

Peter A. Stokes In the year of the Lord’s Incarnation 972 the written contract of this munificence was written with these witnesses agreeing whose names are recorded below, laid out each in its own order according to the authority of each, with God supporting. [. . .]81 Also to the monastery falls the aforementioned quantity of three iugera and two praedia in that well-known city which is called Worcester by its inhabitants, which (quantity) I grant to be held under condition of the same liberty in perpetuity in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.

appendix ii: the letter from godfrey, archdeac on of worcester

The text and translation of Godfrey’s letter is provided below. Two manuscripts were collated for this text: A London, British Library, Cotton Augustus ii. 7 (s. xii) C Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 111, p. 135 (s. xvi) The principles of editing are the same as those used for S 786 above.82 text a

Reuerentissimo domino et patri A. summo pontifici, minimus sanctitatis suęb seruus Godefridus dictus Wigornensis archidiaconus, offerre domino incensum dignum in odorem suauitatis. Inter cetera uirtutum indumenta quę decent seruum bonum et fidelem presertim coram domino suo, ualde necessarium estimo sinceritatis et ueritatis ornamentum. Si quis enim huiuscemodi uestem nuptialem non habuerit, nonc intromittetur ad nuptias, sed eicietur foras, nec ascendet superius, ut sit honor ei coram simul discumbentibus. Quia qui sine ueritate est, patrifamilias placere non potest. Ego itaque, ut tamen non loquaturd os meum opera hominum, huius rei gratia ueritatis emulator existens, ad ueritatem uocatus, ueritati testimonium perhibeoe, ut ex temporali ueritatis exequutionef ab eo qui ueritas est ueritatem mereamini mercedis ęternę. Nouerit itaque sanctitas uestra uerum esse quod contrascriptig huius scriptum originale in uirtute sanctę trinitatis sigilla tria, trium personarum autenticarum, ad ueritatem triplici confirmatione commendant. Est autem sigillum primum illustris regis Ędgari, secundum Sancti Dunstani Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi, tercium Alferi ducis Merciorum. Sicut ex diligenti litterarum impressarum inspectione euidenter accepi. Operetur igitur si uobis placet filię uestrę sanctę Persorensis ęcclesię detrimentum intolerabile. Operetur inquam infra pietatis paterne uiscera compassionem, compassio restitutionem, restitutio consolationem, et quę ex toto fere defecit, quia non erat qui adiuuaret; nunc, nunc tandem, cum acceperitis tempus iustitias iudicandi, sentiat prophetam esse in Israelh, 81

The witness-list is found here, for which see above, pp. 48–50.

76

82

See above, p. 43.

King Edgar’s Charter for Pershore (AD 972) eoque efficatius, quoniam et domnusi abbas et ceteri fratres inibi Deo seruientes per uitę quę coram Deo est sanctitatem et ab hiis qui foris sunt testimonii sani meruere celebritatem. Valeat in perpetuum Sanctitas Vestra. n Hic A. fuit Alexander tertius cuius tempore Galfridus Nothus Henrici Secundi fuit Archidiaconus Wigornensis, Lincolnensis, etj Eboracensis et Cantuariensisk, et postea anno 1174 electus episcopus Lincolnensis. Ut Mattheus Parisiensis, et Mattheus Westmoniensis anno praedicto. Et anno 1178 decorauit eum cingulo militari. Et Florilegus anno 1182 dicit Galfridum renunciasse ministerium episcopalem ex superbia generis. Hic Galfridus fuit 32 Archiepiscopus Eboracensis anno dominil 1189 factus, et eo anno impetitus fuit per Hugonem Dunelmensem et Hubertum Sarum, ut eo anno scribit Walterus Couentrensis.m n Vide Wilhelmum Nouiburg libro secundo capitulo 22 et libro quarto capitulo 2.n a

b c d e f g h i j k l m n

Hoc scriptum appensum fuit magnæ chartæ de cœnobio Persoran Parshorensi in testimonium eius chartæ heading in C sue] tue C non] noti C loquatur] loquantur C perhibeo] exhibeo C exequutione] execucione C contrascripti] conscripsi C Israel] isrł A Israel C domnus] dominus C et] om. C et Cantuariensis] inserted A domini] om. C Hic . . . Couentrensis.] written on dorse in an early modern hand in A; written at end of text in C Vide . . . cap. 2.] marginal note to preceding paragraph in A; written after preceding paragraph in C

translation To the most reverend lord and father, Pope A, Godfrey, called Archdeacon of Worcester, the least servant of your Holiness to offer the lord an incense worthy in the odour of its sweetness.83 Among other clothing of virtues which above all befit a good and faithful servant before his lord, I hold especially necessary the ornament of sincerity and truth. For if anyone shall lack wedding clothes of this sort he shall not be admitted to the wedding but shall be thrown out the door,84 nor shall he go up higher so that at the same time there be honour for him before those sitting at the table.85 Because he who is without truth cannot please the head of the family. Accordingly, so that my mouth speaks not the works of men,86 for the sake of this matter being exceedingly zealous87 for the truth, called to truth, I offer witness to truth, so that, out of a moment’s execution of the truth, from him who is truth you might deserve the truth of eternal reward. And so may your Holiness know that it is true that three signs of three authenticating 83 87

Ecclus. XLV.16. Gal. I.14.

84

Matt. XXII.12–13.

77

85

Luke XIV.10.

86

Ps. XVI.4.

Peter A. Stokes people in virtue of the holy Trinity do commend the original of this copy to the truth with triple confirmation. For the first is the seal of the most famous King Edgar, the second of St Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury, the third of Ælfhere, earl of Mercia; I have accepted it as evidently thus from careful inspection of the letters which have been stamped on it. It could, therefore, affect an intolerable loss for your daughter the holy church of Pershore if it pleases you. It could, I repeat, effect compassion with the mercy of paternal love, compassion could bring about restitution, restitution consolation, and that is something which has been almost entirely lacking because there was noone who would help; now, now at last, since you have accepted that it is time to judge with right judgements,88 let him know that there is a prophet in Israel,89 and all the more efficaciously, since both the lord abbot and the other brothers serving God there through the holiness of a life in God’s sight as well as from those who are outside the community have deserved a cause for celebration at sound testimony. May your Holiness fare well in perpetuity. This A. was Alexander III, in whose time Geoffrey90 the bastard son of Henry II was archdeacon of Worcester, Lincoln, and York (and Canterbury), and afterwards was elected bishop of Lincoln in 1174 (as Matthew Paris and Matthew of Westminster under the aforementioned year).91 And in 1178 he was knighted. And Florilegus says that in 1182 Geoffrey had renounced his bishopric out of pride of birth.92 This Geoffrey was made thirty-second archbishop of York in 1189, and in that year was attacked by Hugh of Durham and Hubert of Sarum, as Walter of Coventry writes for that year.93 See William of Newburgh, Book 2 Chapter 22, and Book 4 Chapter 2.94 88 90

91

92

93

94

89 Ps. LXXIV.3. IV Kings V.8. Sic: the author of this note has apparently confused Archdeacon Godfrey with Geoffrey Plantagenet, archbishop of York. Matthæi Parisiensis, monachi Sancti Albani, chronica majora, ed. H. R. Luard, RS [57], 7 vols. (London, 1872–83) II, 295. For Joscelyn’s knowledge of these texts, see Graham and Watson, The Recovery of the Past, pp. 89–90 and 100–101 (J2.77–8 and J2.100–101). For so-called ‘Matthew of Westminster’, see also Matthæi Parisiensis, monachi Sancti Albani, Historia Anglorum, sive, ut vulgo dicitur, Historia minor, item, ejusdem Abbreviatio chronicorum Angliæ, ed. F. Madden, RS [44], 3 vols. (London, 1866–9) I, xx–xxvii. ‘Florilegus’ is again ‘Matthew of Westminster’: see Historia Anglorum, ed. Madden, xx, for discussion, and Rogeri de Wendover liber qui dicitur Flores historiarum ab anno domini MCLIV, ed. H. G. Hewlett, RS [84], 3 vols. (London, 1886–9) II, 128–9 for the text. Memoriale fratris Walteri de Coventria: the Historical Collections of Walter Coventry, ed. W. Stubbs, RS [58], 2 vols. (London, 1872–3) I, 372; Graham and Watson, Recovery of the Past, pp. 85–6 (no. J2.69). Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I, ed. R. Howlett, RS [82], 4 vols. (London, 1884–9) I, 154–5 and 300–301; for Book 2, see also William of Newburgh, The History of English Affairs, ed. P. G. Walsh and M. Kennedy, 2 vols. (Warminster, 1988–) II, 90–3 (text) and 189 (commentary); for Joscelyn’s knowledge of William of Newburgh, see Graham and Watson, Recovery of the Past, pp. 81–2 (no. J2.60).

78

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield gifford charles-edwards † and helen mckee

abstract Several dry-point glosses were added to the Lichfield Gospels during the tenth or eleventh century, apparently recording the names of members of the pre-Conquest community at Lichfield. We consider the relationship of these glosses to the list of Anglo-Saxon names on p. 141 of the Gospels, and discuss parallels from elsewhere in the Insular world.

The eighth-century gospel book Lichfield, Cathedral Library, Lich. 1 – more commonly referred to as the Lichfield Gospels or the Gospels of St Chad – is one of the outstanding examples of Insular manuscript art. Its origins are, however, unclear. Its earliest known provenance is Llandeilo Fawr in Carmarthenshire, south-west Wales (where it received various additions during the ninth century), but the lack of comparable manuscripts from Wales has prevented recognition of the Lichfield Gospels as an identifiably Welsh book. By the tenth century, it had reached Lichfield (Staffordshire), where it has remained.1 Situated at the heart of Mercia, Lichfield was an important AngloSaxon city (its cathedral had been founded by St Chad in 669). It is, however, 11

The entry Wynsi[ge] pr[e]sul on p. 6 of the Lichfield Gospels provides the earliest evidence for its presence in Mercia; a man of this name was bishop of Lichfield from 963 ⫻ 964 to 975. On the manuscript, see E. A. Lowe, Codices Latini Antiquiores [hereafter CLA], 12 vols. and supp. (Oxford, 1934–71) II, second edition (Oxford, 1972), no. 159; W. M. Lindsay, Early Welsh Script (Oxford, 1912), pp. 3–5; D. Huws, Medieval Welsh Manuscripts (Aberystwyth, 2000), p. 5 and plate I; D. Jenkins and M. E. Owen, ‘The Welsh Marginalia in the Lichfield Gospels’, Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies [hereafter CMCS] 5 (Summer 1983), 37–66, and 7 (Summer 1984), 91–120; N. R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957; rev. imprint, 1990), p. 158 (no. 123); D. N. Dumville, A Palaeographer’s Review: the Insular System of Scripts in the Early Middle Ages, Volume One (Osaka, 1999), p. 123; R. Gameson, ‘The Insular Gospel Book at Hereford Cathedral’, Scriptorium 56 (2002), 48–79 (pp. 59–60, 67). A recently published discussion of the Lichfield Gospels has placed their origins firmly in Anglo-Saxon England: see M. P. Brown, ‘The Lichfield Angel and the Manuscript Context: Lichfield as a Centre of Insular Art’, Jnl of the British Archaeol. Assoc. 160 (2007), 8– 19, and compare Janet Backhouse’s assessment in The Making of England, ed. J. Backhouse and L. Webster (Toronto, 1991), no. 90 (p. 127). However, we would take issue with several of Professor Brown’s statements. In particular, we would note that the presence of runes in the Lichfield Gospels (specifically, four runic forms out of a total of 126 display letters) need not preclude Welsh origin. There is evidence from the earliest Welsh inscriptions (V. E.

79

Gifford Charles-Edwards and Helen McKee one from which regrettably little has survived – although an unexpected spotlight was shone on the shrine of St Chad c. 800 with the recent discovery of a magnificent sculpture of an angel, during archaeological investigations beneath the cathedral nave.2 One comparatively neglected feature of the Lichfield Gospels has been the existence of dry-point glosses – scratched with a stylus rather than written in ink – on several of its pages. Humfrey Wanley, and later Wendy Stein, observed several on pp. 217 and 226.3 Now that Gifford Charles-Edwards has identified additional stylus markings on p. 221 (the incipit page to Luke, one of the most heavily decorated in the book), a transcription and discussion of these glosses as a group seems appropriate. The rich decorative detail and precise penmanship of Insular gospel books focus the eyesight to operate at a certain specialized level. Dry-point glossing, an equally precise type of writing, may exist unnoticed on the same page, and is only revealed by close study. In order to see dry-point glosses clearly, the eye must focus in a quite different way, at an acute angle to the writing surface, and if possible in a raking light. Only by fixing the eye upon marks made by the flensing knife, or on follicles if the hair-side is being examined, will drypoint letters reveal themselves clearly. They are notoriously difficult to photograph, and those observed in the Lichfield Gospels are here presented as line drawings.

13

Nash-Williams, The Early Christian Monuments of Wales (Cardiff, 1950), Group 1) that Welsh letterers were making use of exotic alphabets. Moreover, there is a runic alphabet in the early ninth-century Welsh manuscript known as Liber Commonei: see Saint Dunstan’s Classbook from Glastonbury: Codex Biblioth. Bodleianae Oxon. Auct. F.4.32, facs. ed. R. W. Hunt (Amsterdam, 1961), f. 20r. We note in addition that the influence of runes on Insular display capitals, which has sometimes been affirmed (e.g. M. P. Brown, The Lindisfarne Gospels: Society, Spirituality and the Scribe (London, 2003), pp. 229, 236), is uncertain; the origins of the angularized letter forms in question lie in the epigraphic traditions of western Britain. Cf. C. Tedeschi, ‘Some Observations on the Palaeography of Early Christian Inscriptions in Britain’, in Roman, Runes and Ogham: Medieval Inscriptions in the Insular World and on the Continent, ed. J. Higgitt, K. Forsyth and D. N. Parsons (Donington, 2002), pp. 16–25 and G. Charles-Edwards, The Origin and Development of Insular Geometric Letters (Oxford, forthcoming). A good example of early geometric letter-forms from Wales is the Catacus inscription from Llanfihangel Cwm Du, Breconshire: A Corpus of Early Medieval Inscribed Stones and Stone Sculpture in Wales, I, ed. M. Redknap and J. M. Lewis (Cardiff, 2007), no. B21 2 (pp. 194–6). See Brown, ‘The Lichfield Angel’. H. Wanley, Librorum Vett. Septentrionalium . . . Catalogus Historico-Criticus (G. Hickes and H. Wanley, Antiquæ Literaturæ Septentrionalis Libri Duo (Oxford, 1703–5), II), p. 290, no. IX (bis); W. A. Stein, ‘The Lichfield Gospels’ (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California at Berkeley, 1980), p. 6 (she referred incorrectly to p. 227 rather than 226). Cf. The Liber Vitae of the New Minster and Hyde Abbey, Winchester, ed. S. Keynes (Copenhagen, 1996), p. 55.

80

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield a

b

c

d

Fig. 4a–d Lichfield dry-points

There is a small but growing collection of dry-point writings to provide comparanda,4 and we might include with them the sgraffito constructional notes made by metalworkers on metal.5 A series of scratched glosses extensive enough to provide a complete alphabet and varieties of stroke combinations exists in Dublin, Trinity College, Ussher 1 (noted and listed by William 14

15

Recent discussions of Anglo-Saxon dry-points include P. G. Rusche, ‘Dry-Point Glosses to Aldhelm’s De laudibus virginitatis in Beinecke 401’, ASE 23 (1994), 195–213, and A. Falileyev and P. Russell, ‘The Dry-Point Glosses in Oxoniensis Posterior’, Yr Hen Iaith: Studies in Early Welsh, ed. P. Russell (Aberystwyth, 2003), pp. 95–101. M. P. Brown, ‘Paten and Purpose: the Derrynaflan Paten Inscriptions’, The Age of Migrating Ideas, ed. R. M. Spearman and J. Higgitt (Edinburgh, 1993), pp. 162–7.

81

Gifford Charles-Edwards and Helen McKee O’Sullivan in the front end-papers of the rebind).6 Such letters were made with firm pressure on the upright stylus. Devoid of the linking strokes of cursive hands, this minimalist alphabet reduced letter-forms to the simplest straight down-strokes and tightly curved bows; it was written with a body height as small as one-sixteenth of an inch. In the order that they appear in the manuscript, the Lichfield dry-points (Fig. 4a–d) read: p. 217

[at the lower left of the page, to the left of + Teudur + Ourdol +] Wulfun Alchelm Eadric

p. 221

[in the centre of the left-hand margin] [ ]DVLF 7 + Berht/elf [in the bottom margin, just by Teudubr] [Pas]t [+icc]7

p. 226

[in the bottom margin] Berhtfled Elfled Wulfild

The content of these scratched glosses – Anglo-Saxon personal names8 – encourages the assumption that they were written in Anglo-Saxon England. Their script harmonizes with this: a form of Insular minuscule on pp. 217 and 226, and mixed majuscules on p. 221. Insular minuscule of one kind or another is found in Anglo-Saxon manuscripts from the seventh century until after the Norman conquest (it was the most common script-form until the middle of the tenth century), while mixed majuscules were also regularly used by English scribes. The date of these glosses is potentially very important: were they written in the tenth century or later (when the Lichfield Gospels are already known to have been at Lichfield), or might they pre-date the manuscript’s sojourn at Llandeilo Fawr (thus providing evidence for its ultimate origin in Anglo-Saxon England)? 16

18

P. Ó Néill, ‘The Earliest Dry-point Glosses in Codex Usserianus Primus’, A Miracle of Learning: Studies in Manuscripts and Irish Learning. Essays in honour of William O’Sullivan, ed. T. Barnard, D. Ó Cróinín and K. Simms (Aldershot, 1998), pp. 1–28; G. Charles-Edwards, ‘The Springmount Bog Tablets: their Implications for Insular Epigraphy and Palaeography’, Studia 7 Celtica 36 (2002), 27–45 (pp. 32–3). This reading is extremely tentative. Wulfun, Alchelm, Eadric, [ ]ulf, and Berhtelf are male names; Berhtfled, Elfled, and Wulfild are female.

82

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield There is also the question of why these names were entered into the Lichfield Gospels. Significantly, they are not the only personal names which the manuscript contains. While in Wales, it received numerous names (many accompanied by crosses), which are most likely to record persons to be commemorated at the altar at Llandeilo.9 The gospel book appears to have continued to function as a liber vitae (if that is what it was) when it was taken to Mercia. Apart from the mention of a priest called Wynsige on p. 1,10 there is an extensive list of Anglo-Saxon names on p. 141 (surrounding the lower half of the Welsh ‘Surexit’ memorandum): this list is headed with alpha et omega and looks like a formal record of souls to be remembered.11 We should not expect memorials to be inscribed with a stylus, however, since this renders them effectively invisible. Should we characterize the drypoint glosses in the Lichfield Gospels as ‘tourist’ graffiti, almost comparable with ‘I was here’ on a modern-day wall?12 Another curious point is that six out of the nine scratched names also appear in the long list of names added to p. 141: Wulfun, Alchelm, Eadric, Berhtfled, Elfled and Wulfild. It is particularly striking that Eadric and Alchelm appear side by side on the penultimate line of p. 141, just as they are to be found scratched close together on p. 217, and that Berhtfled and Ælffled appear side by side (partly in Greek letters) a few lines above on p. 141, just as they are to be found together on p. 226. Could the copyist(s) of the list of names on p. 141 also have written some, or all, of the dry-point glosses?13 To answer this question we turn to the dry-points’ palaeography. It is important to emphasize at the beginning the non-standard nature of the glosses’ script. As indicated above, the process of scratching letters onto parchment with a hard point results in rather different letter-forms from those produced by pen and ink. For example, there are no Insular wedges at the tops of ascenders.14 In addition, because it is impossible when using a hard point to 19 11

12

13

14

10 Jenkins and Owen, ‘Welsh Marginalia’, p. 55. See n. 1 above. For reproductions, see The Text of the Book of Llan Dâv Reproduced from the Gwysaney Manuscript, ed. J. Gwenogvryn Evans (Oxford, 1893), plate facing p. xliii; Jenkins and Owen, ‘Welsh Marginalia’, plate A. Other examples of names scratched into manuscripts with a stylus are similarly difficult to assess. EADB and +E+ in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Selden supra 30 (S.C. 3418) may commemorate Eadburh, eighth-century abbess of Minster-in-Thanet, while Liofric sacerdos Garulf leuita in London, British Library, Cotton Caligula A.xv appears to record the names of two members of the ninth-century community at St Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury: see Lowe, CLA, II, nos. 183, 257. The list of Anglo-Saxon names on p. 141 deserves much more attention than it has so far received. At first sight the entire block of text looks like the work of a single hand, but the number of scribes involved in this work is not certain: there may have been two or even three. Cf. A Palaeographer’s View: The Selected Writings of Julian Brown, ed. J. Bately, M. P. Brown and J. Roberts (London, 1993), pp. 189, 206–7.

83

Gifford Charles-Edwards and Helen McKee flow smoothly from one letter to the next, there is a high degree of separation, not only between individual letters, but also between parts of letters (especially noticeable on p. 217). The open e seen in, for example, Alchelm and Elfled is typical of this type of script.15 The number of hands involved in the execution of the Lichfield dry-points is not certain. While we may be dealing with three, four, or five – a different hand on each page, and perhaps two or even three on p. 221 – it is possible that the glosses on pp. 217 and 226 at least were by the same person. These two groups of three glosses each were scratched in the same type of minuscule script, and show similar variation of letter-forms, even within individual names (see l in Wulfild on p. 226 and u in Wulfun on p. 217). On the other hand, the higher visibility of gaps between pen-strokes on p. 217, and the use of rolled entry-strokes on p. 226 alone (see Berhtfled), mean that it is safer to assume that two different people were after all involved here, and that the resemblances between their contributions are simply owing to their having used the same (very common) script-type. (An interesting letter-form on p. 217 is the A of Alchelm, reminiscent of a display-capital A found in several high-grade Insular manuscripts.)16 The bottom inscription on p. 221, while also in a form of Insular minuscule, displays characteristics not seen on pp. 217 and 226, notably the a+s ligature (if that is what this is) and the convex top to t. It is also very difficult to decipher: its first letter (G? P? Æ?) appears anomalous, and [+ icc] does not make obvious sense. The two additional names which are visible on p. 221 contain letter-forms of a higher grade than those on the other pages. -DVLF and the ER- of Berhtelf are in Capitals of monumental, geometric type, although for htelf we see a shift down into minuscule again. It is possible that [ ]DVLF was written first, and that another hand was responsible for 7 + Berhtelf, connecting the two names with an et-nota. It is impossible to be certain as to the date of these glosses, partly because the normal morphology of the letter-forms has been distorted by the use of a hard point. The form of (rounded, single-compartment) a ligatured with e at the beginning of Eadric (p. 217) might suggest that we are not dealing with the tenth century, since during that period Anglo-Saxon minuscule script tended to feature square a (and this would have been easy to execute in ligature with the 15

16

Cf. Ó Néill, ‘Earliest Dry-point Glosses’, p. 4; Charles-Edwards, ‘Springmount Bog Tablets’, p. 33. Notably the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Book of Kells: see J. Higgitt, ‘The Display Script of the Book of Kells and the Tradition of Insular Decorated Capitals’, The Book of Kells: Proceedings of a Conference at Trinity College Dublin, 6–9 September 1992, ed. F. O’Mahony (Aldershot, 1994), pp. 209–33 (p. 225). For an additional example, see C. Nordenfalk, Celtic and Anglo-Saxon Painting (London, 1977), plate 13.

84

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield preceding e). However, the presence or absence of square a is not an invariable indicator of date. Single-compartment a is a regular feature of Insular minuscule from the earliest period, and it is not unknown in the tenth century. We may note that an e+a ligature very similar to that in Eadric appears in several examples of English Square minuscule, from the 960s in particular.18 It is also seen in later material, such as the second hand of the Beowulf-manuscript.19 Unfortunately, therefore, palaeography alone cannot assign a firm date to the dry-point glosses in the Lichfield Gospels. We can say, however, that their script would be consistent with a date in the tenth or eleventh century. We cannot rule out the possibility that they pre-date the episcopate of Wynsige (963/4–975), with whom the earliest identified Anglo-Saxon additions to the Gospels have been associated,20 but they are unlikely to pre-date it by much. This last is inferred not from palaeography but from their position on the page, which in two cases was evidently influenced by pre-existing Welsh additions to the Gospels.21 In other words, the Anglo-Saxon dry-points were made after the Lichfield Gospels had left Llandeilo Fawr, and do not provide evidence for any earlier provenance in England. We now return to the question of whether the Anglo-Saxon names on p. 141 of the Lichfield Gospels and the scratched glosses share a common hand. The answer appears to be in the negative. Although they were written in a mixture of minuscules and majuscules comparable to that in some of the dry-points, the Anglo-Saxon names on p. 141 include several different letter-forms (in addition to Greek majuscules). The most notable are minuscule a in the form ultimately derived from Uncial; f with cross-bar above the line of writing; and r usually without a descending stroke on the right. These forms are characteristic not of Insular minuscule but of Caroline minuscule, which was being written in English scriptoria from the 960s onwards.22 This specimen is likely 17

17

18

19

20 21

22

D. N. Dumville, ‘English Square Minuscule Script: the Background and Earliest Phases’, ASE 16 (1987), 147–79 (p. 153). See, for example, S 697 (A.D. 961) and S 1215 (A.D. 968). These manuscripts have been assigned respectively to ‘Phase V’ and ‘Phase VI’ of Anglo-Saxon Square minuscule: see D. N. Dumville, ‘English Square Minuscule Script: the Mid-Century Phases’, ASE 23 (1994), 133–64 (pp. 155 n. 122, 156 n. 123). London, British Library, Cotton Vitellius A.xv, ff. 129[132]–198[201] (saec. xi in.). Cf. D. N. Dumville, ‘Beowulf Come Lately: Some Notes on the Palaeography of the Nowell Codex’, Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 225 (1988), 49–63. See n. 1 above. The three names on p. 217 were placed in a small section of blank parchment to the left of + Teudur + Ourdol + and above ‘Chad 7’ (Jenkins and Owen, ‘Welsh Marginalia, Part I’, p. 55). On p. 221, the unreadable gloss [Pas]t[+icc] was tucked in above Teudubr. On the career of Caroline minuscule in England, see D. N. Dumville, English Caroline Script and Monastic History: Studies in Benedictinism AD 950–1030 (Woodbridge, 1993); R. Gameson, ‘The Colophon of the Eadwig Gospels’, ASE 31 (2001), 201–22.

85

Gifford Charles-Edwards and Helen McKee to date from relatively early in the career of Anglo-Caroline, and presumably no later than the second decade of the eleventh century (by which time English Caroline script had become the almost exclusive preserve of Latin material, and was in any case developing a range of new letter-forms). Its author may have been a priest: the prayer Domine benedic . . . which is written to the right of the names includes the phrase meis indignis precibus, suggesting an ecclesiastic’s private intercession. We have seen that the Anglo-Saxon names inscribed with a stylus in the Lichfield Gospels contain such standard Insular minuscule letter-forms that they are effectively undatable to any but the broadest bounds. It is suggestive, however, that they include several names which were also written in ink on p. 141.23 Two other names, while they appear only in the dry-points, do contain identical elements to some of the inked names: Wulfild (p. 226) may be compared with Wulfun and Wulfric on p. 141, and Berhtelf on p. 221 with Berhtfled on p. 141. We know that Anglo-Saxon children tended to be given names which included elements from their parents’ names.24 The similarities between the names in the dry-points and those in the collection on p. 141 may be merely coincidental, but it is not impossible that they relate to the same community. The simplest explanation for the personal names scratched into the Lichfield Gospels is that they represent informal commemorations of nine individuals from tenth- or eleventh-century Lichfield, presumably members of the religious community there. From its early history in Wales, the manuscript had served as a repository of both documents and names to be remembered, and it is not surprising that it was used for the same purposes in Anglo-Saxon England. However, the dry-point glosses which were added to the pages of the Gospels are puzzling in several respects. They are effectively invisible, unlike the inked names on p. 141, and their execution would not have been simple. By the time that they were added, not only must the volume have been a revered one, but the surface of the vellum would have hardened with age. How could anyone have approached so close to such a precious object that they could, slowly and painstakingly, have inscribed letters in it? It might have happened while the volume lay open upon an altar, but as good daylight is necessary to execute such work, this seems unlikely. The names have been written by hands accustomed to writing: we might speculate that the authors of the scratched glosses were in some way involved in the keeping of a library, or the 23

24

On the other hand, none of the names is uncommon; Berhtfled indeed occurs twice on p. 141 (towards the end of the bottom line, as well as next to Ælffled a little higher up). W. G. Searle, Onomasticon Anglo-Saxonicum (Cambridge, 1897), pp. xiii–xiv. For a recent discussion, see J. M. H. Smith, Europe After Rome. A New Cultural History 500–1000 (Oxford, 2005), pp. 90–2.

86

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield workings of a scriptorium. It appears that they wished to mark a personal link with the manuscript.25 Lemuel Hopkin-James discussed the significance of entering a name in a precious gospel book in his textual study of the Lichfield Gospels.26 He noted the ‘names by themselves with nothing but a cross before them’ which feature among the Welsh additions to the Lichfield Gospels, and made the parallel with those ‘whose names are in the book of life’ (Philippians IV.3). Entries in the (twelfth-century) Book of Llandaff indicate that names could be written in the ‘book of life’ (liber vitae) upon payment of a fee.27 Such entry of names, then, was a highly significant act. The difference between the names inserted via a commercial exchange and the dry-point entries with which we are concerned is that the former are visible and the latter invisible. This may support the suggestion that the scratched glosses record the names of monks and nuns who had a close connection with the keeping and display of the Lichfield Gospels, and of whom three or four had sufficient scribal knowledge to effect discreet dry-point entries. The glossators of p. 221 were attracted to a display opening as a prime site in the volume – perhaps aware that on such pages a discreet dry-point is even less likely to be noticed. In conclusion, the Lichfield scratched glosses are not able to provide us with an Anglo-Saxon provenance for the manuscript any earlier than that previously known; but they do allow us a momentary glimpse into the Lichfield community a few years, or decades, before the Norman conquest would change its composition forever.28 25

26 27

28

Richard Emms has drawn our attention to a possible parallel in the Gospels of St Augustine (Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, 286: cf. Lowe, CLA, II, no. 126). This manuscript (originally written in Italy during the sixth century) contains several English additions, including a list of relics in a late twelfth-century hand; beneath this list is what appears to be a series of six names, possibly the names of six monks who had responsibility for the relic collection. The Celtic Gospels, their Story and their Text (London, 1934), p. xvi. Aberystwyth, National Library of Wales, 17110E. For example: ‘Ilias, for his soul, and the inscription of his name in the book of life, gave a mansion in the middle of Abergavenny and four modii of land with it’, or ‘Erbig son of Elffin, for inscribing his name in the book of life, granted in alms to God and the Apostle Peter and SS. Dyfrig, Teilo and Euddogwy’ (cf. Text of the Book of Llan Dâv, ed. Gwenogvryn Evans, pp. 186, 197). We are very grateful to the Dean and Chapter of Lichfield Cathedral for allowing us access to the Lichfield Gospels, to Professor Simon Keynes for his helpful suggestions and to Dr Rosalind Love for her invaluable assistance in elucidating the Latin material.

87

APPENDIX

T H E L I S T O F A N G L O - S A X O N N A M E S O N P . 141 O F T H E L I C H F I E L D G O S P E L S

A et ⍀ Atulf. Ælfheh. æ Wulfmer. Wulfgeat. [.]iii Wulfric. 1

Domine benedic, sicut uis et scis, sic fac,2 omnes q[ui] me ‘[W]’3 docuerunt, et ‘omnes qui’ meis indignis precibus se commendauerunt,4 qui confesi fuerint,5 et omnes qui batismum acceperunt.6 + Wulfun. Wulfere.7 Wuftryt. Wulferye. Wihtmund. Berhtfled. [Pater eius Hehwyn].8 Ælffled. Leofe.9 Wynsige. Wulfric. Æeelfled. 11

12 13

14

15

16

18 19

This passage now reads as a single prayer. It was probably written in stages, however. The first part to be committed to parchment was probably Omnes qui me W. docuerunt et omnes qui meis indignis precibus se commendauerunt (following the first line of names). The scribe (who from the above was probably a priest) then added the introductory Domine benedic sicut uis et scis sic fac crammed in at the end of the line above. The remaining portion of the prayer, qui confesi fuerint et omnes qui batismum acceperunt, must have been written after the lines of names beginning + Wulfun and Berhtfled, since it has also been crammed into the blank space at their end. Fiat fiat is written (in the same hand) in the right-hand margin beside this prayer. I take this to represent the scribe’s initial. It is tempting, but unprovable, to guess that W stands for one of the names on p. 141 which begins with a W: perhaps Wulfmer, which was one of the first names to be written and is in majuscules, or Wulfun, the only name to be preceded by a cross. This section of the text is partly written in Greek letters, as are several of the Anglo-Saxon names below. The eta in SH (i.e. se) appears to be constructed like a runic letter (D), which may have been influenced by its use on two of the Lichfield incipit pages. Perhaps influenced by I John I.9, often used in confessional prayers in the form si confessi fuerimus peccata nostra . . . Alternatively, the f may be an error for s (i.e. sunt). Wanley transcribed this passage as omnes qui beatis sunt mu acæ (reading sunt instead of -p[er]unt, and assuming that mu acæ / -mu[m] acce, written above, was intended to follow). He explained 17 sunt mu acæ as sanctimoniales. There appears to be an erasure in the middle of this name. Pater eius Hehwyn is written above Berhtfled, and seems most likely to refer to him. Berhtfled, Ælffled and Leofe (i.e. Leofi?) are partly in Greek letters. In Berhtfled an original F has been changed to ⌽; in Ælffled we find ⌽ and F side by side. There are two marks over Leofe which look like is, perhaps indicating that the name should be written Liofi (although there is something similar over the next name, Wynsige).

88

Lost voices from Anglo-Saxon Lichfield Elfehere. Wulfwyn. Wulfild. Hehfled. B[enedic]. d[omine]. Æ. Æ. S. Wulfmær. W. L. B.10 (PART OF THE SUREXIT MEMORANDUM)11 Æ. Æ. [Æ]. Æ. Burhelm. Æ. Wulsi. I. L. S. Wærulf. Æ. B. Æeelwyn. E. W. T. W. Æ. L. [Pufa]12 Eadric. Alchelm. Ælfric. Wilaf. [benedicam]. Ælferyt13 Burhild. Wulfric. Wulfhelm. Wulffled.14 Ea et ert.15 E. Behtfled. Wulgar. Ælfric. 10

11

13

14 15

The list of letters here and in the line below is puzzling. The easiest explanation may be that they represent more names, which the scribe did not write out in full (all but one of the letters in question are commonly found at the beginning of Anglo-Saxon names; the exception is I, but even this is occasionally attested). Alternatively, they may represent a code, although if so this has yet to be decoded (for a discussion of two codes which were known in Anglo-Saxon England, see Bernhard Bischoff, Latin Palaeography: Antiquity and the Middle Ages, translated by Dáibhí Ó Cróinín and David Ganz (Cambridge, 1990), pp. 177–8). A third possibility might be that the letters are the initials of words in a prayer, but this possibility may be dismissed: it is unlikely that the words of any prayer could begin with the letters in question. The two groups of Anglo-Saxon names are separated by part of the Welsh Surexit memorandum, that is, Teliau tist Gurgint tist . . . quicumque frangerit maladictus erit. Cf. Jenkins and Owen, 12 ‘Welsh Marginalia Part II’, p. 91. This reading is very tentative. This line is indented in order to avoid the Old Welsh names B[ussi] and Ourcein[t] which had been added to this part of the page. Over Wulffled (and under Alchelm, which is immediately above it on the page) is written alia. This part is not clear; Ettier  or even Exier  are both possibilities, but Ea7er  (as it was transcribed by Wanley) is the best reading.

89

Plate I Lichfield, Cathedral Library, Lich. 1, p. 141

The Old English Promissio regis mary clayton

abstract The Old English Promissio regis is a translation of the threefold promise made at their coronations by Anglo-Saxon kings in the tenth and eleventh centuries followed by two paragraphs on the duties of kingship; it is preserved in one eleventh-century manuscript and we have two copies of a second. This article reviews discussions of the text, looks at the manuscript evidence for what it can tell about its authorship and history, examines its sources and function and suggests a close connection with Wulfstan, archbishop of York. A new edition of the text concludes the piece.

The Promissio regis is an Old English text composed of a translation of the threefold promise made at their coronations by Anglo-Saxon kings in the tenth and eleventh centuries, followed by two paragraphs on the duties of kingship, addressed to king and people. According to the text itself, it is copied letter by letter from the document which Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury from 959 to 988, gave to the king, ‘urum hlaforde’, when he was consecrated king at Kingston. From this, we can deduce that the text was addressed to an AngloSaxon king who had been consecrated by Dunstan and who was still alive at the time of writing. While the promise has been printed many times, most notably by Liebermann in his monumental edition of Anglo-Saxon law, and has been discussed by historians, little detailed attention has been paid to the other two paragraphs.1 These two paragraphs on kingship have not yet been included in the Toronto Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus, as this took its text from Liebermann’s edition of the promise only. The entire text was printed by Hickes in 1689 from London, British Library, Cotton Vitellius A. vii, by Arthur Taylor in The Glory of Regality in 1820 from London, British Library, Cotton Cleopatra B. xiii, by Wright and Halliwell in 1843 from Cleopatra B. xiii and by Stubbs in his Memorials of St Dunstan in 1874, again from the Cleopatra version, but it has not been edited since Stubbs. 2 His edition, while 11

12

Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen, ed. and translated by F. Liebermann, 3 vols. (Halle, 1903–16) I, 214–17. The omission of the sermon from the Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus (http://www.doe.utoronto.ca/pub/webcorpus.html) has hindered the recognition of some striking features of its vocabulary. G. Hickes, Institutiones grammaticae Anglo-Saxonicae et Moeso-Gothicae (Oxford, 1689); A. Taylor, The Glory of Regality (London, 1820); Reliquæ Antiquæ, ed. T. Wright and J. O. Halliwell, 2 vols

91

Mary Clayton accurate, is not easily obtainable, his use of th for both  and  is not in accord with modern practice, and, as the text is printed only in an appendix to his book, there is no introduction or notes to the text. This article will, therefore, include an edition of the text. Discussions of the text since Stubbs’s edition have been brief. Plummer suggested that the Promissio might be the address referred to in the entries for 1043 in two versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, C and E, which describe Archbishop’s Eadsige’s address to the newly consecrated Edward the Confessor, quoted here from the C Chronicle: ‘Her wæs Eadward gehalgod to cinge on Wincestre on forman Easter dæig mid myccelum wyrscupe . . . Eadsige arcebisceop hine halgade. 7 to foran eallum am folce hine wel lærde. 7 to his agenre neode 7 ealles folces wel manude.’3 Liebermann set out the relationship of the promises to the Latin promises preserved in coronation ordines from Anglo-Saxon England and argued that the vernacular version was for the coronation of Edward the Martyr (in 975) or of Æthelred (in 979); Dunstan certainly consecrated Æthelred at Kingston but we do not know where Edward the Martyr was consecrated, though it is highly probable that it was also at Kingston with Dunstan officiating.4 Dunstan had already consecrated Edgar in 973, but that coronation was in Bath and so cannot be the one referred to here. Although we do not have any documentary evidence of it, it is highly likely that Edgar had previously been consecrated c. 960, soon after he came to the throne, and in that case it is possible that Dunstan, who became archbishop in 959, also consecrated Edgar then, again most probably at Kingston, the favoured place for royal consecrations.5 Liebermann dated the translation of the promise 973 to 988 (Dunstan died in 988), saying that it ‘entstand vielleicht schon 973–78 oder bald nachher’.6 Given the youth of both Edward and Æthelred when consecrated (Edward was at least eleven at his father’s death in

13

14

15

16

(London, 1841–3) II, 194; Memorials of St Dunstan, ed. W. Stubbs, RS 63 (London, 1874), 355–7. Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel, ed. C. Plummer, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1892–9) I, 162: ‘In this year Edward was consecrated king in Winchester on the first day of Easter with great dignity . . . Archbishop Eadsige consecrated him and instructed him well before all the people, and advised him well for his own sake and for the sake of all the people.’ See S. Keynes’s entry on Kingston in the Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Anglo-Saxon England, ed. M. Lapidge, J. Blair, S. Keynes and D. Scragg (Oxford, 1999), p. 272. On the date of Æthelred’s accession and coronation, see S. Keynes, The Diplomas of King Æthelred ‘the Unready’ 978–1016 (Cambridge, 1980), p. 233, n. 7. J. Nelson, ‘Inauguration Rituals’, Early Medieval Kingship, ed. P. H. Sawyer and I. N. Ward (Leeds, 1977), pp. 50–71; repr. in her Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe (London, 1986), pp. 283–307, esp. 296–303. Liebermann, Gesetze III, 144 (the 978 date was based on the assumption that Edward the Martyr was crowned in that year).

92

The Old English Promissio regis 975, when he became king, but may not have been much older, and Æthelred was probably about thirteen when he was crowned in 979),7 a vernacular promise might have been considered particularly appropriate at their consecrations. Liebermann was cautious on the question of the accompanying address. He pointed out that it is, in parts, very like Institutes of Polity and Napier L,8 both by Wulfstan, and said that it is possibly by the translator of the promise and that, judging by the language and the dates of the manuscripts, it was written, at the latest, by 1030–60.9 If it is by the translator of the promise, then, given Liebermann’s own dating of the vernacular promise, it would have to be from the 970s or 980s. Robertson, in her edition of the promise, reiterated Liebermann’s indications of the similarities between the address and the Wulfstan texts and further pointed out that: ‘In tone and phraseology also it suggests comparison with V and VI Æthelred’, two of Wulfstan’s lawcodes.10 A common assumption about the address over the last forty years is that it is a coronation address. Janet Nelson describes the king reading out the vernacular promise and says that the ‘manuscript evidence shows that the vernacular promise was linked with an address, also in Anglo-Saxon, to the new king, exhorting him to keep his promises’.11 Patrick Wormald in 1978 assumed that 17 18

19 10

11

For the ages of Edgar’s sons at his death, see Keynes, Diplomas of Æthelred, p. 164. Liebermann, Gesetze III, 145: ‘Sie lautet z.T. wörtlich gleich Polity ed. Thorpe 422. 428 und der Homilie nach Wulfstan ed. Napier 266f. Sie macht den König am Jüngsten Gericht verantwortlich für das Wohl seines Volkes in genau denselben Ausdrücken, wie sonst der Bischof für seine Herde verantwortlich gilt. Dass sie vom Übersetzer des Sacr[amentum] cor[onationis] herrühre, ist möglich. Laut des Alters der Sprache und der Hss. entstand sie spätestens um 1030–60.’ K. Jost, Wulfstanstudien, Swiss Stud. in Eng. 23 (Bern, 1950), 249–61, thought that Napier L was not by Wulfstan, though composed of a mosaic-like collection of excerpts from Wulfstan’s works, but it is now recognised as his. D. Bethurum, The Homilies of Wulfstan (Oxford, 1957), pp. 39–41, accepted that it must be by Wulfstan but did not include it in her edition as she did not regard it as a homily. A. G. Kennedy, ‘Cnut’s Law Code of 1018’, ASE 11 (1983), 57–81, at 65, argues that Jost’s arguments against Wulfstan’s composition of Napier L cannot be sustained. It is also accepted as genuine by P. Wormald, The Making of English Law: King Alfred to the Twelfth Century, I: Legislation and its Limits (Oxford, 1999), p. 463, who suggests that it was ‘probably linked with a law-making council, perhaps that of 1018’, and by J. Wilcox, ‘The Dissemination of Wulfstan’s Homilies: the Wulfstan Tradition in Eleventh-Century Vernacular Preaching’, in England in the Eleventh Century, ed. C. Hicks, Harlaxton Med. Stud. 2 (Stamford, 1992), 206–23, at 201. The homily was edited in Wulfstan: Sammlung der ihm zugeschriebenen Homilien nebst Untersuchungen über ihre Echtheit, ed. A. Napier (Berlin, 1883), pp. 266–74; it is analysed by J. T. Lionarons, ‘Napier Homily L: Wulfstan’s Eschatology at the Close of his Career’, Wulfstan, Archbishop of York: the Proceedings of the Second Alcuin Conference, ed. M. Townend, Stud. in the Early Middle Ages 10 (Turnhout, 2004), 413–28. Liebermann, Gesetze III, 145. The Laws of the Kings of England from Edmund to Henry I, ed. A. J. Robertson (Cambridge, 1925), p. 41. J. Nelson, ‘Ritual and Reality in the Early Medieval Ordines’, The Materials, Sources and Methods of Ecclesiastical History, ed. D. Baker, Stud. in Church Hist. 11 (Oxford, 1975), 41–51, repr. in her Politics and Ritual, pp. 329–39, at p. 337.

93

Mary Clayton Dunstan was the author of the sermon, as he termed it, and that it was delivered at Æthelred’s coronation; he also said that, while it was ‘true that ten-yearolds do not usually listen attentively to sermons’, ‘Æthelred will have heard such sentiments many times, not least from Wulfstan, whose chapter on kingship in his Institutes of Polity is couched in similar terms.’12 Wormald argues that Æthelred’s laws ‘can be read as a whole series of illustrations of the principles expounded at his coronation [i.e. in the Promissio regis]: equity, widows, adultery, incest and witchcraft are all there’.13 Wormald places the text firmly within the traditions of theocratic or pastoral kingship.14 Pauline Stafford, in her article on the laws of Cnut and the history of Anglo-Saxon royal promises, writes of the ‘admonition as delivered by Dunstan’ and, while mentioning that Wulfstan knew the sermon and that it inspired sections of Napier L and the Institutes of Polity, argues that it is ‘reminiscent of ninth-century Frankia and should probably be associated with Dunstan’.15 Stafford also adds to the Wulfstan connections by saying that: ‘Both the oath and the sermon are glossed extensively by the laws of Cnut’;16 Wulfstan was, of course, also responsible for the laws of Cnut. In a footnote, however, she says that the sermon ‘is not in Wulfstan’s distinct style and its manuscript traditions do not suggest connection with him. Cleopatra B. xiii was an Exeter book and the mutilated Vitellius A. vii from which Junius made his transcript was a Ramsey manuscript.’17 Douglas Dales, in his 1988 book on Dunstan, declared that: ‘This [the Promissio regis’s] miniatory and homiletic approach by an archbishop to royal justice and law making is normally associated with Wulfstan of York in the reign of Ethelred. But it was by no means his invention, and Dunstan here is in the long tradition of popes and bishops, notably Carolingian bishops like Hincmar of Rheims, who, drawing on Old Testament prophetic tradition, addressed kings in this fearless manner.’18 Jane Rosenthal in 1992 again accepted that the sermon was delivered by Dunstan in 975 or 979 or both.19 Patrick Wormald returned to the promise and the sermon in The Making of English Law in 1999, with somewhat different 12

13 15

16

17 18 19

P. Wormald, ‘Æthelred the Lawmaker’, Ethelred the Unready: Papers from the Millenary Conference, ed. D. Hill, BAR British Series 59 (Oxford, 1978), 47–80, at 74–5. 14 Wormald, ‘Æthelred the Lawmaker’, pp. 74–5. Ibid. P. Stafford, ‘The Laws of Cnut and the History of Anglo-Saxon Royal Promises’, ASE 10 (1982), 173–90, at 186, n. 52. Ibid., p. 179. She goes on to say that ‘Cnut’s laws thus make more explicit the ideas expressed in the king’s coronation oath, constituting, as they do, an extensive statement on the duties of Christian kingship’ (p. 180). Ibid., p. 186, n. 53. D. Dales, Dunstan: Saint and Statesman (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 91–2. J. Rosenthal, ‘The Pontifical of St Dunstan’, St Dunstan: His Life, Times and Cult, ed. N. Ramsay, M. Sparks and T. Tatton-Brown (Woodbridge, 1992), pp. 143–63, at p. 151.

94

The Old English Promissio regis views from his earlier treatment. While asserting that ‘a king consecrated by Dunstan at Kingston, and still reigning at the time of writing, can only have been Æthelred’,20 he suggests that since ‘Vitellius was originally a Ramsey MS, and in the light of Byrhtferth’s wellknown interest in coronations, it might – at the risk of fathering further unwanted progeny on Byrhtferth – be worth pondering his possible role in the oath’s translation.’21 Of the sermon, he says that: ‘The idiom, though not the language, is already that of Wulfstan’;22 he also argues that the sermon ‘may correspond to that said by two of the Chronicles to have been preached to Edward the Confessor in 1043’.23 Wormald is the only one to have commented on the source of the sermon, pointing out that the sermon’s ‘source (which is very close), [is] the section on the “Rex iniquus”, in pseudo-Cyprian’.24 Pseudo-Cyprian is De duodecim abusiuis, a seventh-century Hiberno-Latin text on the twelve abuses of the world; the ninth abuse, the unjust king, had a profound influence on Western ideas of kingship.25 To sum up this review of discussions of the Promissio regis, it is clear that the prevailing assumption is that this is a coronation sermon for Æthelred’s consecration, which might have been used also for Edward the Confessor’s. There is not total agreement about the authorship of the text, but a number of historians have assumed that Dunstan was responsible for it. We find in the literature repeated references to the text’s similarities with various texts of Wulfstan’s, but no-one attributes the text to Wulfstan. The similarities are instead seen as being due to Wulfstan drawing on or being inspired by the Promissio and/or to Æthelred taking seriously the promises made by him at his coronation and ensuring that they were closely reflected in his legislation, much of which was written by Wulfstan. It is notable that Wulfstan scholars other than Wormald have not engaged with the Promissio. There has been very little discussion of the Promissio’s sources and content, other than Liebermann’s comparision of the three promises to the Latin forms of the promises in consecration rituals from Anglo-Saxon England and Wormald’s drawing attention to the text’s close dependence on De duodecim abusiuis. In this article, therefore, in addition to providing a new edition of the Promissio regis, I will explore the sources and the ideology of the text and look again at the question of its authorship and function. 20 22 25

21 Wormald, Making of English Law, pp. 447–8. Ibid., p. 448, n. 118. 23 24 Ibid. p. 448, n. 119. Ibid. p. 448. Ibid. p. 448, n. 119. S. Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, Reihe 3, Band 4, Heft 1 (Leipzig, 1909), pp. 1–62; the ninth abuse is on pp. 51–3.

95

Mary Clayton the manuscript s London, British Library, Cotton Cleopatra B. xiii (Part 1) The vernacular Promissio regis is now found only in an eleventh-century Exeter manuscript, London, British Library, Cotton Cleopatra B. xiii (Part 1).26 Part 1 (fols. 1–58) of Cleopatra B. xiii contains Old English homilies and some other short pieces. As Cleopatra B. xiii is one of the manuscripts produced in the scriptorium established by Leofric in Exeter, it can be dated fairly accurately. Leofric transferred his see from Crediton to Exeter in 1050, therefore the manuscript must have been produced between 1050 and the year of Leofric’s death, 1072.27 Cleopatra B. xiii is a small, easily portable manuscript, now measuring, after cropping, 184 ⫻ 124 mm.; the written space is 170 ⫻ 80 mm. It is ruled for nineteen lines to the page, except for fol. 57 with twenty-three lines and fol. 58 with twenty-eight lines. The contents are: Fol. 1r: Seventeenth-century table of contents for entire manuscript Fol. 1v: Parkerian table of contents for Part 1 11. Fols. 2r–7v: In die iudicii (Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XL; collated by Scragg, Vercelli Homilies, homily II) 12. Fols. 7v–12r: Ælfric, Catholic Homilies I.XVII (for the Second Sunday after Easter) 13. Fols. 13r–31r: Ælfric, Catholic Homilies I.I (on the Creation, quando uolueris) 14. Fols. 31r–38r: Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, no. XVIII (for the dedication of a church) 15. Fols. 38r–43r: Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XXXVII (for the consecration of a bishop)28 16. Fols. 44r–55v: Vercelli XIX with passages from Ælfric, Catholic Homilies, I.XVIII; ed. Luiselli Fadda29 and collated by Scragg, Vercelli Homilies (homily XIX) 26

27

28 29

See J. Wilcox, Wulfstan Texts and Other Homiletic Materials, AS Manuscripts in Microfiche Facsimile 8, MRTS 219 (Tempe, Arizona, 2000), 23. The manuscript is described on pp. 23– 9. Part 1 is now joined to Part 2, containing the revised version of ‘B’’s Vita Sancti Dunstani from St Augustine’s, Canterbury, and Part 3, a chronicle attributed to Peter of Ickham; the three parts were probably joined together by Sir Robert Cotton. A. Watson, Catalogue of Dated and Datable Manuscripts c. 700–1600 in the Department of Manuscripts, The British Library, 2 vols. (London, 1979) I, 101 (no. 524). This in part corresponds to Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, XVII. A. M. Luiselli Fadda, Nuove omelie Anglosassoni della rinascenza Benedittina, Filologia Germanica Testi e Studi 1 (Florence, 1977), homily 4.

96

The Old English Promissio regis 17. Fols. 56r–57r: Promissio regis 18. Fol. 57v: Homilies of Ælfric, ed. Pope, no. VIII, lines 1–19 (on the meaning of gospel) 19. Fol. 58r: Fragment (the last eight lines) of Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XXVII 10. Fol. 58r, line 12–v: Ælfric’s translation of the Paternoster and the Creed.30 There have been varying views on the number of scribes involved in producing this manuscript. Ker says that there were seven or eight scribes and Drage that there were seven. Both ascribe the Promissio regis to scribe 5; Ker ascribes no other item to this scribe whereas Drage thinks that the item on fol. 57v was also written by this scribe.31 Elaine Treharne, in a forthcoming article, suggests very different scribal stints, however, and drastically reduces the number of scribes involved, suggesting that Ker and Drage’s scribes 1 and 2 were the one person who was also responsible for 38r to 57v and 58r, line 12 to 58v.32 This would mean that the scribe of the Promissio regis was the main scribe of Cleopatra, writing all but items 4 and 9 in the list above. Cleopatra B. xiii has links with other Exeter manuscripts. Bishop believed that either Cleopatra B. xiii and London, Lambeth Palace 489 ‘are companion volumes or each contains parts of two pre-existing volumes’.33 Ker felt that Cleopatra B. xiii was ‘evidently a fragment of a larger manuscript’34 and similarly suggested that it was perhaps once part of Lambeth 489, arguing that ‘the script, the use of c-shaped accents, the format and the number of lines to the page’ associate Cleopatra with the Lambeth manuscript and also with Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 421, Part 1.35 Both Lambeth 489 and CCCC 421, Part 1 (confusingly, the later part of this manuscript), were also written in Exeter and contain Old English homilies, many of them by Ælfric and Wulfstan and some anonymous. 36 The hand of article 10 in Cleopatra B. 30 31

32

33

34 36

Sermones Catholici, or Homilies of Ælfric, ed. B. Thorpe, 2 vols. (London, 1844–6) II, 596. N. Ker, A Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957), p. 184, and E. Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric and the Exeter Cathedral Chapter, 1050–1072: a Reassessment of the Manuscript Evidence’ (unpubl. DPhil. dissertation, Oxford Univ., 1978), p. 360. E. Treharne, ‘The Bishop’s Book: Leofric’s Homiliary and Eleventh-Century Exeter’ (forthcoming). T. A. M. Bishop, ‘Notes on Cambridge Manuscripts Part III: Manuscripts Connected with Exeter’, Trans. of the Cambridge Bibliographical Soc. 2 (1954–8), 192–9, at 198. 35 Ker, Catalogue, p. 182. Ibid. p. 184. See Wilcox, Wulfstan Texts and Other Homiletic Materials, pp. 7–13 and 79–82; Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies. The Second Series. Text, ed. M. Godden, EETS ss 5 (Oxford, 1979), xlii and lxxi–lxxii; Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies. The First Series. Text, ed. P. Clemoes, EETS ss 17 (Oxford, 1997), pp. 21–24 and 46–48. The Exeter additions to CCCC 421 were made to a collection of homilies which may have been written in Canterbury in the first half of the eleventh century (see

97

Mary Clayton xiii ‘is closely similar to and perhaps identical with’ that of one of the scribes of Lambeth 489, Ker felt.37 Lambeth 489 and CCCC 421 also share a scribe, as the hand responsible for CCCC 421, Part 1, wrote part of Lambeth 489.38 It is possible, as Clemoes suggests, that ‘in Cleopatra B. xiii, Lambeth 489, and Vb [CCCC 421, Part 1] we have parts of a once connected collection of homiletic material, the original arrangement of which we cannot now determine’.39 Elaine Treharne has now developed this in a discussion of the three manuscripts, arguing that there are only two scribes in Lambeth 489 and that the hand which wrote all but 20v–24v of Lambeth is the principal scribe of Cleopatra and the hand responsible for most of the additions to CCCC 421 (pp. 3–93 and 209–24).40 If this is the case, all three manuscripts, then, would have been written by one principal scribe, with short stints by other scribes in Cleopatra and Lambeth. This supports the view that all three manuscripts represent a single, planned collection and Treharne attempts a reconstruction of it.41 It is also possible that the collection was assembled in booklet form, and Pamela Robinson points that Cleopatra Part 1 and Lambeth 489 together make up ‘three small, portable booklets’ which could have been used in preaching.42 Regardless of whether the collection once consisted of Cleopatra and Lambeth only or of Cleopatra, Lambeth and CCCC 421, Part 1, it does not seem as if the original arrangement was in the order of the liturgical year and the collection seems more of the kind designed for use on particular occasions or suited to preaching on any occasion.43 Malcolm Godden has suggested that the collection in Cleopatra B. xiii and Lambeth 489 was ‘probably for the use of a bishop, since it includes four homilies for the dedication of a church, one for the consecration of a bishop, and a coronation oath’.44 This suggestion is undoubtedly correct and has been developed by Treharne, who argues that it was Leofric’s personal

38

39

41 42

43

Clemoes, Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, p. 47, but, for caution on the Canterbury origin, Wilcox, Wulfstan Texts and Other Homiletic Materials, pp. 7–8). Part 1 of CCCC 421 consists of pp. 3–98 and pp. 209–24; pp. 209–24 once followed p. 98, as the ‘offset of p. 98 is of writing on p. 209’ (Ker, Catalogue, p. 117). We do not know whether Part 1 was joined to Part 2 in Exeter or 37 later. Ker, Catalogue, p. 345. See Bishop, ‘Notes on Cambridge Manuscripts Part III’, p. 198, and Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, p. 151. Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, ed. Clemoes, p. 22. Clemoes and Godden assign a single sigil, J, to 40 Cleopatra B. xiii and Lambeth 489. Treharne, ‘Bishop’s Book’ (forthcoming). Ibid. P. Robinson, ‘Self-Contained Units in Composite Manuscripts of the Anglo-Saxon Period’, ASE 7 (1978), 231–8, at 238. See Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, p. 261; see also D. Scragg, The Vercelli Homilies, EETS os 300 44 (Oxford, 1992), xxxiii. Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, ed. Godden, p. xlii.

98

The Old English Promissio regis 45

homiliary. Given the diversity of items, it appears likely that the scribes drew on different sources in assembling the collection.46 The Wulfstan items in the manuscript are particularly interesting, as Bethurum XVIII, for the dedication of a church, survives only in this manuscript47 and Napier XXXVII (corresponding in part to Bethurum XVII), for the consecration of a bishop, is preserved only here and, in a different form, in Hatton 113, where it is divided between two items, the first 43 lines in Bethurum’s edition of homily XVII as item 30 on 93v–94v and, with a beginning that is not in Cleopatra B. xiii, lines 36 to 79 in item 26, fols. 83–84v.48 Neither item in Hatton 113 has the substantial ending of the text in Cleopatra B. xiii;49 Bethurum rejected this ‘because it has not much organic relation to what precedes, and, though the separate phrases are Wulfstan’s and can be paralleled in his other writings, the whole has the effect of an ill-considered scribal addition’.50 The Cleopatra version of the homily is, however, accepted as genuine by Wilcox, who calls attention to Bethurum’s unsatisfactory editing of this piece.51 As with Cleopatra B. xiii, the Exeter additions to CCCC 421 contain an interesting Wulfstan text; Napier L, beginning ‘We secgea urum cynehlaforde and eallum folce cyan wylla’, an address to king and people, is found here and nowhere else.52 The make-up of the last part of the Old English section of Cleopatra B. xiii is irregular. Six quires of eight folios are followed by a quire which now wants a leaf after fol. 55.53 Fol. 55*, not included in the early modern numbering 45

46

47

48 49 50 51

52 53

E. Treharne, ‘Producing a Library in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, RES n.s. 54 (2003), 155–72, at 165–8, and ‘The Bishop’s Book’ (forthcoming). See Homilies of Ælfric: a Supplementary Collection, 2 vols, ed. J. Pope, EETS 259 and 260 (Oxford, 1967–8) I, 34: ‘Evidently the miscellaneous selections in these two volumes were drawn from older manuscripts of diverse origin. Clemoes has assigned to the CH I homilies a position indicating a textual state just earlier than that of Thorpe’s manuscript, K. One or more exemplars representing a later state must account for the other Ælfrician items, at least for Brotanek I, the excerpts from the Lives of Saints, and the first paragraph of VIII, which was probably the last to be composed, though it may not be later than the turn of the century. The bits from Wulfstan must belong to a still later stratum.’ D. Scragg, ‘The Corpus of Vernacular Homilies and Prose Saints’ Lives before Ælfric’, ASE 8 (1979) 223–77, at 255, n. 2, and Wilcox, ‘The Dissemination of Wulfstan’s Homilies’, p. 212. Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, collates Hatton 114 for lines 124–49, but the Hatton text is a separate anonymous homily, drawing on the Wulfstan text. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, XVII. Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XXXVII, p. 178, line 19–p. 179, line 22. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, p. 351. J. Wilcox, ‘The Wolf on Shepherds: Wulfstan, Bishops, and the Context of the Sermo Lupi ad Anglos’, Old English Prose: Basic Readings, ed. P. Szarmach (New York, 2000), pp. 395–418, at pp. 404–6; see also his review of Bethurum’s edition by J. Ure, MÆ 28 (1959), 112–15, at 114. Wulfstan, ed. Napier, L, p. 266, lines 1–2. For this homily, see n. 8 above. See, however, Treharne, ‘Bishop’s Book’ (forthcoming), who argues, persuasively, that the homily which is currently item 3, Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies I, I, De initio creaturae, was designed as the opening text in the manuscript.

99

Mary Clayton which runs through all three parts of the manuscript, is a blank folio. Fols. 56, 57 and 58 are singletons; 56 is now bound with the preceding quire and fols. 57 and 58 are now bound into the beginning of the next quire.54 The present binding was done in 1970; when Ker examined the manuscript, however, he recorded that the three singletons, fols. 56, 57 and 58, were bound together.55 Fol. 56r, containing the beginning of the Promissio, is very worn. The first folio of the Promissio is ruled for nineteen lines to the page, as is the entire manuscript up to this point, but the ruling changes towards the end of the second section, when the scribe started 57r, which is ruled for twenty-three lines; fol. 58, containing the Paternoster and the Creed, is ruled for twenty-eight lines. The Promissio finishes on line 17 of 57r and the remainder of the page is blank. Fol. 58, containing items 9 and 10, is, as Ker pointed out, unlikely to be in its original position as ‘a wormhole in ff. 56–7, larger on 57 than on 56, does not appear on f. 58.’56 The blank folio, the addition of three singletons and the changes in ruling suggest that the last texts may have been something of an afterthought, added perhaps as they became available, although, given that the same scribe wrote items 3 and 8, they must have been added within a fairly short space of time and within the same Exeter scriptorium.57 The title Promissio regis is in black rustic capitals and the text is divided into three sections, each beginning with ‘an enlarged pen-drawn initial, a technique that is used elsewhere in the manuscript to demonstrate a shift in topic within a single item’.58 The word FINIT is in capital letters at the end of the first section. Two thirds of a line is left blank at the end of the second section. Some corrections have been made: in at least three places, i has been altered to y; this is a feature of the manuscript noted by Ker.59 London, British Library, Cotton Vitellius A. vii, fols. 1–112 The second manuscript which contained this text is London, British Library, Cotton Vitellius A. vii, fols. 1–112, a Latin pontifical, also produced in Exeter under Leofric, and therefore also dated to between 1050 and 1072.60 For a long time, until (and after) Bishop pointed out its Exeter characteristics, this manuscript was considered to be a Ramsey manuscript and this has had an 54 55 57

58 59

60

See Wilcox, Wulfstan Texts and Other Homiletic Materials, p. 25. 56 Ker, Catalogue, p. 184. Ibid. Ker suggests the identity of the hands of these two items. Treharne, as outlined above, argues that the scribe of fols. 58r line 12–58v is the main scribe of the manuscript. Treharne, ‘Bishop’s Book’ (forthcoming). Ker, Catalogue, p. 183. The alterations are not very easy to detect and are noticeable chiefly by the uprightness of the first stroke, written originally as an i; in the usual form of the letter y the first stroke is slanted. The altering hand has inserted an extra stroke and a dot to form y. Watson, Catalogue, I, 109–10 (no. 573).

100

The Old English Promissio regis unfortunate influence on discussions of the Promissio regis.61 The Promissio regis was formerly on fol. ‘7’ but the first fourteen folios were destroyed in the Cotton fire of 1731 and the remainder of the manuscript damaged. Before the fire, however, the Promissio had been copied by Junius in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Junius 60, fol. 2, a paper manuscript containing this text only, in a copy of the original hand, and by Hickes, who published the text in the Preface to his Institutiones grammaticae Anglo Saxonicae, et Moeso-Gothicae of 1689. Vitellius A. vii now starts with an incomplete coronation ordo on the original fol. 15. It originally started with the ordo for the consecration of an archbishop and bishop, followed by the ordo for confirmation, the examination of a bishop for ordination and then the Promissio regis, all preceding De consecratione regis et reginae.62 The manuscript contains three other short vernacular texts: one entitled Incipit coniuratio hominis ante communis (also in the Durham Ritual, Durham, Cathedral A. IV. 19) and translations of two Latin forms of exorcism, the Latin preceding the Old English in each case (both also in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 146, another pontifical). It looks as if vernacular translations of texts were copied into Vitellius A. vii when they were available. As well as the vernacular texts and the Latin texts for services performed by bishops, the manuscript contains two Latin sermons based on sermons 10 and 13 by Abbo of Saint-Germain-des-Prés.63 The same two abbreviated forms of the Abbo sermons appear in manuscripts associated with Archbishop Wulfstan: in CCCC 190 and Cotton Nero A. i; both are sermons for the reconciliation of penitents on Maundy Thursday.64 A third, similar abridged Abbo sermon is found only in CCCC 190 (based on Abbo’s sermon 12). The full text of Abbo sermons 10 and 13 is found, along with seven other Abbo sermons, in 61

62

63

64

T. A. M. Bishop, English Caroline Minuscule (Oxford, 1971), p. 24; Ker, Catalogue, p. 279, had said that the manuscript was ‘almost certainly’ from Ramsey on the basis of the saints included in its litanies. J. Brückmann, ‘Latin Manuscript Pontificals and Benedictionals in England and Wales’, Traditio 29 (1973), 391–458, at 437, calls the manuscript the ‘Pontifical of Ramsey’ and D. Dumville, Liturgy and the Ecclesiastical History of Late Anglo-Saxon England (Woodbridge, 1992), p. 79, also considers it to be from Ramsey. See the description in T. Smith, Catalogus librorum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Cottonianae (Oxford, 1696), p. 81. These texts are on 63v–68r of Vitellius A. vii. See The Copenhagen Wulfstan Collection: Copenhagen Kongelige Bibliotek Gl. kgl. Sam 1595, ed. J. E. Cross and J. Morrish Tunberg, EEMF 25 (Copenhagen, Baltimore and London, 1993), 17, and J. E. Cross and A. Brown, ‘Abbo of Saint-Germain: Sermons’, Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture I, ed. F. M. Biggs, T. D. Hill, P. E. Szarmach and E. G. Whatley (Kalamazoo, 2001), pp. 18–22. The sermons of Abbo are edited by U. Önnerfors, Abbo von Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 22 Predigten: kritische Ausgabe und Kommentar (Frankfurt-am Main, 1985). See J. E. Cross and A. Brown, ‘Wulfstan and Abbo of Saint-Germain-des-Près’, Mediaevalia 15 (1993 for 1989), 71–91, and the brief account in Cross and Brown, ‘Abbo of Saint-Germain: Sermons’, pp. 21–2.

101

Mary Clayton Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, Gl. Kgl. Sam 1595, a manuscript closely connected with Wulfstan and which contains his hand.65 The abridgement of the Abbo texts was probably done by Wulfstan himself and Wulfstan’s Old English homily XV was based on the abbreviation of Abbo’s Sermo 13.66 It seems highly likely that these Latin sermons in Vitellius were added at Exeter, rather than having been in the exemplar, as they are also found in CCCC 190; this manuscript was at Exeter by the middle of the eleventh century, when extensive additions were made to it, and the hand of Leofric himself is found on the same page of CCCC 190 as one of these sermons (on p. 247).67 Presumably, Leofric read the sermons in the original, non-Exeter part of CCCC 190 and then directed that they be included in his pontifical. Although neither Junius nor Hickes records it, the title of the text in Vitellius was Promissio regis; this is recorded by both Wanley and Smith.68 The text was divided into the same three sections as in Cleopatra B. xiii, as is obvious from both Junius and Hickes, though they do not have the FINIT at the end of the first section in Cleopatra. There are some differences between Junius’s and Hickes’s text, as is evident from the textual notes in my edition. The beginning of the Latin ordo for the consecration of a king is missing in Vitellius A. vii, so we cannot compare the form of the Latin promise which was presumably part of the ordo with the vernacular version; as the Old English texts in the manuscript all translate Latin texts included in the manuscript, then Vitellius, like other contemporary coronation ordines, must have included the Latin promise. The manuscript does not seem to have contained a Latin text corresponding to sections 2 and 3 of the vernacular Promissio, however, as Hickes supplied his own translation of the entire vernacular text, something which would not have been necessary had it been in Vitellius A. vii before the fire. He clearly did not use even the Latin text of the three promises from the Vitellius ordo, as his Latin version is very different to any extant version.69 65

66

68

69

Cross and Brown, ‘Abbo of Saint-Germain: Sermons’, pp. 18–22. One of the seven is sermon 12. Cross and Brown, ‘Wulfstan and Abbo’, p. 80. There is also an anonymous Old English version of this abridged Abbo text in CCCC 190, pp. 353–9, and there has been some discussion of whether or not Wulfstan used this vernacular version in the composition of his text; see Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, p. 346, P. Clemoes, ‘The Old English Benedictine Office, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS 190, and the Relations between Ælfric and Wulfstan: a Reconsideration’, Anglia 78 (1960), 265–83, at 271–2, and Cross and Brown, 67 ‘Wulfstan and Abbo’, p. 72. See Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, p. 149. H. Wanley, Librorum veterum septentrionalium catalogus, vol. II of Linguarum veterum septentrionalium thesaurus, ed. G. Hickes (Oxford, 1705), p. 241; Smith, Catalogus, p. 81. Junius entitles the text Sacramentum vel promissio Regis in consecratione. Hickes’s Latin text teads: ‘Apographum hoc descriptum fuit ad literam ex scripto illo, quod Dunstanus Archiepiscopus tradidit Domino nostro apud Kingeston eodem die quo in Regem consecratus fuit, & interdixit illi nequid aliud pignus daret, præter hoc, quod ipse in Christi

102

The Old English Promissio regis The surviving folios of Vitellius A. vii were written by three scribes; the first wrote fols. 1–15 and 54v–72v, line 12; the second 15v–54r; and the third 72v, line 12–112v.70 Drage identifies the hand which wrote the third stint and which also played an important role in adapting the Leofric Missal as the hand of Leofric himself, ‘the only accomplished scribe who does not write in an Exeter-type hand or in some derivative of that style’.71 Watson identifies the first hand as that of 38–55v of Cleopatra B. xiii,72 although Drage does not assign any of Vitellius to the scribe of these folios of Cleopatra.73 If Vitellius and Cleopatra are connected to each other in this way, then they also form part of a group ‘interconnected by Exeter provenance and script and by the hands of some of the scribes’.74 Given that Leofric himself wrote part of the Vitellius Pontifical, it was presumably in accordance with his wishes that vernacular texts were included in it.

70

71

72 73

74

altare posuerat, sic (autem) illi Episcopus dictabat: IN NOMINE SS. TRINITATIS Ego tria promitto populo Christiano, & subditis meis. Primum quod Ecclesia Dei, & populus Christianus omnis ditionis meæ vera pace perfruetur. Secundum est, quod Ego latrocinium, & injustitiam omnimodam omnibus hominum ordinibus prohibebo. Tertium autem, quod spondeo, & præcipio in judiciis omnibus justitiam, & misericordiam adhibendam esse, ut nobis etiam omnibus pro æterna sua clementia ignoscat benignus, & misericors Deus, qui vivit, & regnat, etc. Rex Christianus, qui hæc custodit, temporalem sibi ipsi honorem promeretur, atque Deus insuper se propitium ille præbebit, & in præsenti vita, & in æterna etiam illa, quæ nunquam deficiet. Si quando autem violaverit quod Deo promissum erat, regni sui status quam citissime in pejus ruet, & in fine omnia in exitium vertentur, nisi dum vita suppetat, hæc prius emendaverit. O dilecte domine! cave præ omnibus diligenter tibi ipsi. Recogita hoc frequenter, quod ipse gregem, cujus in hac vita pastor creatus es, ad Dei judicium produces, atque præibis, & tunc cognosces te illum (scil. gregem) gubernare, quem olim Christus ipse suo sanguine redemit. Consecrati regis officium est neminem injuste judicare, viduas, & orphanos, & peregrinos protegere, ac tueri, furta prohibere, adulteria punire, incesta conjugia discindere, & penitus impedire, sagas, & incantatores delere, parricidas, & perjuros exterminare, egenos eleemolynis pascere, insuper senes, sapientes, & sobrios à consiliis habere, & homines justos in ministros constituere. Quandoquidem quæcunque ipsi inique fecerint ejus culpa, eorundem omnium ipse (Rex) rationem reddet in die judicii.’ On the hands, see Bishop, English Caroline Minuscule, p. 24; Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, p. 365; and Watson, Catalogue of Dated and Datable Manuscripts I, 109–10 and I, 71; I, 101; I, 120; and I, 130. Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, p. 139; see also pp. 140–1. This view is accepted in The Leofric Missal, ed. N. Orchard, 2 vols., HBS 113 and 114 (London, 2002) I, 140–1. Watson, Catalogue of Dated and Datable Manuscripts I, 101 (no. 524) and I, 110 (no. 573). Ibid. I, 71; see Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, p. 155. Treharne, of course, attributes much more of Cleopatra to this scribe but does not discuss Cleopatra’s connections with Latin manuscripts from Exeter. Watson, Catalogue of Dated and Datable Manuscripts I, 71. Watson states that the same scribe also wrote parts of London, British Library, Add. 28188 (a pontifical and benedictional), London, British Library, Harley 863 (the ‘Leofric Psalter’) and London, British Library, Harley 2961 (the ‘Leofric Collectar’); the ‘Leofric Missal’, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodley 579, is also linked with these manuscripts through the additions it received in Exeter.

103

Mary Clayton In contents, the incomplete pontifical in Addit. 28188 is related to that in Vitellius A. vii.75 There is no Old English in Addit. 28188, but its pontifical does not include the Latin texts for which translations were supplied in Vitellius. Likewise, Addit. 28188 does not include a coronation ordo; that in Vitellius A. vii comes before the point at which it begins to correspond to Addit. 28188. Vitellius and Addit. 28188 both have strong East Anglian connections and seem to be modelled on a book from that region; Ramsey has been suggested for both manuscripts.76 Nicholas Orchard, however, argues that Ramsey is not likely as a place of origin for the model as pontificals are bishops’ books and Ramsey was a monastic community. He suggests instead that: In view of the fact that much of Vitellius A. vii’s text descends in parallel with that of Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 44 from a pontifical drawn up by Stigand at Christ Church Canterbury in the 1050s, North Elmham seems likeliest. Stigand’s brother Æthelmær was bishop of the house from 1047 until his expulsion in 1070.77

One would like to see more evidence for this claim but, if Vitellius A. vii is closely connected with CCCC 44, then this also suggests that the vernacular texts were added to the pontifical in Exeter, rather than being copied from the exemplar; CCCC 44 has two short vernacular texts at the beginning of the manuscript, but they do not correspond to the vernacular texts in Vitellius A. vii. the relationship of the text s The texts of the Promissio regis in Cleopatra B. xiii and Vitellius A. vii were both produced in the same scriptorium in the same time period.78 Drage suggests that the manuscripts associated with Leofric were produced ‘over a fairly short period of time’79 and that ‘the bulk of the activity at Exeter may well have taken place in the 1050s, rather than being spread evenly throughout the period of Leofric’s episcopate.’80 It is likely, therefore, that the manuscripts were written within the same decade. The variations between the texts are minor, being confined largely to / variation; Cleopatra has ac for Vitellius’s eac in line X, but 75

76

78

80

See J. Brückmann, ‘Latin Manuscript Pontificals and Benedictionals in England and Wales’, Traditio 29 (1973), 391–458, at 437, and M. Lapidge, Anglo-Saxon Litanies of the Saints, HBS 106 (London, 1991), p. 73. See above, n. 61. Brückmann, ‘Latin Manuscript Pontificals’, pp. 426 and 437, considered BL, Add. 28188 East Anglian and Vitellius a Ramsey pontifical. Dumville, Liturgy and Ecclesiastical History, p. 79, suggests that Vitellius might have been written for Ælfweard, the Ramsey monk who became abbot of Evesham and bishop of London. As pointed out above, however, 77 Vitellius is an Exeter manuscript. Leofric Missal, ed. Orchard, I, 141. For convenience, I will talk about Vitellius A. vii’s text, though it has not, of course, survived 79 in that manuscript. Drage, ‘Bishop Leofric’, pp. 185–6. Ibid. p. 187. Treharne, ‘The Bishop’s Book’, supports this argument.

104

The Old English Promissio regis the ac may be due to the e of the preceding word, ge, misleading the scribe, rather than being a dialectal variant. Cleopatra finishes the first section of the text with FINIT, which is not in Hickes’s or Junius’s transcriptions and which was, therefore, presumably missing from Vitellius. Liebermann argued that Vitellius was copied from Cleopatra because, where i has been corrected to y in Cleopatra, Vitellius had y. This would mean that the corrections in Cleopatra would have had to be made very shortly after the text was written, as Vitellius seems to have been copied within the same decade as Cleopatra; Liebermann, of course, was not aware that the two manuscripts had been produced in such a short time-frame. Other explanations for this observation are also possible, however: Cleopatra and Vitellius could have been copied from a common exemplar, with i being a scribal form later corrected from the exemplar in Cleopatra or, indeed, Cleopatra could have been copied from Vitellius and corrected from it. The i to y correction is not restricted to this text in Cleopatra, but is a feature of other homilies in the manuscript also, as Ker pointed out;81 this makes it more difficult to assess its significance for the relationship between the two copies of the Promissio. Ker pointed to four manuscripts which contain i to y corrections;82 Jonathan Wilcox, in his PhD thesis, then observed that three of these four manuscripts are Exeter manuscripts and that this correction therefore seems to be an Exeter characteristic.83 The three Exeter manuscripts are CCCC 190, CCCC 419+421 and Cleopatra B. xiii. In CCCC 190 the i to y correction is found in items 20 and 21, the two anonymous vernacular translations of sermons by Abbo of St-Germain.84 Ker says that the hand which added articles 17 to 21 to CCCC 190 was ‘very like that in no. 69 [CCCC 421], pp. 3–96 and 209–41’ (that is, the similar hands responsible for the Exeter additions to CCCC 421, discussed above),85 so the three manuscripts are connected. It is even possible that this correction may have something to do with Leofric himself, given that both Cleopatra and CCCC 421 were probably part of his personal homiliary and that the corrected texts in CCCC 190 were intended to be preached by a bishop and that Leofric’s own hand is found elsewhere in this manuscript.86 81 83

84

85 86

82 Ker, Catalogue, p. 183. Ibid. p. xlviii. ‘The Compilation of Old English Homilies in MSS Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, 419 and 421’, unpubl. PhD dissertation, Univ. of Cambridge (1987), p. 31. The fourth manuscript noted by Ker is London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius B. i, where ‘the principle of alteration may be different’ (Wilcox, ‘The Compilation of Old English Homilies’, p. 31). The first of these texts, on pp. 351–3 of CCCC 190, was edited by Cross and Brown, ‘Wulfstan and Abbo’, pp. 87–91, along with its Latin source, and the second was edited in an appendix by Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, pp. 366–73, also with its Latin source. Ker, Catalogue, p. 73. As is proved by the reference to ‘we biscopas’ in the vernacular version of the Sermo in cena domini ad penitentes (Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, p. 368, line 56), and the fact that the Latin

105

Mary Clayton Wormald suggested that Cleopatra could have been copied from Vitellius, but only on the basis of an erroneous date and place of origin for Vitellius: ‘Given their respective dates as assigned by Ker and Drage, Cotton Vitellius A. vii can hardly have been copied from Cotton Cleopatra B. xiii, as Liebermann supposes, but since Cleopatra is an Exeter manuscript, and Vitellius found its way to Exeter, the relationship may well be the other way around.’87 Given that Vitellius and Cleopatra share a date and place of origin, however, this argument does not hold up. The evidence for the relationship of the two texts is not conclusive, therefore. It is inherently more probable that the text came to Exeter in the context of a collection of Old English sermons rather than in a liturgical book, as vernacular sermons in pontificals are very rare: only one other pontifical from AngloSaxon England (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 943) contains vernacular sermons for occasions on which a bishop would preach.88 It appears from the inclusion of the abridged Abbo sermons in Vitellius A. vii that Leofric himself played an active role in directing the production of his pontifical89 and the inclusion of the Promissio is probably another instance of this. If Vitellius A. vii is closely related to CCCC 44, then, as noted above, this also indicates that the sermon was probably not in the model but was inserted in Exeter. The most likely possibility is that the Promissio came to Exeter as part of a collection of sermons. sources and analo gues The manuscript layout clearly distinguishes three sections in the Promissio regis. The first section, as is evident from the text, is largely dependent on the threefold promise which was part of the liturgy for the coronation of Anglo-Saxon kings. Patrick Wormald has pointed out that the text also draws on the section on unjust kings, the ninth abuse, in De duodecim abusiuis. The use of this source is very evident in the third section of the Promissio. The middle section does not appear to have as direct a source as the other two, but the ideas contained in it were very much a part of the intellectual and spiritual climate of late Anglo-

87

88

sermons from which they were translated are found in bishops’ books. On Leofric’s homiliary, see Treharne, ‘The Bishop’s Book’ (forthcoming). Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 448, n. 118. Ker dated Cleopatra to s. xi (3rd quarter) and Vitellius to s. xi1. Two sermons for the dedication of a church, printed by R. Brotanek, Texte und Untersuchungen zur altenglischen Literatur und Kirchengeschichte (Halle, 1913); CCCC 44, an English pontifical from the first half of the eleventh century, also contains two short vernacular texts, before the Latin texts begin (see T. Graham, ‘The Old English Prefatory Texts in the Corpus-Canterbury Pontifical’, Anglia 113 (1995) 1–15), and other pontificals contain short texts such as vernac89 ular forms of exorcism. See above, p. 102.

106

The Old English Promissio regis Saxon England. Liebermann noted that some of the ‘ermahnende Anrede an den König’ in sections two and three was word for word like part of Polity and Napier L and made the king responsible for the welfare of his people at the Last Judgement in the same terms that the bishop had been responsible for his flock.90 In discussing the sources and analogues, I will take each of the three sections separately. (a) Section One This section consists of the introductory sentence, recounting the circumstances in which the reigning king made the threefold promise, and a close translation of the promise. We have no independent verification of a custom of the Anglo-Saxon king placing a text of the promise on the altar at his coronation, and the Latin ordines do not mention such an action; they describe the king being led by the hand by two bishops to the church, prostrating himself before the altar while a hymn was sung and then rising from the floor and making the promise.91 However, given that the text addresses the king whose coronation is being described, it was presumably true, at least on this occasion. It may have been a standard feature of the consecration rite or could have been a feature unique to this ceremony; the text stresses that the king did this at the direction of Dunstan, ‘swa se bisceop him dihte’. We have, however, other evidence for particularly important texts being placed on the altar92 and a striking parallel and probable model is that Benedictine monks, at their profession, had to place a copy of their promise on the altar of their church;93 this may well have been the inspiration for the king’s action. The ordo for the profession of monks opens with the monk placing his written promise on the altar – as in, for example, the ordo in the Benedictional of Archbishop Robert: Ego frater .N. deo datus. promitto stabilitatem meam et conuersionem morum meorum et oboedientiam secundum regulam sancti benedicti coram deo et sanctis eius in presentia domini .N. episcopi. Inposita uero propria manu promissione super altare.94

90 91

92

93 94

Gesetze, ed. Liebermann, III, 145. See, for example, the ordo in the Claudius Pontifical (Claudius II): The Claudius Pontificals, ed. D. Turner, HBS 97 (London, 1971), p. 89. See P. Chaplais, ‘The Authenticity of the Royal Anglo-Saxon Diplomas of Exeter’, Bull. of the Inst. of Hist. Research 39 (1966), 1–34, at 29–34, and F. E. Harmer, Anglo-Saxon Writs (Manchester, 1952), pp. 170–1. See Benedicti regula, ed. R. Hanslik, CSEL 75 (Vienna, 1960), LVIII.17–20. Benedictional of Archbishop Robert, ed. Wilson, p. 131: ‘I, brother N. given to God, promise stability and conversion of my life and obedience according to the rule of St Benedict, before God and his saints in the presence of N., the lord bishop. So placing the promise with his own hand on the altar.’

107

Mary Clayton According to Schramm, Frankish kings also placed their coronation promises on a holy place.95 The threefold promise is a fairly faithful translation of a version of the Latin threefold promise and is similar but not identical to the promise found in a variety of pontificals from Anglo-Saxon England. The promise is closest to the form in what is known as the Second English Coronation ordo. Here a short excursus on the early history of the English coronation ordines is necessary. What is known as the first English ordo for the consecration of a king is found in three manuscripts: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodleian 579 (the Leofric Missal), Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 10575 (the so-called Egbert Pontifical) and Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale A.27 (the so-called Lanalet Pontifical).96 This ordo was in existence by the middle of the ninth century, at the latest.97 This first English ordo concludes with an acclamation of the king by the people and his enthronement, after which the principes kiss him, and this is followed by the issuing of three commands to his people, his first acts as law-giver. The rubric and the text of the precepta in the Leofric Missal read: Rectitudo regis est nouiter ordinati et in solium sublimati, populo tria precepta sibi subdito precipere. Inprimis, ut ecclesia dei, et omnis populus christianus, ueram pacem seruent, in omnipotenti deo. R. Amen. Aliud est, ut rapacitates et omnes iniquitates, omnibus gradibus interdicat. R. Amen. Tertium est, ut in omnibus iudiciis, aequitatem et misericordiam precipiat, ut per hoc nobis indulgeat suam misericordiam clemens et misericors deus. R. Amen.98

The Second English ordo draws on the First English ordo and ninth-century West Frankish sources and exists in two versions, termed A and B by Janet Nelson.99 Unlike the First English ordo, the second includes a coronation. The A version is represented by the Sacramentary of Ratoldus (second half of the tenth 95 96

97 98

99

P. Shramm, A History of the English Coronation (Oxford, 1937), p. 184. See J. Nelson, ‘The Earliest Royal ordo: Some Liturgical and Historical Aspects’, Authority and Power: Studies in Medieval Law and Government Presented to Walter Ullmann (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 29–48; repr. in Politics and Ritual, pp. 341–60. The Leofric Missal ordo is edited in Orchard, Leofric Missal, pp. 429–32. The Egbert Pontifical is edited by H. M. J. Banting in Two AngloSaxon Pontificals (the Egbert and Sidney Sussex Pontificals, HBS 104 (London, 1989). For the Lanalet Pontifical, see Pontificale Lanaletense, ed. G. H. Doble, HBS 74 (London, 1937). Nelson, ‘The Earliest Royal ordo’. Leofric Missal, ed. Orchard, II, 432: ‘It is the righteousness of a king newly ordained and raised to the throne to enjoin on the people subject to him three precepts. First, that the Church of God and all Christian people preserve true peace, in God the omnipotent. Response: Amen. The second is that he should forbid robbery and all injustices to all ranks. Response: Amen. The third is that in all judgements he should order justice and mercy so that through that the kind and merciful God may grant us his mercy. Response: Amen.’ (my translation) Nelson, ‘The Second English ordo’ in Politics and Ritual, pp. 361–74, at 369.

108

The Old English Promissio regis century, before 986) and by a number of French manuscripts.100 B appears in seven manuscripts written in England in the later tenth and the eleventh century, representing two sub-versions. The Benedictional of Archbishop Robert (Rouen, Bibliothèque Municipale, Y 7, from Winchester, s. x2) is the sole representative of one sub-version of this ordo.101 The following six manuscripts contain a second sub-version of the Second ordo: the Pontifical of Dunstan (Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 943, s. x2, probably made in Canterbury, and in Sherborne by the beginning of the eleventh century);102 the Anderson Pontifical (London, British Library, Additional 57337, probably from Canterbury, s. x/xi); Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 146 (a Winchester pontifical, s. xiin); Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 44 (Canterbury, s. xi); London, British Library, Cotton Claudius A. iii (the Claudius Pontifical II, from Canterbury, s. xiex);103 and Vitellius A. vii, the Exeter pontifical from the third quarter of the eleventh century which contained the Promissio regis and whose coronation ordo is incomplete, due to the loss of part of the manuscript in the Cotton fire. This second sub-version made only ‘minor verbal changes’ to the version represented by the Benedictional of Robert.104 Janet Nelson suggests a date of c. 900 for the A version of the Second ordo;105 the Robert sub-version of B perhaps dates from the beginning of Edgar’s reign, c. 960,106 and the other B sub-version, which made only minor verbal changes to the Robert sub-version, may date from Edgar’s imperial consecration in Bath in 973.107 She tentatively associates the Robert sub-version of B with Æthelwold, but does not associate any name with the other B sub-version.108 While the A version of the Second ordo preserves the three precepta of the First ordo, in the B version the ‘single significant innovation’ is that the commands are replaced by a threefold promise or coronation oath, placed now at the beginning, rather than the end, of the ceremony: 100

101 102

103 104

105 106

The ordo is edited by P. Ward, ‘An Early Version of the Anglo-Saxon Coronation Ceremony’, EHR 57 (1942), 345–61. The Benedictional of Archbishop Robert, ed. H. A. Wilson, HBS 24 (London, 1903). See Rosenthal, ‘The Pontifical of St Dunstan’ and R. Gameson, ‘The Origin of the Exeter Book of Old English Poetry’, ASE 25 (1996), 135–85, at 173–5. The Claudius Pontificals, ed. Turner. See J. Nelson, ‘The Second English ordo’, p. 369; her list does not include CCCC 44, as it includes only manuscripts from the first half of the eleventh century. CCCC 44 has been variously dated from the first half of the eleventh century (Ker, Catalogue, p. 46; H. Gneuss, ‘Liturgical Books in Anglo-Saxon England and their Old English Terminology’, Learning and Literature in Anglo-Saxon England: Studies Presented to Peter Clemoes on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 91–142, at p. 132) to the middle or second half of the century (M. Budny, Insular, Anglo-Saxon and early Anglo-Norman Manuscript Art at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge: an Illustrated Catalogue (Kalamazoo, MI, 1997), p. 675. Ibid. pp. 365–7. Ibid. p. 370–1. 107 Ibid. pp. 372–4. 108 Ibid. pp. 370–2.

109

Mary Clayton Its substance was derived from the three-fold precept, originally the concluding section of the First English ordo and taken from it into the A version of the Second ordo. But the change in place meant a change in function: what had been a royal declaration of intent, a kind of programmatic statement issued literally from the throne by the newlyinstalled king, was turned by the reviser into a promise that was essentially a precondition of the ensuing consecration.109

The Benedictional of Robert has the same text of the promise as the other B sub-version and the transformation of precepts into promise must therefore date from c. 960, in the version tentatively associated with Æthelwold by Nelson. If the placing of a text of the promise on the altar was a standard feature of the consecration ceremony, then it may well have been introduced when the precepts were changed to a promise, as it is more likely that the king would place a promise which bound him on the altar than a set of commands to his people. Of the manuscripts listed above, Vitellius A. vii no longer preserves the part of the Latin text containing the promise, which means that six liturgical manuscripts now contain the Latin promissio. However, a further text of the threefold promise is included in Byrhtferth’s Vita Oswaldi, which contains a very detailed description of Edgar’s 973 coronation, clearly following a text of the Second ordo; Byrhtferth gives most of the text of the promise, though with slight variations from the texts in pontificals.110 All of the manuscripts containing the B version of the Second ordo have very similar texts of the threefold promise and I quote here that from the Anderson Pontifical, as it is not yet available in print: Haec tria populo christiano et mihi subdito in Christi promitto nomine. Inprimis ut aecclesia dei et omnis populus christianus ueram pacem nostro arbitrio in omni tempore seruet. Aliud ut rapacitates et omnes iniquitates omnibus gradibus interdicam. Tertium ut in omnibus iudiciis aequitatem et misericordiam precipiam, ut mihi et uobis indulgeat suam misericordiam clemens et misericors deus, qui uiuit et regnat.111

The title of the vernacular Promissio regis, with promissio rather than precepta, reflects the B version of the Second ordo. Liebermann compared the English text with a variety of Latin versions, drawing on Cotton Claudius A. iii, the 109 110

111

Ibid. p. 369. Vita Oswaldi, ed. J. Raine, in Historians of the Church of York, 2 vols., RS (London, 1879), I, 436–8; Byrhtferth’s text omits the first sentence (‘Haec tria . . .), inserts promitto after inprimis, has conseruet instead of seruet and inserts another promitto after aliud. MS fol. 57v: ‘I promise these three things in the name of Christ to the Christian people and those subject to me. First that the church of God and all Christian people preserve true peace in our dominion at all times. Second that I forbid robberies and all injustices to all ranks. The third that in all judgements I order justice and mercy so that the kind and merciful God may grant me and you his mercy, who lives and reigns.’ (my translation)

110

The Old English Promissio regis Vita Oswaldi, CCCC 44, Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 10575 and the Leofric Missal; he therefore had a mixture of First and Second ordo manuscripts. His conclusions were that the Old English text followed the First ordo in some points and the Second in others.112 It follows the Second ordo in the introduction (‘Haec tria populo christiano et mihi subdito in christi promitto nomine’); in the first person forms (interdicam, precipiam), appropriate for a promise, rather than the third person forms in the First ordo (interdicat, precipiat), appropriate for a command; and minra gewealda in the first promise translates nostro arbitrio which is found in all of the Second ordo manuscripts but not in the First. However, Liebermann pointed out that in the third promise the First ordo has per hoc, an expression absent from all surviving manuscripts of the Second ordo; the Old English urh æt must be a translation of per hoc.113 The Second ordo has mihi et uobis in the third promise where the corresponding form in the First ordo is nobis;114 the Old English us eallum is somewhat closer to nobis. A further point, not noted by Liebermann, where the Old English follows the First ordo is in having aliud est, oer is, instead of the Second ordo’s aliud at the beginning of the second promise. Liebermann’s conclusion was that the Old English used an exemplar which stood between the two recensions.115 This is problematic, however, as it seems to suggest that the alterations to the Latin text were made piecemeal, whereas it has since become very clear, from Janet Nelson’s work in particular, that the B sub-version of the Second ordo revised the threefold precept to become a threefold promise and that this was a single act of revision. There is no Latin text with a mixture of forms – all of the Second ordo texts with the threefold promise are unanimous in all of the points noted above, including the version in the Benedictional of Archbishop Robert.116 There are also some points at which the Old English does not correspond to any extant manuscript. In the introduction to the promise, the Old English has ‘On ære halgan rynnesse naman’, whereas all of the Second ordo manuscripts (the First ordo has a different introduction, as quoted above)117 agree on in Christi promitto nomine. It is possible that the Old English redactor felt that invoking the trinity was more appropriate for a threefold promise; invoking the trinity also, of course, gives the alliterative sound effect of rynnesse/reo. 112 113

114 115 116

Liebermann, Gesetze III, 144. The Leofric Missal and the so-called Egbert Pontifical have per hoc; the Lanalet Pontifical does not. In the Leofric Missal and the Egbert Pontifical; the Lanalet Pontifical has ‘sibi et nobis’. Liebermann, Gesetze III, 144. I am most grateful to Gill Cannell, of the Parker Library, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, for making a copy of the promise in CCCC 146 available to me and to Birgit Ebersperger for 117 sending me a text of the promise from the Dunstan Pontifical. See above, p. 108.

111

Mary Clayton Another departure from the Latin is in the omission of an Old English equivalent to in omni tempore in the first part of the promise: all of the surviving manuscripts, in First and Second ordines, contain this, apart from the Leofric Missal, which has instead in omnipotenti deo (this form is not represented in the Old English either). It is hard to know whether this was a deliberate or inadvertent omission or whether an Old English phrase corresponding to this has been lost. The Old English also translates the Latin precipiam in the third promise with behate and bebeode; translating one Latin word with a pair of Old English words is very common in Old English prose and the Old English here strengthens the personal aspect of this part of the promise, though this behate is somewhat redundant as the clause is governed by the first behate. No pontifical finishes the threefold promise with FINIT, as Cleopatra B. xiii does. Deviations from the Latin are unlikely to be the result of the Old English author misremembering the Latin forms, as a coronation ordo is a text generally used rarely and therefore unlikely to be committed to memory. There was no coronation between 979 and 1016. The Old English, therefore, does not correspond exactly to any extant Latin version from Anglo-Saxon England. It seems that the translator of the promise must have had before him two different ordines, one of the First ordo and the other of the B version of the Second ordo, and that, while essentially following the Second ordo, he introduced some First ordo forms into his translation, as well as making some independent changes (the introduction of the Trinity, the addition of behate in the third part). The use of features of two different ordines suggests that the translator had available to him two pontificals, each containing a different version. As pontificals are bishops’ books, this in turn suggests that the translator was a bishop or archbishop or at least worked in a cathedral setting where pontificals would have been available. That the translator of the promise must have taken some liberties in translating the Latin text raises a question about the insistence at the beginning that it is copied ‘stæf be stæfe. be am gewrite e dunstan arcebisceop sealde urum hlaforde æt cingestune’. We have Dunstan’s own pontifical, with a Latin text of the Second ordo promise, and one would expect him to have used this – or, at any rate, a translation of this – at any coronation at which he officiated. Moreover, this is the only place in the Toronto Old English corpus where the phrase ‘stæf be stæfe’ occurs and letter-by-letter copying is not something which we usually associate with the vernacular in this period. This in turn prompts the question of which language, Latin or the vernacular, the threefold promise at the coronation was in. The situation envisaged for the delivery of this text seems to be one where the speaker displayed a document containing the threefold promise to his audience, telling them that it is a copy of that used at the coronation. Presumably the king would have 112

The Old English Promissio regis placed a single sheet with his promise on the altar but, when (and if) this text was delivered to an audience, the speaker could have either held up to the audience the text of this address or he could have displayed a separate single sheet, similar to that which the king had used. If the preacher showed a single, separate sheet to his audience, then the promise contained on that sheet could have been in Latin or English. We do not know whether AngloSaxon kings took the promise in Latin or in the vernacular but the ordines for the coronation ceremonies, including the promise, are in Latin in AngloSaxon pontificals. As pointed out above, however, both Edward and Æthelred were very young when consecrated and it is possible that a vernacular promise would have been considered appropriate for their consecrations. Yet it is perfectly conceivable that, in delivering the Promissio, the speaker could have held up a Latin text while providing a vernacular version in the sermon. This clearly has a bearing on whether the author of the Promissio is responsible for the translation of the promise or whether he incorporated a pre-existing vernacular promise into his text – was the text copied ‘stæf be stæfe’ a Latin text on a separate sheet or an already existing Old English text which the author of the Promissio regis incorporated in his own text? In terms of orthography, there are no striking differences between the promise and the remainder of this text, suggesting that the vernacular version could have been created for this text, rather than for the coronation, and that the reference to letter-by-letter copying could be a rhetorical feature, intended to stress the closeness of the text to the eminent archbishop known to have performed the coronation. (b) Section Two The second section recounts the happy consequences for the king, in this life and the next, of keeping his coronation promise and the disastrous consequences for both him and his people if he breaks it; this is followed by a direct appeal to the king to protect himself and a reminder that he, as shepherd, will have to lead his herd to judgement and account for his rule. The linking of the kingdom’s welfare to the behaviour of the king in this section is generally indebted to the influence of the ninth abuse, the unjust king, in the seventhcentury Hiberno-Latin tract De duodecim abusiuis, but there are none of the verbal parallels which are so evident in the third section of the Promissio. As the ninth abuse is central to the third section as well as being of significance for the second, I shall outline it briefly here. The rex iniquus chapter begins by explaining that the unjust king does not maintain the dignity of his name, even though the rex should be rector and should rule and guide the wicked. It follows this with a list of what the righteousness of the king consists in, concluding: ‘Haec regni prosperitatem in praesenti faciunt et regem ad caelestia regna 113

Mary Clayton 118

meliora perducunt.’ Then come the evil effects for the kingdom of a bad ruler: the peace of the people disturbed, the fruits of the earth reduced, deaths of loved ones, hostile invasions, storms, and sons and grandsons failing to inherit. The happy effects for the kingdom of a good king are then enumerated, including peace, protection, temperate weather, still seas, a fruitful earth and the sure inheritance of his children. The ninth abuse ends with a warning to the king that, just as he is set highest among men on earth, he will be given the foremost place of punishment in hell unless he administers justice and that he will be punished in the next world for the sinners he allowed under him. De duodecim abusiuis was ‘one of the most profoundly influential formulations of Christian political obligations in the entire Middle Ages’ and had an enormous influence on later ideas of kingship; 119 the text was very widely disseminated, with over five hundred extant manuscripts.120 The linking of the welfare of the kingdom to the behaviour of the king was taken up in Carolingian texts and can be found in the works of Anglo-Saxons at the court of Charlemagne such as Cathwulf, in his Letter to Charlemagne (c. 775), and Alcuin, and in the works of other Carolingian scholars.121 De duodecim abusiuis was also known in England in the tenth and eleventh centuries: Æthelwold donated a copy of the Latin to Peterborough and Ælfric produced an Old English adaptation of the entire text, as well as using it in Catholic Homilies II.XIX.122 118

119

120

121

122

Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, p. 52 (‘These things create prosperity in the present kingdom and bring the king to the better heavenly realms.’) P. Wormald, ‘Celtic and Anglo-Saxon Kingship: Some Further Thoughts’, Sources of AngloSaxon Culture, ed. P. Szarmach (Kalamazoo, MI, 1986), pp. 151–83, at p. 161. For the influence of De duodecim abusiuis on later texts on kingship, see H. Anton, ‘De duodecim abusivis saeculi and sein Einfluß auf den Kontinent, insbesondere auf die karolingischen Fürstenspiegel’, Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. H. Lowe (Stuttgart, 1982) II, 568–617. For the manuscripts, see A. Breen’s edition, ‘Towards a Critical Edition of De XII abusiuis: Introductory Essays with a provisional Edition of the Text’, unpubl. PhD dissertation, Trinity College, Dublin (1988). See H. Anton, Fürstenspiegel und Herrscherethos in der Karolingerzeit, Bonner Historische Forschungen 32 (Bonn, 1968), 75–9; 103–7; M. Moore, ‘La monarchie carolingienne et les anciens modèles irlandais’, Annales 51 (1996), 307–24, at 307–16; and R. Meens, ‘Politics, Mirrors of Princes and the Bible: Sins, Kings and the Well-Being of the Realm’, EME 7 (1998), 345–57. The influence of the ninth abuse can be seen very clearly in Alcuin’s Epistula ad Aeelredum regem (1), lines 94–110 (Alcuin Letter Books, ed. C. Chase, Toronto Med. Latin Texts 5 (Toronto, 1975), 42). De duodecim abusiuis had already been known to Boniface (see Anton, Fürstenspiegel und Herrscherethos, p. 74). The complete Ælfric text is in Old English Homilies, ed. R. Morris, EETS, OS 29 and 34 (London, 1867–8), pp. 296–304; for the Peterborough copy, see M. Lapidge, ‘Surviving Booklists from Anglo-Saxon England’, Learning and Literature in Anglo-Saxon England: Studies Presented to Peter Clemoes on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. M. Lapidge and H. Gneuss (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 33–89, at 53.

114

The Old English Promissio regis The ideas contained in this section of De duodecim abusiuis were also disseminated through inclusion of parts of the ninth abuse in a variety of other texts. The Collectio canonum Hibernensis, an eighth-century Hiberno-Latin collection, also popular and influential, used most of the ninth abuse in its section on kingship;123 ch. 3 of Liber XXV, De regno, is headed De eo, quod malorum regum opera destruantur, and attributes to Patricius a paragraph which begins with the rex/rector explanation from the ninth abuse, then continues with the account of the effects of an unjust king on his kingdom. 124 Ch. 4 of Liber XXV of the Hibernensis is headed De eo, quod bonorum regum opera aedificent; it is again attributed to Patricius and begins: ‘iustitia vero regis iusti haec est . . .’. It returns to the beginning of the ninth abuse in De duodecim abusiuis for the qualities of the just king and combines this with the last paragraph of the ninth abuse, where the effects on the kingdom of having a just king are described.125 The Hibernensis’s text in these two chapters is, then, a carefully edited version of the ninth abuse. Other chapters in Liber XXV deal with other aspects of kingship, drawing on different sources. The Collectio canonum Hibernensis was well known in England in the tenth and eleventh centuries: Oda of Canterbury drew upon the collection for his Constitutions;126 four manuscripts containing versions of the Hibernensis, all from Brittany or Northern France, were in Anglo-Saxon England (three in Worcester, one in Canterbury) in the late Anglo-Saxon period;127 and extracts are found in manuscripts 123

124

125

126

127

The Hibernensis is extant in two recensions, A and B. Unfortunately, only A has been published: see H. Wasserschleben, Die irische Kanonensammlung, 2nd ed. (Leipzig, 1885) and it is to this that I refer here. For the two recensions and for some shortcomings of Wasserschleben’s edition, see M. Sheehy, ‘The Collectio canonum Hibernensis: A Celtic Phenomenon’, Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. H. Löwe (Stuttgart, 1982) I, 525–35, at 534–5. Lines 1–6 of ch. 3 of the Hibernensis correspond to Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, p. 51, lines 3–8, and lines 6–16 of ch. 3 of the Hibernensis correspond to Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, p. 52, line 11–p. 53, line 5. Ch. 4, lines 1–14 correspond to Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, p. 51, line 9–p. 52, line 6; ch. 4, lines 14–19 correspond to Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, p. 53, lines 7–10. ‘The “Constitutions of Archbishop Oda”’ are edited in Councils and Synods with Other Documents Relating to the English Church, ed. D. Whitelock, M. Brett and C. N. L. Brooke (Oxford, 1981) I, 67–74. See p. 68 for details of Oda’s use of the Hibernensis. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hatton 42, from Brittany, contains the Hibernensis and other collections of canons and was in England by the tenth century, as was London, British Library Royal 5. E. xiii (Northern France or Brittany), also containing the Hibernensis; Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 279 (North-West France) was in England by c. 1000, and London, British Library, Cotton Otho E. xiii, a Breton manuscript, was probably in Canterbury in the tenth century. See S. Ambrose, ‘The Collectio canonum Hibernensis and the Literature of the Anglo-Saxon Benedictine Reform’, Viator 36 (2005), 107–118, at 108–9; H. Gneuss, A Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts, MRTS 241 (Tempe, 2001), nos. 629, 459, 81 and 361; see also Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 344.

115

Mary Clayton 128

associated with Wulfstan. Wulfstan’s so-called ‘commonplace Book’, of which we have multiple versions, includes, in CCCC 265 and Oxford, Bodleian Library, Barlow 37 (neither, however, contemporary with Wulfstan), a section headed De rege, which draws on Sedulius Scottus, the Hibernensis and Isidore;129 the Hibernensis extracts are Liber XXV, ch. 3 (last sentence), ch. 4, ch. 7 and ch. 15. Chapters 3 and 4 are the chapters based on the ninth abuse. The ninth abuse was also quoted by Bishop Jonas of Orléans in his De institutione regali and in the acts of the Council of Paris in 829, for which Jonas was also responsible; the section quoted is that beginning ‘Iusticia regis est’.130 Abbo of Fleury, in compiling his Collectio canonum in the early 990s, adopted the same quotation, taking it from Ansegisus’s capitulary which included the acts of the Council of Paris;131 however, we have no evidence for knowledge of Abbo’s Collectio canonum in England, despite Abbo’s stay in Ramsey from 985 to 987, which one would expect would have led to copies of his later works being sent to England.132 Ansegisus’s capitulary, however, was known in England, and book 1 is in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hatton 42, and was annotated by Wulfstan. There were, therefore, several channels by which the ideas of the De duodecim abusiuis on kingship were disseminated. The ideas in De duodecim abusiuis’s treatment of kingship were quite well known in English church circles, then, and we can see their influence, adapted to suit the context of an address on the coronation promise, in the Promissio’s affirmation that the king who rules with the peace and justice demanded by the threefold promise will be rewarded in this life and the next and that the king who reneges on his promise will have disastrous results for his people (see below, p. 149, for translation): Se cristena cyng e as ing gehealde. he geearna him sylfum woroldlicne weormynt. and him éce god. æger gemiltsa. ge on andwerdum life. ge eac on am ecean e æfre ne ateora; Gif he onne æt awæg. æt gode wæs beháten. onne sceal hit 128

129

130 131 132

There is a good brief account of manuscripts associated with Wulfstan in P. Wormald, ‘Wulfstan (d. 1023)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, ed. H. Matthew and B. Harrison (Oxford, 2004). . See P. Wormald, ‘Archbishop Wulfstan and the Holiness of Society’, Anglo-Saxon History: Basic Readings, ed. D. Pelteret (New York, London, 2000), pp. 191–224, at 201–2, and H. Sauer, ‘The Transmission and Structure of Archbishop Wulfstan’s “Commonplace Book”’, in Old English Prose: Basic Readings, ed. P. Szarmach (New York and London, 2000), pp. 339– 93, at pp. 351 and 369–70. On the unsatisfactory term ‘commonplace book’, see Wormald, Making of English Law, pp. 218–19. M. Mostert, The Political Theology of Abbo of Fleury (Hilversum, 1987), p. 68. It corresponds exactly to the paragraph quoted below from De duodecim abusiuis (p. 126). Abbo’s Collectio canonum is not mentioned in the entry on him by P. Lendinara in Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture, I, ed. Biggs et al., pp. 1–15.

116

The Old English Promissio regis syan. wyrsian swye. sóna on his eode. and eall hit on ende. gehwyrf on æt wyrste. butan he on his liffæce. ǽr hit gebéte.

The statement ‘onne sceal hit syan. wyrsian swye. sóna on his eode. and eall hit on ende. gehwyrf on æt wyrste’ reads almost like a vernacular summary of the list of ill-effects given in the ninth abuse and texts dependent on it. This first part of the second section of the Promissio, then, shows the influence of ideas from De duodecim abusiuis but the very summary treatment does not allow us to determine an exact source. The same ideas are reflected also in vernacular texts by Ælfric and Wulfstan, but without verbal similarities to the Promissio. Ælfric, in his Catholic Homilies II text for the Monday in Rogationtide, drawing on De duodecim abusiuis, says that: ‘æt folc bi gesælig urh snoterne cyning. sigefæst. and gesundful. urh gesceadwisne reccend; And hi beo geyrmede urh unwisne cyning. on manegum ungelimpum. for his misræde’;133 In his adaptation of the full Hiberno-Latin text, Ælfric gives more detail: Gif se cyning wile mid carfulnysse healdan as foresædan beboda. onne by his rice gesundfull on life. 7 æfter life he mot faran to am ecan [rice] for his arfæstnysse. Gif he onne forsyh as gesetnyssa 7 lare. onne by his eard geyrmed for oft. æger ge on heregunge ge on hunger. ge on cwealme. ge on ungewyderum. ge on wildeorum.134

Wulfstan, in his Institutes of Polity, has several statements of how the king’s right rule will benefit him and his kingdom. In his treatment of kingship in the first edition of Polity, he says that: And urh æt he sceal geeon Gode, e he riht lufige and unriht ascunige.135

He expanded this in the revision of the first edition: Foram urh æt he sceal sylf firmest geeon 133

134

135

Catholic Homilies II, ed. Godden, XIX, 96–9: ‘The people will be fortunate by means of a wise king, victorious and prosperous by means of a sagacious ruler. And they will be afflicted with many misfortunes by means of an unwise king, because of his misguidance.’ Old English Homilies, ed. Morris, pp. 296–304, at p. 302: ‘If the king will keep the aforementioned commands with care, then his kingdom will be prosperous during his life and after life he will be allowed to go to the eternal kingdom because of his virtue. If then he despises these decrees and teaching, then his land will be afflicted very often, both by ravaging and by hunger, by plague and bad weather and wild animals.’ Die ‘Institutes of Polity, Civil and Ecclesiastical’, ed. K. Jost, Swiss Studies in English 47 (Bern, 1959), I. 5 (from CCCC 201): ‘And through loving what is right and avoiding wrongful behaviour, he will achieve favour with God.’

117

Mary Clayton and his eodscipe eac swa, e he riht lufige for Gode and for worolde.136

In this same revision, Wulfstan also added Polity I.11, clearly drawing on Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies II.XIX: urh cyninges wisdom folc wyr gesælig, gesundful and sigefæst.137

In his final reworking of Polity, Wulfstan amplified this with another passage influenced by the same Ælfric homily, this time dealing with the ill-effects for the kingdom of an unwise king: Þurh unwisne cyning folc wyr geyrmed for oft, næs ane, for his misræde.138

Wulfstan’s address to king and people, Napier L, also includes a passage identical to the revised Polity I. 5.139 No other late-tenth-century or early-eleventhcentury vernacular author includes similar ideas. The remainder of the second section of the Promissio is the quintessential expression of pastoral kingship in Old English. The author appeals to the king, as shepherd of his flock, to protect himself by acting in accordance with his coronation promise and reminds him that he will have to lead his flock at the Last Judgement and render account of how he has ruled them: ‘Eala leof hlaford beorh huruinga georne e sylfum. Geenc æt gelome æt u scealt a heorde. for æt godes dóme. ywan and lǽdan. e u eart to hyrde gescyft on ysum life. and onne gecennan hu u geheolde. æt crist ǽr gebohte. sylf mid his blóde.’ While I have not been able to find a source for the appeal to the king to protect himself, analogous appeals addressed to a congregation to protect themselves can be found in Old English texts and are a feature of Wulfstan’s work, in particular; Ælfric, while he uses the word gebeorgan, does not seem to use it in this kind of appeal to his audience to protect themselves spiritually, though anonymous texts occasionally include such passages. While other texts do not single out an individual and appeal to him directly, then, the 136

137

138

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, I.5 (from London, Cotton Nero A. i): ‘Because through loving what is right as regards God and as regards this world, he will himself prosper best and his people likewise.’ Ibid. I.11: ‘Through the wisdom of the king, the people will be fortunate, prosperous and victorious.’ Ibid. II.13: ‘Through an unwise king, the people will be afflicted, very often, not once, 139 because of his misguidance.’ Wulfstan, ed. Napier, L, p. 266, lines 18–22.

118

The Old English Promissio regis Promissio’s petition is similar to passages in Wulfstan, as in this selection of examples from Wulfstan’s Homily III, Homily XVII, Homily XX, Napier L, the Institutes of Polity and his laws: Eala, leofan men, utan don swa us earf is, beorgan us georne wi æne egesan . . .140 Leofan men, warnia eow be swylcan 7 uton we ealle don swa us earf is, beorgan us georne wi Godes yrre.141 Ac la, on Godes naman utan don swa us neod is, beorgan us sylfum swa we geornost magon e læs we ætgædere ealle forweoran.142 betan a nu georne, a e yssere eode nu sceolan rædan, swa swa god wyle, gif hig gode willan rihtlice cweman and on am myclan dæge heom sylfum gebeorgan, bet, onne a dydon, e beforan wæron . . .143 and ealle Godes eowas we bidda and læra and huru inga mæssepreostas, æt hig gode hyran and heora clænnysse healdan and beorgan heom sylfum wi godes yrre . . .144 Ac do freonda gehwylc, eallswa hit earf is, warnige hine georne and beorge him sylfum . . .145 7 ealle mæssepreostas we bidda 7 læra, æt hy beorgan heom sylfum wi Godes yrre.146

Similar passages in anonymous texts are very few, but include: ‘Foram we bidda eow and beoda on godes naman and on his haligra, æt ge beorgan eow wi one egefullan godes dom and ealle eowre synna andetton . . .’147 There is certainly a family likeness between these appeals and that in the Promissio, suggesting that the author of the Promissio was familiar with this kind of entreaty. 140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, III, 74–5: ‘O, dear people, let us do what is needful, protect ourselves eagerly against the terror . . .’ Ibid. XVII, 63–4: ‘Dear people, be warned about this and let us do what is needful, protect ourselves eagerly against God’s anger.’ Ibid. XX, 117–19: ‘But oh, in God’s name let us do what is necessary, protect ourselves as we most eagerly may lest we all perish together.’ Wulfstan, ed. Napier, L, p. 268, 8–11: ‘let those who must now advise this people, as God may wish, eagerly atone now if they wish to please God rightly and protect themselves better on that great day, than they did, who came before . . .’ Ibid. L, p. 269, 16–19: ‘and we beseech and instruct all God’s servants, and especially priests, that they obey God and preserve their chastity and protect themselves against God’s anger . . .’ Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, II.93: ‘But let every friend, just as is needful, eagerly take warning and protect himself . . .’ V Æthelred, ed. Liebermann, I, 238 (§9): ‘and we entreat and instruct all priests, that they protect themselves against God’s anger’; see also VI Æthelred, I, 248, (§5); I Cnut, I, 288 (§6.1). Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XXIX, p. 135, 25–8: ‘Because we beseech you and command in the name of God and of his saints, that you protect yourselves against the terrible judgement of

119

Mary Clayton In calling the king a shepherd the Promissio author was drawing on a long Christian tradition of pastoral kingship, going back as far as Eusebius of Caesarea proclaiming Constantine ‘the good shepherd’, though the tradition was elaborated slowly.148 Even before this the term ‘shepherd of the people’ is used as a formulaic designation for a leader of the people in Homeric verse.149 In Old English poetry such formulaic phrases as folces hyrde or rices hyrde are commonly used of kings and are part of a ‘formulaic system in which an A verse, /x/x, is filled by a noun in the genitive ⫹ hyrde.’150 It seems likely that this formulaic system goes back before well the introduction of Christianity;151 in Old English poetry the metaphoric possibilities of the phrase are not, however, exploited and it does not encompass spiritual responsibility for the people. One of the important influences on the way it developed was the Benedictine Rule and its treatment of the abbot: the Rule took over the New Testament metaphor of Christ as shepherd (John X.11–16, Hebrews XIII.20, I Peter II.15 and I Peter V.4) and transferred it to the abbot, seeing him as a shepherd with responsibility for the souls of those over whom he rules, who would have to account for them as well as for himself at the Last Judgement.152 The same idea was applied to bishops. An important influence which contributed to this nexus of ideas and to viewing the king’s office as a spiritual one analogous to the bishop’s was Gregory the Great’s Regula pastoralis, his handbook for bishops. In it, he favoured the word rector for the episcopal office, a term just as appropriate for a secular ruler, and this contributed to seeing both as similar ministries. For Gregory, ‘bishop, priest and king could all be symbolised by the image of the shepherd’.153 In England, we find Alcuin, at the end of the eighth century, exhorting the Northumbrian King Ethelred and his nobles to be shepherds of their people, not plunderers.154 At the end of the

148

149

151

152

153

154

God and confess all your sins . . .’. This text is not accepted as Wulfstan’s by D. Whitelock, ed., Sermo Lupi ad Anglos, 3rd ed. (London, 1963), p. 14, n. 1, or by Wilcox, ‘The Dissemination of Wulfstan’s Homilies’, pp. 200–1. G. Brown, ‘The Carolingian Renaissance’, Carolingian Culture: Emulation and Innovation, ed. R. McKitterick (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 1–51, at pp. 1–2. On Homer’s use of this epithet, see A. Klinck, ‘Folces hyrde and ␲␱␫␮␧␯␣ Ⲑ᎑␫␭␣␻⬘␯: A Generic Epithet in Old English and Homeric Verse’, Papers in Language and Literature, 19 (1983), 150 117–23. Ibid. p. 119. Klinck, ibid. p. 118, comments: ‘“keeper”, rather than “shepherd” is probably the best allround translation of hyrde’. On the king as shepherd in Indo-European cultures, see now M. L. West, Indo-European Poetry and Myth (Oxford, 2007), pp. 131 and 421. See Benedicti Regula, ed. Hanslik, II. 6–10 and II. 36–40, and R. Deshman, ‘Benedictus monarcha et monachus: Early Medieval Ruler Theology and the Anglo-Saxon Reform’, FS 22 (1988), 201–40, esp. 207–10. R. A. Markus, ‘The Latin Fathers’, The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought c. 350–c. 1450, ed. J. H. Burns (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 92–122, at p. 120. Alcuin’s Epistula ad Aeelredum regem (2), lines 95–6 (Alcuin Letter-Books, ed. Chase, p. 56).

120

The Old English Promissio regis ninth century, in the Old English translation of Gregory’s Regula pastoralis, ‘the bishop’s office and king’s come rather closer together’, as Patrick Wormald pointed out.155 The king as shepherd is found in two key texts of the AngloSaxon Benedictine Reform, and the Reform also brought the offices of king and abbot closer together.156 In the New Minster Charter, Edgar exhorts his successors as king to defend the Lord’s flock, calling them most faithful shepherds, pastores fidissimi, and the Charter says that the king must protect his creator’s pastures and flock.157 The Prologue to the Regularis concordia states that King Edgar, like the pastorum pastor, defended the sheep, in this case the reformed monks.158 In the tenth and eleventh centuries in England, then, kings, along with abbots, bishops and priests, could be seen as shepherds with responsibility for their flocks in texts which develop the pastoral imagery implicit in the metaphor.159 However, the majority of texts which speak of shepherds do so with regard to bishops and priests, and in vernacular texts only Ælfric (once only) and Wulfstan speak of the king as shepherd. Ælfric, in his homily for the Sunday after the Ascension, probably written c. 1000, introduces what Pope called a ‘tangential passage’ on the duties of the king where he calls the king Christ’s vicar and says he is consecrated as his people’s shepherd: for an e se cyning is Cristes sylfes speligend ofer am Cristenan folce e Crist sylf alysde, him to hyrde gehalgod, æt he hi healdan sceole, mid æs folces fultume, wi onfeohtende here, and him sige biddan æt am soan Hælende . . .160 155

156

157

158 159

160

Making of English Law, p. 428. On ideas of kingship in England in the Alfredian period, see M. Kempshall, ‘No Bishop, No King: the Ministerial Ideology of Kingship in Asser’s Res Gestae Alfredi’, Belief and Culture in the Middle Ages: Studies Presented to Henry Mayr-Harting, ed. R. Gameson and H. Leyser (Oxford, 2001), pp. 106–28, and D. Pratt, The Political Thought of Alfred the Great (Cambridge, 2007). See the discussions by Deshman, ‘Benedictus monarcha et monachus’, pp. 207–11, and M. Silverman, ‘Ælfric’s Designation of the King as “Cristes sylfes speligend”’ RES n.s. 35 (1984), 332–4. See the edition by A. Rumble in Property and Piety in Early Medieval Winchester: Documents Relating to the Topography of the Anglo-Saxon and Norman City and its Minsters, Winchester Studies 4.iii. (Oxford and New York, 2002), at 88–9. Regularis concordia, ed. T. Symons (London, 1953), p. 2. On priests see, for example, Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies I, 17, ed. Clemoes, p. 314, lines 23–4: ‘Ælc biscop & ælc lareow is to hyrde geset godes folce: æt hi sceolon æt folc wi am wulfe gescyldan,’ or Wulfstan’s Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, II.108 and II.109. Homilies of Ælfric: a Supplementary Collection, ed. Pope, IX, 48–52 (my italics): ‘because the king is Christ’s own vicar over the Christian people whom Christ himself redeemed, consecrated as their shepherd, so that he should guard them, with the help of the people, against an attacking army and pray for victory for them from the true Saviour . . .’. As Silverman, ‘Ælfric’s Designation of the King as ‘Cristes sylfes speligend’, pointed out, both terms are used in the New Minster Charter.

121

Mary Clayton In his first edition of Polity, Wulfstan termed the king Cristes gespeliga but in his expansion of this edition of Polity, he replaced this with rihtwis hyrde: Cristenum cyninge gebyre on cristenre eode, æt he sy, ealswa hit riht is, folces frofer and rihtwis hyrde ofer cristenre heorde.161

The same idea is repeated in identical words in Napier L,162 and Wulfstan reworked it in the second edition of Polity: Cristenum cyninge gebyre swye rihte, æt he cristen folc rihtlice healde, and æt he sy, swa hit riht is, folces frofer and rihtwis hyrde cristenre heorde.163

Pope pointed out that both Cristes gespeliga and hyrde are found in the Ælfric passage just quoted and suggested that Wulfstan had taken both from this Ælfric passage.164 It is certainly a striking coincidence that the two terms which Wulfstan used in successive versions of Polity are found in the same sentence in Ælfric’s homily165 and neither term is used by any other Old English prose author for the king, only for various ecclesiastical ministries. The final major ideas in this second section of the Promissio are the idea that the king will lead his people at the Last Judgement and that he will have to render an account of how he has ruled them, and these again depend on seeing 161

162 163

164 165

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, Ib.1: ‘a Christian king is fitting in a Christian people, that he may be, as is right, a comfort to the people and a righteous shepherd over the Christian flock.’ Wulfstan, ed. Napier, L, p. 266, lines 12–14. Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, II.4 (quoted from London, British Library, Cotton Nero A. i): ‘It very rightly befits a Christian king that he guard the Christian people rightly and that he be, as is right, a comfort to the people and a righteous shepherd of the Christian flock.’ Homilies of Ælfric, ed. Pope, I, 377. Wulfstan does not, however, otherwise use this Ælfric text. Ibid. I, 390–91, note to line 52. There is an extra line in one manuscript of this Ælfric homily, the Worcester Wulfstan manuscript Oxford, Bodleian Library, Junius 121, from the third quarter of the eleventh century. Although the line is similar to a line in Ælfric’s version of the ninth abuse in his adaptation of De duodecim abusiuis, Pope puts forward several reasons for not attributing it to Ælfric and instead suggests Wulfstan was responsible for it. If Pope’s argument that Wulfstan himself composed this extra line is correct (and it is, of course, not provable) then this would mean that Wulfstan certainly knew this Ælfric homily and derived these phrases from it.

122

The Old English Promissio regis the king’s office as a spiritual one. The Promissio regis appears to be the only text from Anglo-Saxon England which describes the king leading his people on the Last Day, but there are a number of examples of spiritual leaders so described. The primary source for this motif seems to be Gregory the Great’s Homilae in evangelia 17, where Gregory exhorts pastors to keep in mind the Day of Judgement when the shepherds with their flocks will come before God; he describes Peter leading a converted Judea; Paul leading a converted world; Andrew Achaia; John Asia Minor; and Thomas India. Gregory then asks what ‘we’, those pastors who will have no flocks to lead, will do: ‘Cum igitur tot pastores cum gregibus suis ante aeterni pastoris oculos uenerint, quid nos miseri dicturi sumus, qui ad Dominum nostrum post negotium uacui redimus, qui pastorum nomen habuimus, et oues quas ex nutrimento nostro debeamus ostendere non habemus? Hic pastores uocati sumus, et ibi gregem non ducimus.’166 The influence of Gregory can be seen in Bede’s letter to Archbishop Egbert of York about the state of the English church, in which he implores Egbert to behave as a good shepherd and asks him to take care that, when, on the Last Day, Peter and the other ‘leaders of the flocks of the faithful’ offer the fruits of their pastoral care to Christ, none of his sheep be condemned to eternal punishment.167 Ælfric used the Gregory homily as a source in his Catholic Homilies II text for the feast of a confessor, where he describes the apostles leading forth, at the Last Judgement, the peoples for whose conversion they have been responsible. He follows this by describing all preachers entrusting their spiritual profit to God and receiving an appropriate reward: ‘and swa gehwilc godes bydela ær betæh a gastlican teolunge am heofenlican deman. and hí underfo æt him heora mede be heora geswinces mæe’.168 While Ælfric clearly uses this motif of contemporary preachers having to lead their flock at the Last Judgement in this homily, it is not very developed and not something which recurs in his work. Wulfstan, on the other hand, takes up this motif from Gregory and uses it on a number of occasions. In a supplement to his Institutes 166

167

168

Gregorius Magnus Homiliae in evangelia, ed. R. Étaix, CCSL 141 (Turnhout, 1999), homilia XVII, 400–5: ‘When so many shepherds with their flocks come before the eternal shepherd, what will we say, we unfortunate ones who return to our master empty-handed after our trading? We have no sheep to show as a result of our care. Now we are called shepherds but we have no flock to lead on the day of judgement.’ (transl. D. Hurst, Forty Gospel Homilies by Gregory the Great, Cistercian Studies 23 (Kalamazoo, 1990), p. 148). Venerabilis Baedae Opera historica, ed. C. Plummer (Oxford, 1896) I, pp. 405–23, at 417–18 (ch. 14). That the Gregory homily is Bede’s source is rendered more likely by the fact that he exhorts Egbert in this same letter to read Gregory’s homilies on the Gospels. Catholic Homilies II, ed. Godden, XXXVIII, 182–6: ‘and so each of God’s messengers will there entrust their spiritual profit to the heavenly judge and they will receive from him their reward according to the extent of their labour’. For the source, see M. Godden, Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies: Introduction, Commentary and Glossary, EETS, ss 18 (Oxford, 2000), p. 653.

123

Mary Clayton of Polity and in his second lawcode for Cnut, he describes the joy of the shepherd (here priests) who can lead his flock into heaven: Eallum us (uel eow) is micel earf, æt we (uel ge) God lufian and Godes lagum filigan and godcundan lareowan geornlice hyran; foram hig us (uel eow) sculon lædan for æt am dome, onne God deme manna gehwilcum be ærran gewyrhtan. And gesæli bi[] se hyrda, e onne his heorde into Godes rice and to heofonlicre myrhe blie mot lædan for ærran gewirhtan.169

The lines quoted here are repeated word for word in the ‘homiletic exordium’ at the end of Cnut’s second lawcode, where sections 84–84.4b are identical to part of this CCCC 201 text.170 In Wulfstan’s sermon for the consecration of a bishop, as transmitted in Cleopatra B. xiii, he exhorts Christians to obey their shepherds, who will lead them on Judgement Day: ‘Ac don cristene men, swa swa we læra, hyran gode georne and am godcundan hyrdan, e æt godes dome hy for scylan lædan’.171 The same idea is found also in the so-called Poenitentiale Pseudo-Egberti or Old English Penitential, edited by Raith; this text occurs in manuscripts associated with Archbishop Wulfstan and was known by him.172 In Book III, chapter 16, part of the text which, in general, closely follows the Latin source (the Penitential of Halitgar), the Old English version adds a sentence to the end of the chapter which is not paralleled in the source: ‘Eall is is gecweden be biscopon 7 be <mæsse>preoston e godes folc on domesdæg to am dome lædan sceolon: ælc æne dæl e him her on life ær betæht wæs.’173 169

170

171

172

173

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, p. 260, 147–8: ‘It is very necessary for all of us (or you) that we (or you) love God and follow God’s laws and eagerly obey spiritual teachers; because they will have to lead us (or you) forth at the judgement, when God will judge every person according to their previous deeds. And that shepherd will be fortunate who may then lead his flock into God’s kingdom and to heavenly bliss on account of previous deeds.’ These lines are preserved only in CCCC 201 which has a text of the first edition of Polity on pp. 87–93 and an item headed Be sacerdan, from which these lines are taken, on pp. 130–1. Liebermann, Gesetze I, 368 (II Cnut, §84, 1–§84, 2); the phrase ‘homiletic exordium’ is Wormald’s, Making of English Law, p. 354. Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XXXVII, p. 178, line 21–p. 179, line 1: ‘But let Christian people, as we instruct, obey God eagerly and the spiritual shepherds, who will have to lead them forth at God’s judgement.’ J. Raith, Die altenglische Version des Halitgar’schen Bussbuches, Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Prosa 13 (Hamburg, 1933, repr. Darmstadt, 1964); the manuscripts are described on pp. ix–xx. See also R. Fowler, ‘A Late Old English Handbook for the Use of a Confessor’, Anglia 83 (1965), 1–34, at 1–12. Raith, Die altenglische Version des Halitgar’schen Bussbuches, p. 46: ‘All this is said regarding bishops and priests who will have to lead God’s people to judgement on the day of judgement: each one the portion previously entrusted to him here in this life.’

124

The Old English Promissio regis The idea that those in positions of spiritual authority will lead their flocks at the Last Judgement is also found in an early-eleventh-century record of decisions at a bishops’ synod, preserved in Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, lat. 943, the ‘Dunstan Pontifical’, which was at Sherborne when this and other additions were made to it.174 This declares: ‘We greta eac ealle ure gebrora 7 geswustra e abbudhades syn 7 abbudyssan swye blielice, 7 hy geornlice myngia 7 eadmodlice bidda æt hy for Godes lufon heora agenne earfe 7 æra e hy æt Godes dome for lædan sceolon georne beenceon.’175 It is very likely that this text shows the influence of Wulfstan, whose role at bishops’ synods in the early eleventh century was doubtless prominent. It is clear, then, that the idea that spiritual leaders would lead their people on the Day of Judgement was known in late-tenth- and early-eleventh-century Anglo-Saxon England and that the author of the Promissio adapts the motif to describe the king so doing. The motif is found chiefly in Wulfstan and he uses wording similar to the Promissio’s, with the verb sculan and the phrase for lædan; what makes the Promissio unique, however, is that it is the king who leads, not a bishop or priest. The final part of this second paragraph exhorts the king to think of how he will have to account at the Last Judgement for his government of the people whom Christ himself bought with his blood. That the king will have to render account for his rule on the Last Day is a Carolingian theme which was known too in Anglo-Saxon England.176 Cathwulf reminded Charlemagne that he was the vice-regent of God who would have to render account on the Day of Judgement.177 Bishop Oda of Canterbury’s Constitutions, written between 942 and 946 and preserved in a manuscript compiled for Wulfstan, London, British Library, Cotton Vespasian A. xiv, reminds kings and all those in authority: ‘Quia etsi omni homini necessarium est, Christi custodire mandata, precipue tamen regibus et omnibus in sublimitate positis, qui et pro se ipsis etiam et pro universis sibi subiectis in die districti examinis iusto iudici rationem sunt reddituri.’178 Robert Deshman has demonstrated how Æthelwold’s Prologue to 174 175

176

177 178

See above, p. 109, for this pontifical. ‘Some decisions at a bishops’ synod’, Councils and Synods, ed. Whitelock, Brett and Brooke, pp. 402–6, at p. 405: ‘We greet also very kindly all our brothers and sisters who are of the rank of abbot or abbess, and exhort them eagerly and pray them humbly that for the love of God they eagerly consider their own benefit and that of those who they must bring forth at God’s judgement.’ See T. Noble, ‘The Monastic Ideal as a Model for Empire: the Case of Louis the Pious’, RB 86 (1976), 235–50, at 243–4. Epistolae Karolini aevi, II, MGH, Epist. IV, ed. E. Dümmler (Berlin, 1895), pp. 501–5, at 503. Councils and Synods, ed. Whitelock, Brett and Brooke, I, 67–74, at 70–1: ‘Because although it is necessary for all men to keep the commands of Christ, nevertheless it is especially so for kings and all those in lofty positions, who will have to render account both for themselves and also for all their subjects on the day of the severe examination by the just judge.’

125

Mary Clayton the Regularis concordia and the iconography of the frontispiece to the copy of the Regularis concordia in London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius A. iii ‘both stress that the fear of the Last Judgement motivates the ruler, whether a king or an abbot, to govern his subjects virtuously’.179 This second section, then, stresses that the welfare of the people depends on their king and that his worldly and eternal welfare depends on keeping his coronation promise; it appeals urgently to the king, as shepherd of his people, to save himself and to bear in mind that he will have to account for his rule on the Last Day. His office here is conceived as a spiritual one and motifs common in treatments of bishops and priests are applied to it. (c) Section Three The third section is clearly dependent on the account of what the justice of the king consists of in the ninth abuse in De duodecim abusiuis or on a text which draws on the ninth abuse: Iustitia uero regis est neminem iniuste per potentiam opprimere, sine acceptione personarum inter uirum et proximum suum iudicare, aduenis et pupillis et uiduis defensorem esse, furta cohibere, adulteria punire, iniquos non exaltare, impudicos et striones non nutrire, impios de terra perdere, parricidas et periurantes uiuere non sinere, ecclesias defendere, pauperes elemosynis alere, iustos super regni negotia constituere, senes et sapientes et sobrios consiliarios habere, magorum et hariolorum et pythonissarum superstitionibus non intendere, iracundiam differre, patriam fortiter et iuste contra aduersarios defendere, per omnia in Deo confidere, prosperitatibus animum non eleuare, cuncta aduersaria patienter ferre, fidem catholicam in Deum habere, filios suos non sinere impie agere, certis horis orationibus insistere, ante horas congruas non gustare cibum. Vae enim terrae, cuius rex est puer et cuius principes mane comedunt. Haec regni prosperitatem in praesenti faciunt et regem ad caelestia regna meliora perducunt.180 179 180

Deshman, ‘Benedictus monarcha’, p. 22. Hellmann, ‘Pseudo-Cyprianus de XII abusivis saeculi’, pp. 51–2: ‘Truly the justice of a king is to oppress no man unjustly through the exercise of power, to judge between one man and another without regard to persons, to be the defender of strangers, orphans and widows, to restrain theft, to punish adultery, not to promote the wicked to high office, not to support the shameless and actors, to destroy the impious from the land, not to permit parricides and perjurers to live, to defend the churches, to nourish the poor with alms, to set just men over the affairs of the kingdom, to have those who are old and wise and temperate as counsellors, not to attend to the superstitions of magicians and soothsayers and sorceresses, to delay anger, to defend his country bravely and justly against adversaries, to put his trust in God in all things, not to be elated in spirit in good fortune, to bear all adversities patiently, to have orthodox faith in God, not to allow his sons to act impiously, to apply himself to prayers at certain times, not to taste food before the proper hours. For woe to the land, whose king is a child and whose princes dine in the morning! These things make a kingdom prosperous in this world and afterwards bring the king to the better heavenly kingdom.’

126

The Old English Promissio regis This same passage, but not including the last two sentences, constitutes Book XXV, ch. 4 of the Hibernensis.181 The Old English begins ‘Gehalgodes cynges riht is. æt he nænigne man ne fordéme’, again tying in with the coronation promise by the introduction of gehalgod, and then seems to combine the next two clauses of the Latin, translating ‘neminem iudicare’ and omitting the passage in between these words. As noted in the notes to the edition, a word like unrihtlice or a phrase such as on unriht appears to be missing here. This passage in the Old English is particularly important as it may give us a clue to the version of the ninth abuse that was the source for this text. The Hibernensis, instead of De duodecim abusiuis’s ‘neminem iniuste per potentiam opprimere, sine acceptione personarum inter uirum et proximum suum iudicare’, reads ‘neminem iniuste iudicare’; like the Old English, therefore, it takes the beginning of one clause in De duodecim abusiuis and the end of the next, but it includes the iniuste which is necessary to the sense. While it is dangerous to argue from omissions, given the numerous omissions from the source in this section, nevertheless the beginning of this section is translated fairly closely and this agreement with the Hibernensis may, then, be significant. The next characteristic of the just king is translated closely in the Old English, the only changes being in the order of those defended and in the employment of a pair of rhyming verbs for the phrase defensorem esse: ‘and æt he wuduwan and steopcild and æleodige werige and amundige’. The third again continues to follow the Latin source closely: ‘stala forbeode’ corresponding to ‘furta cohibere’. ‘Unrihthæmedu gebete’ corresponds to ‘adulteria punire’ but changes the meaning somewhat, insofar as gebetan means to ‘correct, reform, amend’ rather than ‘punish’; unrihthæmed can mean adultery or fornication. The next phrase in the Old English stipulates that the king should separate those committing incest, something not specifically mentioned in De duodecim abusiuis or the Hibernensis; in the Latin text, the next roles of the king are ‘iniquos non exaltare, impudicos et histriones non nutrire’ (this is the order in De duodecim abusiuis while in the Hibernensis these clauses are reversed). The Old English does not mention that the king should not raise up the wicked or support actors, and, indeed, there is no vernacular equivalent to the verbs exaltare or nutrire. It is possible, however, that the Latin impudicos suggested those who commit incest to the Old English author who was here choosing a particular kind of unchaste behaviour. Specifying incest here is interesting, as is the word sibleger itself; sibleger is attested only in Wulfstan and incest is a preoccupation of his and figures in several of his lawcodes.182 181 182

Die irische Kanonensammlung, ed. Wasserschleben, p. 77. On sibleger as unique to Wulfstan, see D. Whitelock, ‘Wulfstan and the so-called Laws of Edward and Guthrum’, EHR 56 (1941), 1–21, at 8: she points out that: ‘The offence itself is

127

Mary Clayton The Old English then translates several other characteristics of the good king from the Latin, but in a different order. The king’s duty that he ‘grundlunga. forbeode. wiccan. and galdra adilige’ corresponds to De duodecim abusiuis’s ‘magorum et ariolorum phitonissarumque superstitionibus non intendere’ or the Hibernensis’s ‘magorum et pythonissarum et auguriorum superstitionibus non intendere’, but the Old English, with the adverb grundlunga and forbeode and adilige as the verbs, is phrased much more strongly than the Latin. The next clause stipulates that the king ‘mægmyrran and manswaran of earde adrife’;183 this is clearly inspired by the De duodecim abusiuis or Hibernensis reading ‘parricidas et periurantes uiuere non sinere’, but with a change from not allowing parricides and perjurers to live to driving them out of the country.184 The Old English continues with ‘earfan mid ælmyssan fede’, unproblematically translating De duodecim abusiuis/Hibernensis ‘pauperes elemosynis alere’ and with ‘ealde. and wise and. syfre him to geeahterum hæbbe’, translating ‘senes et sapientes et sobrios consiliarios habere’. The final thing that the just king must do, according to the Old English, is ‘rihtwise mæn him to wicnerum sette’; again, this is paralleled in De duodecim abusiuis and the Hibernensis. A number of features of the good king, as found in De duodecim abusiuis and the Hibernensis, are omitted and it is worth mentioning these briefly: not to promote the impious to high office, not to support actors, to destroy the wicked from the earth, to defend the churches, to delay anger, to defend his country bravely and justly against adversaries, to trust in God, not to be raised up in spirit by good fortune, to endure misfortune patiently, to have orthodox faith in God, not to allow his children to act wickedly, to devote himself at certain hours to prayers, not to dine before the proper hours. Some of these omissions seem surprising. The author of the Old English has here made the clauses relating to advisors and officers of the king the climax of his list, leading into the final statement, which, like the concluding statement of the second section, is concerned with the Last Judgement. There is no parallel in De duodecim abusiuis or the Hibernensis to the final part of the Old English: ‘for an swa hwæt swa hig to unrihte gedo urh his aful. he his sceal ealles gescead agyldan on domes dæg.’ De duodecim abusiuis, but not the Hibernensis, continues by saying that the king who has

183

184

not dealt with in other laws, so one cannot judge if the term itself is an innovation. Yet it is perhaps worth noting that the penitential literature does not use it, but some much more wordy expression.’ See also R. Dance, ‘Sound, Fury, and Signifiers; or Wulfstan’s Language’ in Wulfstan, ed. Townend, pp. 29–61, at 59. Sibleger can mean incest or those who commit incest – see note to line 20. Mægmyrra is attested eight times in the DOE Web Corpus; one occurrence is in the Old English translation of Gregory’s Dialogues and the other seven are in glossaries, five of them to Aldhelm, glossing parricida. The ninth abuse specifies, however, ‘impios de terra perdere’.

128

The Old English Promissio regis transgressors under him will be punished in the next world for them but has nothing like the Promissio’s concern about the king’s responsibility for that which is done by means of his power or about the Day of Judgement. Instead, the Promissio author is here drawing again on accounts of how spiritual leaders will be held responsible, on Judgement Day, for the actions of those in their care. The ultimate source for this treatment of the theme is the Benedictine Rule, where the abbot has to account for his care of those under him; this theme occurs several times in the Rule, as in these examples from Æthelwold’s Old English translation: Wite eac se abbod, æt se e onfeh saula to ræccænne, he gearwa hine selfne to dome on æm dome on domesdæge, and ær he sceal riht agyldan for ealle, a e he onfeng, and eac for his agene saule. Geænce eahhwæere se abbod, æt he Gode ælmihtigum gescead agyldan sceal be eallum his dædum and domum . . .185

Similar passages can be found in the Old English Rule of Chrodegang186 and the Old English Theofulfi Capitula.187 Ælfric too says that each teacher will have responsibility for the souls of others as well as his own: ‘Ælc lareow sceal agyldan gescead gode ealra æra manna sawla e him betæhte syndon. toeacan his agenre sawle’;188 and Wulfstan, talking about bishops and priests, makes the same point in several different texts, again in terms very similar to the Benedictine Rule: Gyf u onne æt ne dest ac forsuwast hit 7 nelt folce his earfe gecyan, onne scealt u ealra æra sawla on domesdæg gescead agyldan e urh æt losia, e hy nabba a lare & a mynegunge e hy beorfton.189

185

186

187 188

189

Die angelsächsischen Prosabearbeitungen der Benediktinerregel, ed. A. Schröer, Bibliothek angelsächsischen Prosa 2 (Kassel, 1885–8; repr. with appendix by H. Gneuss, Darmstadt, 1964); the first quotation is from Chapter 2, p. 14, lines 16–20 (‘Let the abbot know also, that he who receives souls to govern prepares himself for judgement at the judgement on judgement day, and there he will have to render an account for all those whom he received and also for his own soul.’), and the second from chapter 65, p. 126, lines 9–10: ‘Nevertheless let the abbot bear in mind, that he will have to render account to almighty God for all his deeds and his judgements . . .’. For example, The Old English Version of the Enlarged Rule of Chrodegang, ed. B. Langefeld, Münchener Universitätsschriften 26 (Frankfurt, 2003), ch. 79, 38–9. Theodulfi Capitula in England, ed. H. Sauer (Munich, 1978), ch. 1 (p. 307). Catholic Homilies II, ed. Godden, III, 238–9: ‘Each teacher must render account to God for the souls of all the people who are entrusted to him, in addition to his own soul.’ Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, VI, 10–14; this is identical to Polity, II.138: ‘If you do not do this but are silent about it and do not wish to make known to the people what is necessary for them, then you will have to render account at judgement day for all the souls who are lost through that, because they do not have the teaching and the warning that they needed.’

129

Mary Clayton And æger hi scylon æt Godes dome gescead agyldan, ge heora sylfra dæda ge ealles æs folces, e hi to Godes handa healdan sceolan.190

The Promissio, then, seems to be influenced by other vernacular texts in this passage, but, while the other texts are all concerned with abbots, bishops, priests and canons, the Promissio tailors this theme to the office of king, by stressing his responsibility for injustice committed in his name. It is noteworthy that the Promissio does not have a conventional ending, such as one would expect in an address to king and people such as this appears to be. The final words, ‘for an swa hwæt swa hig to unrihte gedo urh his aful. he his sceal ealles gescead agyldan on domesdæg’, do not feel like a conclusion, and one would expect them to be followed by another plea to the king or, at least, a prayer-like finish. Napier L, addressed to king and people, ends with the prayer that every Christian will turn from sin and earn the heavenly kingdom ‘ær is ece blis and æfre bi mid am, e leofa and rixa a butan ende. amen’.191 The lack of a conventional ending may be an indication that the Promissio was never completed. the function of the text As is evident from the review of discussions of the Promissio at the beginning of this article, the majority view to date is that this text was composed as a coronation text, probably by Dunstan.192 The presence of the text in a pontifical, Vitellius A. vii, before the ordo for the coronation, naturally lends support to this view and one can imagine that it would be relatively easy to adapt the Promissio for a coronation address. However, the text itself makes very clear that it was not composed for preaching at a coronation. The first sentence introduces the translation of the promise by referring back to Dunstan’s coronation of ‘urum hlaforde’. The coronation of this king, who is still reigning, is in the past, ‘a on dæg a hine man halgode to cinge’; it is not something which is taking place on the occasion at which this sermon was delivered. The Promissio regis, then, is addressed to the same king whom Dunstan directed to lay the promise on the altar, but it makes no claim to be by Dunstan himself or 190

191

192

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, II.104 (quoted from Oxford, Bodleian Library, Junius 121, but the text is more or less identical in Cotton Nero A. i and in London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius A. iii): ‘And they will have to render account at God’s judgement both for their own deeds and for those all the people, whom they had to hold from God.’ It is very similar to Napier LII, also by Wulfstan (Wulfstan, ed. Napier, p. 275, lines 18–19). Wulfstan, ed. Napier, L, p. 274, lines 3–5: ‘where there is eternal bliss and always will be with him, who lives and rules forever without end. amen’. Stafford, ‘The laws of Cnut’, p. 187, suggests that this text may even be the consecration address which Wulfstan made to Cnut. See, for example, Nelson, ‘Ritual and Reality’, p. 337; Wormald, ‘Æthelred the Lawmaker’, p. 74; Stafford, ‘The Laws of Cnut’, p. 179.

130

The Old English Promissio regis to be a sermon preached at the coronation ceremony. Instead, it is a sermon addressed to the king (‘Eala, leof hlaford’) and people (addressed particularly in the first sentence, when the story of the coronation is recounted to them), publicly reminding both king and people of the promises made to the people at the king’s coronation. The translation of the promise concludes with ‘FINIT’, drawing a distinct boundary between the promise and the remainder of the text, which is devoted to explaining the consequences for the king and people of his fulfilling or breaking these promises and to detailing in what the justice of the king consists. The function for which the text was composed seems, then, to have been one where the preacher, who must, one imagines, have been a very senior figure in the Anglo-Saxon church, addressed king and people jointly. This does not preclude other uses, of course: that Leofric had the text copied into one of his pontificals, alongside the coronation ordo, and into a preaching manuscript probably indicates that he felt it could be adapted to use at a coronation and/or as a preaching text to a congregation that included king and people, as in the original context. Elaine Treharne, building on Patrick Wormald’s discussion of this text, suggests that it could have been used by Leofric in preaching at the royal council held at Exeter in 1050.193 The occasion for which the text was composed seems to have been one of some importance; there is a tone of compelling and even exasperated urgency in the exhortation to the king that he should save himself at least and in the reminder, at the end of the second and third sections, that he will have to account at Judgement Day for his use of his power, including injustices perpetrated in his name. It would not, I think, have been a very comfortable experience for the king in question to listen to this address. authorship The only authors to whom the Promissio regis has been attributed have been Dunstan, who has been thought to have delivered the text at one or more coronation ceremonies, and, as a hypothesis worth exploring, Byrhtferth.194 Stafford almost raised the possibility of Wulfstan’s being the author, only to dismiss it on the grounds that the manuscripts have no Wulfstan connections and that the piece is not in Wulfstan’s distinct style. The Dunstan attribution arose because of the mention of the archbishop at the beginning of the text: ‘is gewrit is gewriten stæf be stæfe be am gewrite e Dunstan arcebisceop sealde urum hlaforde æt Cingestune.’ However, the opening paragraph makes 193 194

Wormald, Making of English Law, pp. 447–8, and Treharne, ‘The Bishop’s Book’ (forthcoming). For Dunstan, see the references in n. 188 above. For Byrhtferth as a suggestion, see Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 448, n. 118.

131

Mary Clayton clear that what Dunstan was responsible for was handing the promise to the king and directing him to place the text of the promise on the altar; the gewrit alluded to seems to be the text of the promise only, not this text as a whole. Indeed, the reference to Dunstan rather suggests that the text is the work of someone else, as Dunstan would be unlikely to refer to himself in the third person, and that he is being used here to give further authority to the address. Given that Vitellius A. vii is not a Ramsey manuscript and that we have no proof or even indication of any Ramsey connections for this text, Wormald’s suggestion, based on a Ramsey origin for Vitellius and Byrhtferth’s interest in coronations, that ‘it might – at the risk of fathering further unwarranted progeny on Byrthferth – be worth pondering his possible role in the oath’s translation’ does not have any evidence to support it.195 Had Byrhtferth been responsible for the Promissio, one would also expect the version of the threefold promise to correspond to that in his Vita Oswaldi and this is not the case in all details.196 The third Anglo-Saxon author whose name is constantly connected with the text, but without its being attributed to him, is Wulfstan, archbishop of York. Liebermann pointed to the Promissio’s similarities to passages in Napier L and to the Institutes of Polity;197 Robertson added similarities with Wulfstan’s V and VI Æthelred, without going into detail; Jost pointed out that the word afol is found only in the Promissio and in Wulfstan; Stafford showed that ‘[b]oth the oath and the sermon are glossed extensively by the laws of Cnut’ and Wormald said that the ‘idiom, though not the language, is already that of Wulfstan’.198 Wulfstan has already been quoted extensively in this article as offering parallels to the Promissio, both in ideas and wording. One obstacle Stafford raised to Wulfstan’s authorship was the manuscripts’ lack of connection with Wulfstan and it is true that Exeter has not been viewed as a centre in which one might expect to find Wulfstan texts unattested in Worcester or York. However, this is precisely what we find in the case of Napier L, Bethurum XVIII and Napier XXXVII;199 these three texts are all transmitted only in Exeter manuscripts, Cleopatra B. xiii and the Exeter additions to CCCC 421, two closely connected manuscripts. While the preservation in Exeter only of three Wulfstan sermons does not necessarily say anything about the author195 196

197

198 199

Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 448, n. 118. The differences between the Promissio’s text and Byrthtferth’s (and all other texts of the Second ordo) are outlined above, pp. 110–12. The passages in Polity to which he alludes are the section Be eorlicum cyninge and a section on bishops (corresponding to Jost, Institutes of Polity, pp. 211ff, though the latter does not have any striking similarities to the Promissio). Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 448, n. 119. On this last text, see above, p. 99; it corresponds in part to Bethurum XVII.

132

The Old English Promissio regis ship of the Promissio regis, it does mean that an attribution to Wulfstan cannot be dismissed on the grounds that the manuscripts have no connection with him. Given that the manuscript evidence does not rule out a Wulfstan connection, it is worth considering other possible indications of his involvement. There are some suggestive features of the vocabulary of the text. Jost pointed out that the word afol is attested only in the Promissio and in Wulfstan, with a question mark as to whether abal in Genesis B was the same word.200 Afol is found in the first edition (in CCCC 201) of the Institutes of Polity I.3, in a passage on kings: And him gebira eac, æt he eallum his afole Cristendom lufige . . .201

Afol was replaced in subsequent versions of the Institutes of Polity with mægene,202 and Jost explains this by suggesting that Wulfstan himself replaced a littleknown word with a better-known one.203 Wulfstan uses woroldafelum in homily XII, line 38; this text is Wulfstan’s reworking of Ælfric’s De falsis deis and here he writes ‘e mihtige wurdan on woruldafelum’ for Ælfric’s ‘e mihtige wæron on woruldlicum geincum’.204 He uses it again in his Canons of Edgar, where he says that any priest who cannot or does not dare compel a man to penance for woruldafole must declare this at a synod.205 Sara Pons-Sanz has recently discussed afol and suggests that it is not, as had been thought, a Norse loanword, but is more likely to be of native origin, with abal as an alternative spelling; in this case, she says, ‘the preservation of its spelling in Old English solely in Wulfstan’s works should simply be understood as one of Fortune’s whims.’206 While too much weight cannot be placed on Wulfstan’s use of afol, then, it nevertheless remains the case that this is a rare word, with three of its four attestations in Wulfstan (that is, including the attestations of woruldafol), and its use in the Promissio could be a pointer towards Wulfstan’s involvement with this text. Apart from its use in the Promissio, the word sibleger is also found only in Wulfstan, and Audrey Meaney suggests that it may be Wulfstan’s own 200 201 202 204

205 206

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, p. 18. Ibid. I.3: ‘And it befits him also, that he should love Christianity with all his might . . .’. 203 Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, Ib.3 and II.5. Ibid., p. 18. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, XII, 38 (‘who were powerful in worldly might’); Homilies of Ælfric, ed. Pope, XXI, 102 (‘who were powerful in worldly ranks’). Wulfstan’s Canons of Edgar, ed. R. Fowler, EETS 266 (Oxford, 1972), 6, p. 2. ‘The Norse Origin of OE AFOL/ME AFELL: is Evidence Strong Enough?’, ELN 43 (2005), 1–7, at 7.

133

Mary Clayton 207

coinage. Dorothy Whitelock used the occurrence of sibleger in the so-called ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’ as part of her argument that the code was composed by Wulfstan, rather than in the first half of the tenth century, pointing out that the word occurs in this code and in Cnut’s laws and in other texts by Wulfstan, but nowhere else.208 Other features of the vocabulary also fit Wulfstan. Jost points out that ‘Wulfstans übliches Wort für ‘befehlen, gebieten’ ist bebeodan, für ‘versprechen’ behatan, nicht gehatan’;209 in the Promissio we find ‘ic behate and bebeode’. The phrase ‘e u eart to hyrde gescyft on ysum life’ contains another characteristic expression of Wulfstan’s: there are eight occurrences of gescyft or gescyfte in the Old English corpus, which does not yet include the occurrence in the Promissio, of which six are in Wulfstan’s works.210 Wulfstan prefers the word geweald, as in the Promissio’s minra gewealda, to the anweald which is frequent in Alfred and Ælfric.211 The phrase mægmyrran and manswaran is again reminiscent of Wulfstan; Dance, drawing on the work of Chapman, remarks on ‘the various permutations of phrases involving any two or more compounds formed on mann- (“man, person”), man- (“crime, sin”), mor(or)- (“murder”), and sometimes also mæg- (“kin”) which recur especially frequently in Wulfstan’s writing’.212 Wulfstan, however, never uses mægmyrran, though he uses similar compounds and possibly coined the compound bearnmyrra, attested three times, all in his works. Instead, in his catalogues of sinners, he generally couples mansworan with morwyrhtan or sometimes manslagan or mororwyrhtan.213 Given that the Promissio’s reading is a translation of ‘parricidas et periurantes’, it is possible that Wulfstan, if it was he, varied his normal pairings to accommodate the source. While the Promissio does not have many of the intensifiers so typical of Wulfstan, it does have some: swye, huruinga and georne. Grundlunga is less 207

208 209 210

211 213

A. Meaney, ‘ “And we forbeoda eornostlice ælcne hæenscipe”: Wulfstan and Late AngloSaxon and Norse “Heathenism” ’, in Wulfstan, ed. Townend, pp. 461–500, at p. 479; see also R. Dance, ‘Sound, Fury, and Signifiers: or Wulfstan’s Language’ in Wulfstan, ed. Townend, pp. 29–61, at p. 59. ‘Wulfstan and the So-Called Laws of Edward and Guthrum’, EHR 56 (1941), 1–21, at 8. Jost, Wulfstanstudien, p. 119. The remaining two are in glosses to the Regularis concordia; the Wulfstan occurrences are in his homilies, laws and in Episcopus. An example from Bethurum homily 17 is: ‘nu wylle we swutelian am e hit nystan hu bisceophadas wurdan ærest astealde & be Godes dihte mannum gescyfte’; compare this to ‘e u eart to hyrde gescyft on ysum life’. 212 DOE ‘anweald’. Dance, ‘Sound, Fury and Signifiers’, p. 59, n. 96. In Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, VII, 130, Wulfstan says ‘mansworan 7 morwyrhtan’; in XIII, 92–2, ‘manslagan 7 . . . mansworan’; in XX (EI), 162–3, ‘mansworan 7 mororwyrhtan’; in the ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’, ‘mansworan oe morwyrhtan’; in Cnut’s letter proclamation of 1020, ‘mægslagan 7 morslagan 7 mansworan’ and in Wulfstan’s Be hæendome (ed. Meaney, ‘And we forbeoda eornostlice ælcne hæenscipe’, p. 482), ‘morwyrhtan oe mansworan’.

134

The Old English Promissio regis typical of Wulfstan, but is used in his homily II, line 33, with the spelling grundlinga. Wulfstan’s works also contain passages similar to other parts of the Promissio. The notion that the joy of eternal life will never fade is a common one in Old English homilies, often expressed by Ælfric, for example, in a phrase like ‘e him næfre ne ateora’214 and this is similar to the Promissio’s ‘ge eac on am ecean e æfre ne ateora’; it is, however, also paralleled in Wulfstan’s homily 7, where even the unusual æfre, rather than næfre, is found: ‘And se e to am gesælig bi æt he to am mærum 7 to am myrhum cym, ne ateoria hy him æfre.’215 The appeal to the king to protect himself is similar to the many appeals to the congregation or readers that Wulfstan made in his sermons, laws and Institutes of Polity to protect themselves, all using the verb beorgan, as in the examples quoted above.216 These pleas to enlightened self-interest – if for no other reason, people should behave righteously for the sake of their own salvation – are characteristic of his work and the Dictionary of Old English says that the verb, which occurs altogether c. 130 times, is ‘disproportionately frequent in Wulfstan’.217 The Promissio’s appeal to the king, Eala leof hlaford, is again similar to the many addresses to his audience in Wulfstan’s work, generally in his characteristic form leofan men and often prefaced with Eala.218 This is not a feature of the work of other Old English homilists; Ælfric does use Eala leof x in speeches within his texts, but not in addressing a congregation, while anonymous homilists prefer Eala men a leofestan. Like the joys of heaven never fading, the concept of Christ buying salvation with his blood or his life is a common enough one in Old English homilies, but nevertheless it is very frequent in Wulfstan and his work contains striking parallels to the Promissio’s ‘hu u geheolde. æt crist ǽr gebohte. sylf mid his blóde’: from V Æthelred, ‘ac beorge man georne, æt man a sawla ne forfare, e Crist mid his agenum life gebohte’219 and from Wulfstan homily XIII, ‘Ac he gebohte us a ealle mid his deorwuran blode of helle wite.’220 In the revised Polity, Wulfstan asks what will happen to shepherds (here priests) on the Last Day if they did not guard or rule 214 215

216 218

219

220

Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, ed. Clemoes, VIII, 176. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, VII, 155–7 (‘And he who will be so fortunate that he will come to those glories and to those joys, they will never come to an end’); see also XIII, 15. 217 See p. 119. Dictionary of Old English, ‘beorgan’. See, e.g., III, 74; VI, 214; VII, 104; Xc, 39; XIX, 41 (all from Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum). V Æthelred, 2, Liebermann, Gesetze, I, 238 (‘but let one protect oneself eagerly that one does not bring to ruin the souls which Christ bought with his own life’; compare VI Æthelred 9, Liebermann, Gesetze I, 250, and II Cnut 3, Liebermann, Gesetze, I, 310. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, XIII, 45–6 (‘But then he redeemed us all with his precious blood from the torment of hell’); see also II Cnut 3.

135

Mary Clayton (healdan) their flock, in a passage that contains parallels to geheolde and Crist . . . gebohte: And gefara onne æt Godes egeslican dome a hyrdas, e ne cunnon gehealdon a godcundan heorde, e Crist mid his agenum life gebohte, and e hi healdon sceoldan, gif hi cuan?221

As well as features of vocabulary and turns of phrase, the concerns of this address are shared by Wulfstan. It is not only the word sibleger itself that points to Wulfstan, but also the interest in incest. Incest was a preoccupation of Wulfstan’s and something that he asked Ælfric about early in his archepiscopate, receiving a less than helpful reply.222 Texts dealing with incest are also included in his ‘commonplace book’.223 In the ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’, dated before 1008, he stipulated the punishment for incest;224 in VI Æthelred Wulfstan defined the forbidden degrees of marriage,225 repeating them in I Cnut,226 and in II Cnut he came back again to the topic, pointing out that the compensation had to reflect the degree of consanguinity involved.227 Incest is included in the list of sins of the English in the Sermo Lupi and in Napier XXVII, another Wulfstan homily.228 It would be in keeping with Wulfstan’s marked interest in the topic that he would introduce it in the Promissio, without warrant from the source. Both the topic and the word chosen to express it point, then, to Wulfstan. That the justice of the king includes that he should ‘grundlunga. forbeode. wiccan. and galdra adilige’ is again characteristic of Wulfstan’s interests: in the ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’, in VI Æthelred, and in II Cnut, it is ordained that witches are to be driven out or completely destroyed.229 In Cnut’s letterproclamation of 1020, Wulfstan lists as examples of unriht ‘mægslagan 7 221

222

223

224

226 228

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, II.114: ‘And what will happen the shepherds then, at God’s terrifying judgement, who did not know how to rule the flock belonging to God whom Christ bought with his own life and whom they should rule, if they knew how?’ See M. Godden, ‘The Relations of Wulfstan and Ælfric’ in Wulfstan, ed. Townend, pp. 353– 74, at p. 354. Incest for Wulfstan covered all degrees of prohibited union between blood and spiritual relations. See Sauer, ‘The Transmission and Structure of Archbishop Wulfstan’s “Commonplace Book”’, p. 348 (item 19). The text is edited in Councils and Synods I, ed. Whitelock, Brett and Brooke, pp. 302–12; the 225 clause on incest is §4, p. 307. Liebermann, Gesetze I, 250, §12. 227 Ibid. I, 290, §7. Ibid. I, 346, §§51–52. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, XX (BH), 95; XX (C), 136; Wulfstan, ed. Napier, XXVII, 229 p. 130, ll. 4–5. Liebermann, Gesetze, I, 134, §11; I, 248, §7; I, 310, §4a.

136

The Old English Promissio regis morslagan 7 mansworan 7 wiccean 7 wælcyrian 7 æwbrecan 7 syblegeru.’230 In his homily VIIIc, he exhorts the congregation ‘And ne gyman ge galdra ne idelra hwata, ne wigelunga ne wiccecræft’ and in the Canons of Edgar galdra are included in a list of things which every priest must forbid.231 The similarities in terms of law, then, are with Wulfstan’s laws. This is true again of the next clause of the Promissio, stipulating that the king ‘mægmyrran and manswaran of earde adrife’; this is clearly inspired by De xii abusiuis/Hibernensis ‘parricidas et periurantes uiuere non sinere’, but with a change from not allowing parricides and perjurers to live to driving them out of the country. The ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’ pronounces: ‘Gif wiccan oe wigleras, mansworan oe morwyrhtan oe fule, afylede, æbære horcwenan ahwar on lande wuran agytene, onne fyse hi man of earde 7 clænsie a eode, oe on earde forfare hy mid ealle, buton hig geswican 7 e deoppor gebetan’; the same paragraph is included in VI Æthelred and II Cnut.232 While these features are to be found in the source, nevertheless the selection is significant and fits with Wulfstan’s known interests. The mention of Dunstan in the Promissio can also be associated with Wulfstan. Twice elsewhere, Wulfstan invokes Dunstan: once in the second edition of the Canons of Edgar and the second time in his letter to Cnut and Aelfgifu.233 Wormald suggests that the names of Edgar and Dunstan in the Canons of Edgar ‘may imply attempts to (re)create suitable standards for the clergy of Wulfstan’s dioceses’;234 it is possible that the mention of Dunstan in the Promissio was also intended to create a link back to a time associated with the founding fathers of the Reform and their moral authority. The king as shepherd leading his flock to the Last Judgement is a memorable image that is difficult to associate with anyone but Wulfstan. The shepherd metaphor was one that he exploited throughout his career: Jonathan Wilcox’s article, ‘The Wolf on Shepherds’, details how he used it in his work on bishops; he exploited it in Polity and Napier L in his discussions of kingship; and, towards the end of his life, he even extended his use of the metaphor and wrote 230

231

232

233

234

Ibid. I, 274, §15: ‘parricides and murderers and perjurors and witches and valkyries and adulterers and those who commit incest’. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, VIIIc, 165–6 (‘And do not pay heed to spells or idle auguries, or sorceries or witchcraft’); Wulfstan’s Canons of Edgar, ed. Fowler, 16. Liebermann, Gesetze I, 134, §11 (‘If witches or soothsayers, perjurors or murderers or foul, corrupted prostitutes are found anywhere in the country, then drive them out of the country and cleanse the people, or destroy them completely in the country, unless they cease and repent deeply’); see also VI Æthelred, §7 (Liebermann, I, 248 and II Cnut, §4a (Liebermann, I, 310). Wulfstan’s Canons of Edgar, ed. Fowler, §68c; the letter is reproduced in Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, pp. 352–3 (‘Dunstan e god wæs’, p. 353). Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 391, n. 579.

137

Mary Clayton a chapter in Polity II on the reeves of his day as failed shepherds, unlike those reeves of Edgar’s day who were chosen as shepherds for the people, ‘folce to hyrdum’.235 He also repeatedly used the motif of the shepherd leading his flock at the Last Judgement. In terms of access to sources, Wulfstan, as archbishop, would naturally have had access to one, or probably more, pontificals236 and we know that Wulfstan was acquainted with the source for the third section, on what the justice of the king consists of, because it is preserved in two manuscripts of his pastoral handbook, and, as part of the Hibernensis, in Hatton 42, which we know he consulted.237 As mentioned earlier, CCCC 265 and Barlow 37 include a section headed De rege containing texts about kingship. These comprise: 1. an extract from Sedulius Scottus’s Liber de rectoribus christianis, ch. X, on the eight columns which support the kingdom of the just king; 2. Hibernensis, Book XXV, ch. 15, on the seven things which befit a king; 3. a passage on wisdom as the ornament of the king; 4. Hibernensis, Book XXV, ch. 4, taken from the ninth abuse in De duodecim abusiuis, beginning ‘Iustitia iusti regis est neminem iniuste iudicare’; 5. a passage beginning ‘Iustitia boni regis patriam aedificat, iniustitia iniusti regis patriam destruit . . .’; 6. a passage from Hibernensis, Book XXV, ch. 3, also drawn from the ninth abuse in De duodecim abusiuis, on the benefits for the kingdom of a just king; 7. Hibernensis, Book XXV, ch. 7 (an extract from Gregory Nazianzenus); 8. a passage on the shortness and uncertainty of life. The fourth passage reads: Iustitia iusti regis est neminem iniuste iudicare. Aduenis et pupillis et uiduis. defensorem esse. furta cohibere. adulteria punire. inpudicos non nutrire. iniquos non exaltare. impios de terra perdere. parricidas et periurantes de terra expellere. ecclesias dei defendere. pauperes pascere. iustos super regni negotia constituere. Senes et sapientes. ac domini timentes consiliaros habere. Magorum phitonissarum. atque insipientium superstitionibus non intendere. patriam fortiter contra aduersarios defendere. per omnia in deum confidere . . .238 235

236

237

238

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, II.94–101; the reeves are termed ryperas ‘e scoldon beon hyrdas cristenes folces’. C. Jones discusses the only surviving Wulfstan pontifical, ‘Claudius Pontifical I’ in his ‘Wulfstan’s Liturgical Interests’, in Wulfstan, ed. Townend, pp. 325–52, at pp. 334–46. Wulfstan annotated some of a chapter of the Hibernensis in Hatton 42; on this, see N. Ker, ‘The Handwriting of Archbishop Wulfstan’, England before the Conquest, ed. P. Clemoes and K. Hughes (Cambridge, 1971), pp. 315–31, at p. 328. Quoted from CCCC 265, p. 149: ‘The justice of a just king is to judge no-one injustly; to be the defender of strangers and orphans and widows; to punish adultery; not to support the

138

The Old English Promissio regis There are some details in this passage in CCCC 265 which are not identical to the text translated in the Promissio, however, suggesting that this was not the source for the third section of the vernacular text. Where, for example, De duodecim abusiuis has ‘senes et sapientes et sobrios consiliarios habere’, translated in the Promissio with ‘ealde. and wise. and syfre him to geeahterum hæbbe’, and the A text of the Hibernensis printed by Wasserschleben has ‘senes sapientes et sobrios consiliarios habere’, the passage in CCCC 265 reads ‘Senes et sapientes. ac domini timentes consiliaros habere’. The Promissio here is clearly closest to De duodecim abusiuis. The CCCC 265 wording may be influenced by the immediately preceding extract, which includes: ‘Initium sapientie timor domini. Salomon dicit. Timor domini apponit dies et anni impiorum breuiabuntur.’239 The Promissio’s ‘earfan mid ælmyssan fede’ is closer to the De duodecim abusiuis/Hibernensis reading ‘pauperes elemosynis alere’ than CCCC 265’s ‘pauperes pascere’. On the other hand, the CCCC 265 reading ‘parricidas et periurantes de terra expellere’ exactly corresponds to the Promissio’s ‘mægmyrran and manswaran of earde adrife’, rather than the De duodecim abusiuis/Hibernensis reading ‘parricidas et periurantes uiuere non sinere’. The first sentence corresponds to the Promissio’s ‘æt he nænigne man ne fordéme’, like other texts of the Hibernensis, apart from the vernacular’s omission of a word corresponding to iniuste. While it has some points in common with the Promissio, then, it departs from it in others and does not seem to be the direct source of the third section of the vernacular text. The same lack of agreement can be seen in the relationship between one of the other passages (the second in the list above) in this De rege section and a passage in Wulfstan’s Polity. Where the passage on the seven things which befit a king in Polity reads ‘æt he æfre rihtwisnesse lufige’, glossed in CCCC 201 with ‘ueritatem diligere’, CCCC 265 has the reading ‘ueritatem iudicare’, casting doubt on this version being the direct source.240 Given that Wulfstan was certainly responsible for the passage in Polity on the seven things which befit a king, but that it does not correspond in all details to the Latin text in

239

240

shameless; not to promote the wicked to high office; to destroy the impious from the land; to expel parricides and perjurors from the country; to defend the churches of God; to feed the poor; to set just men over the affairs of the kingdom; to have old and wise and Godfearing counsellors; not to attend to the superstitions of magicians, sorcercesses and the foolish; to defend his country bravely against adversaries; to put his trust in God in all things.’ ‘The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord. Salomon said: The fear of the Lord shall prolong days and the years of the wicked shall be shortened.’ Sauer, ‘The Transmission and Structure of Archbishop Wulfstan’s “Commonplace Book”’, p. 369, says that Wulfstan was here translating from his commonplace book, but the difference in reading does not bear this out; it is true that the Wulfstan reading is closer to CCCC 265 than it is to Wasserschleben’s edition of the Hibernensis, but he was not translating the CCCC 265 reading.

139

Mary Clayton CCCC 265, the similar relationship between the Promissio and the CCCC 265 does not constitute conclusive proof that he was not responsible for the vernacular text. Wulfstan also had access to the Hibernensis in Hatton 42 and personally annotated part of Book XXVI, immediately after Book XXV on kingship. It contains a text of the B version of the Hibernensis and the passage on the justice of a king reads here: Patricius: Iustitia uero regis iusti haec est: Neminem iniuste iudicare, aduenis et uiduis et pupillis defensorem esse, furta cohibere, adulteria punire, impudicos et histriones non nutrire, iniquos non exaltare, impios de terra perdere, parricidas et periurantes uiuere non sinere, ecclesias defendere, pauperes elemosinis alere, iustos super regni negotia constituere, senes sapientes et sobrios consiliarios habere, magorum et pythonissarum et auguriorum superstitionibus non intendere, patriam fortiter et iuste contra aduersarios defendere, per omnia in Deo confidere . . .

This manuscript, like De duodecim abusiuis and Hibernensis A, has ‘parricidas et periurantes uiuere non sinere’, but is otherwise very close to the Promissio. A point which might tell against Wulfstan as author is that Jost adduces some evidence, though not very substantial, which indicates that Wulfstan knew Ælfric’s De duodecim abusiuis, which, of course, contains a version of the ninth abuse; if this were the case, then we might expect him to have drawn on it for the Promissio, given his tendency to use Ælfric as a source. The two versions of the ninth abuse material are very different, however, and the Promissio shows no traces of influence from Ælfric. It is possible, however, that Wulfstan was not acquainted with Ælfric’s full version of De duodecim abusiuis, though he certainly knew Catholic Homilies II.XIX, which draws on the Hiberno-Latin text. Jost’s main evidence is that Wulfstan uses for oft in Polity II.13, echoing, he says, Ælfric’s for oft in his full De duodecim abusiuis.241 He also points to Wulfstan’s use of for mid in Polity II.112, a paragraph on bishops, which phrase is, he says, also taken from Ælfric’s full De duodecim abusiuis, although none of the rest of the section has any verbal echoes of Ælfric.242 The evidence consists of such minute points that it seems rather flimsy. However, Ælfric’s text is part of the Worcester manuscripts CCCC 178 and Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hatton 115, whose contents display striking similarities with the list of Ælfric texts Wulfstan is known to have used.243 Even if he knew Ælfric’s full version of De duodecim abusiuis, if the Promissio is by Wulfstan it is very possible that his 241 242

243

Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, p. 38, n. 3. Ibid. p. 92, note to II.112. Jost also says that fedan earfan in Ælfric’s De duodecim abusiuis prompted Wulfstan’s Polity II.28, but Wulfstan is here translating pauperes pascere from the Hibernensis and it seems highly unlikely that he would consult an Ælfric text for his wording. See M. Godden, ‘The Relations of Wulfstan and Ælfric’, pp. 366–7.

140

The Old English Promissio regis source for the last section was the Hibernensis, so that Ælfric’s text of the twelve abuses might not have even occurred to him as relevant. Some features of the text’s vocabulary do not point to Wulfstan. Wulfstan does not use forgifan in the sense of ‘to give’, as in the Promissio’s ‘his ecean miltse forgyfe’; Jost points out that Wulfstan uses forgifan only in the sense of ‘forgive’ and this is borne out by the DOE Corpus.244 Jost also points out that nænig is very unusual in Wulfstan,245 but it is found occasionally in his work, and is in the Promissio.246 Ar and its derivatives, including arfaest, are also not found in Wulfstan, except where he is adapting Ælfric, when he does employ it; 247 the Promissio has arfæst in line 8. Unusual too is the translation of the Latin ‘iustos super regni negotia constituere, senes et sapientes et sobrios consiliarios habere’ as ‘ealde. and wise. and syfre him to geeahterum hæbbe. and rihtwise mæn him to wicnerum sette’. Ælfric’s translation of this same passage is: ‘Witan him sceolon rædan . . . He sceal sofæste men settan him to gerefan’, making his text very immediate for an Anglo-Saxon audience. The Promissio’s ‘to geeahterum’ and ‘to wicnerum’ do not convey the same sense of Anglo-Saxon institutions, whereas, if Wulfstan were the author, one would expect him to do this. Geeahtere is not attested in Wulfstan and wicnere only in VIII Æthelred, where it refers to the officers of abbots.248 Had Wulfstan translated this passage and come up with his own equivalent of those responsible for regni negotia and of consiliarios, we might expect something more like Ælfric’s witan or the ‘eorlan and heretogan, deman and gerefan’ whom he addressed in Napier L.249 It is notable that these uncharacteristic vocabulary items are all in the sections directly dependent on sources, that is, in the translation of the promise and of the ninth abuse/Hibernensis extract. The other crucial factor in any attribution to Wulfstan is his style, and the style of the Promissio has not been associated with him. It is true that the Promissio lacks the density of rhetorical features that we regard as most typical of Wulfstan; however, it is most certainly not entirely lacking in them and Wulfstan’s texts vary in the degree to which they employ his high style.250 The Promissio contains many two-stress phrases, alliteration, and some doublets and rhyme. These can be found in all parts of the text to some extent; for example, 244 246

248

249 250

245 Wulfstanstudien, p. 120. Ibid. pp. 159–62; see also Institutes of Polity, p. 21. nænig is found in Wulfstan’s Canons of Edgar, ed. Fowler, ch. 4; Institutes of Polity, ed. Jost, I.88 ; 247 II.182; II.188. Jost, Wulfstanstudien, p. 127. ‘And se cyngc beode eallum his gerefan on æghwilcere stowe, æt ge am abbodan æt eallum worldneodum beorgan, swa ge betst magon, & be am e ge willan Godes oe minne freondscipe habban, filstan heora wicneran æghwar to rihte, æt heo sylfe magan e oftor on mynstrum fæste gewunian & regollice libban.’ (Gesetze, ed. Liebermann, I, 267, §32) Wulfstan, ed. Napier, L, p. 267, lines 25–6. See I. M. Hollowell, ‘Linguistic Factors Underlying Style Levels in Four Homilies by Wulfstan’, Neophilologus 61 (1977), 287–96.

141

Mary Clayton this passage from the first section, which falls naturally into two-stress phrases, with alliteration in the last line: æt godes cyrice and eall cristen folc minra gewealda soe sibbe healde

or the doublet ‘ic behate and bebeode’, with its rhyme and alliteration. What is striking, however, is that the middle section, which does not depend on a direct source in the way that the other two sections do, is composed – and punctuated in Cleopatra B. xiii – in two-stress phrases throughout, such as are invariably associated with Wulfstan: Se cristena cyng e as ing gehealde. he geearna him sylfum woroldlicne weormynt. and him éce god. æger gemiltsa. ge on andwerdum life. ge eac on am ecean e æfre ne ateora; Gif he onne æt awæg. æt gode wæs beháten. onne sceal hit syan. wyrsian swye. sóna on his eode. and eall hit on ende. gehwyrf on æt wyrste. butan he on his liffæce. ǽr hit gebéte. Eala leof hlaford beorh huruinga georne e sylfum. Geenc æt gelome æt u scealt a heorde. for æt godes dóme. ywan and lǽdan. e u eart to hyrde gescyft on ysum life. and onne gecennan hu u geheolde. æt crist ǽr gebohte. sylf mid his blóde.

142

The Old English Promissio regis This section also has a lot of grammatical rhyme, on the -e endings, again very typical of Wulfstan’s style. Alliteration is frequent: cristena cyng; woroldlicne weormynt; eac / ecean; æfre / ateora and so on. I think that in the case of this section there can be little doubt that, stylistically, it could have been written by Wulfstan. So we have the situation where we have some vocabulary items associated solely with Wulfstan up to now, Exeter manuscripts that preserve otherwise unknown Wulfstan texts, ideas associated very closely with Wulfstan, a style that is, at least in part, very like his, combined with some uncharacteristic features of vocabulary and some inconsistency of style. The most Wulfstan-like section, style-wise, is the middle one, but the words otherwise unique to Wulfstan are found in the third section. In addition, this text could only have been composed and delivered by someone with great authority – Wulfstan certainly possessed that and we know that he was involved in law-making and preached to the witan and the king. The Promissio author would also have to have had the confidence to transfer themes associated with bishops, in particular, to the king – leading the flock on the Day of Judgement, especially. One possible explanation for the marked similarities with Wulfstan’s work combined with some uncharacteristic features of vocabulary, in particular, is that Wulfstan had been supplied with – or had commissioned – vernacular translations of the two main Latin sources, the coronation promise and the ninth abuse and that he then reworked these, but without completely eliminating features alien to his style, perhaps because the piece was never finished. Malcolm Godden has pointed to how, when writing in the vernacular, Wulfstan ‘does seem to have found it convenient to use as a starting point texts in English’;251 possibly this is what happened here, as it is otherwise difficult to reconcile the clear Wulfstan connections of the piece with the occasional atypical features. It is hard to believe that anyone else could have been responsible for a text which shares so much with the archbishop’s work and whose closest parallel is Wulfstan’s Napier L. If Wulfstan was not the author then it is not, I think, a case of Wulfstan knowing the Promissio, as Stafford states,252 so much as the Promissio author knowing and drawing on Wulfstan’s work; we would have to postulate a Wulfstan-imitator to account for the similarities. There was no shortage of Wulfstan imitators but they do not compose texts like this, addressing the king with all the force that we find here.253 I find it hard to attribute this text to a Wulfstan imitator. 251 252 253

Godden, ‘The Relations of Wulfstan and Ælfric’, p. 374. Stafford, ‘The Laws of Cnut’, p. 186, n. 53. On Wulfstan imitators, see D. Scragg, Dating and Style in Old English Composite Homilies, H. M. Chadwick Memorial Lectures 9 (Cambridge, 1999).

143

Mary Clayton If Wulfstan was responsible for the Promissio, then it seems likely that the text was part of a group which included the other three unique Wulfstan texts in the Exeter manuscripts, Cotton Cleopatra B. xiii and CCCC 421. The Promissio, moreover, shares certain features with these texts. Bethurum XVII and XVIII are in Bethurum’s ‘archepiscopal functions’ group; she says of it that ‘the homilies in this section all have to do with the duties of a bishop or archbishop and are therefore particularly suitable in Wulfstan’s repertory’.254 She does not include Napier L in her edition, regarding it as notes for a sermon rather than a sermon, but this text, addressing king and people and outlining the duties of all ranks of society, certainly also has an archiepiscopal feel to it; only someone of great eminence could deliver it. The Promissio is similar in this respect and since Liebermann its affinity with Napier L has been recognized. In addition, the unfinished quality of the Promissio, which lacks a conventional ending, echoes with Bethurum’s comments on the three other texts, all of which made her uneasy. Of the Wulfstan texts in Cleopatra B. xiii, Bethurum says: ‘the only complete homilies connected with Wulfstan are those relating to the functions of an archbishop, XVII and XVIII. In neither case is the ascription to Wulfstan clear and certain. [Cleopatra B. xiii] also contains the end of [Napier] 27, itself of dubious authenticity. It looks as if the scribe of [Cleopatra B. xiii], or his model, had in hand incomplete – or at least unpolished – materials of Wulfstan’s and had then filled them out with scraps from the archbishop’s sermons elsewhere available.’255 While critical opinion today would not agree with the filling out with scraps theory, Bethurum was responding to what she saw as atypical features of these texts. Bethurum XVII was, she says ‘hastily put together’;256 of Napier L she says that it ‘may be that the occasion for which Wulfstan assembled this document dictated haste’;257 and of Bethurum XVIII she says that ‘the rhythm of the phrases and the approach to the subject are not quite like his writing’ and ‘perhaps . . . this one was produced hastily’.258 In terms of style, Bethurum commented on homily XVIII, saying: ‘The main body of the homily is remarkably free of rhetorical features, where Wulfstan is most adept, but there can be little doubt that the homily is his.’259 She says of Napier 254 255

256

259

Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, p. 33. Ibid. p. 352. Napier XXVII is accepted as genuine by Wilcox (‘The Dissemination’, p. 200) and Wormald (‘Archbishop Wulfstan: Eleventh-Century State-Builder’, p. 27); it is found, in its complete form, in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, 201 and London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius A. iii, while part of it, Napier, p. 128, line 14, to p. 129, line 12, is incorporated in Napier L, p. 268, line 20 to line 32. Ibid. p. 34. See also p. 351, n. 2, where Bethurum says of this sermon: ‘As we have it, it is incomplete, wanting a conclusion, and may have been put together from other sources.’ The piece has a conclusion in Cleopatra B. xiii, however, and, though this was rejected by 257 258 Bethurum, it is accepted as genuine by Wilcox. Ibid., p. 40. Ibid., p. 35. Ibid. p. 35.

144

The Old English Promissio regis L that ‘the parts of Ælfric’s letters used are left almost unchanged. When Wulfstan reworked Ælfric’s material for oral delivery, he changed it sufficiently to give the lines his own rhythm, not Ælfric’s.’260 The ‘haste’ which, rightly or wrongly, Bethurum saw in homilies XVII, XVIII and Napier L may help to explain some puzzling features of the Promissio, which, if Wulfstan’s, also seems to contain passages written by someone else which are imperfectly assimilated to Wulfstan’s style and fewer rhetorical features than we might expect; it also seems to be incomplete. Bethurum comments too on the fact that homily XVIII ‘is preserved only in MS N [Cleopatra B. xiii] suggests that it was not in the main body of Wulfstan’s collected sermons.’261 The same is true of Napier L and Napier XXXVII/Bethurum XVII and, if it is his, the Promissio. Given that they are all found in what is essentially the same Exeter manuscript, the likelihood is that they all came to Exeter together. It is difficult to know why these texts are not preserved in manuscripts from Worcester or York, where one would expect them to be preserved, but the reason why they were not circulated more widely perhaps lies in the fact that they are, as Bethurum said of XVII and XVIIII, ‘archepiscopal’ and therefore not terribly suited to delivery by priests who could make use of many of Wulfstan’s other sermons in their own preaching. It is possible, though certainty is unattainable, that these texts were preserved in Worcester until the middle of the eleventh century, at least, and sent to Exeter at Leofric’s request because they were suited to a bishop. Leofric seems to have acquired CCCC 190 from Worcester and a booklet containing these texts could have travelled with it, all being considered appropriate for a newly appointed bishop.262 the date of the text The internal indications in the Promissio date it to between 960, the earliest possible date when Dunstan could have consecrated a king, and 1016, the date of 260

261 262

Ibid. p. 41. A. McIntosh, in his review of K. Jost’s Wulfstanstudien in ES 32 (1951), pp. 163– 8, also pointed out how ‘it is clear from such texts as Napier VII [Bethurum IX] and XVIII [Bethurum XII] that Wulfstan was often content to leave his Old English source material only partly transformed, so that the style of what he produced in such a case is something of a compromise between that of the original and his own personal idiom’ (p. 167). In both of these instances, Wulfstan is rewriting an Ælfric text. Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, p. 35. On the Worcester origin of CCCC 190, see Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 220, drawing on Dumville, English Caroline Script and Monastic History: Studies in Benedictinism, Stud. in AS Hist. VI (Woodbridge, 1992), pp. 52 (n. 228), 55, Plate III; see also Wilcox, ‘The Dissemination of Wulfstan’s Homilies’, p. 203. Whitelock had said that CCCC 190 ‘was based on a collection made at Worcester’ (‘Archbishop Wulfstan, Homilist and Statesman’, TRHS, 4th series 24 (1942), 25–45, at 34) and Bethurum, Homilies of Wulfstan, p. 8, without giving evidence, said that it ‘was probably compiled at Worcester under Wulfstan’s direction’.

145

Mary Clayton Æthelred’s death, as he was the last king consecrated by Dunstan. There seems no reason not to take these limits as correct and the authenticity of the text in this regard has not been questioned by historians. Janet Nelson suggests a date of c. 960 for the first B sub-version of the Second Ordo which has the text of the promise. The other sources – a version of the ninth abuse and texts expressing the concept of pastoral kingship – would also have been available from the beginning of this time period; Æthelwold donated a copy of De duodecim abusiuis to Peterborough and some of the foundational texts of the Benedictine Reform refer to the king as pastor. However, if my suggestion of Wulfstan’s involvement be accepted, then we have, of course, a date between 1002 (when Wulfstan became archbishop of York, as it seems unlikely that Wulfstan would have composed a text like this as bishop of London) and 1016. Within these limits, there are indications of a later rather than earlier date in the Wulfstan texts that offer the closest parallels and in the other unique Wulfstan texts in the Exeter manuscripts, Cleopatra B. xiii and CCCC 421. Wormald dates Bethurum XVII, Bethurum XVIII/Napier XXXVII and Napier L all to c. 1018,263 although Jost had proposed a date of 1014 for Bethurum XVII.264 Polity II is also a late work as are, of course, the laws of Cnut. A date of 1018 is too late for the Promissio, as Æthelred’s death is the terminus ad quem for the text but a date very late in Æthelred’s reign seems probable. Justice must have been one of Wulfstan’s main concerns from the time when he began to write lawcodes but it is tempting, though risky, to speculate further and to suggest a date around the time of Æthelred’s return from exile in 1014, in that the Promissio can be seen to have a particularly close relationship with the concerns of that time. Stafford has suggested that chapters 69–83 of II Cnut, dealing with abuses of royal power, may represent Æthelred’s lost secular legislation of 1014, ‘the original specific commitments which Æthelred made in 1014’, which, she suggests, could have been incorporated in Cnut’s laws.265 She points out that the witan, in sending to Æthelred to return to England after the death of Swein, said that ‘him nan leofre hlaford nære onne heora gecynde hlaford. gif he hi rihtlicor healdan wolde onne he ær dyde’.266 Æthelred in response promised to reform the abuses and Stafford suggests that II Cnut 69–83 may represent Wulfstan’s version of the commitments Æthelred made, ‘a legal commentary on “just kingship”’.267 Wulfstan may have composed the Promissio in order to spell out to Æthelred what it meant to rihtlicor healdan his people and what the consequences of neglecting this riht were: 263 265

267

264 ‘Archbishop Wulfstan’, p. 27. Jost, Wulfstanstudien, pp. 71–2. Stafford, ‘The Laws of Cnut’, p. 181; Stafford links the Promissio text with Cnut’s laws, saying that ‘the oath and sermon [i.e. the Promissio] were glossed extensively by the laws of Cnut’ (p. 266 179). Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel, ed. Plummer, p. 145 (from E). Stafford, ‘The Laws of Cnut’, p. 181; see also Wormald, Making of English Law, pp. 361–2.

146

The Old English Promissio regis ‘Gehalgodes cynges riht is . . .’. It is possible that the Promissio was conceived as an address to accompany the legislation issued in 1014, although Wormald suggests that Wulfstan’s Napier LI may have been preached on that occasion.268 Wormald has also proposed that Anglo-Saxon kings may have staged festal crown-wearings on occasions when law-codes were issued and such an occasion would fit the Promissio perfectly; 269 with the king wearing his crown, as at his coronation, it would have been an ideal opportunity to remind him of his coronation promise. Given that the text does not seem to be complete, it may never have been delivered on the occasion for which it was originally planned. Regardless of whether or not Wulfstan preached this text to Æthelred, however, it appears to be a distillation of his thinking about just kingship.270 268 269 270

Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 337, n. 344. Ibid. pp. 445–9. I am grateful to Don Scragg and Juliet Mullins for their comments on this article.

147

APPENDIX

The text is based on London, British Library, Cotton Cleopatra B. xiii, 56r–57v (C), with variants from Junius’s transcript of London, British Library, Cotton Vitellius A. vii in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Junius 60 (J) and from George Hickes’s text, also of the Vitellius version, in the Preface to his Institutiones grammaticae Anglo-Saxonicae, et Moeso-Gothicae (H). Punctuation, capitalization and accent marks are from Cleopatra B. xiii. Abbreviations have been expanded. Variant readings where they consist of  for  or and for the tironian nota have not been noted.

PROMISSIO REGIS.. 1 is gewrit is gewriten stæf be stæfe. be am gewrite e dunstan arcebisceop2 sealde urum hlaforde æt cingestune. a on dæg3 a hine man halgode to cinge. and forbead him ælc wedd to syllanne butan ysan wedde e he up on cristes weofod lede swa se bisceop4 him dihte; On ære halgan rynnesse5 naman . Ic reo ing behate cristenum folce. and me undereoddum;6 An ærest æt godes cyrice and eall cristen folc7 minra gewealda soe sibbe healde., Oer is æt8 ic reaflac and ealle unrihte ing. eallum hadum forbeode. Þridde æt9 ic behate and bebeode on eallum dómum riht and mildheortnesse. æt us eallum arfæst and mildheort god urh æt. his ecean miltse forgyfe.10 Se lyfa11 and rixa. FINIT..12 Se cristena cyng e as ing gehealde. he geearna him sylfum woroldlicne weormynt. and him éce god. æger gemiltsa. ge on andwerdum life. ge eac13 on am ecean e æfre ne ateora; Gif he onne æt awæg. æt gode wæs behaten. onne sceal hit syan. wyrsian swye. sóna on his eode.14 and eall hit on ende. gehwyrf15 on æt wyrste.16 butan he on his liffæce. ær hit gebéte. Eala leof hlaford beorh huruinga georne e17 sylfum. Geenc æt gelome æt u scealt a heorde. for æt godes dome. ywan and lædan. e u eart to hyrde gescyft on ysum life. and onne gecennan hu u geheolde. æt crist ær gebohte. sylf mid his blóde.. 11 12 14 16 19 13

Sacramentum vel promissio Regis in consecratione J; no title H 13 arceb with stroke through ascender of b, C, J; arcb H dæge H 15 .b. with stroke through ascender C, J; bisceop H y altered from i C 17 18 undereoddum J; undereodum H folce H  C, J; at H 10 111 12  C, J; at H y altered from i C y altered from i C omitted J, H 14 15 16 17 ac C eode J, H gehwyrfa H wyrst H e J

148

The Old English Promissio regis Gehalgodes cynges riht is. æt he nænigne man ne fordeme. and æt he wuduwan. and steopcild. and æleodige werige. and amundige. and stala forbeode. and unrihthæmedu gebete. and siblegeru19 totwæme. and grundlunga.20 forbeode. wiccan. and galdra adilige.21 mægmyrran and manswaran of earde adrife. earfan mid ælmyssan fede. and ealde.22 and wise. and syfre him to geeahterum hæbbe. and rihtwise mæn23 him to wicnerum sette. for an swa hwæt swa hig to unrihte24 gedo urh his aful. he his sceal ealles gescead agyldan on domesdæg.. 18

This document is written letter by letter in accordance with the document which Archbishop Dunstan gave our lord at Kingston on the day when he was consecrated as king and he forbade him to give any pledge except for this pledge which he laid on Christ’s altar, as the bishop directed him: In the name of the Holy Trinity, I promise three things to the Christian people who are subject to me: first, that God’s church and all Christian people in my dominions preserve true peace; the second is that I forbid robbery and all unrighteous things to all orders; the third, that I promise and command justice and mercy in all judgements, so that the kind and merciful God because of that may grant us all his eternal mercy, who lives and reigns. Finit. The Christian king who observes these things will earn for himself worldly honour and eternal God will have mercy on him both in this present life and also in the eternal which will never come to an end. If he fails to fulfil that which was promised to God, then within a very short time after that things will grow worse among his people, and in the end it will all turn out for the worst, unless he previously make amends for it in his lifetime. O beloved lord, eagerly protect yourself at least! Remember frequently that you will have to present and lead forth the flock of which you are appointed shepherd in this life and then will have to declare how you ruled that which Christ himself had previously purchased with his blood. The justice of a consecrated king is that he condemn no man [unjustly?]; and that he defend and protect widows and orphans and foreigners; and forbid theft; and correct adulteries; and separate those who commit incest; and completely forbid witches; destroy spells; drive kin-murderers and perjurers out of the country; feed the needy with alms; have the old and wise and temperate as his counsellors; and appoint righteous men as officers; because, whatever they do unjustly by means of his might, he must give a reckoning on judgement day for all of it.

notes to text l. 18 There is a problem with the Old English here; Stubbs translated fordeme as ‘judge unrighteously’ and this is clearly the meaning demanded by the context (Memorials of St Dunstan, p. 356). However, the Dictionary of Old English gives the meaning of fordeman as ‘to condemn, express strong disapproval of, censure, blame, find guilty, pass judicial 18 22

cinges H eald H

19 23

sib[[..]]legeru C; sibligeru H 24 men J, H unriht H

149

20

grundlinga H

21

adelige H

Mary Clayton sentence on, pass sentence on (with the sentence expressed), to damn, to judge, pass judgement on’; fordeman does not mean, therefore, ‘to judge unrighteously’ and no occurrence in the DOE Web Corpus supports such a meaning. None of the DOE meanings seems as suitable to the context as Stubbs’s translation, however, as the text can hardly be saying that a king should not condemn or not judge, especially as the promise insists on just judgements. It may be that a word is missing here, the ‘unrighteously’ which Stubbs’s translation includes and which would translate the Latin’s iniuste; possibilities are the word unrihtlice or the phrase on unriht, giving ‘æt he nænigne man unrihtlice/on unriht ne fordeme’. Compare, for example, Wulfstan’s ‘Ne ænig man oerne on unriht ne fordeme.’ (Homily 10c, Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. Bethurum, lines 92–3). I have not, however, amended the OE text, as Cleopatra and Vitellius do not differ from each other and it is possible that the error goes back to the author. l. 20 Sibleger can mean incest or those who commit incest. It first occurs in Wulfstan’s ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’; in this text and in Cnut’s letter-proclamation to the people of England in 1020, written in part by Wulfstan, it is used, as here in the Promissio, to denote those who commit incest. Meaney is uneasy about siblegeru in the Cnut letter as, she says, ‘it comes in rather awkwardly, since all the other words refer to people, while it is abstract’ (see A. Meaney, ‘ “And we forbeoda eornostlice ælcne hæenscipe”: Wulfstan and Late Anglo-Saxon and Norse “Heathenism” ’, Wulfstan, Archbishop of York, ed. Townend, pp. 461–500, at p. 481, n. 75). Given the use in the Promissio, the ‘Peace of Edward and Guthrum’ and Cnut’s letter-proclamation, it is clear that the word was not only abstract, but could also refer to people. On Wulfstan’s part in Cnut’s letter, see Wormald, Making of English Law, p. 347. l. 20: The manuscript punctuation makes it difficult to decide whether and grundlunga. forbeode is to be read with the preceding clause, and siblegeru totwǽme, or with the following word, wiccan. I have chosen the latter in my translation.

150

Viking invasions and marginal annotations in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162 kathryn powell abstract In the margins of Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily in Cambridge Corpus Christi College 162, an early-eleventh-century annotator adds a remark specifying ‘invasions’ among various misfortunes afflicting the English on a daily basis. This article argues that this marginal annotation constitutes a contemporary reference to the viking raids of King Æthelred the Unready’s reign. The article examines this marginal text in the context of Ælfric’s homily and in relation to other marginalia possibly written by the same scribe, including a second comment on the viking incursions. Based on this evidence, it is suggested that the annotator is revising homilies in this manuscript for preaching, possibly at St Augustine’s, Canterbury, in the years 1009–12.

In the margins of early English manuscripts, one finds all sorts of annotations by later readers, including corrections, alterations and expansions of the main text or commentary upon it, glosses on particular words, rubrics, and apparently unrelated texts that have been copied into an available blank space. It is extremely rare, however, for such marginalia to relate a text to contemporary events. Yet that is what we appear to find in two separate additions in the margins of Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162. One of these annotations, found in the margins of an anonymous rogationtide homily, is badly rubbed so that any reading of it must be at least partly conjectural, and is phrased in such a way that it need not refer to events taking place at the time when it was written. On its own, then, it does not appear remarkable, which may account for the fact that it has received scant comment.1 The other annotation, however, found in the margins of Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily, is much more striking, although no more frequently noticed.2 When viewed in its manuscript context, it becomes clear that this marginal text must refer to invasions taking place at the time when it was written – that is, in the early eleventh century. In other words, we have here evidence of someone reading one of 11

12

A partial transcription of these marginalia is printed in the apparatus of the Bazire and Cross edition of the homily; see homily 3 in Eleven Old English Rogationtide Homilies, ed. J. Bazire and J. E. Cross, Kings College London Med. Stud. 4 (London, 1989), 47–55, at 47, line 18. It is printed in N. R. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957), no. 38, art. 14.

151

Kathryn Powell Ælfric’s homilies in the first part of the eleventh century, connecting the admonitions in that homily with the frequent viking raids of that period, and making the connection explicit for himself and possibly for other readers or listeners as well. Taken together, and read in light of other marginalia in this manuscript possibly written by the same scribe, the two annotations provide us with further testimony to the viking raids of Æthelred the Unready’s reign, albeit from a less vocal witness than Wulfstan or Æthelred’s chronicler. Such important texts, however brief, deserve more scholarly attention than they have so far received. My purpose here, then, is to analyse both marginal texts and place them in a historical context. My analysis will focus initially on the marginal annotation to Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily, since it is this annotation that provides us with the clearest evidence of a scribe working during the reign of Æthelred, commenting on the viking raids as they were happening. I will read the annotation in light of what we know of CCCC 162, with the aim of demonstrating that the comment is a contemporary reference to the viking raids of the early eleventh century, and will place that reference in the context of Ælfric’s ‘AshWednesday’ homily. I will then survey marginalia in this manuscript which others have suggested were written by the same scribe, in order to better understand his scribal habits, his purpose in annotating the manuscript, and his particular interests. Only after such a thorough analysis of the ‘Ash-Wednesday’ annotation and the scribe who produced it can one turn to the annotation to the anonymous rogationtide homily and understand it for what it is – another contemporary reference to the viking raids, possibly written by the same scribe. Armed with an understanding of both marginal texts, it is then possible to speculate on when and where the annotator may have been working and what might have inspired him to write about the vikings. Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162 is a collection of homilies mainly by Ælfric written by a single scribe working at the beginning of the eleventh century in either Canterbury or Rochester.3 The first eight homilies are for general use, while the remainder of the manuscript takes the form of a temporale, with homilies for Sundays and important feast days from the second Sunday after epiphany to the second Sunday in advent. The manuscript is closely related to two other large collections of mainly Ælfrician homilies – 13

Ker notes that the decorative capitals used at the opening of homilies are reminiscent of those in BL, Royal 6 C. i from St Augustine’s, Canterbury. The early-eleventh-century addition of the beginning of a unique homily on St Augustine of Canterbury to a blank leaf at the end of the manuscript also supports a connection with Canterbury. By the mid-eleventh century, however, the manuscript was at Rochester, and it has been suggested that it might have been written there; see Ker, Catalogue, p. 56; Vercelli Homilies, ed. D. G. Scragg, EETS os 300 (Oxford 1992), xxviii–xxix; Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies: The Second Series, ed. M. Godden, EETS ss 5 (Oxford, 1979) [hereafter CH II], xxxi–xxxiii.

152

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodley 340/342, and Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 198 – although, as Donald Scragg has shown, it is a much more independently organized collection, including many alternative homilies not found in those manuscripts, particularly for the period leading up to and immediately following Easter.4 The manuscript seems to have been well used throughout the first half of the eleventh century, since it has been heavily corrected and annotated by a number of different hands of this date.5 One of these hands writes a number of marginal or interlinear notes against various homilies, including the marginal addition to Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily with which we are concerned.6 Ælfric begins his homily by admonishing his audience to observe the fast particularly during Lent, because Ash Wednesday and the subsequent Lenten season are about shunning the ephemerality of this world and putting one’s faith in the next. He characterizes the next life as one never-ending good day, whereas this life is full of cares. He writes: We sceolan gewilnian symle tæs ecean lifes fortan te on tam life syndon gode dagas, na swa teah manega dagas ac an, se ne geendae næfre. Weah te hwa wille her on life habban gode dagas, he ne mæg hi her findan teah te he sy welig forean te he bie otte untrum oeee hohfull, otte his frynd him ætfeallae oee his feoh him ætbyrst. oeee sume oeer ungelimp on tysum life becyme, and tær-to-ecean he him ondræt his deaees symble7

Following ‘oeee sume oeer ungelimp on tysum life becyme’, on page 198 of CCCC 162, the annotator in question writes in the right margin, ‘swa swa us 14

15

17

See D. G. Scragg, ‘Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162’, Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts and Their Heritage, ed. P. Pulsiano and E. M. Treharne (Aldershot, 1998), pp. 71–83. It is hard to say exactly how many individuals have annotated the manuscript because of the general difficulty of differentiating between roughly contemporary gloss-hands. Peter Stokes suggests that at least four individuals in addition to the main scribe have added interlinear and marginal notes and corrections to this manuscript in the first part of the eleventh century; see P. A. Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script, ca 990–ca 1035’, 2 vols., (unpublished PhD dissertation, Univ. of Cambridge, 2005) II, nos. G.50–2–G.50–5 (18–21). Ker, hedging his bets, merely notes ‘the rather numerous alterations and additions in later hands of s. xi’ (Catalogue, 6 p. 51). Stokes describes this hand in ‘English Vernacular Script’ II, G.50–5 (20–1). W. W. Skeat, Ælfric’s Lives of Saints, EETS os 76, 82, 94, 114 (Oxford, 1881–1900), repr. 2 vols. (Oxford, 1966), (hereafter LS) I, 260–83, lines 79–87. ‘We should always desire eternal life because in that life there are good days – not, however, many days, but one that never ends. Though one may wish, in this life, to have good days, he will not find them here, although he may be wealthy, because he will be infirm or full of cares, or his friends will turn away from him, or he will lose his money, or some other misfortune will come upon him in this life, and further, he will always dread his death.’

153

Kathryn Powell dæghwamlice on ufan sitt ægeer ge on heregangum ge on oerum mislicum unbelimpum’ (Plate II).8 While Ælfric has compiled a general list of misfortunes common to this life, the annotator has felt the need to expand upon it, making it more specific to his own time. And the mention of attacks or invasions in an early-eleventh-century context brings to mind immediately the viking incursions of that period. The comment seems to go unnoticed other than by Ker. W. W. Skeat makes no mention of it in his edition of the ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily in Ælfric’s Lives of Saints because he does not include variants from this version of the homily in his apparatus.9 In fact, when he describes CCCC 162 in his preface, he does not seem to recognize that it contains a version of the homily.10 This is understandable; the version in CCCC 162 is simply headed ‘alia narratio doctrina populi’, employs an alternate opening not found in the other manuscripts, and is assigned not to Ash Wednesday, but to the previous Sunday.11 If Skeat simply looked at the beginning of the homily in this manuscript, it would not announce itself as a version of the ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily. At any rate, the omission of these marginalia from Skeat’s apparatus, together with this homily’s status as one of Ælfric’s less frequently studied productions, means that this brief marginal text has largely gone unnoticed.12 Few have ever had a reason to notice it, much less to analyse what it means in its manuscript context. And that manuscript context – particularly the question of the date when this annotation was made – is, of course, critical. If one wishes to see it as commenting on the viking invasions of King Æthelred the Unready’s reign, then it would have to have been written not long after the manuscript’s production, during or before the Danish conquest in 1016. Although it is nearly always 18

19

11

12

‘Just as daily we are afflicted from above either by invasions or by various other misfortunes’. ‘On ufan sitt’ is an unusual construction; since on sittan/sittan on can mean ‘to attack’ or ‘to afflict’, I have chosen to translate the phrase as ‘afflicts [us] from above’ and then to rephrase the whole statement passively, since there is no expressed subject. I am grateful to Mary Clayton for her helpful comments on this construction. Skeat’s base text is taken from BL, Cotton Julius E. vii, and he collates this text with Cambridge, University Library Ii. 4. 6, Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 303 and 10 Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 302. For his description, see LS II, xiv. Ker prints the alternate opening in its entirety; see Ker, Catalogue, no. 38, art. 14. This opening makes it clear that, although the homily concerns Ash Wednesday, it is to be preached on the previous Sunday when more congregants will be present. For analysis of the passage, see Scragg, ‘Corpus Christi College 162’, p. 77. It seems likely that the homily was always intended for preaching before, rather than on, Ash Wednesday (ibid. pp. 72, 77). The homily is at a disadvantage, being one of the few non-hagiographic texts in the Lives of Saints. In so far as it has received scholarly attention recently, it has been for its indications of penitential practices in Anglo-Saxon England; see, for example, B. Bedingfield, ‘Public Penance in Anglo-Saxon England’, ASE 31 (2002), 223–55; C. Cubitt, ‘Bishops, Priests and Penance in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, EME 14 (2006), 41–63, at 50–1.

154

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 impossible to date the necessarily compressed hands of marginalia and glosses with such precision, it can at least be said that there is nothing in the features of this hand to preclude such a date. The long ascenders and descenders, the penant-shaped wedging on some ascenders, the relatively long ascender on e when compared to d, and the generally square aspect of the hand, for example, are all features which may be found in other hands of this date.13 Peter Stokes, who describes the hand quite fully in his dissertation, notes that ‘it has the small bodies and long ascenders typical of glosses written in the early eleventh century’,14 and assigns it to a group of hands that are localizable to southeastern England on the basis of spelling.15 Ker, however, describes the hand in which the marginal annotation is written as ‘a good hand, s. xi1’, a date possibly later than the time of the viking incursions.16 In order to understand what Ker means and why he might have assigned such a date to this hand, it is necessary to review what he says about his system of dates in the introduction to his Catalogue. Generally, the dates Ker assigns to manuscripts in his Catalogue are given in roughly twenty-five-year intervals, e.g., s. x/xi, s. xi1, s. xi med., s. xi2. Because each dating period covers a span of about twenty-five years, manuscripts assigned to a date range need to be thought of as written around the midpoint of that twenty-five-year period. So, for example, Ker writes, ‘in itself “s. xi1” means in the first half of the eleventh century, but in relation to the other dates in the scale it means “about the middle of the first half of the eleventh century”, since a date at the beginning or at the end of the half-century would be expressed as s. x/xi or s. xi med.’.17 By this reasoning, we should take Ker’s dating of the hand of the annotator to mean ‘about 1025’, that is, later than the viking raids. However, CCCC 162 is a special case, in that Ker departs from his usual system in dating the main hand of the manuscript as ‘s. xi in.’. He writes: Sometimes there are special reasons for a different form of dating. 38 [that is, CCCC 162], 220, 243 and 309 contain texts by Ælfric and are in a type of script which seems to have gone out of use soon after 1000. A date for these manuscripts a little before 13

14

16

See, for example, P. H. Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters: an Annotated List and Bibliography, R. Hist. Soc. Guides and Handbooks 8 (London, 1968), no. 1220, attributed to Canterbury and datable to 1013 ⫻ 1020, which shares these and other features with the hand of the CCCC 162 annotator. For discussion of this hand and comparison with other Canterbury documents, see Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ I, 120–4. Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ II, no. G.50–5, p. 20. Dr Stokes has clarified for me that these proportions are typical of, but not exclusive to the early eleventh century. On the chronological development of script features in this period, see Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ I, esp. 195–200; and on the cultural development of proportionally long ascenders and descenders in English script, see Stokes, ‘Shoots and Vines: Some Models for the Ascenders and Descenders of English Vernacular Minuscule’, Quaestio Insularis 5 (2004), 15 98–110. Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ I, 140–1. 17 Ker, Catalogue, no. 38, art. 12. Ker, Catalogue, p. xx.

155

Kathryn Powell 1000 would be paleographically possible – they are quite like a charter of 995 (Brit. Mus. Facs. iii. 39) – but historically not very likely. ‘s. xi in.’ seems the best date for them and for some other manuscripts (e.g. 354, 362) which may be a little later, but which are clearly influenced in their script by Anglo-Saxon minuscule.18

Once he has dated the main hand of the manuscript in this way, he has little choice about how to date nearly contemporary annotations. I do not think that he would wish to depart from his usual system without a good historical basis for doing so, and he does not have Ælfric’s chronology to support such a departure with regard to the annotations. It should not be surprising, therefore, if he does not date the annotator’s hand as ‘s. xi in.’ He cannot date it as ‘s. x/xi’ even if the features of the hand might support a date within that range, since it would at least appear to assign an earlier date to the annotation than to the manuscript that contains it. His only real choice is ‘s. xi1’. Given the circumstances, I do not think in this case that we need necessarily read that date to mean ‘about 1025’, but only ‘in the years following the production of the manuscript’. Overall, there is nothing in the palaeographic evidence to preclude the dating of this annotation to the earliest decades of the eleventh century. The language of the annotation also conjures images of the viking incursions of the early eleventh century. The word ‘heregangum’, in particular, is suggestive. Heregang is a noun compound that literally would mean something like, ‘the comings and goings of an army’, and that in Old English usage refers either to an invasion or to the devastation caused by an invasion force. It is etymologically distinct from heregung or hergung, a participle that derives from the verb hergian, and also means ‘invasion’ or ‘attack’, or the ‘harrying’ or plundering that comes with an invasion.19 In practice, however, the two words differ hardly at all in their meanings or spellings, and are frequently conflated in surviving texts. So, for example, while the Oxford, Bodleian Library, Tanner 10 copy of the Old English version of Bede’s Historia ecclesiastica describes ‘swa reere hergunge 7 swa gelomlicre tara noreteoda’ during the reign of Vortigern, the copy in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 41 has ‘heregange’.20 Likewise, when Ælfric describes the ages of the world in the course of his homily for the second Sunday after Epiphany, he refers to the Babylonian invasion and occupation of Judea as the ‘babiloniscre heregunge’ while Wulfstan, 18 19

20

Ibid. pp. xx–xxi. J. Bosworth and T. Northcote Toller, An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary (Oxford, 1898), p. 532, with T. Northcote Toller, An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary: Supplement (Oxford, 1921), p. 538 (heregang), and Bosworth and Toller, Dictionary, p. 534, with Toller, Supplement, p. 539 (hergung). ‘[S]uch savage and repeated devastations of the northern nations’; text and translation from The Old English Version of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People, ed. T. Miller, EETS os 95–6 (Oxford, 1890–1) and 110–11 (Oxford, 1898), I.i, p. 50, line 11. For the CCCC 41 variant, see ibid. II.i, p. 23.

156

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 in his text on the ‘Ages of the World’ refers to the same occupation as ‘eam myclan heregange’.21 If Ælfric’s heregunge is Wulfstan’s heregange, it seems unlikely that eleventh-century English writers and readers generally made much of a distinction between these words. If we do accept that readers generally understood heregang and heregung to be interchangeable, then the CCCC 162 annotator’s use of heregangum acquires ominous and particularly Danish connotations. The word occurs frequently in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and the great majority of those occurrences are found in the annals of Æthelred’s reign, in entries for the years 994–1016. Here, the word describes Olaf Tryggvason and Swein Forkbeard’s campaigns in 994, the destruction that followed the arrival of the great fleet in Sandwich in 1006, and Cnut’s campaigns in 1016, as well as being used to refer more generally to the Danish harrying that was so frequent during these years.22 Once the regular viking campaigns end in 1016, the word does not occur again in the Chronicle until 105523 – certainly later than the date of the marginal note in CCCC 162, which does not exhibit the round aspect of mid-century English minuscule script. Indeed, between Cnut’s accession in 1016 and Ælfgar’s Welsh campaign in 1055, the Chronicle records a great deal of political intrigue and isolated outbreaks of violence, but little that could be described as heregung, and certainly not daily heregung. The annotator’s description of the invasions and other misfortunes as happening ‘daily’ [dæghwamlice] is likewise reminiscent of the way in which the viking raids of the latter part of Æthelred’s reign are described in the Chronicle. One of the reasons why the attacks, as they are described in these annals, seem so terrible is that they are characterized as affecting regions of England on a daily basis for extended periods of time. To take one example, the entry for 1006 describes not only the arrival of the great fleet at Sandwich, but also details at some length the looting and burning that characterized the whole Christmas season that year as the raiding army marched through a large part of southern England. A tone of helpless resignation permeates the entire lengthy annal, and when the chronicler writes of the raiding army that ‘hi a 21

22 23

For Ælfric’s text, see Homily IV in Godden, CH II, 29–40, at 32, line 88; for Wulfstan’s, see Wulfstan: Sammlung der ihm zugeschriebenen Homilien nebst Untersuchungen über ihre Echtheit, ed. A. Napier (Berlin, 1883), LXII, pp. 311–13, at 312, line 1. Versions of the same text occur in commonplaces on the ‘Six Ages of the World’ that are found in the widest variety of manuscripts from the tenth through the twelfth centuries, some (but not all) of which include some variant of heregange/ heregunge; see Helmut Gneuss, Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts: a List of Manuscripts and Manuscript Fragments Written or Owned in England up to 1100, MRTS 241 (Tempe, AZ, 2001), nos. 55, 304, 389, 411, 435, 500, 637. See the entries for 994, 1006, 1011 and 1016 in ASC CDE. See entry for 1055 in ASC CD, where the term is used to describe the havoc wreaked by Ælfgar on 9 November of that year.

157

Kathryn Powell dydon heora ealdan gewunan, atendon hiora herebeacen swa hi ferdon’24 – i.e., they burned down everything in their path – one gets a sense of such events as both terrible and quotidian.25 It is no wonder that he adds, ‘Ea weare hit swa micel ege fram tam here tæt man ne mihte getencan 7 ne asmeagan hu man hi of earde adrifan sceolde otte eisne eard wie hi gehealdan, forean te hi hæfdon ælce scire on Wesseaxum stiee gemearcod mid byrne 7 mid heregunge’.26 Indeed, if the chronicler’s portrayal of events is at all accurate, the viking attacks must have seemed both inexplicable and irremediable. And this is the picture briefly painted by the CCCC 162 annotator: these attacks are a daily reality, yet another of the ‘mislicum unbelimpum’ of this life, and a reason to place one’s hope in the next world. So we have here an annotation written in the first part of the eleventh century, referring to daily invasions which are best understood as the viking incursions of Æthelred’s reign, and employing language that is reminiscent of the Chronicle’s account of these incursions. It is interesting that the annotator’s description, however brief, should be at all similar to the chronicler’s. The Chronicle, despite its quite full account of the viking invasions, is not a perfectly reliable source for the period. The chronicler who composed the annals of Æthelred’s reign was working retrospectively, and his account is coloured by his awareness of the eventual Danish conquest of England.27 If one accepts that this brief annotation in CCCC 162 does refer to the vikings, however, we have here what is definitely a contemporary record. There would be no point in making such a note about daily invasions after the invasions had ended. This record not only tells us that another person at the time was concerned enough about the viking incursions to write about them; it also hints that this writer felt some of the same sense of their oppressive regularity as they were happening as did the chronicler looking back on them afterwards. The fact that the annotator writes in response to Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ is also interesting, although at first glance this seems an unlikely homily to inspire 24

25

26

27

ASC CDE, s.a. 1006 (The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: a Collaborative Edition, MS C, ed. K. O’Brien O’Keeffe (Cambridge, 2001), p. 91): ‘They always did as was their old custom, lighting their war-beacons as they went.’ S. Keynes, ‘The Declining Reputation of King Æthelred the Unready’, Ethelred the Unready: Papers from the Millenary Conference, ed. D. Hill, BAR Brit. ser. 59 (Oxford, 1978), 227–53, at 234, repr. in Anglo-Saxon History: Basic Readings, ed. D. A. E. Pelteret (New York, 2000), pp. 157– 90, at p. 166, remarks on the way in which the chronicler’s euphemisms ‘present the ravaging not so much as an act of violence but more as a form of exercise or a matter of course’. ASC CDE, s.a. 1006 (ASC, MS C, ed. O’Brien O’Keeffe, p. 92): ‘Then there was such great awe of the raiding army that no man could think or work out how they could be driven out of the land or how this land might be held against them, because they had cruelly marked each shire of Wessex with burning and harrying.’ See S. Keynes, ‘Declining Reputation’, esp. pp. 229–36, and S. Keynes, ‘A Tale of Two Kings: Alfred the Great and Æthelred the Unready’, TRHS, 5th ser. 36 (1986), 195–217, at 201–5.

158

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 such a comment. It is not obviously political in its content and contains none of the martial imagery or typological usefulness of, for example, his translation of the Book of Judith, that one might expect to inspire thoughts of the vikings.28 Instead, it is a rather straightforward sermon on the necessity during Lent of repenting one’s sins and abstaining from further sin in preparation for the Easter mystery. Ælfric begins by reminding his audience that they should observe the fast for four days at the beginning of Lent and provides examples of what befalls individuals who fail to do so. He then attempts to persuade his audience that eternal life is really worth striving for because it is so much better than the life of this world, and it is to this section that the annotator adds his comment about invasions. In the remainder of the sermon, Ælfric advises his audience of what they must do to earn their eternal reward – namely, be shriven (particularly during the first week of Lent), and avoid sin in the future while performing good deeds and almsgiving. In short, there is nothing in the sermon that is particularly suggestive of the viking raids. And yet, if we imagine the annotator writing sometime during the final decade of Æthelred’s reign – especially during or after 1009 – then it may be possible to understand what he saw in the ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily. During the last decade of Æthelred’s reign, a marriage of political and religious practices suggests that the response to the viking raids shifted focus slightly from the martial to the moral. Particularly, in response to the arrival of Thorkell’s raiding army in 1009, an extensive programme of public prayer and fasting was introduced in which the entire country was expected to participate. The programme, outlined in Æthelred’s seventh code of laws, was aimed at securing God’s favour in the conflict with the Danes through penance and prayer. The Old English version of VII Æthelred in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 20129 begins by decreeing that the English people will fast for three days, and goes on to say that everyone should be shriven and should participate in an outlined programme of almsgiving, then concludes by outlining the responsibilities of religious communities.30 Thus, VII Æthelred’s admonitions to laymen are similar 28

30

Ælfric was famously aware of the similarities between the Babylonian occupation that forms the background to the story of Judith and the viking raids of Æthelred’s reign. For his translation of the Book of Judith, see Angelsächsische Homilien und Heiligenleben, ed. B. Assman, Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Prosa 3 (Kassel, 1889), repr. with introduction by P. Clemoes (Darmstadt, 1964), pp. 102–16. For his comment that he translated the work to inspire the English to defend themselves against their attackers, see ‘On the Old and New Testament’, The Old English Version of the Heptateuch, ed. S. J. Crawford, EETS os 160 (Oxford, 1922), 29 15–75, at 48, lines 776–80. Ker, Catalogue, no. 49, art. B 16. For VII Æthelred, see F. Liebermann, Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen, 3 vols. (Halle, 1903–16) I, 262; English Historical Documents c. 500–1042, ed. D. Whitelock, 2nd ed. (London, 1979), pp. 447–8. For a discussion of the law code in the context of the viking invasions, see S. Keynes, ‘An Abbot, an Archbishop, and the Viking Raids of 1006–7 and 1009–12’, ASE 36 (2007), 151–220, at 179–89.

159

Kathryn Powell in content and organization to Ælfric’s homily. I do not wish to suggest either that there is any significant relationship between Ælfric’s homily and Æthelred’s law code31 or that the annotator was necessarily familiar with the law code as such. Nonetheless, he may well have been familiar with the practices it outlines in connection with the vikings and, upon seeing similar practices outlined in Ælfric’s sermon, was reminded (if he needed reminding) of the Danish threat. More significantly, this annotation seems to indicate a similar shift in response to the viking threat to that which underlies VII Æthelred. The annotator makes his intervention in the section of the homily where Ælfric is urging his audience to act so as to earn eternal life because one cannot place one’s faith in this one. Ælfric’s rhetoric turns on the question of the efficacy of human action in a mutable world. No matter what one does or acquires, Ælfric argues, it is no guarantee of happiness in this life because ill fortune can befall us at any time. When the annotator suggests that the viking raids are one such misfortune, he is not conceiving of the vikings as foreign invaders to be dealt with through military force or diplomacy, but as a test of faith to be passed through penance and steadfast piety. Indeed, his specification of the attacks as coming ‘from above’ (ufan) may suggest their divine origin. A similar understanding of the viking attacks must underlie the promulgation of VII Æthelred. While the English by no means ceased in 1009 to take military and political actions to defend their country, such actions alone were not thought to be enough to win the day against what must have increasingly been seen as a divine test. This does not mean that the annotator’s view is necessarily identical with Wulfstan’s as the author of the law code. While Wulfstan makes it clear in his writings generally, and especially in his Sermo Lupi ad Anglos, that he understands the vikings to be a divine punishment for the behaviour of the English people, the annotator apparently views them only as one of various misfortunes, such as those handed out, with God’s permission, by capricious Fortuna in Boethius’s Consolatio. By interpolating his comment on the vikings into Ælfric’s homily, he is clearly saying that the English must place their faith in God to deliver them from this crisis, but not obviously suggesting that they have brought on this crisis through sinful behaviour. His annotation provides us with another glimpse into the English people’s increasing dependence on their faith in their struggles with the Danes, and perhaps a slight corrective to Wulfstan’s understanding of the invaders as a necessary sign of God’s displeasure. 31

Ælfric probably first composed this homily in the 990s, before such practices were instituted in response to the viking raids; see P. Clemoes, ‘The Chronology of Ælfric’s Works’, The AngloSaxons: Studies in Some Aspects of their History and Culture presented to Bruce Dickins (London, 1959), pp. 212–47, repr. OEN Subsidia 5 (Binghamton, 1980), at 34. The similarities between the two works arise coincidentally because both outline communal penitential practices.

160

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 So without an inscription to give a name to this individual who provides us with a brief contemporary reference to the devastation caused by the viking raids, what can we learn about him? In particular, can we deduce anything about why he was reading this homiliary and why he made this and other annotations? Perhaps the first question to be answered is whether this annotation was intended to be a note or a revision to Ælfric’s homily. Ker asserts in his Catalogue that ‘the words are for insertion after “becyme” ’,32 suggesting that this material was intended to be added to the homily. If that is the case, the passage was never incorporated into any other surviving copy, although that in itself does not tell us very much.33 Perhaps more problematically, no insertion point or mark of revision of any kind is used to indicate that the passage is a revision to the main text or where it is meant to be inserted. The marginal text begins precisely on the line of writing following ‘becyme’, but this is no necessary sign that it is to be inserted into the text here. If we are to know whether this contemporary comment was intended for a larger audience than the scribe himself, we have to look at his scribal practices in his other annotations. Ker assigns one other annotation to this scribe, written interlinearly on page 174 at the beginning of Ælfric’s ‘Dominica in sexagesima’ (Plate III).34 Here, he writes, ‘Men ta leofestan, we willae hwilcum feawum wordum eow trahtnian embe tæt godspell tæt man eow nu beforan rædde’.35 It is clear enough from the context that this passage is intended as an alternative opening to the homily. Again, there is no insertion point or mark of revision used to indicate this. However, while there is ample room in the left margin of this page to write this alternate opening, the scribe has instead taken some pains to write the entire passage interlinearly (and surprisingly legibly) between the rubric for the homily and its opening lines – in other words, exactly where he intends it to be inserted. Based on his practice here, one feels more confident concluding that the same individual’s remark about the viking attacks was intended to be inserted into Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ homily where he begins writing it – that is, after ‘becyme’, as Ker suggests. If the remark is meant for insertion into the homily, then our annotator is very likely someone with pastoral duties, revising the homilies in this manuscript for delivery to a congregation. The alternate opening for CH II.6 that he 32 33

34

35

Ker, Catalogue, p. 53. If the annotation is a comment on the vikings, this is hardly surprising, since the other surviving copies of the homily that are later than that in CCCC 162 are all post-Conquest; see Ker, Catalogue, nos. 18, 56 and 57. For the homily, see Godden, CH II.6, pp. 52–9; for Ker’s description of the annotation, see Ker, Catalogue, no. 38, art. 12. As printed in Ker and checked against the manuscript, with abbreviations silently expanded: ‘Beloved men, we desire in a few words to comment for you upon that gospel reading that someone has just now read before you.’

161

Kathryn Powell writes on page 174 certainly seems to be the sort of revision one would make with preaching in mind. Likewise, the way he marks up the manuscript without using any sort of insertion points suggests that he was not necessarily concerned about other, subsequent readers being able to make sense of his work. He writes legibly and as closely as possible to the point where he means to insert his remarks, which would be enough to allow him to make sense of his own annotations and insert them at the right point if he were preaching these homilies; it does not seem to matter to him if other readers are able to repeat the trick. Annotations meant for public view would normally be more clearly marked; private notes could be far more hastily written. This writer seems to be making private notes for a public performance, and expecting a listening rather than a reading audience. That said, it should not be assumed that this manuscript was a preacher’s private homiliary. Firstly, its size seems to preclude such an assumption. At 297 ⫻ 203 mm (roughly 11.7 ⫻ 8 in.)36 and well over 500 pages, CCCC 162 is no pocket book. The trip that it likely made from Canterbury to Rochester some time in the first part of the eleventh century is probably the only travelling it did in the Anglo-Saxon period. Secondly, based on the number of individuals who annotate this manuscript, it seems likely that, at least for the earliest part of its life, the volume was used in a monastery or other religious community – perhaps at St Augustine’s, Canterbury – by a number of individuals for preaching and private meditation, and that the annotator was a member of that community. And if the community was St Augustine’s – a possibility which I will explore more fully below – the annotator might have good reason to be concerned about the vikings. Indeed, Canterbury was regularly threatened by the viking attacks of Æthelred’s reign, particularly by Thorkell’s army in and after 1009, culminating in the burning of the cathedral in 1011 and the murder of Archbishop Ælfheah in 1012.37 Here, as much as anywhere, one would be justified in imagining the viking attacks as occurring ‘daily’. Before we draw any further conclusions about this individual, it is worth considering one other addition to a homily in this manuscript which may be the work of the same scribe, although such an identification is problematic. Peter Stokes suggests that a longer addition on page 107 of the manuscript (Plate IV) may be attributed to the same person, ‘although the aspect and some of the letter-forms are slightly different’.38 To enumerate only a few of the differences discussed by Stokes: all three forms of s are used here, where only long s is used in the two passages already discussed; round and dotted y is used, where 36 37

38

The measurements are Ker’s; see his Catalogue, p. 56. ASC CDE, s.a. 1009, 1011 and 1012. See also N. Brooks, The Early History of the Church of Canterbury (Leicester, 1984), pp. 283 and 285. Stokes, ‘English Vernacular Script’ II, G.50–5, 20–1.

162

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 a straight-limbed and undotted y occurs on page 174; the tail of g is closed where it is characteristically open and s-shaped elsewhere; and the hand appears heavier here, where it is quite thin elsewhere. In addition to differences in the script, the scribe here also uses a mark of revision to show where his text should be inserted into the homily – a practice which, as already noted above, seems uncharacteristic of the annotator of page 198. Some or all of these differences, however, may be due to the main scribe of CCCC 162 having left the entire bottom half of the page blank, so that the annotator has all the room in the world to write his text, provided he does not follow his usual scribal practice of beginning his writing as close as possible to the point where his text is to be inserted. He has room to write full-sized, bookhand characters, which might well change the aspect of his writing as well as his choice of letterforms. These differences aside, there is enough similarity in script between the annotation here and those on pages 174 and 198 to suggest that they may just have been written by the same person. This annotation is an addition to Ælfric’s secunda sententia, or second sermon for Sunday in mid-Lent from his second series of Catholic Homilies. The sermon offers an allegorical reading of the Israelites’ razing the walls of Jericho as a figure of the Christian man’s spiritual battle against the heafodleahtras, or capital sins. It is filled with martial imagery of the Israelites’ triumph over the heathens and thus begs for another added comment about the struggles of the English against the Danes, but the interpolator has other ideas. When Ælfric writes near the end of his homily, Ta godes eeowas ea on israhela eeode nane landare hleotan ne moston, for ean ee god bebead ær eurh moysen tæt hi be his lacum lybban sceoldon, cwæe tæt he sylf wære, heora yrfweardnyss. Swa sceolon eac nu ea æeelan godes eeowas, lybban be godes dæle, gif hi rihtlice doe, and his rihtwisnysse symle aræran, and ea gastlican teolunga gode gestreonan, and beon his folces foreeingeras .a. wissian hi eac, and mid weorcum gebysnian, and habban him tæt edlean, on eam ecan life,39

the annotator adds, ‘eac ta læwedan 7 ungelæredan hlystan lare 7 lifes wege 7 huru him to langsum ne eince on godes huse to gehlystenne drihtnes tenunge, seo us foretihtee to tam ecean life’.40 This addition, if it was made by the same 39

40

‘Then God’s servants among the people of Israel might not obtain for themselves any land, because God had earlier decreed through Moses that they must live by his gifts, said that he was himself their inheritance. So now must those noble servants of God live by God’s dispensation, if they behave rightly, and always uphold his justice, and amass spiritual gain through God, and they [must] be his people’s mediators always to guide them as well, and set an example by their works, and have for themselves that reward in the eternal life.’ CH II, XII, ed. Godden, pp. 110–26, with the secunda sententia on pp. 121–6; quotation at p. 126. ‘Also the laymen and the unlearned [must] attend to instruction and the path of [eternal?] life, and at least not think it too tedious for them to listen in God’s house to the Lord’s service, which leads us to eternal life.’ Ibid. p. 126 (checked against the manuscript).

163

Kathryn Powell scribe who wrote the others, may not obviously tell us anything more about his interest in the viking raids, but it may tell us something about the audience he imagines listening (or not) to these homilies. Ælfric’s remarks in this passage have a dual valence: on the one hand, they literally describe the duty of the clergy (godes eeowas) to provide a model of behaviour to laymen; on the other hand, his language seems aimed at the wealthy lay nobility, reminding them of the relative importance of spiritual and earthly matters in the sort of fiscal and legal language they could understand. Although our annotator likewise sees a need to emphasize that lay people have responsibilities too (even if only to be quiet and attentive during mass), the fiscal metaphors do not seem to strike him as applicable to everyone in his audience, and he chooses a more straightforward approach. At the very least, the interpolation reinforces our sense of this individual as a preacher revising and adapting Ælfric’s homilies for a listening audience. Also, the fact that he does not choose to expand upon the martial material when, from our perspective, it seems such an obvious opening, perhaps reinforces the impression that he conceives of resistance to the vikings in religious and moral terms rather than military ones. Having learned what we can about the scribe of this annotation, his practices, and his interests in revising selected homilies in this manuscript, we can now consider another interesting marginal addition that seems to address the viking raids and that may be the work of the same scribe (Plate V). Admittedly, the text is so badly rubbed as to render it only partly legible. Nonetheless, some of the distinctive features of this hand are visible here, including the insular open-tailed g and the form of e. This annotation occurs on page 423 of the manuscript, in the margins of an anonymous homily for the fourth week of Lent.41 It begins seventeen lines down the manuscript page, above the line of writing and after the words ‘hæeene teoda’ – where, syntactically, the text would belong if it were to be inserted into the homily – and then continues into the margin. What remains visible of the annotation reads, ‘te us ormætlice swiee mid . . . gylde 7 mid weridgryre ofsett habbae’.42 The homily itself is a fire-and-brimstone sermon describing the Last Judgement, though the homilist has barely begun to stoke the flames at this early point in his sermon. He is fond of compiling lists of horrors, and he is in the midst of one here. He 41 42

As noted above, this is homily 3 in Rogationtide Homilies, ed. Bazire and Cross, pp. 47–55. Bazire and Cross use CCCC 162 as the base text for their edition of this homily and print in their apparatus, at line 18 of their text, what they are able read of the annotation: ‘te us ormætlice swiee mid . . . gylde . . . mid werid gryre of s . . . h . . .’ (47). By magnifying a digital image of the annotation provided to me by the Parker Library, I am able to read more. Digital images of CCCC 162 should soon be available online through the Parker on the Web project at http://parkerweb.stanford.edu/. I preserve the unusual form ‘werid’ from Bazire and Cross’s reading although, as I will discuss further below, the letter forms here are not entirely clear.

164

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 exhorts his audience to pray to God and all his saints ‘tæt he us gescylde wie gedwolan and deofolgyld and wie hæeene teoda and wie arleasum hungore and heregungge, and tæt he us sibbe forgyfe and smyltnysse lyf ’.43 If we assume that, as with the other two annotations definitely belonging to him, the scribe intends his text to be inserted in the homily at the point where he begins writing, then what we seem to have is an expansion on ‘hæeene teoda’ along the lines of his previous comment about the ‘heregangum’. It is not surprising that the mention of heathen peoples would inspire such a comment. The word hæeen, although clearly able to refer to any non-Christian people or their practices, took on the special sense of Dene during the late tenth and early eleventh centuries.44 Although the homilist’s source, if he had one for this passage,45 might have intended the phrase ‘hæeene teoda’ to refer more generally to pagan peoples, for an English audience at this time it would probably have brought to mind the vikings. The ‘te’ which appears to subordinate the entire phrase to ‘hæeene teoda’, together with ‘us . . . ofsett habbae’ makes it clear enough that the comment is an aside referring to heathen people who have afflicted the English in some way. Given this special sense of hæeen at this time, there is no better candidate for that role than the vikings. The remainder of the passage is more problematic to decipher, both because it is only partly legible and because what is visible presents some unusual spellings and vocabulary. As one should be able to see in Plate V, the page margins become more rubbed approaching the edge of the page, so that words at the ends of lines are somewhat more difficult to read than others. The unusual form ‘werid’ is one such word. It is difficult to make much sense at all of this form, as it cannot be broken up into two sensible words that could syntactically follow ‘mid’, and it is unattested as the spelling of a single word or the first part of a single word.46 When magnified, what is clearly visible of the word are its consonants: w, r, and to a lesser extent d. The first vowel is rounded in its form and is most likely an e, but could possibly be an o; the most clearly 43

44

45

46

Rogationtide Homilies, ed. Bazire and Cross, p. 47, lines 17–19: ‘that he protect us against heresy and idolatry and against heathen peoples and against shameful desire and ravaging, and that he grant us peace and a life of tranquility’. Toller, Supplement, s.v. hæten where the term is sub-defined as ‘used specially of the Scandinavian invaders of England’; pp. 499–500, B.II .1.a a as an adjective; A.II.1.a. as a noun. For Wulfstan’s particular use of the term, see A. L. Meaney, ‘ “And we forbeodae eornostlice ælcne hæeenscipe”: Wulfstan and Late Anglo-Saxon and Norse “Heathenism” ’, Wulfstan, Archbishop of York: the Proceedings of the Second Alcuin Conference, ed. M. Townend, Stud. in the Early Middle Ages 10 (Turnhout, 2004), 461–500, esp. pp. 462–72. The homilist draws material from Sophonius, Gregory the Great and the Apocalypse of Thomas, but it is not clear that he is drawing on any identifiable source in this passage; see the introduction to the homily in Rogationtide Homilies, ed. Bazire and Cross, pp. 40–6. Based on searches of both the DOE Corpus and the MANCASS C11 Database at http:// www.arts.manchester.ac.uk/mancass/C11database/ on 10 January 2008.

165

Kathryn Powell visible stroke of the letter is angled in the wrong direction to match this scribe’s a. The second vowel appears to be an i, but with more space left between this letter and the following d than is the case in either instance of ‘mid’ in the same passage, making it just possible that part of a letter has been lost here. Given these variables, the best possible reading is probably ‘werid’ or ‘werud’, as either an unattested or unusual spelling of werod, meaning ‘troop’.47 If further letters or words intervene between ‘werid’ and ‘gryre’, no trace of them remains. Therefore, since one would expect ‘werid’ to be in an oblique case following ‘mid’, it makes sense to understand ‘weridgryre’ as a compound, literally meaning ‘troop-terror’, and in context meaning something like ‘attack’ or ‘invasion’. While such a word is unattested in the surviving corpus, the same would be true of any word that could fit the manuscript evidence.48 The phrase ‘mid . . . gylde’ is similarly problematic. Viewed under magnification, it is clear that there are more letters following ‘mid’ at the end of the first line of the annotation, but very little of them remains visible now. What is perfectly clear is that whatever follows ‘mid’ begins with a minim stroke, and a series of minims appear to follow. The visible remains fill the space of two or three letters, although there is room on the page for more letters to have followed. Obviously, it is difficult to make much of such scant evidence. However, even from the few bits of marginalia the annotator has left to us, it seems clear that he has something of a sense of style and, like many prose stylists in Old English, is fond of doubling and parallel constructions. He gives us ‘ge on heregangum ge on oerum mislicum unbelimpum’ on page 198, and, if it is his work, the alliterative ‘lawedan 7 ungelæredan hlystan lare 7 lifes wege’ on page 107. The scribe here appears to be creating something similar with ‘mid . . . gylde 7 mid . . . gryre’, and if we are to take ‘gryre’ as the second element of a compound, it would be stylish if ‘gylde’ were also the second element of a compound or complex word. If we assume for a moment, then – and it is no more than an assumption – that what follows ‘mid’ is the first element of a word ending in -gylde, and that word is written beginning with a minim stroke, then the possibilities are greatly narrowed. Three words suggest themselves: medgylde, nidgylde, and ungylde. Medgyld, meaning ‘beggar’ or ‘hireling’, makes little sense in context, whereas both nidgyld, ‘enforced payment’, and 47

48

A search of the DOE Corpus returns twenty-five instances of werud (as opposed to 415 of the more common spelling werod), fourteen in poetry. It is possible, for example, that ‘werid’ could be an adjectival form of the verb wyrgan/wiergan, in which case it would mean ‘cursed’ or ‘damned’. Based on a search of the DOE Corpus, however, adjectives from wyrgan almost always take the prefix a- (awyrged), and there is no room for an initial letter here. Additionally, if there is nothing to intervene between ‘werid’ and ‘gryre’, then ‘weridgryre’ meaning ‘cursed terror’ would be equally unattested and would produce a less obvious reading. I am grateful to Richard Dance and Donald Scragg for helpful discussion of this form.

166

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 ungyld, ‘excessive payment’, are suggestive of the increasingly large tributes needed to buy peace from the Danes during Æthelred’s reign.49 ‘Ungylde’, in particular, seems to fit the manuscript evidence, since only minims remain visible and the first character after ‘mid’ appears to be a u. Assuming this is a plausible reading, the entire marginal annotation would respond to the anonymous homilist’s assertion that one should pray for God’s protection from heathen peoples by specifying the heathen people ‘who have afflicted us extremely greatly with excessive tribute and terrible invasion’. In an earlyeleventh-century context, those heathens associated with large payments and attacks could really only be the vikings. If this phrase, like the annotations discussed above, is intended for insertion into the homily, it is understandable that the annotator might feel the need to mention the vikings in a litany of evils from which one must pray for God’s protection. The need for and efficacy of prayer in confrontations with pagan peoples is a recurring theme throughout Ælfric’s Lives of Saints, which would have been written and circulated as the viking incursions were intensifying, not long before the compilation of this manuscript.50 Likewise, such litanies of terrors, offered in connection with calls for prayer and reform, are particularly characteristic of the most famous homiletic composition to address the Danish problem, Wulfstan’s Sermo Lupi ad Anglos.51 Here, we have evidence of another 49

50

51

On the payment of tribute to the vikings, see S. Keynes, ‘The Historical Context of The Battle of Maldon’, The Battle of Maldon, AD 991, ed. D. Scragg (Oxford, 1991), pp. 81–113, at 100–2; M. K. Lawson, ‘ “Those Stories Look True”: Levels of Taxation in the Reigns of Æthelred II and Cnut’, EHR 104 (1989), 385–406, and ‘Danegeld and Heregeld Once More’, EHR 105 (1990), 951–61. This theme is elaborated particularly in ‘Forty Soldiers, Martyrs’ (LS XI), Ælfric’s translations from the Book of Kings (LS XVIII) and from Maccabees (LS XXV), ‘St Oswald, King and Martyr’ (LS XXVI), the ‘Passion of St Edmund, King and Martyr’ (LS XXXII), and in the ‘Prayer of Moses’ (LS XIII), where its relevance to contemporary events in England is made explicit in lines 147–77. On the ‘Prayer of Moses’ and the viking invasions, see M. Godden, ‘Apocalypse and Invasion in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, Anglo-Saxon to Early Middle English: Studies presented to E. G. Stanley, ed. M. Godden et al. (Oxford, 1994), pp. 130–62, at 133–7. Interestingly, this annotation offers a hint that the scribe might have seen or heard an early version of the Sermo Lupi. Ungyld, with the specific sense of ‘excessive payment’, is a word associated with Wulfstan; its earliest usage in this sense seems to be in the Sermo, as part of just such a litany: ‘Ne dohte hit nu lange inne ne ute, ac wæs here 7 hunger, bryne 7 blodgite on gewelhwylcum ende oft 7 gelome; 7 us stalu 7 cwalu, stric 7 steorfa, orfcwealm 7 uncoeu, hol 7 hete 7 ripera reaflac derede swiee tearle, 7 us ungylda swyee gedrehton, 7 us unwidera foroft weoldon unwæstma’ (‘It has not gone well for a long time now, within or without this land, but there has been war and famine, burning and bloodshed in every region time and again; and stealing and killing, affliction and pestilence, cattle-plague and disease, slander and malice and looting by robbers have harmed us very grievously, and excessive payments have afflicted us greatly, and bad weather has very often brought us crop failures’); The Homilies of Wulfstan, ed. D. Bethurum (Oxford, 1957), XX, pp. 261–6, at 262–3. The conventional date of composition for the Sermo Lupi is 1014; however, Simon Keynes has suggested that Wulfstan may have

167

Kathryn Powell individual preaching at this time who feels the need to admonish his audience to pray for God’s help against the vikings, not only in the face of the military threat they pose, but in light of their depletion of the nation’s coffers. This suggestion that the English people should pray to God for protection from the vikings seems entirely in keeping with the attitude expressed toward the Danish incursions in the ‘Ash-Wednesday’ annotation. There, the annotator’s comment in the context of that homily expressed a view that the viking attacks were one of the various misfortunes of this life, and that the remedy for such suffering was to place one’s faith in the next world and to obtain God’s favour through penance and almsgiving. In other words, the appropriate response to the viking threat was not so much a military one as a religious and moral one. The same seems to be the case here. Although the annotator here delineates the threat posed by the vikings as a military and financial one, he does so in the context of urging his audience to pray for God’s protection. If the two annotations are made by the same individual, they present us with a view of someone who, while being well aware of the practical dangers posed by the Danish incursions, turns to his faith as a way of addressing these dangers. If the second annotation is made by someone else, then we seem to have two individuals, working at roughly the same time and place, exhibiting a similar attitude toward contemporary events. In either case, these annotations offer us another witness to the seriousness of the viking attacks of Æthelred’s reign and the turn to prayer and repentance that increasingly formed part of the English response. One has to be cautious about drawing any conclusions about the annotator of Ælfric’s ‘Ash-Wednesday’ based on two brief marginal additions to homilies definitely written by him and two more such additions that may have been his work as well – a corpus totalling less than eighty words. Nonetheless, we do get the strong sense of someone who is revising the homilies in this manuscript for preaching and adapting them with a specific audience in mind. It is also clear enough that he must be working during one of the periods of sustained viking activity in Æthelred’s reign, and that he expects his audience to understand and be moved by his brief reference(s) to the viking attacks. He is probably also working after Ælfric has circulated his Lives of Saints, since items from this series are included in CCCC 162.52 This gives us an outside window within which to date the annotations of 998–1016, with the most likely dates

52

composed and circulated versions of this homily as early as 1009; see S. Keynes, ‘An Abbot and Archbishop’, pp. 203–13. If this is so, the annotator may be recalling the term and redeploying it in a similar context. These are ‘Ash-Wednesday’, discussed above, and the ‘Prayer of Moses’, on pp. 66–79 of the manuscript.

168

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 of composition falling in the periods of intense viking activity from 1006–7 and 1009–12. Considering that the manuscript was compiled in the southeast, either at St Augustine’s, Canterbury, or in Rochester, one could hardly imagine a better historical context for expressing concern about the viking incursions than the period from 1009–1012, when this region of England was under serious threat from Thorkell’s army. Although it can be no more than speculation, I think it worth considering the possibility that this annotator was working during this period at St Augustine’s, Canterbury, and that his remarks address what would have been the very serious concerns of any audience he might find there. In 1009, when Thorkell’s army arrives in the east of England, the Chronicle tells us that they intended to storm Canterbury, ‘gif hi ee hraeor to him friees ne gyrndon. 7 ealle Eastcentingas frie wie tone here genamon 7 him gesealdon .iii. tusend punda’.53 This is a relatively small sum of money compared to the tributes paid by the English generally at this time, but a large sum for East Kent alone to raise, suggesting that the people of Canterbury at this time would know something about being afflicted ‘mid ungylde’. The ‘hraeor’ of the chronicle entry suggests that it may have been necessary to raise the money quickly, and one suspects some part of it would have been drawn from treasures or contingency funds held by Christ Church in particular, and possibly by other religious communities.54 It seems unlikely, then that members of the community at St Augustine’s would have been cloistered from the worldly concern of raising funds on short notice to pay tribute to the vikings. According to the Chronicle account, the payment of tribute worked temporarily. Thorkell’s army made its way through the whole of the rest of the southeast and East Anglia, as well as other parts of the country, burning and looting wherever it went, but managed to avoid Canterbury until September of 1011. Then, the chronicler tells us, on eissum geare betweox Natiuitas Sancte Marie 7 Sancte Michaeles mæssan hi ymbsæton Cantwareburuh, 7 hi into coman turuh syruwrencas forean Ælmær hi becyrde, te se arcebisceop Ælfeah ær generede æt his life, 7 hi tær ea genaman tone arcebisceop Ælfeah 7 Ælfweard cynges gerefan 7 Leofrune abbatissan 7 Godwine bisceop. 7 Ælfmær abbod hi leton aweg, 7 hi eær genamon inne ealle ta gehadodan men 7 weras 53

54

ASC CDE, s.a. 1009 (ASC, MS C, ed. O’Brien O’Keeffe, p. 93): ‘if they [the people of Canterbury] had not more readily desired peace with them. And all the people of East Kent made peace with the raiding army and gave them three thousand pounds’. King Eadred, for example, bequeathed in his will four hundred pounds to the Archbishop of Canterbury, ‘to the end that they [the people of Kent, Surrey, Sussex and Berkshire] may redeem themselves from famine and from a heathen army if they need’, demonstrating that such contingency funds existed and were replenished in times of peace; see EHD, no. 107, pp. 554–6, at 555. On the sources of funds for payments of tribute, see S. Keynes, ‘The Historical Context’, pp. 101–2.

169

Kathryn Powell 7 wif – tæt wæs unasecgendlic ænigum men hu micel tæs folces wæs – 7 on tære byrig syttan wæron swa lange swa hi woldon, 7 hi ea hæfdon ta buruh ealle asmeade, wendon him ta to scypan 7 læddon tone arcebisceop mid him. Wæs ea ræpling se ee wæs heafod Angelkynnes 7 Cristendomes. Wær man mihte ea geseon yrmee tær man oft ær geseah blisse on tære earman byrig tanon com ærest Cristendom 7 blis for Gode 7 for worulde. 7 hi hæfdon tone arcebisceop mid him swa lange oe tæne timan te hi hine gemartiredon.55

The entry for 1012 goes on to detail the shameful martyrdom of the archbishop on 19th April of that year, but the damage to Canterbury had already been done. The Ælfmær responsible for betraying the city to Thorkell’s men was the abbot of St Augustine’s, and the Chronicle account makes it clear enough that members of his own community must have become victims of the viking atrocities as a result of his actions. At Easter in 1012, the English people were forced to pay a tribute of £48,000 to the vikings – the largest such payment yet – in order to obtain a brief respite from the viking depredations.56 Particularly in the aftermath of these events, it is not difficult to imagine some member of the community at St Augustine’s reading Ælfric’s ‘AshWednesday’, coming upon his assertion that no one finds good days in this life because ‘his friends will turn away from him, or he will lose his money, or some other misfortune will come upon him in this life, and further, he will always dread his death’, and thinking immediately of the vikings (and perhaps of his supposed ‘friend’, Ælfmær) as the annotator of Ælfric’s homily in CCCC 162 does. Nor is it problematic to understand his interpolations in ‘Ash-Wednesday’ and the anonymous homily as having special resonance for the members of St Augustine’s or for a broader audience in Canterbury at this time. While Thorkell’s army laid siege to the city in 1011, the people of Canterbury would indeed have faced attacks daily, as the ‘Ash-Wednesday’ annotation stipulates. Likewise, in the period from 1009–12, the English people generally and the people of Kent in particular would have ample experience of both ‘excessive payment’ and ‘troop-terror’. These annotations fit well, then, within this 55

ASC CDE, s.a. 1011 (ASC, MS C, ed. O’Brien O’Keeffe, p. 95–6): ‘in this year, between the Nativity of St Mary and Michaelmas, they besieged Canterbury, and they entered through trickery, because Ælfmær betrayed them, he whose life Archbishop Ælfheah had previously saved. And they then took there the Archbishop Ælfheah and Ælfweard the king’s reeve and Abbess Leofrune and Bishop Godwine, and they let Abbot Ælfmær go away. And they took there within all the monastics and men and women – no one could say how many people that was – and they were in the town afterwards just as long as they wished. And when they had searched the entire town, they returned to their ships and led the archbishop with them. He was then a captive who was the head of the English and of Christendom. There might one then see misery where one often before saw joy, in that poor city whence first came Christianity and bliss before the eyes of God and the world. And they had the archbishop 56 with them up until the time when they martyred him’. ASC CDE, s.a. 1012.

170

Viking Invasions and Marginal Annotations in CCCC 162 historical context and provide us with an insight into the impact of the viking raids on an apparently ordinary individual who happened to be living through them. For unlike most of the accounts we have of the viking raids, these brief comments show no interest in the politics of the Danish problem and no attempt to place blame on Æthelred or his court. The chronicler, based on his account of such figures as ealdorman Ælfric and Eadric Streona, had an axe to grind regarding Æthelred’s counsellors.57 Ælfric and Wulfstan were both connected with Æthelred’s court and their interest in its politics finds expression in their writings.58 Here, we have a writer who expresses no such interests, who apparently views the repeated viking attacks as another of the ‘mislicum unbelimpum’ of this life. His perspective, however briefly glimpsed, provides a counterpoint to those given fuller expression elsewhere.59 57

58

59

For Ealdorman Ælfric, see ASC CDE, s.a. 992, 1003; for Eadric Streona, see esp. CDE 1015–17. Wulfstan, of course, was one of Æthelred’s advisors and drafted legislation for the king from at least 1008; see P. Wormald, The Making of English Law: King Alfred to the Twelfth Century, I: Legislation and its Limits (Oxford, 1999), 330–45 and 449–65. Ælfric was perhaps at a further remove from court, but his patrons, Æthelweard and Æthelmær, were kinsmen and advisors to King Æthelred; see S. Keynes, The Diplomas of King Æthelred ‘The Unready’, 978–1016: a Study in their Use as Historical Evidence (Cambridge, 1980), pp. 187–8. On the politics of the viking raids in Ælfric’s and Wulfstan’s writings, see M. K. Lawson, ‘Archbishop Wulfstan and the Homiletic Element in the Laws of Æthelred II and Cnut’, The Reign of King Cnut, King of England, Denmark and Norway, ed. A. Rumble (London, 1994), pp. 141–64; M. Godden, ‘Apocalypse and Invasion’; M. Clayton, ‘Ælfric and Æthelred’, Essays on Anglo-Saxon and Related Themes in Memory of Lynne Grundy, ed. J. Roberts and J. Nelson, Kings College London Med. Stud. 17 (London, 2000), 65–88; and S. Keynes, ‘An Abbot and Archbishop’. My thanks are due to the Master and Fellows of Corpus Christi College for allowing me access to the manuscript and for permission to reproduce images from it, as well as to Ms Gill Cannell, Dr Suzanne Paul, and the rest of the staff at the Parker Library for being so accommodating while I was working there. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Prof. Simon Keynes, Prof. Donald Scragg and Dr Peter Stokes for providing helpful discussion and comments that have undoubtedly clarified my argument; the responsibility for any faults that remain is entirely my own.

171

Plate II Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 198 (detail)

Plate III Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 174 (detail)

Plate IV Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 107 (detail)

Plate V Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 162, p. 423 (detail)

Re-evaluating base-metal artefacts: an inscribed lead strap-end from Crewkerne, Somerset gabor thomas, naomi payne and elisabeth okasha abstract Strap-ends represent the most common class of dress accessory known from late Anglo-Saxon England. At this period, new materials, notably lead and its alloys, were being deployed in the manufacture of personal possessions and jewellery. This newly found strap-end adds to the growing number of tongue-shaped examples fashioned from lead dating from this period. It is, however, distinctive in being inscribed with a personal name. The present article provides an account of the object and its text, and assesses its general significance in the context of a more nuanced interpretation of the social status of lead artefacts in late Anglo-Saxon England.

the lo cation of the find The strap-end was found by Mr Michael Charles, who was using a metal-detector on an arable field about two km from the Saxon settlement at Crewkerne, in south Somerset. The strap-end has been recorded on the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database under the reference SOMDOR-0DB481 and has been acquired by the Somerset County Museum.1 Michael Charles has been metal-detecting on the site, and on three adjacent fields, for more than a year and three objects of a similar date have been located nearby: an incomplete Winchester-style strap-end, a fragment of a Ringerike-style harness cheek-piece and an oval openwork Urnes-style mount.2 Crewkerne was a royal manor of the kings of Wessex.3 The manor was first mentioned in the will of King Alfred (871–99), in which the king left it to his younger son Æthelweard.4 Æthelweard died c. 920. It is possible that the manor passed to one or other of his sons, Ælfwine and Æthelwine, both of whom were killed at Brunanburh in 937, and that it passed thereafter to King Æthelstan 11 12

13 14

Accession number TTNCM 83/2007. Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) database http://www.findsdatabase.org.uk, respectively SOMDOR-EE1252, SOMDOR-ED68B8 and SOMDOR-ED0DC0. A History of the County of Somerset I-V, ed. R. W. Dunning (Oxford, 1978) IV, 10. For a recent edition of King Alfred’s will, see Charters of the New Minster, Winchester, ed. S. Miller, AS Charters 9 (Oxford, 2001), 3–12 (no. 1).

173

Gabor Thomas, Naomi Payne and Elisabeth Okasha (924–39). St Bartholemew’s church was an Anglo-Saxon minster and Crewkerne was also the site of one of Somerset’s eleven Anglo-Saxon mints, in operation at times during the reigns of Æthelred II (978–1016), between c. 997 and 1003, Cnut (1016–35) and Harold (1037–40).5 It was one of the twelve Somerset settlements which appear to have had urban characteristics by the time of the compilation of Domesday Book.6 There is little archaeological evidence for the early-medieval period in Somerset before the tenth century because of the scarcity of diagnostically datable artefacts.7 Tenth- and eleventh-century artefacts are also uncommon in the county, although in recent years metal detector finds have added to the known assemblage of metalwork. On the PAS database there are three further strap-ends of probable tenth- to eleventh-century date from the county. Two fairly crude copper alloy Class E strap-ends come from Milborne Port; one is an unelaborate Winchester-style example and the other is decorated with stamped annulets.8 Another much finer Winchester-style strap-end has been found at Chilton Trinity.9 There are also several Class B strap-ends which may be as late in date as c. 1100. The only other dress accessories are three undecorated hooked tags of probable tenth-century date, the first of silver from Long Sutton and the other two of copper alloy from West Chinnock and Charlton Mackrell.10 Nine provenanced eleventh-century stirrup-strap mounts have been reported through the PAS. They come from Broadway (Williams Class A, Type 6), Ilminster (Williams Class A, Type 1 and Williams Class A, Type 11), Milborne Port (Williams Class A, Type 1), Puriton (Williams Class A, Type 9), Spaxton (Williams Class B, Type 2), Ston Easton (Williams Class B, Type 4), Taunton (Williams Class B, Type 1) and Wiveliscombe (Williams Class A, Type 11).11 Other finds of a similar date include a bridle cheek-piece from Ilminster, a harness bit link from Milborne Port, a stirrup terminal from Milborne Port 15

16 17 18

19 10

11

J. J. North, English Hammered Coinage, I: Early Anglo-Saxon to Henry III c. 600–1272, 3rd ed. (London, 1994), pp. 163 and 173. The Archaeology of Somerset, ed. C. Webster and T. Mayberry (Wellington, 2007), p. 63. Archaeology of Somerset, ed. Webster and Mayberry, p. 60. PAS database respectively SOMDOR-81A196 and SOMDOR-81EDA1. The type descriptions are from G. Thomas, Late Anglo-Saxon and Viking-Age Strap-Ends, c. 750–1100, Finds Research Group AD 700–1700 Datasheets 32 and 33, Consolidated reprint of Datasheets issued by the Finds Research Group between 1999 and 2007. PAS database SOMDOR-06A773. PAS database respectively SOM-D90C24 (Treasure reference 2007 T431), SOMDORBA21C3 and SOM-6B8E22. PAS database respectively SOMDOR-226BA5, SOMDOR461, SOMDOR-2B4D96, SOMDOR-35D9D3, SOMDOR-BAB5A0 (Somerset County Museum accession no. TTNCM 135/2007/2), SOMDOR-48C3A2, GLO-F4EC33, SOMDOR-06DE98 and SOMDOR500. The type classifications are from D. Williams, Late Saxon Stirrup-Strap Mounts: a Classification and Catalogue, CBA Research Report 111 (York, 1997).

174

Re-evaluating base-metal artefacts and a probable mount fragment in the Urnes style from Otterhampton.12 Due to the small quantity of finds, the distribution of these recent discoveries seems likely to reflect the locations where metal detecting has taken place rather than to represent a historically significant pattern. description of the strap-end The lead strap-end is complete and measures a maximum of 42 mm in length. One end is squared and the other rounded, the squared end containing three holes for attachment. On side B these holes are slightly recessed. It seems likely that the strap-end was constructed in this way, although it is just possible that the recessing was caused by wear. The strap-end is decorated on both sides with four incised lines which continue around both the squared and the rounded ends; however, these incised lines surround the attachment holes only on side A. The incised lines leave a blank panel in the middle of the strap-end on each side, and these panels are filled with an inscribed text. On both sides, the text starts from the end with the attachment holes. It is likely that the text is primary, that is, that the strap-end was always intended to be inscribed. The letters are formed to fit into the space available, some of them touching each other and some touching the incised lines at top and bottom of the panels. Only one letter, the first letter A on side B, extends slightly outside the panel, above its upper line. The letters vary in size between a maximum of 6 mm and a minimum of 3 mm. the text The text is divided between the two sides of the strap-end. Brackets indicate a reading that is less than totally certain, and underlining indicates a damaged letter. Side A: W [V] L F S T A N

Side B: M [E] C A H A

reading of the text With word-division added, the text reads w[v]lfstan m[e]c ah a, that is, ‘W[u]lfstan owns me -’, apparently with an extraneous letter A at the end. The lack of worddivision and the use of the letters V for U and W (the Old English letter wynn) for W are perfectly usual in Anglo-Saxon inscriptions. The first bracketed letter appears as if it should read Y, not V. However, this form of Y, as if it were a 12

PAS database respectively SOMDOR-940716, SOMDOR-DBBDC3, SOMDOR-CCB761 and SOMDOR-B7E4C7.

175

Gabor Thomas, Naomi Payne and Elisabeth Okasha small V with a medial vertical tail, is not elsewhere recorded in the corpus of Anglo-Saxon inscriptions. All recorded examples of Y in inscribed texts are formed like an X but with one or other lower limb missing. It seems probable that the inscriber incised a small form of V, perhaps inadvertently, and then incised a vertical line to fill in the space below, possibly so that the letter would touch the lower line of the panel. On side B, the M is also formed with a medial vertical line, which affords a nice parallel with the V of side A. The second bracketed letter, E, is damaged but the reading is reasonably certain. interpretation of the text The text is in Old English and is probably to be read as above meaning ‘W[u]lfstan owns me -’. The name Wulfstan is a relatively common name, especially in the later Anglo-Saxon period: the PASE database lists over fifty occurrences of the name.13 The word mec is an old and/or poetic variant of the usual Old English word me ‘me’. This form is quite common in comparable inscribed texts. The word ah is the third person present singular of the verb agan ‘to own’. Although it is formally possible that the final letter A represents the Old English word a ‘for ever’, this has been rejected on the grounds that adverbs are virtually unrecorded in existing Old English inscribed texts. This final letter A is better considered as a space-filler rather than as part of the text as such. Why should a space-filler be necessary? We may perhaps assume that the inscriber was copying a text in written form and found that (s)he had completed it before reaching the end of the allotted space within the panels. One may speculate that the written exemplum might have had the personal name divided by a space from the rest of the text, thus encouraging the inscriber to place the name on side A and the rest of the text on side B. Some squashing of the final letter of the name on side A seems to have occurred, which might support this hypothesis. The inscriber might have noticed the spacing problem during the inscribing of side B: the letters AH, forming the word ah ‘owns’, are considerably larger than the preceding letters on this side and this letter A has a widely splayed leg. However, even after this enlargement, extra space still remained and the inscriber may therefore have decided to repeat the penultimate letter to fill up the space available. The addition of extraneous letters to fill extra space can be paralleled from other inscribed objects (see below). It seems that the inscriber of the strap-end had a dislike of spaces, which might also account for the extra vertical lines in the letters V (on side A) and M (on side B). Alternative, but less likely, explanations for the extra letter A are simple error or, perhaps, that the text continued on another object. However the dividing of one text between two objects is highly unusual among Anglo-Saxon inscriptions. 13

Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England database (PASE): http://eagle.cch.kcl.ac.uk:8080/pase

176

Re-evaluating base-metal artefacts similar anglo-saxon text s No other Anglo-Saxon strap-end, from the vast number recorded, bears an inscription. Small portable items containing owner texts of the sort on the Crewkerne strap-end are, however, not uncommon in the corpus of AngloSaxon objects with inscriptions. There are nine other Anglo-Saxon inscribed objects that use the Old English owner formula me(c) ah ‘owns me’, that is, with personification of the object.14 The types of objects, and the material they are made from, differ: there are six items of jewellery, two weapons and one weaving tool. They are all made of metal (gold, iron, silver), except for the weaving tool which is whale-bone. One of these objects is a gold ring from Bodsham, Kent, now in the British Museum.15 Following the owner formula [g]armvnd mec ah ‘[G]armund owns me’ are the two extraneous letters I and M. Although other explanations are possible, the likelihood is that these letters are simply filling up the available space so as not to leave a blank portion on the ring. This ring text thus affords a nice parallel with the strap-end text. script of the text The script used is known as Anglo-Saxon capitals. One typical feature of this script is the lack of word-division. Another is that certain letters may touch each other: examples here are the first two, and the last two, letters on side A, W and V, then A and N. Another typical feature is that different forms of seriffing may appear, while some letters may lack serifs altogether. On side A there is less seriffing than on side B, and on side A the seriffing mainly takes the form of a slight thickening of the stem. This may be related to the lack of space on this side. On side B there is more seriffing, with more obvious full and half serifs on some letters. Another common feature of Anglo-Saxon capital script is that different letter-forms can occur in the same text. In the present case, only the letter A appears more than once, but three different forms are used. In all three instances the A is of the pointed variety, but other details differ. The first instance of A, on side A, has a large serif at the top but lacks a medial crossbar. The next instance, the first A on side B, also has a large top serif but has a v-shaped cross-bar. The final instance likewise has a v-shaped cross-bar but contains a line instead of a serif at the top. Of those letters that may appear in either a rounded or an angular form, two are angular (C and W ⫽ W), while one is rounded (S). 14

15

These are listed in E. Okasha, ‘The Commissioners, Makers and Owners of Anglo-Saxon Inscriptions’, ASSAH 7 (1994), 71–7, at 76. E. Okasha, Hand-list of Anglo-Saxon Non-runic Inscriptions (Cambridge, 1971), p. 55 and plate 13.

177

Gabor Thomas, Naomi Payne and Elisabeth Okasha As regards epigraphical dating, the text contains only a few diagnostic forms. The use of the Anglo-Saxon letter W ⫽ W certainly suggests a date in the preConquest, or immediate post-Conquest, period, but more particular dating features are inconclusive: both angular and rounded letters occur, while all three instances of A have a pointed top. These features are all consistent with any date within the literate Anglo-Saxon period. The form of the object itself offers more useful evidence of its probable date-range. discussion The Crewkerne find belongs to a series of Anglo-Saxon tongue-shaped strapends, ultimately derived from a continental Carolingian prototype, popularized across southern and eastern England during the tenth and eleventh centuries.16 This series, together with its commoner animal-headed predecessor of the ninth century, numbers several thousand objects. However, no other native Anglo-Saxon strap-end bears an inscription.17 One has to travel to the continental mainland to find a similarly inscribed example, in the form of the fine silver-gilt strap-end from Notmark (Alsen), Denmark, which ended its life beyond the borders of its native Frankish homeland as a converted Viking brooch.18 As is sometimes found on the tongueshaped examples, including the Crewkerne piece itself, the Notmark strap-end carries ornamentation on both sides. The front bears a fairly typical panel of acanthus decoration and the reverse has a central field of vine-scroll surrounded by a clockwise niello-inlaid inscription. The text, which reads ‘EGO IN D.NOMINE + ERMADU(S) ME FECIT’ (‘I, in God’s name, Ermadus made me’), has been attributed to the early ninth century on epigraphic/ linguistic grounds. This date receives general support from the style of the plant decoration carried on both surfaces which displays affinities with the decorative repertoire of manuscripts illuminated at Tours during the 840s and 850s.19 Unfortunately the Crewkerne strap-end lacks stylistic detail that might permit a more refined dating within the late Anglo-Saxon period, the tenth and eleventh centuries. Nor does its decoration suggest any assessment of origin. What little surface elaboration does occur is confined to multiple concentric borders and is clearly designed to focus the viewer’s attention on the central 16 17

18

19

D. M. Wilson, ‘A Late Saxon Strap-End’, AntJ 49 (1969), 326–9. Cf. G. Thomas, ‘A Survey of Late Anglo-Saxon and Viking-Age Strap-Ends from Britain’, unpublished PhD Thesis, University of London, 2000. E. Roesdahl and D. M. Wilson, From Viking to Crusader: the Scandinavians and Europe 800–1200 (New York, 1992), cat. no. 122, p. 258, with references; E. Wamers, Insularer Metallschmuck in Wikingerzeitlichen Gräbern Nordeuropas, Offa-Bücher 56 (Neumunster, 1985), 77, plate. 44.1. N. Fraenkel-Schoorl, ‘Carolingian Jewellery with Plant Ornament’, Berichten van de Rijksdienst het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 28 (1978), 346–98, cat. no. 5 (pp. 352–4).

178

Re-evaluating base-metal artefacts inscription. This inscription is displayed boldly in large letters which consume the available space. Although the deployment of text as decoration on inscribed Anglo-Saxon objects certainly occurs,20 it is unusual to find such an overt visual celebration of text on a dress-fitting, particularly one fashioned from an alloy of the base metal, lead. Anglo-Saxon inscriptions on objects made of lead are not very common, with the exception of a group of lead funerary crosses and plates.21 How can we explain the seemingly contradictory combination of a status-proclaiming display of literacy on such a rudimentary object as the Crewkerne strap-end? The number of known lead and lead-alloy dress accessories of late AngloSaxon date has increased in recent years. To date, a total of seventy such items have been recorded on the PAS database. The majority of these, forty-eight, are brooches but the second most common object type is the strap-end (sixteen items). The majority of examples are from Lincolnshire (twenty-eight), Suffolk (thirteen), Norfolk (ten) and Cambridgeshire (five). It is more unusual to find lead dress accessories so far to the south and west of the country as Crewkerne. There has hitherto been a tendency to assign late Anglo-Saxon dressaccessories made of lead, lead-alloy or lead-tin alloy (pewter) into one of two categories: cheap alternatives to those made from precious metals or else trialpieces or models used in the casting process. A proportion of the repertoire may certainly fall into one of these two categories; however, the expanded corpus of lead dress accessories brought to light by the Portable Antiquities Scheme encourages a rather more rounded view. The known lead examples appear finished and were therefore presumably used. Some of these accessories are executed to an impressively high technical and artistic standard, echoing the Winchester-style strap-end from Thetford, Norfolk, which surpasses the quality of many of its copper-alloy counterparts.22 Other well-made examples with competent designs are the ornate rectangular plate brooches, one of pewter, the other of debased tin, recovered from excavations at Mill Lane, Thetford.23 20

21

22

23

See L. E. M. Webster, ‘Encrypted Visions: Style and Sense in the Anglo-Saxon Minor Arts, AD 400–900’, Anglo-Saxon Styles, ed. C. E. Karkov and G. H. Brown, SUNY series in Med. Stud. (New York, 2003), pp. 11–30, at 18–19. See Okasha, Hand-list. See also E. Okasha, ‘A Supplement to Hand-list of Anglo-Saxon Non-runic Inscriptions’, ASE 11 (1983), 83–118; ‘A Second Supplement to Hand-list of Anglo-Saxon Nonrunic Inscriptions’, ASE 21 (1992), 37–85; and ‘A Third Supplement to Hand-list of Anglo-Saxon Non-Runic Inscriptions’, ASE 33 (2004), 225–81. T. D. Kendrick, ‘An Anglo-Saxon Cruet’, AntJ 68 (1938), 236–42, at 80–1, plate LXXIV; A. R. Goodall, ‘Non-Ferrous Metal Objects’, A. Rogerson and C. Dallas, Excavations in Thetford 1948–59 and 1973–80 (Dereham, 1984), pp. 68–76, at 69, no. 26, fig. 111. S. Youngs, ‘Lead Alloy Brooches’, in ‘Excavations at Mill Lane, Thetford, 1995’, ed. H. Wallis, East Anglian Archaeol. 108 (1995), 38–40, at fig. 35, SF161 and SF 437.

179

Gabor Thomas, Naomi Payne and Elisabeth Okasha The derogatory tone that colours discussion of late Anglo-Saxon lead-based dress accessories stems partly from the widely held perception that during the period under review sources of lead were plentiful and ubiquitous. Indications that lead escaped the recycling process more often than did other non-ferrous alloys and precious metals would certainly appear, superficially at least, to support this view, and no doubt other evidence for its relative abundance could be garnered from a wider comparative assessment of workshop evidence and patterns of contemporary consumption.24 Yet we should beware of making simplistic connections between estimates of availability on the one hand and judgements on the value which contemporaries attached to finished products on the other. This is particularly so given our knowledge that lead was utilised, quite conspicuously, in such religious and ritual contexts as church roofs, chalices, inscribed funerary crosses, inscribed plaques attached to ossuaries, and large handled tanks, some of which were arguably used as fonts.25 It thus seems reasonable to argue that secular manifestations of the deployment of lead could, through the power of association, be imbued with symbolic meaning and significance. The apparent upsurge in the production of lead-alloy jewellery and dress accessories during the later tenth and the eleventh centuries also needs to be considered in this re-assessment. Although there are a number of rural findspots recorded on the PAS database, the frequent discovery of lead jewellery and manufacturing detritus from late Anglo-Saxon towns demonstrates that this trend was closely linked to urban expansion. We may conclude, as others have done, that this material reflects the dawn of mass production, fuelled by an expanding consumer market of town dwellers eager to adorn themselves with affordable accessories.26 However this conclusion misses the point that lead and pewter were at the forefront of novel, continentally inspired designs in jewellery manufacture, as is admirably demonstrated by the fine selection of beads, finger-rings and brooches represented in the Cheapside hoard from London.27 Anything more than a cursory comparison is sufficient to highlight the fact that the artistic inspiration behind late Anglo-Saxon lead-alloy disc brooches on the one hand, and silver ones on the other, was sometimes quite different. Lead and lead-alloy dress accessories, at least at the more accomplished end of the range, 24

25

26

27

J. Bailey, ‘Non-Ferrous Metalworking’, in N. S. H. Rogers, Anglian and Other Finds from Fishergate, Archaeol. of York, Small Finds 17.9 (York, 1993), 1232–8, at 1238; E. Roesdahl et al., The Vikings in England and their Danish Homeland (London, 1981), p. 116, YMW2. P. R. G. Hornsby et al., Pewter: a Celebration of the Craft (London, 1989), p. 50; J. Blair, The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society (Oxford, 2005), p. 461, n. 161. J. Graham-Campbell, Viking Artefacts (London, 1980); A. Reynolds, ‘A Late Anglo-Saxon Disc Brooch from Steyning, West Sussex’, MA 38 (1994), 169–71; D. A. Hinton, Gold and Gilt, Pots and Pins: Possessions and People in Medieval Britain (Oxford, 2005), p. 158. Hornsby et al., Pewter, p. 50, cat. no. 8.

180

Re-evaluating base-metal artefacts emerge as more than just cheap, derivative copies of precious-metal exemplars, but as distinctive fashion statements in their own right. As a consequence of the widespread availability of lead and the relative ease with which it could be turned into finished products, it is hardly surprising to find that the repertoire of late Anglo-Saxon dress accessories derived from this metal includes the bad and the decidedly ugly. Given the dull and often bedraggled condition of such material on recovery, however, we may be less inclined than we should be to recognize the ‘good’. A considerable feat of imagination is often required to appreciate the aesthetic impact of untarnished surfaces which, on occasion, could have been further enhanced and protected by a silver coating.28 The Wulfstan behind the Crewkerne inscription clearly had no difficulty in reconciling the material selected for his new acquisition with a prestige-enhancing display of literacy, which simultaneously acted as a proud proclamation of ownership. The latest and most remarkable addition to the growing corpus of late Anglo-Saxon dress accessories fashioned from lead, the Crewkerne strap-end bears witness to the possibilities which this metal offered as a medium for advertising status, whether real or aspirational. As a final observation: in a period which has otherwise left behind frustratingly little evidence for establishing the gender of dress accessories, it is helpful to receive at least one piece of confirmation of male ownership. While a single inscription is hardly a sufficient basis for making wider generalizations, nevertheless tongue-shaped strap-ends depicted in Carolingian manuscripts and represented in furnished Norse burials do hint at a bias towards use by males.29 The same sources also indicate that strap-ends of this type served as attachments to leather waist-belts and baldrics, with the smaller end of the range catering for garters and spurs.30 28

29

30

A. J. Mainman and N. S. Rogers, Craft, Industry and Everyday Life: Finds from Anglo-Scandinavian York, Archaeol. of York, Small Finds 17.14 (York, 2000), 2572, fig. 1268, no. 10601. F. Mütherich and J. E. Gaehde, Carolingian Painting (London, 1977), plates 22, 25, 44; G. Bersu and D. M. Wilson, Three Viking Graves in the Isle of Man, Med. Archaeol. Monograph Ser. 1 (1966), 40–1, plate VIII, A. G. R. Owen-Crocker, Dress in Anglo-Saxon England, rev. ed. (Woodbridge, 2004), p. 258; J. Mitchell, ‘Fashion in Metal: a Set of Sword-belt Mounts and Bridle Furniture from San Vincenzo al Volturno’, Studies in Medieval Art and Architecture, ed. D. Buckton and T. A. Heslop (London, 1994), pp. 127–57.

181

Plate VI Inscribed strap-end from Crewkerne

Plate VII Inscribed strap-end from Crewkerne. Illustrated by Jane Read

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (2004) helen foxhall forbes, matthias ammon, eliza beth boyle, c ona n t. d oyle, peter d. evan, rosa maria fera, paul ga zzoli, helen imhoff, anna matheson, sophie rixon and levi roach The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB), originally designated the New Dictionary of National Biography, was published in 2004 as a successor to the renowned Dictionary of National Biography (DNB), edited by Sir Leslie Stephen (1832–1904) and itself published in sixty-three volumes between 1885 and 1900, with supplements. All of the subjects in the old DNB were retained for the ODNB; new entries were commissioned for a significant proportion of the existing subjects (including almost all of those falling within the early medieval period); and of course the opportunity was taken to add entries for a large number of new subjects. In its print version, the ODNB occupies sixty volumes, though it is unlikely to be found in that form outside reference libraries; most importantly, it is also available online, to subscribing institutions, with search facilities and other useful features. Like its most distinguished predecessor, the ODNB is already well established as an invaluable academic resource. It is not the purpose of this article to reflect on the criteria for inclusion, or on the mode of treatment, or to discuss how respects in which the old DNB had come to show its own age had necessitated the production of a modern successor blazing a new historiographical path for the twenty-first century. More mundanely, it is to register the existence of the quantity and range of entries in the ODNB on ‘Anglo-Saxon’ and ‘related’ subjects, and in this way to advertise its credentials as a massive collaborative achievement of a certain and indispensable kind. The ODNB includes re-assessments of familiar subjects, including Arthur (O. J. Padel), the Sutton Hoo burial (J. Campbell), Cuthbert (D. Rollason and B. Dobson), Aldhelm (M. Lapidge), Bede (J. Campbell), Alcuin (D. Bullough), Alfred the Great (P. Wormald), Ælfric (M. Godden) and Edward the Confessor (F. Barlow), alongside accounts of many other or lesser figures. It also provides excellent coverage of ‘Welsh’, ‘Scottish’ and ‘Irish’ subjects, across the same period. No less important for the AngloSaxonist are the entries on twelfth- and thirteenth-century historians, such as William of Malmesbury (R. M. Thomson) and Matthew Paris (S. Lloyd and R. Reader), and the entries on a wide range of antiquaries and scholars, from John 183

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Leland (J. Carley) and Sir Robert Cotton (S. Handley) to Elizabeth Elstob (M. Gretsch), John Mitchell Kemble (J. D. Haigh) and Sir Frank Stenton (J. C. Holt). In the ‘Bibliography for 2004’, published in Anglo-Saxon England 34 (2005), all of the contributions were subsumed under a single entry: Matthew, H. C. G., and Brian Harrison, ed., Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, in association with the British Academy: from the Earliest Times to the Year 2000, 60 vols. with index of contributors as suppl. vol. (Oxford)

This entry does not begin to do justice to the work of all those who contributed ‘Anglo-Saxon’ and related entries to the ODNB. It was felt, however, that the inclusion of separate entries in the annual bibliography, for each contributor, distributed between the relevant sections, would overload the rest of the bibliography and detract from its usefulness. At the same time, it would not accord with the nature of the ODNB to isolate the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ entries from those covering other parts of Britain and Ireland; and it was felt that a separate listing of all of the ODNB entries for the period might be of some interest and value in its own right. Users of the ODNB who have access only to the online version may also find it helpful for one reason or another to have the bibliographical details of a particular contribution in the printed work. The great majority of the entries registered below are of a standard biographical type, written in accordance with the principles laid down by the general editors of the ODNB. In addition to these entries, there are several ‘joint entries’, in which one or two additional family members are appended to the main entry, and several ‘group-entries’, bringing together a number of subjects who for whatever reason did not rate separate treatment in their own right but who could be usefully covered as part of a larger group.1 In its online form, the ODNB is able to publish additional entries at frequent intervals. An entry for Patrick Wormald (A. May) was published in January 2008. The ODNB is also supplemented regularly, in its online form, by ‘Themes’ of three types. The ‘Reference lists’ comprise organized sets of links to a selection of separate entries, with some explanatory text. Among the subjects currently available are the following: ‘Rulers of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (5th cent.–924)’, ‘Archbishops of Canterbury’, ‘Archbishops of York’, ‘Consorts of the monarchs 11

Anglo-Saxon group-entries: kings of the East Saxons (B. Yorke), of the people of Kent (B. Yorke), of the South Saxons (S. E. Kelly), and of the Hwicce (P. Sims-Williams). ‘British’ group-entry: Roman officials (A. R. Birley). ‘Scottish’ group-entries: abbots of Iona (T. M. Charles-Edwards); kings of Dál Riata (M. O. Anderson) and of the Picts (M. O. Anderson). ‘Irish’ group-entries: saints of Connacht (T. M. Charles-Edwards), saints of Leinster (C. Doherty), saints of Meath (N. Stalmans and T. M. Charles-Edwards), saints of Munster (E. Johnston) and saints of Ulster (T. M. Charles-Edwards).

184

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) of England’, ‘High-Kings of Ireland’, ‘Monarchs of England’, ‘Monarchs of Scotland’, ‘Saints in the Oxford DNB’ and ‘Viking and Scandinavian kings and leaders in the Oxford DNB’; new entries on individual subjects are listed, under ‘Reference lists’, as ‘Updates’. The ‘Reference groups’ are substantive entries in their own right, bringing together significant groups of subjects, some but not all of whom may be treated separately in the main dictionary; examples currently available include ‘Gregorian mission (act. 596–601)’ (N. P. Brooks), ‘Scholars at King Alfred’s Court (act. 880–899)’ (M. Lapidge), ‘Cynfeirdd (act. 6th–11th cent.)’ (M. E. Haycock) and ‘Companions of the Conqueror (act. 1066–71) (C. P. Lewis). The ‘Feature essays’ are more wide-ranging; examples currently available include ‘Roman Britain’ (P. Salway), ‘The rising of Owain Glyn Dwr’ (Ll. Smith), ‘The Isle of Man’ (B. Maddrell) and ‘School founders and patrons in England, 597–1560’ (N. Orme). The various forms of entry in the ODNB are covered in the listing below under various numbered sections. In section 1, the names of those who contributed new entries to the ODNB are arranged in alphabetical order, with an indication of the subjects in question. In these sections, the subjects themselves are reduced to their bare names, without titles or dates, in order to avoid large-scale duplication; fuller details, derived from the ODNB entries, are given in the later sections. Joint-entries and group-entries are treated under the contributor’s name as single entries; the subjects mentioned within such entries are registered separately in the later sections, although in some cases it will be found that there is little more than a passing reference. The names of these who revised existing entries, whether derived from the old DNB or (for example) from the Missing Persons supplement (1993), are given where appropriate below. Sections 2–6 cover subjects in the ODNB who fall within the chronological limits which had to be set for the present purpose (400–1100). In October 2006, a search for all subjects in the ODNB database who flourished within this period generated a data-set of 1,290 names, which could be arranged in alphabetical order, in birth-date order, or in death-date order. Within this data-set one could search for men (1196), or for women (94). One could also generate a list of all those believed to have been alive in any specified year (24 alive in 400; 84 alive in 500; 160 alive in 600; 144 alive in 700; 93 alive in 800; 70 alive in 900; 120 alive in 1000; 351 alive in 1100); or a list of all those associated with specified places (e.g. Cambridge, 2; London, 40; Oxford, 10; Winchester, 54; York, 46); or (overlapping) lists of those with particular fields of activity (e.g. ‘Royalty, rulers and aristocracy’, 607; ‘Religion and belief’, 596; ‘Scholarship and research’, 78). The subjects were divided into four main groups. The largest is inevitably a set of ‘Anglo-Saxon’ entries, which includes persons of Scandinavian, Norman and other extraction who are known to have come to England before 1066 (section 2); there are also groups labelled 185

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. ‘British’, ‘Welsh’, ‘Irish’ and ‘Scottish’, which in view of many complications have to be taken in much the same spirit (sections 3–6). Within each of these sections, subjects are classified for the user’s convenience under generic subheadings, whether ‘Kings and rulers’, ‘Ecclesiastics’ or ‘Secular men and women’; again, the many anomalies are easily detected. Sections 7–9 are necessarily of a different nature. Section 7 includes a selection of subjects who flourished between c. 1080 and c. 1450, whose writings bear directly or indirectly on our perception of the early medieval past, starting with those who wrote about Anglo-Saxon saints (Goscelin, Folcard, et al.), the AngloNorman historians (Florence of Worcester, Eadmer, William of Malmesbury, et al.), and the main thirteenth-century historians (Roger of Wendover, Matthew Paris, et al.). These subjects are listed in alphabetical of their first name. Section 8 covers a selection of ‘Antiquaries’ who flourished between c. 1450 and c. 1750, who in their different ways laid the foundations for current understanding of the period, including Leland, Parker, Cotton, Dugdale, Wanley, and many others. Section 9 covers a selection of ‘Modern scholars’ who were active between c. 1750 and c. 2000, including Astle, Kemble, Stenton and Whitelock. The subjects in sections 8–9 are listed in alphabetical order of their surname. Throughout these lists, an asterisk (*) signifies a woman; that there are so few is of course instructive. Entries for a majority of the subjects in the ODNB will be found in the old DNB, and in many cases the old entries are of interest as an indication of the perception of the given subject at the end of the nineteenth century. A valuable feature of the ODNB, in its online form, is that all of the ‘original’ entries in the old DNB can be seen simply by clicking on ‘DNB Archive’ in the left-hand column of the new or revised entry. In the classified lists below, the name of the DNB contributor is given, after the reference. It so happens that over 200 of the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ entries were written by William Hunt (1842–1931), here identified by his initials WH. An entry for him is to be found in the ODNB. Some of his entries (for example, those on Ælfric and Wulfstan) show how far scholarship has moved forwards since his day, but overall he deserves credit as one who made a sustained effort to work things out from first principles. Other recurrent contributors are similarly identified here only by their initials: Mary Bateson (MB); Alice M. Cooke (AMC); C. L. Kingsford (CLK); J. E. Lloyd (JEL); A. J. G. Mackay (AJGM); Norman Moore (NM); Thomas Olden (TO); A. F. Pollard (AFP); W. R. W. Stephens (WRWS); D. L. Thomas (DLT); E. M. Thompson (EMT); and T. F. Tout (TFT). The work involved in the compilation of this article was undertaken by the group of graduate students named at the top of the first page, based in the Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Celtic, University of Cambridge. The task was organized by Helen Foxhall Forbes, as co-ordinating editor; and 186

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Elizabeth Boyle helped in the editing of the ‘Celtic’ elements. Simon Keynes and Rosalind Love acted as general editors, with guidance from their colleagues Fiona Edmonds, Jonathan Grove, Máire Ní Mhaonaigh and Paul Russell. Simon Keynes

Summary 1. C O N T R I B U T O R S A N D T H E I R S U B J E C T S 2. ‘ A N G L O - S A X O N ’ A N D ‘ N O R M A N ’ S U B J E C T S (c. 400–c. 1100) Kings, consorts and other rulers, 196; Ecclesisastics, 202; Secular men and women, 208 3. ‘ B R I T I S H ’ S U B J E C T S (c. 400–c. 600) Kings, consorts and other rulers, 210; Ecclesisastics, 210; Secular men and women, 211 4. ‘ W E L S H ’ S U B J E C T S (c. 600–c. 1100) Kings, consorts and other rulers, 212; Ecclesisastics, 213; Secular men and women, 214 5. ‘ I R I S H ’ S U B J E C T S (c. 400–c. 1100) Kings, consorts and other rulers, 214; Ecclesisastics, 216; Secular men and women, 221 6. ‘ S C O T T I S H ’ S U B J E C T S (c. 400–c. 1100) Kings, consorts and other rulers, 221; Ecclesisastics, 223; Secular men and women, 224 7. L A T E R M E D I E V A L S U B J E C T S (c. 1080–c. 1450) 8. A N T I Q U A R I E S (c. 1450–c. 1750) 9. M O D E R N S C H O L A R S (c. 1750–)

187 196 210 212 214 221 225 226 229

1. CONTRIBUTORS AND THEIR SUBJECTS Abbott, D. M.: George Buchanan, viii.468–72 Abels, Richard: Byrhtnoth, ix.333–5; Thorkell the Tall, liv.586–7; Ulfcytel, lv.865 Abrams, L.: Ailnoth, i.490–1; Rodulf, xlvii.506; Sigfrid, l.594 Aird, William M.: Copsi, xiii.377; Robert Cumin, xiv.623; Gospatric, xxii.1033–4; Morcar, xxxix.10–11; Osulf, xlii.72; Siward, l.812–13; Tostig, lv.67–9; Uhtred, lv.863–4 Aitken, A. J. rev.: Sir William Alexander Craigie, xiii.967–9 Alsop, J. D.: William Lambarde, xxxii.287–90 Anderson, Marjorie O.: Aedán mac Gabrán, i.378; Brude mac Bile, viii.342–3; Brude mac Maelchon, viii.343; Dál Riata, kings of, xiv.971–5; Domnall Brecc, xvi.489; Kenneth I, with Donald I, xxxi.278–9; Nechtan mac Derile, xl.313; Oengus mac Forgusso, xli.540; Picts, kings of the, xliv.243–6 Backhouse, Janet: Aldred, i.628 Barlow, Frank: Edward the Confessor, xvii.785–92; Folcard, xix.204–5; Edward Augustus Freeman, xix.920–4; Goscelin, xxii.1020–1; Gui, xxiv.182–3; Leofric, xxxiii.397; Lyfing, xxxiv.858 Barrow, G. W. S.: Malcolm III, xxxvi.279–81; Margaret, xxxvi.632–3

187

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Barrow, Julia: Giso, xxii.358–9; Hermann, xxvi.787–8; Oscytel, xlii.41–2; Walter, lvii.156; William, lix.32–3; Wulfsige, lx.555–6; Wulfwig, lx.566–7 Bartlett, Robert: Bega, iv.834; Gerald of Wales, xx.925–8; Jocelin of Furness, xxi.190–1; Moninne, xxxviii.625; Turgot, lv.577–8 Bates, David: William I, lix.45–57 Bell, David N.: Ailred of Rievaulx, i.491–3 Bendall, Sarah: John Speed, li.771–3 Benedikz, B. S.: Eiríkur Magnússon, xxxvi.137–9 Bibire, Paul: Arnórr Earls’ Poet, ii.511 Biddle, Martin: Rupert Lee Scott Bruce-Mitford, xxxviii.459–60 Birley, A. R.: Roman officials, xlvii.652–6 Blair, John: Botwulf, vi.773; Frithuswith, xx.50–1; Mannig, xxxvi.483–4; Mildburg, xxxviii.111–12; Osgyth, xlii.45–6; Seaxwulf, xlix.617; Spearhafoc, li.761–2; John Allen Giles, xxii.229–30 Bonner, Gerald: Pelagius, xliii.455–7 Borrie, Michael: Sir Edward Augustus Bond, vi.509–11; Francis Wormald, lx.331–2; Sir Edward Maunde Thompson, liv.420–1 Boyer, Allen D.: Sir Edward Coke, xii.451–63 Bracken, Damian: Feidlimid mac Crimthainn, xix.235–6; Mac Briain, Donnchad, xxxv.65–7; Muirchertach Ua Briain, lv.830–2; Toirdelbach Ua Briain, lv.832–3 Bremmer, Rolf H. jun.: Johannes Laet, xxxii.207 Brett, Caroline: Paul, xliii.126–7; Petroc, xliii.927; Piran, xliv.402–3 Brooks, N. P.: Laurence, xxxii.691; Mellitus, xxxvii.751–2; Oswald, xlii.79–84; Wulfred, lx.552–4; see also ‘Gregorian mission (act. 596–601)’, Reference group (online) Broun, Dauvit: Constantine I, xiii.32; Constantine II, with Donald II, xiii.32–3; Culen, with Constantine III, xiv.572–3; Dubh, with Macduff, xvii.11–12; Duncan I, xvii.218–19; Giric mac Dúngal, xxii.347; Indulf, xxix.230; Kenneth II, xxxi.279–80; Kenneth III, xxxi.280; Kentigern, xxxi.333–4; Macbeth, with Lulach, xxxv.59–60; Malcolm I, xxxvi.278–9; Malcolm II, xxxvi.279; Mawgan, xxxvii.479–80; Ninian, xl.919 Bullough, D. A.: Alcuin, i.602–8 Cameron, M. L.: Bald, iii.436 Campbell, James: Bede, iv.758–65; Rædwald, xlv.786; Sigeberht, l.592; Stubbs, William, liii.217–22; Sutton Hoo burial, liii.416–17 Carey, John: Cináed ua hArtacáin, xi.713; Cuán ua Lothcháin, xiv.574–5; Eochaid ua Flannucáin, xviii.472–3; Flann Mainistrech, xix.997–8; Máel Muru Othna, xxxvi.100–1 Carley, James P.: Leland, John, xxxiii.297–301; Robert Talbot, liii.722–3 Charles-Edwards, T. M.: Áed Allán mac Fergaile, i.373; Áed Oirdnide mac Néil, i.374– 5; Áed Uaridnach mac Domnaill, i.376; Blaímac mac Áeda, vi.70; Brigit, with Conlaíd and Dar Lugdach, vii.650–4; Brochfael Ysgithrog, vii.742–3; Brynach, viii.429–30; Cadfan, ix.408; Cadog, ix.410–12; Cadwallon ap Cadfan, ix.425–6; Cellach mac Máele Coba, with Conall Cóel mac Máele Coba, x.805–6; Cenn

188

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Fáelad mac Blaímaic, x.810; Cináed mac Írgalaig, xi.712–13; Congal Cáech, xii.929; Connacht, saints of, xii.960–3; Cybi, xiv.857; Cyfeilliog, xiv.857–8; Cynidr, xiv.866–7; Dallán Forgaill, xiv.954–5; Deiniol, xv.696; Dergain, xxii.963; Diarmait mac Cerbaill, xvi.22–3; Dogfael, xvi.451; Domnall mac Áeda, xvi.489– 90; Domnall mac Murchada, xvi.490; Dubthach maccu Lugair, xvii.22–3; Elfoddw, xviii.31; Fínsnechtae Fledach mac Dúnchada, xix.629; Flaithbertach mac Loingsig, xix.979; Forggus mac Muirchertaig, xix.366–7; Gwallawg, xxiv.336; Gwenfrewi, xxiv.340–1; Gwynllyw, xxiv.360–1; Iarlaithe, xxix.179–80; Iona, abbots of, xxix.316–21; Máel Sechnaill mac Máele Ruanaid, xxxvi.102–4; Meath, saints of, see Stalmans, Nathalie; Muirchertach mac Muiredaig, xxxix.681–2; Mynyddog Mwynfawr, xl.87; Niall mac Maíl Shechnaill, xl.746–7; Palladius, xlii.461–2; Suibne Menn mac Fiachnai, liii.290; Taliesin, liii.737–8; Tigernach Ua Braín, lv.889; Tuathal Máelgarb mac Cormaic, lv.484–5; Ulster, saints of, lv.872– 8; Vorteporius, lvi.594–5 Chibnall, Marjorie: Geoffrey, xx.762–3; William of Poitiers, xliv.682–3 Christianson, Paul: John Selden, xlix.694–705 Clapinson, Mary: Richard Rawlinson, xlvi.162–4 Clunies Ross, Margaret & Amanda J. Collins: Edward Thwaites, liv.732–3 Coates, S. J.: Benedict Biscop, v.64–6; Ceolfrith, x.817–19 Contreni, John J.: Dícuil, xvi.132–4; Martin of Laon, xxxvi.917–18 Cooper, Janet: Cynesige, xiv.861 Corner, David: Roger of Howden, xxviii.463–4; Roger of Wendover, lviii.106–8 Costambeys, Marios: Adalbert, i.190; Æthelburh, i.401; Æthelflæd, i.401–3; Æthelred, i.407–8; Albinus, i.587–8; Beornred, v.316; Burchard, viii.725–6; Colmán, xii.756– 7; Cyngar, xiv.864–5; Disibod, xvi.264; Donnán, xvi.531–2; Ealhswith, xvii.555– 6; Erhard, xviii.496–7; Erik Bloodaxe, xviii.497–9; Felix, xix.253; Fredericus, xix.914–15; Guthrum, xxiv.322; Hálfdan [Healfdene], xxiv.562–3; Ívarr [Ívarr inn Beinlausi], xxix.443–5; Jænberht, xxix.580; Lebuin, xxxiii.22–3; Lul, xxxiv.740–1; Nigel, xl.900; Odhran, xli.496; Paulinus, xliii.166–8; Ragnall Guthfrithson, xlv.796–7; Sihtric inn Gamli, l.597; Sihtric inn Ungi, l.597; Sualo, liii.261; Swithberht, liii.523; Waldhere, lvi.781–2; Willehad, lix.16; Willibrord, lix.363–8 Couper, Sarah: John Pinkerton, xliv.373–5 Cowdrey, H. E. J.: Robert of Jumièges, xlvii.122–3; Stigand, lii.774–7 Cownie, Emma: Robert de Brus, viii.372 Cox, D. C.: Dominic of Evesham, xviii.802 Craig, D. J.: Adda, xxix.189; Ida, xxix.188–9; Osric, xlii.61–2; Osric, xlii.62; Oswald, xlii.76–9; Oswine, xlii.93–4; Oswiu, xlii.94–7 Cramer, P.: Ernulf, xviii.511–12 Cramp, Rosemary: Ælla, i.391–2; Æthelfrith, i.403–4; Alchfrith, i.589; Aldfrith, i.618– 19; Eadwine, xvii.543–6 Crankshaw, David J., & Alexandra Gillespie: Matthew Parker, xlii.707–28 Crawford, Barbara E.: Einarr, xvii.1023–4; Hákon Paulsson, xxxvi.130–1; Paul, with Erlend, xliii.128–9; Sigurd (II) Hlödvisson, l.595–6; Thorfinn Sigurdson, with Rögnvald (II) Brúsason, liv.584–5

189

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Crick, J. C.: Geoffrey of Monmouth, xxxviii.629–32 Cubitt, Catherine, & Marios Costambeys: Oda, xli.484–7 Dalton, Paul: Norman Darcy (I), xv.130 Damian-Grint, Peter: Haimo [Haymo], xxiv.479 Davies, Luned Mair: Cú Chuimne, xiv.574; Modestus, xxxviii.486; Sedulius Scottus, xlix.660–1; Ruben mac Connad, xlviii.66 Dearden, James S.: William Gershom Collingwood, xii.681–3 Dockray-Miller, Mary: Mary Bateson, iv.331–3 Doggett, Nicholas: Thomas Gale, xx.303–5 Doherty, Charles: Cellach Cualann, x.804–5; Congal Cendmagair, xii.929–30; Donnchad Donn mac Flainn, xvi.532–3; Donnchad mac Domnaill, xvi.533–4; Fergal mac Máele Dúin, xix.338–9; Flann Sinna, xix.998–9; Leinster, saints of, xxxiii.277–9; Ruaidrí ua Canannáin, xlviii.62–3 Duffy, Seán: Áed Ua Conchobair, lv.835–6; Brian Bóruma, vii.533–8; Cathal mac Conchobair, x.536; Conn na mBocht, xii.957–8; Flaithbertach Ua Néill, lv.844–5; Godred Crovan, xxii.600–1; Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, lv.836 Dunning, Robert W., William Hunt, xxviii.877–8 Du Toit, Alexander: George Chalmers, xi.870–2; Thomas Dempster, xv.759–62 Edwards, Francis: Joseph Stevenson, lii.588–90 Edwards, Heather: Æthelheard, i.404–5; Beorhtric, v.314–15; Cuthred, xiv.837–8; Cynewulf, xiv.863–4; Ecgberht, xvii.636–9; Sigeberht, l.592–3 Evans, J. Wyn: David, xv.277–82; Non, xv.279 Evans, Mihail Dafydd: John Davies, xv.381–2; Robert Powell Vaughan, lvi.198–9 Farmer, D. H.: Baldred, iii.617–18; Balthere, iii.617–18; Ceadda, x.713–14; Cedd, x.800–1; Robert of Shrewsbury, l.454 Flanagan, M. T.: Donngus Ua hAingliu, lv.842–3 Fleming, Robin: Harold II [Harold Godwineson], xxv.356–62 Foot, Sarah: Æthelstan, i.420–8 Foote, Yolanda: John Obadiah Westwood, lviii.318–19 Ford, Alan: James Ussher, lvi.6–14 Fouracre, Paul: Agilbert, i.457–8; Foillan, xix.203–4; Fursa, xx.201–2; Leuthere, xxxiii.516 Fox, Adam: John Aubrey, ii.907–11 Franklin, M. J.: Walkelin, lvi.805–6 Gameson, Richard: Aelsinus (Ælfsige), i.393; Eadwig Basan, xvii.542–3 Ganz, David: Bernard, v.417; Dúngal, xvii.297–8 Garrison, Mary: Fridugisus, xx.27–8; Hygbald, xxix.158–9; Joseph Scottus, xxx.715–16 Geraint Gruffydd, R.: Sir Idris Llewelyn Foster, xix.504–5 Gillies, William: Kenneth Hurlstone Jackson, xxix.509–10 Godden, Malcolm: Ælfric of Eynsham, with Ælfric Bata, i.387–8 Gransden, Antonia: Edmund, xvii.754–5; Hermann, xxvi.787–8 Gray, Douglas: Guy of Warwick, xxiv.328–9 Greatrex, Joan: Henry Bradshaw, vii.213 Green, Judith A.: Baldwin, iii.441

190

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Greenway, D. E.: Henry [Henry of Huntingdon], xxvi.413 Gretsch, Mechthild: Elizabeth Elstob, xviii.335–7 Gruffydd, R. Geraint: William Morgan, xxxix.152–5 Haigh, John D.: John Mitchell Kemble, xxxi.153–4 Hall, A. T.: William Douglas Simpson, l.718–9 Hall, Ursula: Regulus, xlvi.373–4 Halloran, Brian M.: Thomas Innes, xxix.307–8 Hamilton, Alistair: Abraham Wheelocke, lviii.444–7 Handley, Stuart: Sir Robert Bruce Cotton, xiii.624–9; Sir Henry Spelman, li.791–3 Harmsen, Theodor: Thomas Hearne, xxvi.156–60; George Hickes, xxvii.5–11 Harries, Jill: Germanus, xx.965–6 Harris, Jennifer: Joseph Strutt, liii.120–1 Hart, Cyril: Æthelstan, i.428–9; Æthelwine, i.433–4; Edward, xvii.783–5; Guthfrith, l.597; Oslac, xlii.51; Ragnall, xlv.796; Sihtric Cáech, l.597; Wulfstan, lx.557–8 Harvey, Barbara F.: Sulcard, liii.292 Haycock, David Boyd: William Stukeley, liii.231–5 Haycock, M. E.: Merlin, xxxvii.898–9; see also ‘Cynfeirdd (act. 6th–11th cent.)’, Reference group (online) Herbert, Máire: Columba, xii.805–10 Herendeen, Wyman H.: William Camden, ix.603–14 Hewitt, David: Sir Walter Scott, xlix.490–510 Heyworth, Peter: Humfrey Wanley, lvii.239–42 Holt, J. C.: Sir Frank Merry Stenton, lii.405–7 Hooper, Nicholas: Christina, xi.584 Horden, Peregrine: Faricius, xix.43–4 Hudson, Benjamin T.: Áed mac Néill, i.373–4; Cellachán mac Buadacháin, x.806; Cerball mac Dúngaile, x.821–2; Conchobar mac Donnchada (online update, Oct. 2005); Congalach mac Máele Mithig, xii.930; Diarmait mac Máel na mBó, xvi.23; Domnall ua Néill, xvi.490–1; Dub dá Leithe, xvii.9–10; Dúnán, xvii.199–200; Ealdred, xvii.551–2; Lethlobar mac Loingsig, xxxiii.509–10; Máel Sechnaill mac Domnaill, xxxvi.101–2; Muirchertach mac Néill, xxxix.682–3; Niall mac Áeda, xl.744–5; Niall mac Áeda, xl.745; Niall mac Eochada, xl.746; Óláf Guthfrithson, xli.662–3; Óláf Sihtricson, with Sihtric Cam, xli.663–5; Óláf the White, xli.665; Sihtric, l.596–7; Turges, lv.576 Hüllen, Werner: Vivien Anne Law, Lady Shackleton (online update, October 2006) Huws, Daniel: Thomas Jones, xxx.635–6 Irwin, Philip: Áed Sláine mac Diarmata, i.375–6; Ailill Molt, i.490; Báetán mac Cairill, iii.212; Cathal mac Finguine, x.536–7; Coirpre mac Néill, xii.441; Fiachu mac Néill, xix.462; Fogartach mac Néill, xix.199–200; Lóegaire mac Néill, xxxiv.292– 3; Lugaid mac Lóegairi, xxxiv.724; Nath Í mac Fiachrach, xl.264; Niall Frossach mac Fergaile, xl.743–4; Sechnassach mac Blathmaic, xlix.621 Jayatilaka, R.: Finán, xix.549–50 John, James J.: Elias Avery Lowe, xxxiv.563

191

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Johnston, Elva: Beoán, v.314; Fiachra, xix.461–2; Gormlaith, xxii.1011; Mo Ling, with Gobbán Sáer, xxxviii.469–70; Mo Nennus, xxxviii.470–1; Munster, saints of (c. 450–c. 700), xxxix.783–93; Nathalan, xl.264–5; Senchán Torpéist, xlix.753–4; Urard mac Coise, lv.936 Jones, Nerys Ann: Pabo, xlii.295–6; Padarn, xlii.315 Jones, R. Brinley: Humphrey Llwyd, xxxiv.174–6; William Salesbury, xlviii.696–9 Kellett, Arnold: Joseph Wright, lx.464–7 Kelly, Fergus: Eugene O’Curry, xli.483–4; Níall Noígíallach, xl.747–8 Kelly, S. E.: Ælle, i.392; Æthelbald, i.393–5; Æthelberht I, i.398–400; Æthelberht II, joint king of Kent, with others (8th cent.), i.400–1; Anna, ii.169; Baldred, iii.440; Beornwulf, v.316–17; Berhtwulf, v.348–9; Burgred, viii.815–16; Ceolred, x.819–20; Coenred, xii.393; Cwenthryth, xiv.856–7; Cynethryth, xiv.861–2; Eadbald, xvii.521– 2; Eadberht Præn, xvii.523; Thomas Elmham, xviii.294; Eorcenberht, with Ecgberht I, xviii.473; Hlothhere, with Eadric, xxvii.339–40; Offa, with Ecgfrith, xli.545–8; Osthryth, xlii.65; Peada, xliii.263; Penda, xliii.515–16; South Saxons, kings of, li.702–3; Wiglaf, lviii.853–4; Wihtred, lviii.864; Wulfhere, lx.550–1 Kenneally, Daniel F.: Thomas Oswald Cockayne, xii.326–7 Kerlouégan, François: Gildas, xxii.223–5 Keynes, Simon: Æthelred II, i.409–19; Æthelstan ætheling, i.429; Eadric Streona, xvii.535– 8; Eadwig, xvii.539–42; Emma, xviii.412–14; Dorothy Whitelock, lviii.692–4 King, Edmund: Eustace, xviii.648–9; Hugh Candidus, xxviii.620–1; Ingulf, xxix.294–5 King, John N.: John Bale, iii.482–6 Knobel, Paul: Nora Chadwick, x.847–8. Krag, Claus: Harald Hardrada, xxv.100–1 Lapidge, Michael: Aldhelm, i.619–23; Byrhtferth of Ramsey, ix.332–3; Cellán, x.806–7; Dunstan, xvii.347–53; Ecgwine, xvii.640–1; Frithegod, xx.49; Hadrian, xxiv.437– 8; Hildelith, xxvii.91–2; John the Old Saxon, xxx.204; Lantfred, xxxii.545–6; Máeldub, xxxvi.99–100; Neot, xl.424; Oswald, xlii.84; Rhigyfarch ap Sulien, xlvi.589–90; Tatwine, liii.831–2; Theodore of Tarsus, liv.226–30; Wulfstan Cantor, lx.564–5; see also ‘Scholars at King Alfred’s court (act. 880–899)’, Reference group (online) Larrington, Carolyne: Hugeburc, xxviii.599–600; Walburg, lvi.758; Willibald, lix.363; Winnebald, lix.746 Law, V. A.: Clemens Scotus, xii.17–18 Lawson, M. K.: Alfred Ætheling, i.727; Cenwulf, x.817; Cnut, xii.239–46; Edmund II, xvii.769–70; Edward Ætheling, xvii.896–7; Harold I [called Harold Harefoot], xxv.355–6; Harthacnut, xxv.602–3 Levy, F. J.: Henry Savile, of Banke, xlix.118 Lewis, C. P.: Gundrada de Warenne, lvii.392; Ordgar, xli.923; Ordgar, xli.922–23; Ordgar, xli.923; Osbern fitz Richard, xlvi.757; Richard Scrob, xlvi.756–7; Thurcytel, liv.709; Waltheof, lvii.187–9; Withman, lix.890; see also ‘Companions of the Conqueror (act. 1066–71), Reference group (online) Leyser, Henrietta: Ælfheah, i.382–3; Eve of Wilton, lix.667; Kentigerna, xxxi.334; Wulfhelm, lx.550

192

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Leyser, Karl: (John) Michael Wallace-Hadrill, xxiv.438–9 Lloyd, Simon, & Rebecca Reader: Matthew Paris, with John of Wallingford, xlii.620–8 Loyn, H. R.: Sharon Turner, lv.661–3 Lucas, Peter J.: John Capgrave, ix.991–3 Lund, Niels: Ohthere, xli.639; Óláf Tryggvason, xli.665–6 MacCarthy, Fiona: William Morris, xxxix.317–24 Macfarlane, Leslie J.: William Elphinstone, xviii.326–8 MacMahon, M. K. C.: Arthur Sampson Napier (online update, October 2007); Henry Sweet, liii.447–50 Macquarrie, Alan: Catroe, x.559–60; Donald, xvi.494; Monan, xxxviii.574–5; Owen the Bald, xvi.494; Ternan, liv.153–4 Maddicott, J. R.: Ecgfrith, xvii.639–40 Marenbon, John: Candidus, ix.888–9; John Scottus [John Scottus Eriugena], xxx.196–203 Martin, G. H.: John Joscelin, xxx.714–15; John Smith, li.205–6; William Henry Stevenson, lii.612–13 Mason, Emma: Ælfric, i.385; Ælfwine, i.391; Æthelnoth, i.406–7; Æthelric, i.419–20; Athelm, ii.806; Lyfing, xxxiv.857–8; Sigeric, l.593; Wulfstan, lx.562–4 Mason, J. F. A.: Hemming, xxvi.280 Maund, K. L.: Ealdgyth, xvii.551; Herewald, xxvi.766–7 May, Alex: Patrick Wormald (online update, January 2008) Mayr-Harting, Henry: Áedán, i.376–7; Augustine, ii.948–50; Ecgberht, xvii.635–6; Guthlac, xxiv.301–2 McGurk, P.: Florence of Worcester, lx.292; John of Worcester, lx.292–3 Meehan, Bernard: Symeon of Durham, liii.581–2 Meens, Rob, Columbanus, xii.810–13 Miller, Sean: Æthelbald, i.395–6; Æthelberht, i.397–8; Æthelred I, i.408–9; Ceolwulf II, x.821; Ecgberht, church reformer, xvii.634–5; Edward, xvii.779–83 Milsom, S. F. C.: Frederic William Maitland, xxxvi.204–10 Mortimer, Ian: Thomas Talbot, liii.725 Mortimer, Richard: Richard de Clare, xi.759–60 Nelson, Janet L.: Æthelwulf, with Judith, i.438–41; Balthild, iii.618–19; Bertha, v.479– 80; Eadburh, xvii.524; Eadgifu, xvii.526–7; Hæsten, xxiv.440–1; Osburh, xlii.40 Ní Dhonnchadha, Máirín: Adomnán, i.353–6; Loingsech mac Óenguso, xxxiv.329 Ó Briain, Mairtin: Oisín, xli.645 O’Donoghue, Bernard: Robin Ernest William Flower, xx. 177–8 O’Donoghue, Heather: Gabriel Turville-Petre, xliii.907–8 O’Loughlin, Thomas: Ailerán, i.489–90 Ó Muraíle, Nollaig: Dubhaltach Óg Mac Fhirbhisigh, xxxv.387–8; Míchél Ó Cléirigh, xli.433–5; John O’Donovan, xli.527–9; Whitley Stokes, lii.872–4 Ó Riain, Pádraig: Óengus of Tallaght, xli.540–1 Ó Riain-Raedel, Dagmar: Deicolus, xv.695; Gall, xx.307–8; Killian, xxxi.548–9; Virgilius, lvi.561–2 Orme, Nicholas: Nicholas Roscarrock, xlvii.730–1; William Worcester, lx.294–5

193

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Owen, Morfydd: Aneirin, ii.141–2 Padel, O. J.: Arthur, with Uther Pendragon, ii.529–43; Gudwal, with Gulval, xxiv.165–6 Palliser, D. M.: John of Beverley, xxx.193–4 Parry, Graham: Roger Dodsworth, xvi.440–1; Sir William Dugdale, xvii.153–7 Pettegree, Andrew: John Day, xv.584–6 Pfaff, Richard W.: Abbo of Fleury, i.10–11; Grimbald, xxiv.19–20; Montague Rhodes James, xxix.723–6; Ursula, lv.958–9; Werferth, lviii.166–7 Pontfarcy, Yolande de: Henry of Saltrey, xlvii.775–6 Prestwich, J. O.: Orderic Vitalis, xli.921–2 Price, Angharad: Siôn Dafydd Rhys, xlvi.626–7 Pryce, Huw: Bleddyn ap Cynfyn, with Rhiwallon ap Cynfyn, Sir Owain ap Cadwgan and Iorwerth ap Bleddyn, vi.198–9; Gruffudd ap Cynan, with Iago ab Idwal ap Meurig, xxiv.133–5; Sir John Prise, xlv.424–5 Ramsay, Nigel: Thomas Astle, ii.771–3; Bryan Faussett, xix.159–60 Reuter, Timothy: Clement, xii.18–19 Rhodes, Michael: Charles Roach Smith, li.67–9 Rigg, A. G.: Godfrey of Winchester, lix.688–9 Roberts, Brynley F.: Edward Lhuyd, xxxiii.710–12 Roberts, R. Julian: John Dee, xv.667–75 Roffe, David: Hereward [called Hereward the Wake], xxvi.767–8; Leofric, xxvi.767 Rollason, David: Ælberht, i.378–9; Ælle, i.392; Aldhun, i.623–4; Billfrith, v.720; Ceolwulf, x.820–1; Cynehelm, xiv.860–1; Eadberht, xvii.522–3; Ealhmund, xvii.554–5; Eanbald (I), xvii.556–7; Eanbald (II), xvii.557; Eardwulf, with Eanred, Æthelred II and Rædwulf, xvii.562–3; Mildrith, xxxviii.126–7; Osbald, xli.979; Osberht, xli.982–3; Osred I, xlii.60–1; Osred II, xlii.61; Oswulf, with Æthelwold Moll, Alhred, Æthelred I and Ælfwald I, xlii.97–8; Seaxburh, xlix.616; Wigstan, lviii.863; William Ketel, xxxi.447 Rollason, David, & R. B. Dobson: Cuthbert, xiv.829–34 Romburgh, Sophie van: Franciscus Junius, xxx.834–5 Ross, Margaret Clunies, & Amanda J. Collins: Edward Lye, xxxiv.849–51 Rowland, Jenny: Llwyarch Hen, xxxiv.180 Royan, Nicola: Hector Boece, vi.418–21 Rubenstein, J. C.: Eadmer of Canterbury, xvii.530–1; Osbern, xli.983–4 Russell, Paul: Cellach, x.803; Cormac mac Cuilennáin, xiii.434–5; Donatus, xvi.520–1 Salt, S. P.: Sir Edward Dering, xv.874–80 Sawyer, P. H.: Swein, liii.453–5; Ulf Fenisc, lv.864; Wulfric Spot, lx.555 Schoeck, R. J.: Charles Plummer, xliv.612–13; Edmund Bishop, v.864–5 Sherlock, Peter: William Somner, li.627–9 Shippey, T. A.: J. R. R. Tolkien, liv.902–5 Short, Ian: Geffrei Gaimar, xx.265–6 Sims-Williams, Patrick: Beuno, v.565–6; Burginda, viii.803; Ecgburh, xvii.639; Hwicce, kings of the, xxix.114–16; Milred, xxxviii.330; Oftfor, xli.556–7; Putta, xlv.601–2 Smith, David L.: Sir Roger Twysden, lv.750–4

194

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Smith, Julia M. H.: Maglorius, xxxvi.127–8; Samson, xlviii.807–8 Smith, Mary Frances: Regenbald, xlvi.364–5 Smith, Peter J.: Airbertach mac Cosse Dobráin, i.511–12; Flann mac Lonáin, xix.996– 7; Gilla Coémáin, xxii.253; Muirchertach, xxxix.681 Stacey, Robin Chapman: Dyfnwal Moelmud ap Garbanion, xvii.493–4 Stafford, Pauline: Ælfgifu, i.380–1; Ælfgifu, i.381–2; Ælfthryth, i.389–90; Eadgifu, xvii.527–8; Erik of Hlathir, xviii.499–500 Stalmans, Nathalie: Dympna, xvii.505–6; Forannán, xix.253–4; Plechelm, xliv.574; Rumold, xlviii.115–16 Stalmans, Nathalie, & T. M. Charles-Edwards: Meath, saints of, xxxvii.671–8 Stancliffe, Clare: Faustus, xix.161–3; Patrick, xliii.69–80; Sedulius, xlix.659–60 Stanley, E. G.: Cædmon, ix.427–8; Cynewulf, xiv.863–4 Stephens, Meic: Gwyn Jones, xxx.504–5 Sullivan, M. G.: Paul de Rapin de Thoyras, xlvi.68–71 Summerson, Henry: Eugenius I–VIII [Scottish kings], xviii.644–5 Taylor, John: John of Tynemouth, lv.795–6; Ranulf Higden, xxvii.49–50 Taylor, Stephen: Edmund Gibson, xxii.68–75 Taylor, T. F.: Joseph Armitage Robinson, xlvii.376–8 Thacker, Alan: Acca, i.133; Æbbe, with Ebba, i.372–3; Ælfflæd, i.379–80; Æthelthryth, i.429–32; Boisil, vi.452; Bosa, vi.687; Brorda, vii.954–5; Deusdedit, xv.929; Eadberht, xvii.522; Eadfrith, xvii.526; Eanflæd, xvii.557–8; Eata, xvii.605–6; Hild, xxvii.90–1; Stephen of Ripon, lii.423–4; Werburh, lviii.164–5; Wilfrid, lviii.944–50 Thomson, R. M.: Eilmer, xvii.1022–3; William of Malmesbury, xxxvi.348–51 Thornton, David E.: Ambrosius Aurelianus, i.922; Asaf, ii.584–5; Barinthus, iii.857; Beulan, v.564–5; Brychan Brycheiniog, viii.412–13; Cadell ab Arthfael, ix.401; Cadell ap Rhodri, ix.401–2; Cadell Ddyrnllug, ix.402; Cadwaladr ap Cadwallon, ix.423–4; Cafan ab Iago, ix.408; Cynan Garwyn, xiv.858; Cynddylan ap Cyndrwyn, xiv.859–60; Cyngen ap Cadell, xiv.865–6; Decuman, xv.663–4; Dyfrig, xvii.494–5; Euddogwy, xviii.643; Hywel [called Hywel Fychan], xxix.171–2; Hywel ab Ieuaf, xxix.172–3; Hywel Dda, xxix.175–6; Iago ab Idwal Foel, xxix.177; Idwal ap Meurig, xxix.190; Idwal Foel, xxix.190–1; Illtud, xxix.208–9; Livinus, xxxiv.88–9; Maelgwn Gwynedd, xxxvi.100; Maredudd ab Owain, xxxvi.625–6; Merfyn Frych, xxxvii.885–6; Mordaf Hael, xxxix.11–12; Morgan ab Athrwys, xxxix.94–5; Morgan Hen, xxxix.95–6; Muirchú, xxxix.683; Nennius, xl.423–4; Owain ab Edwin, xlii.176–7; Owain ap Hywel, xlii.177; Peulan, xliii.966–7; Probus, xlv.447–8; Rhodri Mawr, xlvi.611; Rhun Hir, xlvi.611–12; Rhydderch Hen, xlvi.613; Seiriol, xlix.686; Selyf ap Cynan, xlix.737–8; Teilo, liv.28–9; Tírechán, liv.836–7; Tysilio, lv.817; Urien Rheged, lv.944; Vortigern, lvi.598–9 Todd, Andy: Æthelberht, i.396–7 Tomlin, R. S. O.: Constantine III, xiii.33–5; Gerontius, xxi.967–8 Triggs, Tony D.: Wulfstan, lx.556–7 Tudor, V.: Reginald of Coldingham, xii.496–7 Vaisey, David: Richard William Hunt, xxvii.866–7

195

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. van Houts, Elisabeth: Ælfthryth, i.389; Judith of Flanders, xxx.815; Matilda, xxxvii.318–20; William of Jumièges, xxx.828 Waite, Greg: Harold McCarter Taylor, liii.896–7 Walker, David: Caradog ap Gruffudd ap Rhydderch, with Gruffudd ap Rhydderch and Caradog ap Rhydderch, x.10–11; Gruffudd ap Llywelyn, xxiv.136–7; Llywelyn ap Seisyll, xxiv.136 Wareham, A. F.: Æthelred, i.407; Byrhtnoth, ix.335; Ceolnoth, x.819; Plegemund, xliv.574–5 Warnicke, Retha M.: Laurence Nowell, xli.237–9 Watt, D. E. R.: John Fordun, xx.355–7; Walter Bower, vi.921–2 Wawn, Andrew: George Stephens, lii.466–8 Williams, Ann: Ælfgar, with Eadwine, i.380; Ælfhere, with Ælfric Cild and Ælfheah, i.383–5; Ælfric, i.385–6; Ælfstan of Boscombe, i.389; Æthelheard, i.405–6; Æthelred, i.407; Asgar the Staller, ii.596–7; Beorhtric, v.315; Beorn Estrithson, v.315–16; Bregowine, vii.435; Cuthbert, xiv.834–6; Eadgifu the Fair, xvii.528; Eadnoth the Staller, xvii.531; Eadred, xvii.531–4; Eadric of Laxfield, xvii.534–5; Eadric the Wild, xvii.538–9; Edgar, xvii.698–703; Edith, xvii.738–9; Edmund I, xvii.766–9; Godgifu, xxii.574–6; Godwine, with Gytha, xxii.626–9; Gyrth, xxiv.377–8; Hygeberht, xxix.160; Leofric, xxxiii.395–7; Leofwine, xxxiii.397–8; Odda, xli.491–2; Osgod Clapa, xlii.42–3; Ralph, xlv.868–9; Ralph, xlv.869–70; Ralph the Staller, xlv.873; Robert fitz Wimarc, xlvii.121–2; Swein, liii.455–6; Tovi the Proud, lv.99–100; Wulfweard White, lx.565–6 Williams, Gruffydd Aled: Edmwnd Prys, xlv.494–5 Williams, J. E. Caerwyn: Thomas Wiliems, lviii.952–3 Wood, I. N.: Boniface, vi.540–5 Wormald, Patrick: Æthelweard, i.432–3; Alfred, i.716–25; Asser, ii.759–60; Cunedda, xiv.65; Earconwald, xvii.559–60; Ine, xxix.236–8; Wulfstan, lx.558–62 Yorke, Barbara: Ælfsige, i.388–9; Æthelwold, i.434–8; Birinus, v.831; Bugga, viii.566– 7; Bugga, viii.567; Byrnstan, ix.340; Cædwalla, ix.429; Ceawlin, x.715–16; Centwine, x.814–15; Cenwalh, x.815; Ceol, x.817; Ceolwulf, x.820.; Cerdic, x.822–3; Cuthburh, xiv.837; Cwichelm, xiv.857; Cynegils, xiv.860; Cynric, xiv.867; Daniel, xv.63; Denewulf, xv.770–1; Eadburh, xvii.523; Eadburh, xvii.524–5; Eadburh, xvii.523–4; East Saxons, kings of, xvii.602–4; Edith, xvii.737–8; Frithestan, xx.49–50; Hædde, xxiv.439–40; Kent, kings of, xxxi.315–16; Leoba, xxxiii.394–5; Seaxburh, xlix.616; Swithun, liii.523–5; Wihtgar, lviii.863; Wine, lix.716; Wulfhild, lx.551–2; Wulfthryth, lx.565

2. ‘ANGLO-SAXON’ AND ‘NORMAN’ SUBJECTS (c. 400–c . 1100) a. Kings, consorts and other rulers *Ælfgifu, consort of King Eadwig (fl. 956–66): Pauline Stafford, i.380–1; DNB WH *Ælfgifu, first consort of King Cnut (fl. 1006–36): Pauline Stafford, i.381–2; DNB WH

196

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) *Ælfthryth, princess (d. 929): Elisabeth van Houts, i.389; DNB WH *Ælfthryth, queen, consort of King Edgar (d. 999x1001): Pauline Stafford, i.389–90; DNB WH Ælfwald, king of the South Saxons (fl. c. 760): see South Saxons, kings of the Ælfwald I, king of Northumbria (d. 788): David Rollason, xlii.97–8 Ælla, king of Deira (d. in or after 597?): Rosemary Cramp, i.391–2; DNB WH Ælle, king of Northumbria (d. 867): David Rollason, i.392; DNB WH Ælle, king of the South Saxons (fl. late 5th cent.): S. E. Kelly, i.392; DNB WH Æsc, king of Kent (d. 512?): see Kent, kings of; DNB WH Æthelbald, king of the Mercians (d. 757): S. E. Kelly, i.393–5; DNB WH Æthelbald, king of the West Saxons (d. 860): Sean Miller, i.395–6; DNB WH Æthelberht, king of the West Saxons (d. 865): Sean Miller, i.397–8; DNB WH Æthelberht, king of the South Saxons (fl. 733–47?): see South Saxons, kings of the Æthelberht, king of the East Angles (779/80–94): Andy Todd, i.396–7; DNB WH Æthelberht I, king of Kent (d. 616?): S. E. Kelly, i.398–400; DNB WH Æthelberht II, joint king of Kent (d. 762), et al.: S. E. Kelly, i.400–1 *Æthelflæd, ruler of the Mercians (d. 918): Marios Costambeys, i.401–3; DNB WH Æthelfrith, king of Northumbria (d. c. 616): Rosemary Cramp, i.403–4; DNB WH Æthelheard, king of the West Saxons (d. 740): Heather Edwards, i.404–5 Æthelmund, king of the Hwicce (d. before 746): see Hwicce, kings of the Æthelred, ruler of the Mercians (d. 911): Marios Costambeys, i.407–8 Æthelred, king of the Mercians (d. after 704): Ann Williams, i.407 Æthelred I, king of Northumbria (d. 796): David Rollason, xlii.97–8 Æthelred I, king of the West Saxons (d. 871): Sean Miller, i.408–9; DNB WH Æthelred II, king of Northumbria (fl. c. 854–c. 862): David Rollason, xvii.563 Æthelred II (‘the Unready’), king of the English (c. 966x8–1016): Simon Keynes, i.409–19; DNB WH Æthelric, king of the Hwicce (fl. c. 693–736): see Hwicce, kings of the Æthelstan, king of the South Saxons (fl. 714?): see South Saxons, kings of the Æthelstan, king of the English (893/4–939): Sarah Foot, i.420–8; DNB Grant Allen Æthelstan ætheling (d. 1014): Simon Keynes, i.429 *Æthelthryth, queen in Northumbria, consort of King Ecgfrith, and abbess of Ely (d. 679): Alan Thacker, i.429–32; DNB Edmund Venables Æthelwealh, king of the South Saxons (d. c. 685): see South Saxons, kings of the Æthelwold Moll, king of Northumbria (fl. 759–765): David Rollason, xlii.97 Æthelwulf, king of the West Saxons (d. 858): Janet L. Nelson, i.438–41; DNB WH Aldfrith, king of Northumbria (d. 704/5): Rosemary Cramp, i.618–19; DNB WH Alfred (‘the Great’), king of the West Saxons and of the Anglo-Saxons (848/9–899): Patrick Wormald, i.716–25; DNB E. A. Freeman Alfred ætheling, prince (d. 1036/7): M. K. Lawson, i.727; DNB WH Alhred, king of Northumbria (fl. 765–774): David Rollason, xlii.97 Anna, king of the East Angles (d. 654?): S. E. Kelly, ii.169 Baldred, king of Kent (fl. c. 823–7): S. E. Kelly, iii.440; DNB WH

197

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. *Balthild, queen of the Franks, consort of Clovis II of Neustria (d. c. 680): Janet L. Nelson, iii.618–19; DNB TAA Beorhtric, king of the West Saxons (d. 802): Heather Edwards, v.314–15; DNB WH Beornwulf, king of the Mercians (d. 826): S. E. Kelly, v.316–17; DNB WH Berhtwulf, king of the Mercians (d. 852); S. E. Kelly, v.348–9; DNB WH *Bertha, queen in Kent, consort of Æthelberht (b. c. 565; DNB d. in or after 601): Janet L. Nelson, v.479–80; DNB WH Burgred, king of the Mercians (d. 874?): S. E. Kelly, viii.815–16; DNB WH Cædwalla, king of the Gewisse (c. 659–89): Barbara Yorke, ix.429; DNB WRWS Ceawlin, king of the Gewisse (d. 593): Barbara Yorke, x.715–16; DNB WH Centwine, king of the Gewisse (d. in or after 685): Barbara Yorke, x.814–15; DNB WH Cenwalh, king of the Gewisse (d.672): Barbara Yorke, x.815; DNB WH Cenwulf, king of the Mercians (d. 821): M. K. Lawson, x.817 Ceol, king of the Gewisse (d. 597): Barbara Yorke, x.817; DNB WH Ceolred, king of the Mercians (d. 716): S. E. Kelly, x.819–20; DNB WH Ceolwulf, king of the Gewisse (d. 611): Barbara Yorke, x.820. Ceolwulf, king of Northumbria (d. 764): David Rollason, x.820–1; DNB WH Ceolwulf II, king of the Mercians (fl. 874–9): Sean Miller, x.821 Cerdic, king of the Gewisse (fl. 6th cent.): Barbara Yorke, x.822–3; DNB WH Cnut, king of England, Denmark and Norway (d. 1035): M. K. Lawson, xii.239–46; DNB WH Coenred, king of the Mercians (d. after 709): S. E. Kelly, xii.393; DNB Henry Bradley Cuthred, king of the West Saxons (d. 756): Heather Edwards, xiv.837–8; DNB WH Cwichelm, king of the Gewisse (d. 636): Barbara Yorke, xiv.857; DNB WH Cynegils, king of the Gewisse (d. 642): Barbara Yorke, xiv.860; DNB WH *Cynethryth, queen of the Mercians and abbess of Cookham (fl. c. 770–98): S. E. Kelly, xiv.861–2 Cynewulf, king of the West Saxons (d. 786): Heather Edwards, xiv.863–4; DNB WH Cynric, king of the Gewisse (fl. 6th cent.): Barbara Yorke, xiv.867; DNB WH Eadbald, king of Kent (d. 640): S. E. Kelly, xvii.521–2; DNB WH Eadberht, king of Northumbria (d. 768): David Rollason, xvii.522–3; DNB WH Eadberht I, joint king of Kent (d. 748): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Eadberht II, joint king of Kent (fl. 762–3): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Eadberht Præn, king of Kent (fl. 796–8): S. E. Kelly, xvii.523; DNB WH *Eadburh, queen of the West Saxons (fl. 789–802): Janet L. Nelson, xvii.524; DNB WH *Eadgifu, queen of the Anglo-Saxons (b. in or before 904; DNB d. in or after 966): Pauline Stafford, xvii.527–8 *Eadgifu, queen of the West Franks (d. in or after 951): Janet L. Nelson, xvii.526–7 Eadred, king of the English (d. 955): Ann Williams, xvii.531–4; DNB WH Eadric, king of Kent (d. 686): see Hlothhere, king of Kent Eadwig, king of the English (c. 940–59): Simon Keynes, xvii.539–42; DNB WH Eadwine, king of Northumbria (c. 586–633): Rosemary Cramp, xvii.543–6; DNB WH *Ealdgyth, queen (fl. c. 1057–66): K. L. Maund, xvii.551; DNB WH

198

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Ealdred, leader of the Northumbrians (d. 933?): Benjamin T. Hudson, xvii.551–2 Ealdred, king of the Hwicce (fl. 757–77): see Hwicce, kings of the Ealdwulf, king of the South Saxons (fl. c. 760): see South Saxons, kings of the Ealhmund, joint king of Kent (fl. 784): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Ealhmund, prince and martyr (d. 800): David Rollason, xvii.554–5 *Ealhswith, consort of Alfred, king of the Anglo-Saxons (d. 902): Marios Costambeys, xvii.555–6 Eanberht, king of the Hwicce (fl. 757–9): see Hwicce, kings of the *Eanflæd, queen in Northumbria (b. 626, d. after 685): Alan Thacker, xvii.557–8; DNB WH Eanfrith, king of the Hwicce (fl. c. 670): see Hwicce, kings of the Eanhere, king of the Hwicce (fl. c. 670): see Hwicce, kings of the Eanmund, joint king of Kent (fl. 763–4): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Eanred, king of Northumbria (fl. c. 830–c. 854): David Rollason, xvii.558 Eardwulf, joint king of Kent (d. in or before 762): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Eardwulf, king of Northumbria (fl. 796–c. 830): David Rollason, xvii.562–3 East Saxons, kings of the (act. late 6th cent.–c.820) [group-entry]: Barbara Yorke, xvii.602–4 Ecgberht, king of the West Saxons (d. 839): Heather Edwards, xvii.636–9; DNB WH Ecgberht I, king of Kent (d. 673): see Eorcenberht, king of Kent Ecgberht II, joint king of Kent (fl. 765–79): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Ecgfrith, king of Northumbria, 645/6–685): J. R. Maddicott, xvii.639–40 Ecgfrith, king of the Mercians (d. 796): see Offa, king of the Mercians Edgar, king of the English (943/4–975): Ann Williams, xvii.698–703; DNB WH *Edith, queen (d. 1075): Ann Williams, xvii.738–9; DNB WH Edmund, king of the East Angles (d. 869): Antonia Gransden, xvii.754–5; DNB William Benham Edmund I, king of the English (920/21–946): Ann Williams, xvii.766–9; DNB WH Edmund II, king of the English (d. 1016): M. K. Lawson, xvii.769–70; DNB WH Edward the Elder, king of the Anglo-Saxons (870s?–924): Sean Miller, xvii.779–83; DNB WH Edward (‘the Martyr’), king of the English (c. 962–978): Cyril Hart, xvii.783–5; DNB WH Edward (‘the Confessor’), king of the English (1003x5–1066): Frank Barlow, xvii.785– 92; DNB WH Edward (‘the Exile’), ætheling (d. 1057): M. K. Lawson, xvii.896–7 *Emma, queen (d. 1052): Simon Keynes, xviii.412–14; DNB WH Eorcenberht, king of Kent (d. 664): S. E. Kelly, xviii.473 Eormenric, ruler of Kent (fl. 550x600): see Kent, kings of Erik Bloodaxe, viking leader (d. 954): Marios Costambeys, xviii.497–9 Guthfrith, king of York (b. before 920, d. 934): Cyril Hart, l.597; DNB F. Y. Powell Guthrum, king of the East Angles (d. 890): Marios Costambeys, xxiv.322; DNB Kate Norgate Hálfdan [Healfdene], king of the Danes (d. 877): Marios Costambeys, xxiv.562–3

199

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Harald Hardrada, king of Norway (1015–1066): Claus Krag, xxv.100–1 Harold I [called Harold Harefoot], king of the English (d. 1040): M. K. Lawson, xxv.355–6; DNB WH Harold II [Harold Godwineson], king of the English (1022/3?–1066): Robin Fleming, xxv.356–62; DNB WH Harthacnut, king of England and Denmark (c. 1018–1042): M. K. Lawson, xxv.602–3; DNB WH Heahberht, joint king of Kent (fl. 764): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Hengist, king in Kent (d. 488?): see Kent, kings of; DNB C. T. Martin Hlothhere, king of Kent (d. 685): S. E. Kelly, xxvii.339–40 Horsa, king in Kent (d. 455?): see Kent, kings of; DNB C. T. Martin Hwicce, kings of the (act. c. 670–c. 780) [group-entry]: Patrick Sims-Williams, xxix.114– 16 Ine, king of the West Saxons (d. in or after 726): Patrick Wormald, xxix.236–8; DNB WH *Judith, queen of Wessex (b. after 843; DNB d. c. 870): Janet L. Nelson, i.439–40; DNB WH *Judith of Flanders, duchess of Bavaria (1030x35–1095): Elisabeth van Houts, xxx.815 Kent, kings of (act. c. 450–c. 590) [group-entry]: Barbara Yorke, xxxi.315–16 *Matilda, queen, consort of William I (d. 1083): Elisabeth van Houts, xxxvii.318–20; DNB WH Nunna, king of the South Saxons (fl. 692–714?): see South Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Octa, king of Kent (fl. 512?): see Kent, kings of; DNB WH Offa, king of the East-Saxons (fl. 709): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Offa, king of the Mercians (d. 796): S. E. Kelly, xli.545–8; DNB WH Óláf Tryggvason, king of Norway (d. 999): Niels Lund, xli.665–6 Osbald, king of Northumbria (d. 799): David Rollason, xli.979; DNB WH Osberht, king of Northumbria (d. 867): David Rollason, xli.982–3; DNB CLK *Osburh, consort of Æthelwulf, king of the West Saxons (fl. 839): Janet L. Nelson, xlii.40; DNB WH Oshere, king of the Hwicce (fl. c. 680–c. 693): see Hwicce, kings of the; DNB WH Oslac, king of the South Saxons (fl. c. 760): see South Saxons, kings of the Osmund, king of the South Saxons (fl. 765–770x72): see South Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Osred I, king of Northumbria (696x8–716): David Rollason, xlii.60–1; DNB WH Osred II, king of Northumbria (d. 792): David Rollason, xlii.61; DNB WH Osric, king of Deira (d. 634): D. J. Craig, xlii.61–2; DNB WH Osric, king of Northumbria (d. 729): D. J. Craig, xlii.62; DNB James Mackinnon Osric, king of the Hwicce (fl. 674–9): see Hwicce, kings of the *Osthryth, queen, consort of Æthelred, king of the Mercians (d. 697): S. E. Kelly, xlii.65; DNB Edmund Venables Oswald, king of Northumbria (603/4–642): D. J. Craig, xlii.76–9; DNB WH Oswine, king of Deira (d. 651): D. J. Craig, xlii.93–4; DNB CLK

200

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Oswiu, king of Northumbria (611/12–670): D. J. Craig, xlii.94–7; DNB WH Oswulf, king of Northumbria (d. 759): David Rollason, xlii.97–8; DNB WH Peada, king of the Middle Angles (d. 656): S. E. Kelly, xliii.263; DNB WH Penda, king of the Mercians (d. 655): S. E. Kelly, xliii.515–16; DNB WH Rædwald, king of the East Angles (d. 616x27): James Campbell, xlv.786; DNB WH Rædwulf, king of Northumbria (d. c. 858): David Rollason, xvii.563 Ragnall, king of York (d. 920/21): Cyril Hart, xlv.796 Sæbbi, king of the East Saxons (d. 693/4): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sæberht, king of the East Saxons (d. 616/17): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sæward, king of the East Saxons (d. in or after 617): see East Saxons, kings of the *Seaxburh, queen of the Gewisse (d. 674?): Barbara Yorke, xlix.616; DNB WH *Seaxburh, queen of Kent; consort of King Eorcenberht, and abbess of Ely (b. in or before 655, d. c. 700): David Rollason, xlix.616; DNB WH Seaxred, king of the East Saxons (d. in or after 617): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Selered, king of the East Saxons (d. 746): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sigeberht, king of the East Angles (fl. 630/31–654): James Campbell, l.592; DNB WH Sigeberht, king of the West Saxons (d. 757): Heather Edwards, l.592–3; DNB WH Sigeberht I, king of the East Saxons (fl. 626): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sigeberht II, king of the East Saxons (fl. c. 653): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sigeheard, king of the East Saxons (fl. 693/4): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sigehere, king of the East Saxons (fl. 663–4): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sigered, king of the East Saxons (fl. 811): see East Saxons, kings of the; DNB WH Sigered, joint king of Kent (fl. 762–5): see Æthelberht II, king of Kent Sigeric, king of the East Saxons (d. in or after 798): see East Saxons, kings of the Sihtric Cáech, king of York (d. 927): Cyril Hart, l.597; DNB F. Y. Powell South Saxons, kings of the (act. 477–772) [group entry]: S. E. Kelly, li.702–3 Sutton Hoo burial, king or aristocrat (early 7th cent.): James Campbell, liii.416–17 Swæfbert, king of the East Saxons (d. 738): see East Saxons, kings of the Swæfred, king of the East Saxons (fl. 693/4): see East Saxons, kings of the Swein, king of England and of Denmark (d. 1014): P. H. Sawyer, liii.453–5; DNB WH Swithhelm, king of the East Saxons (d. 663): see East Saxons, kings of the Swithred, king of the East Saxons (fl. c. 746): see East Saxons, kings of the Uhtred, king of Hwicce (fl. 757–777): see Hwicce, kings of the Watt, king of South Saxons (fl. 692): see South Saxons, kings of the Wiglaf, king of the Mercians (fl. 827–c. 840): S. E. Kelly, lviii.853–4; DNB AMC Wihtgar, king of Wight (d. 544?): Barbara Yorke, lviii.863; DNB AMC Wihtred, king of Kent (d. 725): S. E. Kelly, lviii.864; DNB AMC William I (‘the Conqueror’), king of England (1027/8–87): David Bates, lix.45–57; DNB WH Wulfhere, king of the Mercians (d. 675): S. E. Kelly, lx.550–1; DNB Mary Tout

201

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. b. Ecclesiastics Abbo of Fleury, abbot of St Benoît-sur-Loire (945x50–1004): Richard W. Pfaff, i.10– 11 Acca, bishop of Hexham (d. 740): Alan Thacker, i.133; DNB Mandell Creighton Adalbert, missionary (supp. fl. early 8th cent.): Marios Costambeys, i.190; DNB T. A. Archer *Æbbe, abbess of Coldingham (d. 683?): Alan Thacker, i.372–3; DNB WH Ælberht, archbishop of York (d. 779/80): David Rollason, i.378–9 *Ælfflæd, abbess of Strensall-Whitby (654–714): Alan Thacker, i.379–80; DNB WH Ælfheah, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1012): Henrietta Leyser, i.382–3; DNB WH Ælfric, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1005): Emma Mason, i.385; DNB WH Ælfric, archbishop of York (d. 1051): rev. Marios Costambeys, i.386; DNB WH Ælfric Bata, monk and author (fl. c. 1010): Malcolm Godden, i.388; DNB WH Ælfric of Eynsham, homilist and abbot (c. 950–c. 1010): Malcolm Godden, i.387–8; DNB WH Ælfsige, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 959): Barbara Yorke, i.388–9; DNB WH [Ælfsige] Aelsinus, monk and scribe of the New Minster, Winchester (fl. c. 1023–c. 1031): Richard Gameson, i.393; DNB W. C. Monkhouse Ælfweard, abbot of Evesham, bishop of London (d. 1044): rev. Marios Costambeys, i.390–1; DNB WH Ælfwig, abbot of New Minster, Winchester (d. 1066): rev. Marios Costambeys, i.391; DNB WH Ælfwine, bishop of Winchester (d. 1047): Emma Mason, i.391; DNB WH Ælric, archbishop-elect of Canterbury (fl. 1050–1): rev. Marios Costambeys, i.392–3; DNB WH *Æthelburh, abbess of Barking (fl. 664): Marios Costambeys, i.401; DNB WH Æthelgar, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 990): rev. Mary Frances Smith, i.404; DNB WH Æthelheard, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 805): Ann Williams, i.405–6; DNB WH Æthelnoth, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1038): Emma Mason, i.406–7; DNB WH Æthelred, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 888): A. F. Wareham, i.407; DNB WH Æthelric, bishop of Dorchester (d. 1034): Emma Mason, i.419–20 Æthelwold, abbot of Abingdon, bishop of Winchester (d. 984): Barbara Yorke, i.434–8; DNB WH Agilbert, bishop of the West Saxons (d. 679x90): Paul Fouracre, i.457–8 Ailnoth [Ælnoth], Benedictine monk and hagiographer (fl. c. 1085– c. 1122): L. Abrams, i.490–1; DNB Alexander Gordon Albinus, abbot of St Peter’s and St Paul’s, Canterbury (d. 732): Marios Costambeys, i.587–8; DNB C. F. Keary Alcuin, abbot of St Martin’s, Tours, and royal adviser (c. 740–804): D. A. Bullough, i.602–8; DNB Robert Adamson Aldhelm, abbot of Malmesbury, bishop of Sherborne, and scholar (d. 709/10): Michael Lapidge, i.619–23; DNB WH Aldhun, bishop of Durham (d. 1018): David Rollason, i.623–4; DNB WH

202

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Aldred, provost of Chester-le-Street and glossator (fl. c. 970): Janet Backhouse, i.628; DNB E. M. Thompson Alhmund, bishop of Hexham (d. 781): rev. Marios Costambeys, i.731; DNB WH Anselm, abbot of Bec. archbishop of Canterbury (c. 1033–1109): R. W. Southern, ii.247–58; DNB WRWS Athelm, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 926): Emma Mason, ii.806; DNB WH Augustine, missionary, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 604): Henry Mayr-Harting, ii.948–50; DNB Mandell Creighton Baldred, bishop (d. 608?): see Balthere, hermit; DNB TFT Balthere, hermit (d. 756): D. H. Farmer, iii.617–18; DNB T. F. Henderson Beadwulf, bishop of Whithorn (fl. 791–5): rev. Marios Costambeys, iv.504; DNB TFT Bede, monk, historian, and theologian (673/4–735): James Campbell, iv.758–65; DNB WH *Bega, abbess of Hartlepool (supp. fl. late 7th cent.): Robert Bartlett, iv.834; DNB WRWS Benedict Biscop, abbot of Wearmouth (c. 628–89): S. J. Coates, v.64–6; DNB WRWS Beornred, archbishop of Sens, abbot of Echternach (d. 797): Marios Costambeys, v.316 Berhthun, abbot (probably of Beverley): (d. 733/40): rev. D. M. Palliser, v.347–8; DNB Henry Bradley Berhtwald, archbishop of Canterbury (c. 650–731): rev. Henrietta Leyser, v.348; DNB WRWS Bernard, cleric and traveller (fl. c. 865–70): David Ganz, v.417; DNB Henry Bradley Billfrith, anchorite (d. 750x800?): David Rollason, v.720; DNB E. M. Thompson Birinus, bishop of Dorchester (d. c. 650): Barbara Yorke, v.831; DNB E. M. Thompson Boisil, prior of Melrose (d. c. 661): Alan Thacker, vi.452; DNB [Anon.] Boniface, archbishop of Mainz, missionary (672x5?–754): I. N. Wood, vi.540–5; DNB E. M. Thompson Bosa, bishop of York (d. 706): Alan Thacker, vi.687; DNB WH Botwulf, abbot of Iken (fl. 654–c.670): John Blair, vi.773; DNB Arthur H. Grant Bregowine, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 764): Ann Williams, vii.435; DNB WH Brihtwold, abbot of Glastonbury and bishop of Ramsbury (d. 1045): rev. Marios Costambeys, vii.655; DNB W. R. W. Stephens *Bugga, abbess (fl. late 7th– early 8th cent.): Barbara Yorke, viii.566–7 *Bugga [Hæaburh], abbess (d. 759x65): Barbara Yorke, viii.567 Burchard, bishop (d. 753): Marios Costambeys, viii.725–6 *Burginda, author (fl. 7th–early 8th cent.): Patrick Sims-Williams, viii.803 Byrhtferth of Ramsey, monk and scholar (fl. c.986–c.1016): Michael Lapidge, ix.332–3; DNB Henry Bradley Byrhtnoth, abbot of Ely (d. 996): A. F. Wareham, ix.335 Byrnstan, bishop of Winchester (d. 934): Barbara Yorke, ix.340; DNB TFT Cædmon, poet (fl. c. 670): E. G. Stanley, ix.427–8; DNB Henry Bradley Candidus, theologian (fl. 793–802): John Marenbon, ix.888–9

203

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Ceadda, abbot of Lastingham, bishop of Mercia and Lindsey (d. 672?): D. H. Farmer, x.713–14; DNB W. R. W. Stephens Cedd, bishop of East Saxons (d. 664): D. H. Farmer, x.800–1; DNB TFT Cenwulf, abbot of Peterborough, bishop of Winchester (d. 1006): rev. Henrietta Leyser, x.815–17; DNB WH Ceolfrith, abbot of Wearmouth and Jarrow (642–716): S. J. Coates, x.817–19; DNB WH Ceolnoth, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 870): A. F. Wareham, x.819; DNB WH *Christina, princess and nun (fl. 1057–93): Nicholas Hooper, xi.584; DNB TFT Cuthbert, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 760): Ann Williams, xiv.834–6; DNB WH Cuthbert, bishop of Lindisfarne (c. 635–87): David Rollason and R. B. Dobson, xiv.829–34; DNB WH *Cuthburh, supposed abbess of Wimborne (fl. c. 700–18): Barbara Yorke, xiv.837; DNB WH *Cwenthryth, abbess (fl. 811–c.827): S. E. Kelly, xiv.856–7 Cynehelm, martyr (supp. fl. 803x11): David Rollason, xiv.860–1 Cynesige, archbishop of York (d. 1060): Janet Cooper, xiv.861; DNB WH Cynewulf, poet (fl. 9th cent.): E. G. Stanley, xiv.863–4; DNB L. T. Smith Cyngar, holy man (supp. fl. early 8th cent.): Marios Costambeys, xiv.864–5; DNB WH Daniel, bishop of Winchester (d. 745): Barbara Yorke, xv.63; DNB Edmund Venables Denewulf, bishop of Winchester (d. 908): Barbara Yorke, xv.770–1 Deusdedit, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 664): Alan Thacker, xv.929; DNB T. A. Archer Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 988): Michael Lapidge, xvii.347–53; DNB WH Eadberht, bishop of Lindisfarne (d. 698): Alan Thacker, xvii.522; DNB WH *Eadburh, abbess (probably of Wimborne): (fl. c. 716–46): Barbara Yorke, xvii.523–4 *Eadburh, nun (921x4–951x3): Barbara Yorke, xvii.524–5 *Eadburh, abbess of Thanet (d. 751): Barbara Yorke, xvii.523; DNB WH Eadfrith, bishop of Lindisfarne (d. 721?): Alan Thacker, xvii.526; DNB TFT Eadsige, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1050): rev. Mary Frances Smith, xvii.539; DNB WH Eadwig Basan, monk and scribe (fl. c. 1020): Richard Gameson, xvii.542–3 Ealdred, archbishop of York (d. 1069): M. K. Lawson, rev. Vanessa King, xvii.552–4 Ealdwulf, archbishop of York (d. 1002): rev. Mary Frances Smith, xvii.554; DNB WH Eanbald (I): archbishop of York (d. 796): David Rollason, xvii.556–7; DNB WH Eanbald (II): archbishop of York (fl. 796–803): David Rollason, xvii.557; DNB WH Earconwald, abbot of Chertsey, bishop of the East Saxons (d. 693): Patrick Wormald, xvii.559–60; DNB WH Eata, bishop of Hexham (d. 685/6): Alan Thacker, xvii.605–6; DNB WH Ecgberht, archbishop of York (d. 766): Henry Mayr-Harting, xvii.635–6; DNB WH Ecgberht, church reformer (639–729): Henry Mayr-Harting, xvii.634–5; DNB TFT *Ecgburh, nun (fl. c. 717): Patrick Sims-Williams, xvii.639 Ecgwine, bishop of Worcester (d. 717): Michael Lapidge, xvii.640–1 *Edith, nun (961x4–984x7): Barbara Yorke, xvii.737–8; DNB WH

204

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Ernulf, bishop of Rochester (1039/40–1124): P. Cramer, xviii.511–12; DNB R. L. Poole *Eve of Wilton, Benedictine nun and anchoress (c. 1058–c. 1125): Henrietta Leyser, lix.667 Felix, bishop of the East Angles (d. 647/8): Marios Costambeys, xix.253; DNB Mandell Creighton Feologeld, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 832): rev. Marios Costambeys, xix.334; DNB WH Florence of Worcester, monk and chronicler (d. 1118): P. McGurk, lx.292; DNB WH Folcard, monk, musician and hagiographer (d. after 1085): Frank Barlow, xix.204–5; DNB WH Fredericus, bishop of Utrecht (d. 838): Marios Costambeys, xix.914–15; DNB Henry Bradley Fridugisus, abbot and scholar (d. 833): Mary Garrison, xx.27–8 Frithegod, cleric and poet (fl. c. 950–8): Michael Lapidge, xx.49; DNB WH Frithestan, bishop of Winchester (d. 932/3): Barbara Yorke, xx.49–50 *Frithuswith, abbess of Oxford (d. 727): John Blair, xx.50–1; DNB WH Giso, bishop of Wells (d. 1088): Julia Barrow, xxii.358–9; DNB WH Godfrey of Winchester, poet and prior of Winchester (b. before 1055, d. 1107): A. G. Rigg: lix.688–9; DNB CLK Goscelin, monk, musician, and hagiographer (b. c. 1035, d. in or after 1107): Frank Barlow, xxii.1020–1; DNB T. A. Archer, Grimbald, monk, musician, and hagiographer (d. 901?): Richard W. Pfaff, xxiv.19–20; DNB WH Guthlac, hermit (674–715): Henry Mayr-Harting, xxiv.301–2; DNB Kate Norgate Hadrian, abbot of St Peter’s and St Paul’s, Canterbury (630x7–709): Michael Lapidge, xxiv.437–8 Hædde, bishop of Winchester (d. 705/6): Barbara Yorke, xxiv.439–40; DNB WH Haimo [Haymo], archdeacon of Canterbury (supp. fl. 1054): Peter Damian-Grint, xxiv.479; DNB CLK Hereberht, hermit (d. 687): rev. Marios Costambeys, xxvi.763; DNB CLK Hermann, Benedictine monk and hagiographer (fl. 1070–1100): Antonia Gransden, xxvi.787–8; DNB WH Hermann, bishop of Ramsbury and of Sherborne (d. 1078): Julia Barrow, xxvi.787–8; DNB WH *Hild, abbess of Strensall-Whitby (614–80): Alan Thacker, xxvii.90–1; DNB Edmund Venables *Hildelith, abbess of Barking (fl. c. 700): Michael Lapidge, xxvii.91–2; DNB CLK Honorius, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 653): rev. N. P. Brooks, xxvii.910–11; DNB WH *Hugeburc, nun and hagiographer (fl. 760–80): Carolyne Larrington, xxviii.599–600 Hygbald, bishop of Lindisfarne (d. 802/3): Mary Garrison, xxix.158–9 Hygeberht, archbishop of Lichfield (d. in or after 803): Ann Williams, xxix.160; DNB WH

205

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Ingulf, abbot of Crowland (c. 1045–1109): Edmund King, xxix.294–5; DNB WH Jænberht, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 792): Marios Costambeys, xxix.580; DNB WH John of Beverley, bishop of York (d. 721): D. M. Palliser, xxx.193–4; DNB WH John the Old Saxon, scholar and abbot of Athelney (fl. c. 885–904): Michael Lapidge, xxx.204 Justus, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 627x31): rev. N. P. Brooks, xxx.845–6; DNB WH Lantfred, monk and author (fl. 974–84): Michael Lapidge, xxxii.545–6; DNB CLK Laurence, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 619): N. P. Brooks, xxxii.691; DNB WH Lebuin, missionary (d. c. 775): Marios Costambeys, xxxiii.22–3; DNB WH *Leoba, abbess of Tauberbischofsheim (d. 782): Barbara Yorke, xxxiii.394–5 Leofric, bishop of Exeter (d. 1072): Frank Barlow, xxxiii.397; DNB WH Leofric, priest and rebel (fl. 1070–1071): David Roffe, xxvi.767; DNB MB Leuthere, bishop of Winchester (d. 675/6): Paul Fouracre, xxxiii.516 Lul, archbishop of Mainz (c. 710–786): Marios Costambeys, xxxiv.740–1 Lyfing, abbot of Tavistock, bishop of Worcester (d. 1046): Barlow Frank, xxxiv.858; DNB WH Lyfing, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1020): Emma Mason, xxxiv.857–8; DNB WH Mannig, abbot of Evesham and craftsman (d. 1066): John Blair, xxxvi.483–4 Mellitus, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 624): N. P. Brooks, xxxvii.751–2; DNB MB *Mildburg, abbess of Much Wenlock (d. in or after 716): John Blair, xxxviii.111–12; DNB WH *Mildrith, abbess of Minster in Thanet (fl. 716–c. 733): David Rollason, xxxviii.126–7; DNB WH Milred, bishop of Worcester (d. 774/5): Patrick Sims-Williams, xxxviii.330; DNB WH Nothhelm, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 739): rev. Henry Mayr-Harting, xli.212–13; DNB WH Oda, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 958): Catherine Cubitt and Marios Costambeys, xli.484–7; DNB WH Oftfor, bishop of Worcester (d. c. 699): Patrick Sims-Williams, xli.556–7; DNB MB Oscytel, archbishop of York (d. 971): Julia Barrow, xlii.41–2; DNB MB Osgar, abbot of Abingdon (d. 984): rev. Marios Costambeys, xlii.42; DNB MB *Osgyth, abbess of Chich (fl. late 7th cent.): John Blair, xlii.45–6; DNB WH Osmund, bishop of London (d. 805x11): rev. Marios Costambeys, xlii.58; DNB WH Oswald, archbishop of York (d. 992): N. P. Brooks, xlii.79–84; DNB WH Oswald, monk and scholar (fl. 1006–1042): Michael Lapidge, xlii.84; DNB MB Paulinus, bishop of York and of Rochester (d. 644): Marios Costambeys, xliii.166–8; DNB WH Pehthelm, bishop of Whithorn (d. 735): rev. Marios Costambeys, xliii.441; DNB MB Pehtwine, bishop of Whithorn (d. 776/7): rev. Marios Costambeys, xliii.441; DNB MB Petronius, abbot of St Peter’s and St Paul’s, Canterbury (d. 654?): rev. Marios Costambeys, xliii.927–8; DNB WH Petrus, abbot of St Peter’s and St Paul’s, Canterbury (d. 605x11): rev. Marios Costambeys, xliii.928–9; DNB WH Plegemund, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 914): A. F. Wareham, xliv.574–5; DNB WH

206

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Putta, bishop (d. c. 688): Patrick Sims-Williams, xlv.601–2; DNB WH Regenbald, priest and chancellor (fl. 1050–86): Mary Frances Smith, xlvi.364–5; DNB J. H. Round Robert of Jumièges, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1052/1055): H. E. J. Cowdrey, xlvii.122–3; DNB WH Rodulf, missionary bishop, abbot of Abingdon (d. 1052): L. Abrams, xlvii.506 Romanus, bishop of Rochester (d. in or before 627): rev. Marios Costambeys, xlvii.656; DNB C. R. Beazley Seaxwulf, abbot of Peterborough, bishop of Lichfield (d. 692): John Blair, xlix.617; DNB WH Sigeric, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 994): Emma Mason, l.593; DNB WH Sigfrid, co-abbot of St Peter’s, Wearmouth (d. 689): rev. Marios Costambeys, l.593–4; DNB WH Sigfrid, missionary bishop (fl. mid-10th–early 11th cent.): L. Abrams, l.594 Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 1072): H. E. J. Cowdrey, lii.774–7; DNB WH Siward, abbot of Chertsey, bishop of Rochester (d. 1075): rev. Marios Costambeys, l.813–14; DNB WH Siward, bishop and coadjutor-archbishop (d. 1048): rev. Marios Costambeys, l.812; DNB WH Spearhafoc, abbot of Abingdon (fl. 1047–1051): John Blair, li.761–2 Stephen of Ripon, priest (fl. c. 670–c. 730): Alan Thacker, lii.423–4; DNB WH Sualo, hermit (d. 794): Marios Costambeys, liii.261; DNB CLK Sulcard, monk of Westminster (fl. c. 1080): Barbara F. Harvey, liii.292; DNB MB Swithberht, bishop and missionary (d. 713): Marios Costambeys, liii.523; DNB MB Swithun, bishop of Winchester (d. 863): Barbara Yorke, liii.523–5; DNB WH Tatwine, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 734): Michael Lapidge, liii.831–2; DNB WH Theodore of Tarsus, archbishop of Canterbury (602–90): Michael Lapidge, liv.226–30; DNB WH Thurcytle, abbot of Crowland (d. 975?): C. P. Lewis, liv.709; DNB AMC Tidferth, bishop of Dunwich (d. 816x24): rev. Marios Costambeys, liv.765; DNB AFP Tobias, bishop of Rochester (d. 726): rev. Marios Costambeys, liv.854; DNB AFP Turgot, bishop of St Andrews and hagiographer (c. 1050–1115): Robert Bartlett, lv.577–8; DNB G. W. Sprott Unwona, bishop of Leicester (d. 800x3): rev. Marios Costambeys, lv.921; DNB AFP *Walburg, abbess of Heidenheim (c. 710–79?): Carolyne Larrington, lvi.758; DNB MB Waldhere, bishop of the East Saxons (fl. 694–704/5): Marios Costambeys, lvi.781–2; DNB WH Walkelin, bishop of Winchester (d. 1098): M. J. Franklin, lvi.805–6; DNB WH Walter, bishop of Hereford (d. 1079?): Julia Barrow, lvii.156; DNB WH *Werburh, abbess (d. 700x7): Alan Thacker, lviii.164–5; DNB WH Werferth, bishop of Worcester (d. 907x15): Richard W. Pfaff, lviii.166–7; DNB AMC Wigheard, archbishop-elect of Canterbury (d. 664x7): rev. Marios Costambeys, lviii.842; DNB MB Wigstan, martyr (d. 849): David Rollason, lviii.863

207

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Wilfrid, bishop of Hexham (c. 634–709/10): Alan Thacker, lviii.944–50; DNB WH Willehad, bishop of Bremen (d. 789): Marios Costambeys, lix.16; DNB AMC William, bishop of London (d. 1075): Julia Barrow, lix.32–3; DNB WH William of Jumièges, monk and author (fl. 1026–70): Elisabeth van Houts, xxx.828 Willibald, bishop of Eichstätt (c. 700–787?): Carolyne Larrington, lix.363; DNB AMC Willibrord, abbot of Echternach (657/8–739): Marios Costambeys, lix.363–8; DNB Mary Tout Wine, bishop (fl. c. 660–c. 675): Barbara Yorke, lix.716; DNB WH Winnebald, abbot of Heidenheim (c. 702–61): Carolyne Larrington, lix.746 Withman, abbot of Ramsey (d. c. 1047): C. P. Lewis, lix.890; DNB AMC Wulfhelm, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 941): Henrietta Leyser, lx.550; DNB WH *Wulfhild, abbess of Barking and Horton (d. after 996): Barbara Yorke, lx.551–2 Wulfred, archbishop of Canterbury (d. 832): N. P. Brooks, lx.552–4; DNB WH Wulfsige, bishop of Sherborne (d. 1002x4): Julia Barrow, lx.555–6 Wulfstan, archbishop of York (d. 955/6): Cyril Hart, lx.557–8 Wulfstan, archbishop of York (d. 1023): Patrick Wormald, lx.558–62; DNB WH Wulfstan, bishop of Worcester (c. 1008–95): Emma Mason, lx.562–4; DNB WH Wulfstan Cantor, monk, hagiographer and poet (fl. 996): Michael Lapidge, lx.564–5; DNB MB *Wulfthryth, abbess of Wilton (d. c. 1000): Barbara Yorke, lx.565 Wulfwig, bishop of Dorchester (d. 1067): Julia Barrow, lx.566–7; DNB AMC c. Secular men and women Ælfgar, earl of Mercia (d. 1062?): Ann Williams, i.380; DNB WH Ælfheah, ealdorman (d. 971): Ann Williams, i.384 Ælfhere, ealdorman of Mercia (d. 983): Ann Williams, i.383–5; DNB WH [Ælfmær or Æthelmær] Eilmer, pioneer of man-powered flight (b. c. 985, d. after 1066): R. M. Thomson, xvii.1022–3; DNB WH Ælfric, ealdorman (d. 1016): Ann Williams, i.385–6; DNB WH Ælfric Cild, magnate (fl. 975–85): Ann Williams, i.384 Ælfstan of Boscombe, nobleman (fl. 1043–65): Ann Williams, i.389 Æthelstan (‘Half-King’), ealdorman (fl. 932–56/7): Cyril Hart, i.428–9; DNB WH Æthelweard, ealdorman and chronicler (d. 998?): Patrick Wormald, i.432–3; DNB WH Æthelwine, ealdorman, founder of Ramsey Abbey (d. 992): Cyril Hart, i.433–4; DNB WH Aio, supposed historian (supp. fl. 950x75): rev. Marios Costambeys, i. 510; DNB C. F. Keary Asgar the staller, nobleman (d. after 1066): Ann Williams, ii.596–7 Bald, supposed physician and medical writer (fl. c. 900): M. L. Cameron, iii.436 Baldwin, magnate (d. 1086x90): Judith A. Green, iii.441; DNB WH Beorhtric, magnate (d. in or before 1066?): Ann Williams, v.315 Beorn Estrithson, magnate (d. 1049): Ann Williams, v.315–16; DNB WH Brorda, ealdorman (d. 799): Alan Thacker, vii.954–5 Byrhtnoth, ealdorman (d. 991): Richard Abels, ix.333–5; DNB WH

208

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Copsi, earl of Northumbria, magnate (d. 1067): William M. Aird, xiii.377; DNB WH *Eadgifu the Fair, magnate (fl. 1066): Ann Williams, xvii.528 Eadnoth the staller (d. 1068): Ann Williams, xvii.531; DNB WH Eadric of Laxfield, magnate (d. in or after 1066?): Ann Williams, xvii.534–5 Eadric Streona, ealdorman of Mercia (1007–17): Simon Keynes, xvii.535–8; DNB WH Eadric the Wild, magnate (fl. 1067–72): Ann Williams, xvii.538–9; DNB WH Eadwine, earl of Mercia (d. 1071): Ann Williams, i.380 Eilmer, see [Ælfmær] Erik of Hlathir, earl of Northumbria (fl. 995–1023): Pauline Stafford, xviii.499–500 Eustace, count of Boulogne (d. c. 1087): Edmund King, xviii.648–9 *Godgifu, noblewoman (d. 1067?): Ann Williams, xxii.574–6; DNB Alexander Gordon Godwine, earl of Wessex (d. 1053): Ann Williams, xxii.626–9; DNB WH Gospatric, earl of Northumbria (d. 1073x5): William M. Aird, xxii.1033–4; DNB WH Guy of Warwick, legendary hero (supp. fl. c. 930): Douglas Gray, xxiv.328–9; DNB Sidney Lee Gyrth, earl of East Anglia (d. 1066): Ann Williams, xxiv.377–8; DNB WH *Gytha, wife of Earl Godwine of Wessex (fl. c. 1022–68): Ann Williams, xxii.628–9; DNB WH Hæsten, viking leader (fl. 882–93): Janet L. Nelson, xxiv.440–1 Hereward [called Hereward the Wake], rebel (fl. 1070–1): David Roffe, xxvi.767–8; DNB TFT Leofric, earl of Mercia, magnate (d. 1057): Ann Williams, xxxiii.395–7; DNB WH Leofwine, earl (d. 1066): Ann Williams, xxxiii.397–8; DNB WH Morcar, magnate (fl. 1065–87): William M. Aird, xxxix.10–11; DNB WH Odda, magnate (d. 1056): Ann Williams, xli.491–2; DNB CLK Ohthere, sea-farer (fl. 871–99): Niels Lund, xli.639; DNB C. R. Beazley Ordgar, landholder (d. 1094?): C. P. Lewis, xli.923; DNB MB Ordgar, landowner (fl. 1066): C. P. Lewis, xli.923; DNB MB Ordgar, magnate (d. 971): C. P. Lewis, xli.922–3; DNB MB Osbern fitz Richard, landowner (fl. c. 1066–88): see Richard Scrob Osgod Clapa, landowner and exile (d. 1054): Ann Williams, xlii.42–3; DNB CLK Oslac, ealdorman (fl. 963–75): Cyril Hart, xlii.51; DNB WH Osulf, magnate (d. 1067): William M. Aird, xlii.72; DNB WH Ralph, earl (d. 1097x9): Ann Williams, xlv.869–70; DNB CLK Ralph, earl of Hereford (d. 1057): Ann Williams, xlv.868–9; DNB WH Ralph the Staller, earl of East Anglia (d. 1068x70): Ann Williams, xlv.873 Richard Scrob, landowner (fl. 1052–66): C. P. Lewis, xlvi.756–7; DNB CLK Robert fitz Wimarc, magnate (d. c. 1070): Ann Williams, xlvii.121–2; DNB J. H. Round Sihtric inn Gamli, viking leader (d. 871): Marios Costambeys, l.597; DNB F. Y. Powell Sihtric inn Ungi, viking leader (d. 871): Marios Costambeys, l.597; DNB F. Y. Powell Siward, earl of Northumbria (d. 1055): William M. Aird, l.812–13; DNB WH Swein, earl (d. 1052): Ann Williams, liii.455–6; DNB WH Thorkell the Tall, viking leader (fl. 1009–23): Richard Abels, liv.586–7; DNB AMC Tostig, magnate (c. 1029–66): William M. Aird, lv.67–9; DNB WH

209

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Tovi the Proud, nobleman (fl. 1018–42): Ann Williams, lv.99–100 Uhtred, earl of Bamburgh (d. 1016): William M. Aird, lv.863–4; DNB WH Ulf Fenisc, magnate (fl. 1066): P. H. Sawyer, lv.864 Ulfcytel, earl of East Anglia (d. 1016): Richard Abels, lv.865; DNB WH Waltheof, earl of Northumbria (c. 1050–76): C. P. Lewis, lvii.187–9; DNB WH Wulfric Spot, founder of Burton Abbey (d. 1002x4): P. H. Sawyer, lx.555; DNB AFP Wulfstan, sea-farer (fl. 880): Tony D. Triggs, lx.556–7 Wulfweard White, landowner (d. 1072x86): Ann Williams, lx.565–6

3. ‘BRITISH’ SUBJECTS ( c. 400–c. 600) a. Kings, consorts and other rulers Arthur, legendary warrior and supposed king of Britain (supp. fl. in or before 6th cent.): O. J. Padel, ii.529–43; DNB C. F. Keary Brochfael Ysgithrog, king of Powys (supp. fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, vii.742–3; DNB WH Brychan Brycheiniog, king of Brycheiniog (fl. c. 500): David E. Thornton, viii.412–13 Cadell Ddyrnllug, king of Powys (fl. 5th cent.): David E. Thornton, ix.402 Constantine III, Roman emperor proclaimed in Britain (d. 411): R. S. O. Tomlin, xiii.33–5 Cunedda, ruler in north Wales (supp. fl. late 4th–5th cent.): Patrick Wormald, xiv.65 Gwallawg, king in Britain (fl. 572x9–585x92): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxiv.336 Llwyarch Hen, legendary hero (supp. fl. late 6th cent.): Jenny Rowland, xxxiv.180; DNB DLT Mynyddog Mwynfawr, king in Britain (supp. fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xl.87 Rhun Hir, king of Gwynedd (fl. 547–c. 600): David E. Thornton, xlvi.611–12; DNB JEL Rhydderch Hen, king of Strathclyde (fl. c. 573–c. 612): David E. Thornton, xlvi.613; DNB JEL Uther Pendragon, supposed king of Britain (supp. fl. late 5th cent.?): O. J. Padel, ii.534; DNB C. F. Keary Vorteporius, king of the Demetae (fl. c. 540): T. M. Charles-Edwards, lvi.594–5 Vortigern, ruler in Britain (fl. 5th cent.): David E. Thornton, lvi.598–9; DNB JEL b. Ecclesiastics Asaf, bishop (supp. fl. 6th cent.): David E. Thornton, ii.584–5; DNB DLT Brynach, founder of the church of Nevern, Pembrokeshire (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, viii.429–30 Cadfan, founder of a religious settlement (supp. fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, ix.408; DNB Arthur Miller Cadog, founder and abbot of Llancarfan (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, ix.410– 12; DNB Arthur Miller

210

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Chrysanthus, bishop of Byzantium (fl. 395): see Roman officials (in section 3c) Cybi, founder of churches (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xiv.857; DNB TFT Cynidr, founder of churches (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xiv.866–7 David, patron saint of Wales (d. 589/601): J. Wyn Evans, xv.277–82; DNB Henry Bradley Deiniol, bishop of Bangor (d. 584): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xv.696; DNB TFT Dogfael, holy man (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xvi.451; DNB TFT Dyfrig, holy man and supposed bishop (supp. fl. c. 475–c. 525): David E. Thornton, xvii.494–5; DNB TFT Faustus, bishop of Riez and theologian (400x10–c. 490): Clare Stancliffe, xix.161–3 Germanus, bishop of Auxerre (d. c. 437/48): Jill Harries, xx.965–6; DNB WH Gildas, author (fl. 5th–6th cent.): François Kerlouégan, xxii.223–5; DNB TFT Illtud, abbot of Llantwit Major (fl. 5th–6th cent.): David E. Thornton, xxix.208–9; DNB DLT Ninian, missionary and bishop (supp. fl. 5th–6th cent.): Dauvit Broun, xl.919; DNB James Mackinnon *Non, mother of St David (fl. 6th cent.): J. Wyn Evans, xv.279; DNB JEL Maglorius, ascetic (fl. late 6th cent.): Julia M. H. Smith, xxxvi.127–8; DNB MB Mawgan, holy man (fl. 5th–6th cent.): Dauvit Broun, xxxvii.479–80; DNB MB Padarn, founder of churches (fl. 6th cent.): Nerys Ann Jones, xlii.315; DNB JEL Paul, bishop of St Pol-de-Léon, Brittany (fl. 6th cent.): Caroline Brett, xliii.126–7; DNB MB Pelagius, theologian (fl. c. 390–418): Gerald Bonner, xliii.455–7; DNB C. R. Beazley Petroc, monk (fl. 6th cent.): Caroline Brett, xliii.927; DNB JEL Peulan, holy man (fl. 6th cent.): David E. Thornton, xliii.966–7; DNB JEL Piran, holy man (supp. fl. 6th cent.): Caroline Brett, xliv.402–3; DNB CLK Samson, bishop (fl. 561/2): Julia M. H. Smith, xlviii.807–8; DNB JEL Seiriol, holy man (fl. 6th cent.): David E. Thornton, xlix.686; DNB JEL Teilo, holy man and bishop (supp. fl. c. 550): David E. Thornton, liv.28–9; DNB JEL Tysilio, holy man (fl. c. 600): David E. Thornton, lv.817; DNB JEL *Ursula, martyr (fl. mid–5th cent.): Richard W. Pfaff, lv.958–9; DNB Mary Tout c. Secular men and women Alypius, Roman official (fl. 360–c. 371): see Roman officials Ambrosius Aurelianus, military leader (fl. 5th cent.): David E. Thornton, i.922; DNB Arthur Miller Aneirin, poet (fl. c. 575–c. 600): Morfydd Owen, ii.141–2; DNB Arthur Miller Dyfnwal Moelmud ap Garbanion, dynast (fl. c. 450–70): Robin Chapman Stacey, xvii.493–4; DNB JEL Gerontius, Roman general (d. 411): R. S. O. Tomlin, xxi.967–8 Merlin, poet and seer (supp. fl. 6th cent.): M. E. Haycock, xxxvii.898–9; DNB CLK Mordaf Hael, dynast (fl. c. 550–c. 575): David E. Thornton, xxxix.11–12; DNB JEL Pabo, chieftain (supp. fl. c. 500): Nerys Ann Jones, xlii.295–6; DNB JEL

211

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Roman officials (act. AD 43–410): A. R. Birley, xlvii.652–6 Taliesin, poet (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, liii.737–8; DNB JEL Victorinus, administrator (fl. 400): see Roman officials

4. ‘WELSH’ SUBJECTS ( c. 600–c. 1100) a. Kings, consorts and other rulers Anarawd ap Rhodri, king in Wales (d. 916): rev. David E. Thornton, ii.12–13; DNB Arthur Miller Bleddyn ap Cynfyn, king of Gwynedd and of Powys (d. 1075): Huw Pryce, vi.198–9 Cadell ab Arthfael, king of Gwent (d. 942): David E. Thornton, ix.401; DNB TFT Cadell ap Rhodri, king in Wales (d. 910): David E. Thornton, ix.401–2; DNB TFT Cadwaladr ap Cadwallon, king of Gwynedd (d. 664/82): David E. Thornton, ix.423–4; DNB TFT Cadwallon ap Cadfan, king of Gwynedd (d. 634): T. M. Charles-Edwards, ix.425–6; DNB W. R. W. Stephens Cadfan ab Iago, king of Gwynedd (fl. c. 616–c. 625): David E. Thornton, ix.408; DNB TFT Caradog ap Gruffudd ap Rhydderch, king in Wales (d. 1081): David Walker, x.10–11; DNB TFT Caradog ap Rhydderch, king in Wales (d. 1035): David Walker, x.10–11; DNB TFT Cynan Garwyn, king of Powys (fl. c. 550–c. 600): David E. Thornton, xiv.858 Cynddylan ap Cyndrwyn, king in Wales (fl. c. 616–c. 641): David E. Thornton, xiv.859–60 Cyngen ap Cadell, king of Powys (d. 854/5): David E. Thornton, xiv.865–6 Gruffudd ap Cynan, king of Gwynedd (1054/5–1137): Huw Pryce, xxiv.133–5; DNB TFT Gruffudd ap Llywelyn, king of Gwynedd and of Deheubarth (d. 1063): David Walker, xxiv.136–7; DNB TFT Gruffudd ap Rhydderch, king in Wales (d. 1055): David Walker, x.10; DNB TFT Gwynllyw, king of Glywysing (fl. 6th cent.): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxiv.360–1; DNB TFT Hywel [called Hywel Fychan], king of Gwynedd (d. 825): David E. Thornton, xxix.171–2; DNB TFT Hywel ab Edwin, king of Deheubarth (d. 1044): rev. David E. Thornton, xxix.172; DNB TFT Hywel ab Ieuaf, king of Gwynedd (d. 985): David E. Thornton, xxix.172–3; DNB TFT Hywel Dda, king in Wales (d. 950): David E. Thornton, xxix.175–6; DNB TFT Iago ab Idwal ap Meurig, king of Gwynedd (d. 1039): Huw Pryce, xxiv.133; DNB DLT Iago ab Idwal Foel, king of Gwynedd (d. c. 979): David E. Thornton, xxix.177; DNB DLT Idwal ap Meurig, dynast (d. 996/7): David E. Thornton, xxix.190; DNB DLT Idwal Foel, king of Gwynedd (d. 942): David E. Thornton, xxix.190–1; DNB DLT

212

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Iorwerth ap Bleddyn, Welsh prince (d. 1111): Huw Pryce, vi.199; DNB TFT Llywelyn ap Seisyll, king of Gwynedd and of Deheubarth (d. 1023): David Walker, xxiv.136; DNB TFT Maelgwn Gwynedd, king of Gwynedd (d. 547/49): David E. Thornton, xxxvi.100; DNB JEL Maredudd ab Owain, king of Gwynedd and of Deheubarth (d. 999): David E. Thornton, xxxvi.625–6; DNB JEL Merfyn Frych, king of Gwynedd (d. 844): David E. Thornton, xxxvii.885–6; DNB JEL Morgan ab Athrwys, king of Glywysing (d. c. 665/710): David E. Thornton, xxxix.94– 5; DNB JEL Morgan Hen, king of Morgannwg (d. 974): David E. Thornton, xxxix.95–6; DNB JEL Owain ab Edwin, ruler in Wales (d. 1105): David E. Thornton, xlii.176–7; DNB JEL Owain ap Hywel, king of Deheubarth (b. before 929, d. 988): David E. Thornton, xlii.177 Owain, Sir, ap Cadwgan, prince of Powys (d. 1116): Huw Pryce, vi.199; DNB JEL Rhiwallon ap Cynfyn, king of Gwynedd and of Powys (d. 1069): Huw Pryce, vi.198–9; DNB JEL Rhodri Mawr, king of Gwynedd (b. before 844, d. 878): David E. Thornton, xlvi.611; DNB JEL Rhys ab Owain, ruler in Wales (d. 1078): rev. David E. Thornton, xlvi.614; DNB JEL Rhys ap Tewdwr, ruler in Wales (d. 1093): rev. David E. Thornton, xlvi.619; DNB JEL Selyf ap Cynan, king of Powys (d. 613x16): David E. Thornton, xlix.737–8 Trahaearn ap Caradog, ruler in Wales (d. 1081): rev. David E. Thornton, lv.203–4; DNB JEL Urien Rheged, king of Rheged (fl. c. 560–c. 580): David E. Thornton, lv.944; DNB JEL b. Ecclesiastics Asser, bishop of Sherborne (d. 909): Patrick Wormald, ii.759–60; DNB [Anon] Beulan, priest (fl. c. 1000–c. 1050): David E. Thornton, v.564–5; DNB WH Beuno, holy man (d. 653/9): Patrick Sims-Williams, v.565–6; DNB Alexander Mackie Bleddri, bishop in south-east Wales (d. 1022/3): rev. K. L. Maund, vi.198; DNB TFT Cyfeilliog, bishop of Ergyng (d. 927): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xiv.857–8; DNB TFT Elfoddw, archbishop of Gwynedd (d. 809): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xviii.31 Euddogwy, holy man (supp. fl. late 6th cent.): David E. Thornton, xviii.643; DNB JEL Gudwal, bishop of St. Malo (supp. fl. 7th cent.): O. J. Padel, xxiv.165–6; DNB CLK *Gulval, Cornish saint (fl. before 1000): O. J. Padel, xxiv.165–6; DNB CLK *Gwenfrewi, nun (fl. c. 650): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxiv.340–1; DNB MB Herewald, bishop in south-east Wales and the border (d. 1104/7): K. L. Maund, xxvi.766–7; DNB TFT Neot, monk and hermit (d. in or before 878): Michael Lapidge, xl.424; DNB MB Rhigyfarch ap Sulien, scholar and teacher (1056/7–99): Michael Lapidge, xlvi.589–90; DNB JEL Sulien, bishop of St David’s (c. 1012–91): rev. Nancy Edwards, liii.292; DNB JEL

213

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. c. Secular men and women Meilyr Brydydd, poet (fl. 1081–1137): rev. R. Geraint Gruffydd, xxxvii.726; DNB JEL Nennius, scholar (fl. c. 770–c. 810): David E. Thornton, xl.423–4; DNB CLK

5. ‘IRISH’ SUBJECTS ( c. 400 –c. 1100) a. Kings, consorts and other rulers Áed Allán mac Fergaile, high-king of Ireland (d. 743): T. M. Charles-Edwards, i.373 Áed mac Néill, high-king of Ireland (d. 879): Benjamin T. Hudson, i.373–4 Áed Oirdnide mac Néil, high-king of Ireland (d. 819): T. M. Charles-Edwards, i.374–5 Áed Sláine mac Diarmata, joint high-king of Ireland (d. 604): Philip Irwin, i.375–6 Áed [in Gaí Bernaig] Ua Conchobair, king of Connacht (d. 1067): Seán Duffy, lv.835–6; DNB NM Áed Uaridnach mac Domnaill, high-king of Ireland (d. 612): T. M. Charles-Edwards, i.376 Ailill Molt, high-king of Ireland (d. c. 482): Philip Irwin, i.490 Báetán mac Cairill, king of Ulster (d. 581): Philip Irwin, iii.212 Blaímac [Blathmac] mac Áeda, joint high-king of Ireland (d. 665): T. M. CharlesEdwards, vi.70 Brian Bóruma, high-king of Ireland (c. 941–1014): Seán Duffy, vii.533–8; DNB NM Cathal mac Conchobair, king of Connacht (d. 1010): Seán Duffy, x.536; DNB NM Cathal mac Finguine, king of Munster (d. 742): Philip Irwin, x.536–7 Cellach mac Máele Coba, joint high-king of Ireland (d. 658): T. M. Charles-Edwards, x.805–6 Cellach Cualann, king of Leinster (d. 715): Charles Doherty, x.804–5 Cellachán mac Buadacháin, king of Munster (d. 954): Benjamin T. Hudson, x.806; DNB NM Cenn Fáelad mac Blaímaic, high-king of Ireland (d. 675): T. M. Charles-Edwards, x.810 Cerball mac Dúngaile, king of Osraige (d. 888): Benjamin T. Hudson, x.821–2; DNB NM Cináed mac Írgalaig, high-king of Ireland (d. 728): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xi.712–13 Coirpre mac Néill, high-king of Ireland (supp. fl. 485–94): Philip Irwin, xii.441 Conall Cóel mac Máele Coba, joint high-king of Ireland (d. 654): T. M. CharlesEdwards, x.805–6 Conchobar mac Donnchada, high-king of Ireland (d. 833): Benjamin T. Hudson (online update, October 2005) Congal Cáech, high-king of Ireland (d. 637): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xii.929 Congal Cendmagair, high-king of Ireland (d. 710): Charles Doherty, xii.929–30 Congalach mac Máele Mithig, king of Brega and high-king of Ireland (d. 956): Benjamin T. Hudson, xii.930 Cormac mac Cuilennáin, king of Munster and bishop (d. 908): Paul Russell, xiii.434–5; DNB NM Dál Riata, kings of: see sect. 6a, ‘Scottish’ kings and other rulers

214

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Diarmait mac Cerbaill, high-king of Ireland (d. 565): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xvi.22–3 Diarmait mac Máel na mBó, king of Leinster (d. 1072): Benjamin T. Hudson, xvi.23 Domnall mac Áeda, high-king of Ireland (d. 642): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xvi.489–90 Domnall mac Murchada, high-king of Ireland (d. 763): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xvi.490 Domnall ua Néill, high-king of Ireland (d. 980): Benjamin T. Hudson, xvi.490–1 Donnchad Donn mac Flainn, high-king of Ireland (d. 944): Charles Doherty, xvi.532–3 Donnchad mac Briain, king of Munster (d. 1064): Damian Bracken, xxxv.65–7; DNB NM Donnchad mac Domnaill, high-king of Ireland (733–97): Charles Doherty, xvi.533–4 Feidlimid mac Crimthainn, king of Munster (d. 847): Damian Bracken, xix.235–6 Fergal mac Máele Dúin, high-king of Ireland (d. 722): Charles Doherty, xix.338–9 Fiachu mac Néill, king in Ireland (fl. 510–16): Philip Irwin, xix.462 Fínsnechtae Fledach mac Dúnchada, high-king of Ireland (d. 695): T. M. CharlesEdwards, xix.629 Flaithbertach mac Loingsig, high-king of Ireland (d. 765): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xix.979 Flaithbertach ua Néill, king of Ailech (d. 1036): Seán Duffy, lv.844–5; DNB NM Flann Sinna, high-king of Ireland (847/8–91): Charles Doherty, xix.998–9 Fogartach mac Néill, high-king of Ireland (d. 724): Philip Irwin, xix.199–200 Forggus mac Muirchertaig, joint high-king of Ireland (d. c. 566): T. M. CharlesEdwards, xix.366–7 Godred Crovan, king of Man and the Isles (d. 1095): Seán Duffy, xxii.600–1 *Gormlaith, queen in Ireland and tragic heroine (d. 948): Elva Johnston, xxii.1011 Lethlobar mac Loingsig, king of Ulster (d. 873): Benjamin T. Hudson, xxxiii.509–10; DNB NM Lóegaire mac Néill, high-king of Ireland (fl. 5th cent.): Philip Irwin, xxxiv.292–3; DNB NM Loingsech mac Óenguso, high-king of Ireland (d. 704): Máirín Ní Dhonnchadha, xxxiv.329; DNB NM Lugaid mac Lóegairi, high-king of Ireland (d. 507): Philip Irwin, xxxiv.724; DNB NM Máel Sechnaill mac Domnaill, high-king of Ireland (948–1022): Benjamin T. Hudson, xxxvi.101–2; DNB NM Máel Sechnaill mac Máele Ruanaid, high-king of Ireland (d. 862): T. M. CharlesEdwards, xxxvi.102–4; DNB NM Muirchertach mac Muiredaig, high-king of Ireland (d. 534): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxxix.681–2; DNB NM Muirchertach mac Néill, king of Ailech (d. 943): Benjamin T. Hudson, xxxix.682–3; DNB NM Muirchertach ua Briain, high-king of Ireland (c. 1050–1119): Damian Bracken, lv.830–2; DNB NM Nath Í mac Fiachrach, high-king of Ireland (supp. d. 445?): Philip Irwin, xl.264 Niall Frossach mac Fergaile, high-king of Ireland (718–78): Philip Irwin, xl.743–4; DNB NM

215

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Niall [Caille] mac Áeda, king of Ailech and high-king of Ireland (d. 846): Benjamin T. Hudson, xl.744–5; DNB NM Niall [Glúndub] mac Áeda, king of Ailech and high-king of Ireland (c. 869–919): Benjamin T. Hudson, xl.745; DNB NM Niall mac Eochada, king of Ulaid (d. 1063): Benjamin T. Hudson, xl.746; DNB NM Niall mac Maíl Shechnaill, king of Ailech (d. 1061): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xl.746–7; DNB NM Níall Noígíallach, high-king of Ireland (d. c. 452): Fergus Kelly, xl.747–8; DNB NM Nigel [= Niall Glúndub mac Áeda] (d. 919): Marios Costambeys, xl.900; DNB AMC Óláf Guthfrithson, king of Dublin and of Northumbria (d. 941): Benjamin T. Hudson, xli.662–3; DNB AMC Óláf Sihtricson, king of Dublin and of Northumbria (c. 926–81): Benjamin T. Hudson, xli.663–5; DNB AMC Ragnall Guthfrithson, viking king (fl. 943–4): Marios Costambeys, xlv.796–7; DNB AMC Ruaidrí ua Canannáin, king of Cenél Conaill (d. 950): Charles Doherty, xlviii.62–3 Ruaidrí [na Saide Buide] ua Conchobair, king of Connacht (d. 1118): Seán Duffy, lv.836; DNB NM Sechnassach mac Blathmaic, high-king of Ireland (d. 671): Philip Irwin, xlix.621 Sihtric, king of Dublin (d. 1042): Benjamin T. Hudson, l.596–7; DNB F. Y. Powell Suibne Menn mac Fiachnai, high-king of Ireland (d. 628): T. M. Charles-Edwards, liii.290 Toirdelbach ua Briain, king of Munster (1009–86): Damian Bracken, lv.832–3; DNB NM Tuathal Máelgarb mac Cormaic, high-king of Ireland (fl. 535–9): T. M. CharlesEdwards, lv.484–5; DNB NM b. Ecclesiastics Adomnán, abbot of Iona and writer (627/8?–704): Máirín Ní Dhonnchadha, i.353–6; DNB J. T. Gilbert Áed mac Bricc, bishop of Rahugh, Killare and Slieve League; saint of Cenél Fiachach (d. 589): see Meath, saints of Áedán, missionary and bishop (d. 651): Henry Mayr-Harting, i.376–7; DNB Mandell Creighton Ailbe, bishop, church founder, saint of Munster (d. 534?): see Munster, saints of Ailerán, scholar (d. 665): Thomas O’Loughlin, i.489–90 Airbertach mac Cosse Dobráin, poet (d. 1016): Peter J. Smith, i.511–12 Assicus, holy man (fl. c. 480): see Ulster, saints of *Athracht ingen Thaláin, holy woman (fl. c. 500): see Connacht, saints of Béoáed mac Ocláin, bishop (d. (520/24): see Connacht, saints of Berach mac Amargin, holy man (fl. late 6th–early 7th cent.): see Connacht, saints of Brendan mac Nemainn, holy man (d. (565/73): see Meath, saints of Brendan of Clonfert, holy man (d. 577): see Connacht, saints of *Brigit, patron saint of Kildare (439/52–524/6): T. M. Charles-Edwards, vii.650–4; DNB TO

216

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Brón mac Icni, holy man (d. 512): see Connacht, saints of *Brónach, holy woman (fl. 5th–6th cent.?): see Ulster, saints of Buíte mac Brónaig, holy man (d. 519/20): see Meath, saints of Caillín mac Niataig, holy man (fl. 6th cent.): see Meath, saints of Caimín, holy man (d. 644): see Munster, saints of Cainnech moccu Dálann, holy man (521/7–599/600): see Munster, saints of *Cairech Dergain, holy woman (d. 577/9): see Connacht, saints of Cairnech, holy man (fl. 5th–early 6th cent.): see Meath, saints of Camulacus, holy man (fl. 5th cent.?): see Meath, saints of *Canir, saint (fl. 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of Carthach mac Fianáin, holy man (fl. late 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of Catroe, abbot of St Felix, Metz (900/1–971): Alan Macquarrie, x.559–60; DNB T. A. Archer Cellach, bishop of Killala (fl. 6th–7th cent.): Paul Russell, x.803; DNB TO Cellán, abbot of Péronne and writer (d. 706): Michael Lapidge, x.806–7 Céthech, bishop (fl. 5th cent.): see Connacht, saints of Cianán mac Sétnai, saint (d. 489): see Meath, saints of Ciarán mac int Shaír, saint (c. 515–584/9): see Meath, saints of Ciarán mac Luaigne, bishop and patron of Ossory (fl. 450–500): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Clement, alleged heretic (fl. 744–7): Timothy Reuter, xii.18–19; DNB R. L. Poole Cóemgen, founder of Glenn Dá Locha (fl. 7th cent.): see Leinster, saints of; DNB TO Coirpre Crom mac Feradaig, bishop of Clonmacnoise (d. 904): see Meath, saints of; DNB TO Colcu ua Duinechda, scriba, and probably bishop of Clonmacnoise (d. 796): see Meath, saints of; DNB TO Colmán, bishop of Lindisfarne (d. 676): Marios Costambeys, xii.756–7; DNB WH Colmán Elo, saint (d. 611): see Meath, saints of; DNB TO Colmán mac Léníne, saint (530–606): see Munster, saints of Colum mac Crimthainn, monastic founder (d.548): see Munster, saints of Columbanus, missionary and monastic founder (d. 615): Rob Meens, xii.810–13; DNB WH Comgall mac Sétnai, monastic founder (511/16–602): see Ulster, saints of; DNB T. A. Archer Comgán mac Dá Cherda, possible abbot of Emly (d. 645): see Munster, saints of Commán mac Fáelchon, patron of Roscommon (d. 747): see Connacht, saints of; DNB TO Conlaíd, patron of Kildare (d. 518/520): T. M. Charles-Edwards, vii.650; DNB TO Conn na mBocht, ecclesiastical leader (d. 1060): Seán Duffy, xii.957–8; DNB TO Connacht, saints of, holy men and women believed to have been buried within the province of Connacht (act. c. 400–c. 800): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xii.960–3 Cormac mac Eogain, saint in Connacht (fl. 6th cent.): see Connacht, saints of; DNB TO Cormac ua Liatháin, monastic founder and navigator (fl. late 6th cent.): see Meath, saints of

217

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. *Cranat ingen Buicín, saint (fl. 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of Crónán moccu Éile, monastic founder (d. 665): see Munster, saints of; DNB T. A. Archer Cumméne Fota, bishop of Clonfert and Ardfert (c. 591–662): see Connacht, saints of Daig mac Cairill, saint of Ulster (d. 587): see Ulster, saints of *Dar Lugdach, abbess of Kildare (d. 525/7): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xv.105; DNB TO Déclán mac Eircc, saint of Munster (fl. late 5th cent.): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Decuman, holy man (fl. 6th cent.): David E. Thornton, xv.663–4; DNB WH Deicolus, Benedictine monk and hermit (d. c. 625): Dagmar Ó Riain-Raedel, xv.695; DNB TO *Dergain, saint (d. 577–9): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxii.963 Díchu mac Trichim, saint (fl. 5th cent.): see Ulster, saints of Disibod, holy man (supp. d. 674): Marios Costambeys, xvi.264; DNB TO Do Biu mac Comgaill, saint (fl. 5th cent.?): see Ulster, saints of Donatus, bishop of Fiesole (d. 876): Paul Russell, xvi.520–1; DNB TO Donngus Ua hAingliu, bishop of Dublin (d. 1095): M. T. Flanagan, lv.842–3; DNB TO Dub dá Leithe, abbot of Armagh (d. 1064): Benjamin T. Hudson, xvii.9–10; DNB TO Dublitter, saint of Meath (d. 796): see Meath, saints of Dúnán, bishop of Dublin (d. 1074): Benjamin T. Hudson, xvii.199–200; DNB TO Dúngal, astronomer and theologian (fl. c. 800–27): David Ganz, xvii.297–8; DNB TO *Dympna, martyr (fl. late 6th–early 7th cent.): Nathalie Stalmans, xvii.505–6; DNB TO Énda mac Conaill, saint of Munster (fl. 6th cent.?): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Eochaid ua Flannucáin, poet and historian (c. 936–1004): John Carey, xviii.472–3 Erc mac Dega, saint of Meath (d. 513): see Meath, saints of *Ercnat ingen Dáire, saint of Ulster (fl. 5th–6th cent.): see Ulster, saints of Éogan mac Dega, saint of Ulster (fl. late 6th cent.): see Ulster, saints of Erhard, bishop of Regensburg (d. before 784): Marios Costambeys, xviii.496–7; DNB TO Fachtna mac Mongaig, saint of Munster (fl. 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Féchín moccu Cháe, saint of Meath (d. 665): see Meath, saints of; DNB NM Fiachra, monastic founder (fl. mid–7th cent.): Elva Johnston, xix.461–2; DNB TO Finán, missionary and bishop of Lindisfarne (d. 661): R. Jayatilaka, xix.549–50 Fínán Cam mac Móenaig, saint of Meath (fl. late 6th–early 7th cent.): see Meath, saints of Findbarr mac Amairgin, saint of Munster (fl. 6th cent.?): see Munster, saints of Findbarr moccu Fiatach, saint of Ulster (d. 579): see Ulster, saints of Findchú mac Finnloga, saint of Munster (d. 655/65): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Finnián mac Findloga, saint of Meath (d. 549/51): see Meath, saints of; DNB TO Fintan, saint of Leinster (d. 603?): see Leinster, saints of; DNB TO Finten, saint of Leinster (fl. 7th cent.): see Leinster, saints of; DNB TO Flann mac Lonáin, poet (d. 891x918): Peter J. Smith, xix.996–7; DNB NM Flann Mainistrech, poet and historian (d. 1056): John Carey, xix.997–8; DNB NM

218

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Flannán mac Toirrdelbaig, saint of Munster (fl. 7th cent.): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Foillan, holy man (d. 653x5): Fouracre, Paul, xix.203–4; DNB TO Forannán, bishop of Donaghmore and abbot of Waulsort (d. 982): Nathalie Stalmans, xix.253–4; DNB TO *Funech, saint of Meath (fl. late 7th cent.): see Meath, saints of Fursa, missionary monk (d. 649): Paul Fouracre, xx.201–2; DNB TO Gall, supposed monastic founder (fl. 615): Dagmar Ó Riain-Raedel, xx.307–8; DNB WH Garald, saint of Connacht (d. 732): see Connacht, saints of; DNB TO Gobbán Sáer, legendary Irish church-builder (supp. fl. 7th. cent.): Elva Johnston, xxxviii.469; DNB TO *Gobnait, Irish saint (fl. 6th cent.?): see Munster, saints of Grellán of Cráeb Grelláin, Irish saint (fl. 5th–6th cent.): see Connacht, saints of; DNB TO Guasacht maccu Buáin, bishop of Granard (Meath): (fl. late 5th cent.): see Meath, saints of Iarlaithe, supposed bishop of Armagh (supp. d. 481): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxix.179– 80; DNB NM Iarlaithe mac Loga, Irish saint (fl. 6th cent.): see Connacht, saints of; DNB NM Ibar mac Lugna, Irish bishop (d. 500/1): see Munster, saints of; DNB W. A. J. Archbold Iona, abbots of: see section 6b, ‘Scottish’ ecclesiastics *Íte ingen Chinn Fhalad, Irish saint (d. 570/7): see Munster, saints of; DNB NM John Scottus [called John Scottus Eriugena], theologian (fl. c. 845–c. 870): John Marenbon, xxx.196–203; DNB R. L. Poole Joseph Scottus, abbot and scholar (d. 791x804): Mary Garrison, xxx.715–16 *Kentigerna, anchorite (d. 734): Henrietta Leyser, xxxi.334 Killian, missionary in Franconia (d. 689?): Dagmar Ó Riain-Raedel, xxxi.548–9; DNB NM Lachtín mac Tarbín, saint (d. 622/7): see Munster, saints of; DNB NM Laisrén mac Decláin, saint (fl. 6th cent.): see Connacht, saints of *Lallóc, saint (fl. 5th cent.): see Connacht, saints of Leinster, saints of (act. c. 550–c. 800): Charles Doherty, xxxiii.277–9 Livinus, missionary (supp. d. 633?): David E. Thornton, xxxiv.88–9; DNB MB Lommán mac Dalláin, saint (fl. 5th–early 6th cent): see Meath, saints of Lonán mac Talmaig, saint (fl. 5th–6th cent.): see Meath, saints of Mac Caírthinn mac Cainnig, saint (d. 506): see Ulster, saints of Mac Creiche mac Pessláin, saint (fl. late 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of Mac Cuilinn mac Cathmoga, saint (d. 496): see Meath, saints of Mac Nisse mac Faíbrig, saint (d. 507/8): see Ulster, saints of Máedóc, saint (fl. 7th cent.): see Leinster, saints of Máel Cétair mac Rónáin, saint (fl. 6th–7th cent.?): see Munster, saints of Máel Muru Othna, poet and historian (d. 887): John Carey, xxxvi.100–1; DNB NM

219

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Máel Ruain, saint (d. 792): see Leinster, saints of Máel Suthain Ua Cerbaill, ecclesiastic (d. 1010): T. M. Charles-Edwards, lv.835; DNB NM Máeldub, abbot (supp. fl. mid–7th cent.): Michael Lapidge, xxxvi.99–100; DNB MB Mainchín mac Setnai, saint (fl. late 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of Manchán mac Silláin, saint (d. 665): see Meath, saints of Marianus Scotus, Benedictine monk and chronicler (1028–82): rev. P. McGurk, xxxvi.665–6; DNB CLK Martin of Laon, scholar (819–75): John J. Contreni, xxxvi.917–18 Meath, saints of (c. 400–c. 900): Nathalie Stalmans; T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxxvii.671–8 Mél, saint (fl. 5th–early 6th cent.): see Meath, saints of; DNB NM Mo Chóe mac Luacháin, saint (d. 497): see Ulster, saints of; DNB TO Mo Chóemóc mac Béoáin, founder of Leamakevoge (d. 656): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Mo Chua mac Bécáin, saint (d. 694): see Connacht, saints of; DNB TO Mo Chutu mac Fínaill, abbot of Rahan (Rathan) and abbot-founder of Lismore (Les Mór Mo Chutu) (d. 637): see Munster, saints of; DNB T. A. Archer Mo Genóc, saint (fl. 5th cent.?): see Meath, saints of Mo Laga mac Duib Dligid, saint (fl. late 6th cent.?): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Mo Laisse mac Nad Froích, saint (d. 564): see Ulster, saints of; DNB NM Mo Ling, abbot of St Mullins (d. 697): Elva Johnston, xxxviii.469–70; DNB TO Mo Lua moccu Óche, saint (554–609): see Munster, saints of; DNB MB Mochtae, saint (d. 535): see Meath, saints of Modestus, missionary (d. c. 763): Luned Mair Davies, xxxviii.486; DNB MB Móenu, bishop of Clonfert, saint (d. 572): see Connacht, saints of; DNB MB *Moninne, nun (d. 517): Robert Bartlett, xxxviii.625; DNB TO Mucnoe, saint (fl. c. 500): see Connacht, saints of Muirchú, biographer (fl. 697): David E. Thornton, xxxix.683; DNB TO Muiredach mac Echdach, saint (fl. early 6th cent.): see Connacht, saints of Munis, bishop (fl. 5th cent.?): see Meath, saints of Munster, saints of (act. c. 450–c. 750): Elva Johnston, xxxix.783–93 Muru mac Feradaig, saint of Ulster (c. 600–c. 650): see Ulster, saints of; DNB NM Nessán, saint of Munster (d. 556): see Munster, saints of Óengus of Tallaght, bishop and writer (fl. c. 830): Pádraig Ó Riain, xli.540–1 Olcán, saint of Ulster (fl. 5th cent.): see Ulster, saints of Palladius, missionary and bishop (fl. 429–c. 433): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xlii.461–2; DNB C. R. Beazley Patrick, patron saint of Ireland (fl. 5th cent.): Clare Stancliffe, xliii.69–80; DNB TO Plechelm, missionary and bishop (fl. 8th cent.): Nathalie Stalmans, xliv.574; DNB MB Probus, writer (fl. 9thx11th cent.): David E. Thornton, xlv.447–8; DNB TO Ruadán mac Fergusa Birn, saint of Munster (d. 584): see Munster, saints of Rumold, martyr (fl. 7th–8th cent.): Nathalie Stalmans, xlviii.115–16; DNB TO Sachellus, saint of Connacht (fl. 5th cent.): see Connacht, saints of

220

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) *Samthann ingen Díaráin, saint of Meath (d. 739): see Meath, saints of Sechnall mac Restitiúit, saint of Meath (fl. 5th cent.): see Meath, saints of Sedulius, religious writer (fl. 7th–8th cent.): Clare Stanfcliffe, xlix.659–60; DNB TO Sedulius Scottus, poet and scholar (fl. 840x51–860x74): Luned Mair Davies, xlix.660–1 Senán mac Geirrcinn, saint of Munster (fl. 6th cent.): see Munster, saints of; DNB TO Sillán moccu Mind, saint of Ulster (d. 610): see Ulster, saints of Tigernach mac Coirpri, saint (d. 549): see Ulster, saints of Tigernach Ua Briaín, abbot of Clonmacnoise (d. 1088): T. M. Charles-Edwards, lv.889; DNB NM Tírechán, bishop and hagiographer (fl. c. 690): David E. Thornton, liv.836–7; DNB TO Ulster, saints of (act. c. 400–c. 600): T. M. Charles-Edwards, lv.872–8 Ultán moccu Chonchobair, saint (d. 657): see Meath, saints of; DNB NM Virgilius, bishop of Salzburg (d. 784): Dagmar Ó Riain-Raedel, lvi.561–2; DNB TO c. Secular men and women Arnórr Earls’ Poet, court poet in Iceland (fl. c. 1046–73): Paul Bibire, ii.511 Barinthus, legendary navigator (supp. fl. 6th cent.): David E. Thornton, iii.857; DNB T. A. Archer Cináed ua hArtacáin, poet (d. 975): John Carey, xi.713; DNB NM Clemens Scotus, grammarian (fl. c. 814–26): V. A. Law, xii.17–8; DNB R. L. Poole Cuán ua Lothcháin, Gaelic poet (d. 1024): John Carey, xiv.574–5; DNB NM Dallán Forgaill, poet (fl. 597): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xiv.954–5; DNB NM Dícuil, scholar and teacher (fl. c. 795–825): John J. Contreni, xvi.132–4; DNB T. A. Archer. Dubthach maccu Lugair, poet (supp. fl. 432): T. M. Charles-Edwards, xvii.22–3; DNB TO Gilla Coémáin, Gaelic poet (fl. 1072): Peter J. Smith, xxii.253 Ívarr [Ívarr inn Beinlausi], viking leader (d. 873): Marios Costambeys, xxix.443–5 Muirchertach, poet (d. 1014/16): Peter J. Smith, xxxix.681; DNB NM Oisín, legendary hero (supp. fl. 3rd–5th cent.): Máirtín Ó Briain, xli.645; DNB [Anon] Óláf the White, viking leader (fl. 853–71): Benjamin T. Hudson, xli.665 Ruben mac Connad, scribe (d. 725): Luned Mair Davies, xlviii.66 Senchán Torpéist, Gaelic poet (fl. 6th–7th cent.): Elva Johnston, xlix.753–4; DNB NM Sihtric Cam, warrior (fl. 962): Benjamin T. Hudson, xli.663–5; DNB F. Y. Powell Turges, viking leader (d. 845): Benjamin T. Hudson, lv.576; DNB AMC Urard mac Coise, Gaelic poet (d. 983x1023): Elva Johnston, lv.936; DNB TO

6. ‘SCOTTISH’ SUBJECTS ( c. 400–c . 1100) a. Kings, consorts and other rulers Adda, king of Bernicia (d. 565?): D. J. Craig, xxix.189; DNB WH Aed Find, king of Dál Riata (d. 778): see Dál Riata, kings of

221

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Aedán mac Gabrán, king of Dál Riata (c. 535–609?): Marjorie Anderson, i.378; DNB [Anon] Ainfcellach, king of Dál Riata (d. 719): see Dál Riata, kings of Alchfrith, sub-king of Deira (fl. c. 655– c. 665): Rosemary Cramp, i.589; DNB WH Alpin, king of Dál Riata (d. 840): see Dál Riata, kings of Brude [Bridei] mac Bile, king of Picts (d. 693): Marjorie O. Anderson, viii.342–3 Brude [Bridei] mac Maelchon, king of Picts (d. c. 586): Marjorie O. Anderson, viii.343 Comgall mac Domangart, king of Dál Riata (d. c. 538): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Conall Crandomna, king of Dál Riata (d. 660): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Conall mac Comgall, king of Dál Riata (d. 574): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Connad Cerr, king of Dál Riata (d. c. 629): see Dál Riata, kings of Constantine I, king in Scotland (d. 876): Dauvit Broun, xiii.32; DNB AJGM Constantine II, king in Scotland (d. 952): Dauvit Broun, xiii.32–3; DNB AJGM Constantine III, king in Scotland (d. 997): Dauvit Broun, xiv.572–3; DNB AJGM Constantine mac Fergus, king of the Picts (d. 820): see Picts, kings of the; DNB AJGM Culen, king in Scotland (d. 971): Dauvit Broun, xiv.572–3; DNB AJGM Dál Riata, kings of (act. c. 500–c. 850): Marjorie O. Anderson, xiv.971–8 Domangart, king of Dál Riata (d. 673): see Dál Riata, kings of Domnall Brecc, king of Dál Riata (d. 642/3): Marjorie O. Anderson, xvi.489; DNB AJGM Donald [Dyfnwal son of Owen], king of the Cumbrians (d. 975): Alan Macquarrie, xvi.494 Donald I [Domnall mac Alpin], king in Scotland (d. 862): Marjorie O. Anderson, xvi.496; DNB AJGM Donald II, king in Scotland (d. 900): Dauvit Broun, xvi.496; DNB AJGM Donald III, king of Scots (b. in or before 1040, d. 1099?): A. A. M. Duncan, xvi.496–7 Drust, king of the Picts (d. 729): see Picts, kings of the Drust, king of the Picts (d. c. 848): see Picts, kings of the Dubh, king in Scotland (d. 966): Dauvit Broun, xvii.11–12; DNB AJGM Duncan I, king of Scots (d. 1040): Dauvit Broun, xvii.218–19; DNB T. A. Archer Dúngal, king of Dál Riata (d. c. 736): see Dál Riata, kings of Eochaid, ruler in Scotland (d. 697): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Eochaid Buide, ruler in Scotland (d. c. 629): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Eoganán, king of the Picts (d. 839): see Picts, kings of the Eugenius I–VIII, Scottish kings (act. c. 350–763): Henry Summerson, xviii.644–5; DNB AJGM Ewen [Eogan], ruler in Scotland (d. 763): see Dál Riata, kings of Ferchar, ruler in Scotland (d. c. 651): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Ferchar Fota, ruler in Scotland (d. 697): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Fergus, ruler in Scotland (d. 501): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Fiannamail, ruler in Scotland (d. 700): see Dál Riata, kings of Gabrán, ruler in Scotland (d. c. 558): see Dál Riata, kings of Giric mac Dúngal, king in Scotland (d. c. 890): Dauvit Broun, xxii.347; DNB AJGM

222

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Ida, king of Bernicia (d. 559/60): D. J. Craig, xxix.188–9; DNB WH Indulf, king in Scotland (bap. 927?, d. 962): Dauvit Broun, xxix.230; DNB AJGM Kenneth I [Cináed mac Alpin], king in Scotland (d. 858): Marjorie O. Anderson, xxxi.278–9; DNB AJGM Kenneth II, king in Scotland (d. 995): Dauvit Broun, xxxi.279–80; DNB AJGM Kenneth III, king in Scotland (d. 1005): Dauvit Broun, xxxi.280; DNB AJGM Lulach, king of Scots (d. 1058): Dauvit Broun, xxxv.60; DNB WH Macbeth, king of Scots (d. 1057): Dauvit Broun, xxxv.59–60; DNB AJGM Malcolm I, king in Scotland (d. 954): Dauvit Broun, xxxvi.278–9; DNB AJGM Malcolm II, king of Scots (d. 1034): Dauvit Broun, xxxvi.279; DNB AJGM Malcolm III, king of Scots (d. 1093): G. W. S. Barrow, xxxvi.279–81; DNB AJGM *Margaret, queen of Scots, consort of Malcolm III (d. 1093): G. W. S. Barrow, xxxvi.632–3; DNB AJGM Muredach, ruler in Scotland (d. 771): see Dál Riata, kings of Nechtan mac Derile, king of Picts (d. 732): Marjorie O. Anderson, xl.313; DNB AJGM Nechtan Morbet, king of Picts (d. 481?): see Picts, kings of the; DNB AJGM Oengus, king of Picts (d. 834): see Picts, kings of the Oengus mac Forgusso [Onuist son of Uurguist], king of Picts (d. 761): Marjorie O. Anderson, xli.540 Owen the Bald, king of the Cumbrians (d. 1018): Alan Macquarrie, xvi.494 Picts, kings of the (act. c. 300–c. 900): Marjorie O. Anderson, xliv.243–6 Selbach, king of Dál Riata (d. 730): see Dál Riata, kings of; DNB AJGM Talorg mac Congus, king of the Picts (d. 734): see Picts, kings of the Talorgan mac Drostan, king of the Picts (d. 739): see Picts, kings of the Talorgen, king of the Picts (d. 657): see Picts, kings of the b. Ecclesiastics Baíthéne mac Brénainn, abbot of Iona (d. 598): see Iona, abbots of Beoán, bishop of Mortlach (supp. fl. 1012x24): Elva Johnston, v.314; DNB [Anon] Blaímac [Blathmac] mac Flainn, abbot of Iona (d. 825): see Iona, abbots of Bresal mac Ségéni, abbot of Iona (d. 801): see Iona, abbots of Cellach mac Ailella, abbot of Iona (d. 815): see Iona, abbots of Cellach mac Congaile, abbot of Iona (d. 815): see Iona, abbots of Cilléne Droichtech, abbot of Iona (d. 752): see Iona, abbots of Cilléne Fota, abbot of Iona (d. 726): see Iona, abbots of Columba, monastic founder (c. 512–597): Máire Herbert, xii.805–10; DNB NM Conamail mac Faílbi, abbot of Iona (d. 710): see Iona, abbots of Connachtach, abbot of Iona (d. 802): see Iona, abbots of Cú Chuimne, canonist and hymn writer (d. 747): Luned Mair Davies, xiv.574 Cumméne Albus, abbot of Iona (d. 669): see Iona, abbots of; DNB TO Diarmait alumnus Daigri, abbot of Iona (d. in or after 831): see Iona, abbots of Donnán, martyr (d. 617): Marios Costambeys, xvi.531–2 Dorbéne mac Altaíni, abbot of Iona (d. 713): see Iona, abbots of Dúnchad mac Cind Fháelad, abbot of Iona (d. 717): see Iona, abbots of

223

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Fáelán, abbot of Iona (fl. 734): rev. Benjamin T. Hudson, xviii.886; DNB W. D. Macray Fáelán Amlabar, abbot of Iona (641/2–724): rev. Benjamin T. Hudson, xviii.886; DNB W. D. Macray Fáelchú mac Dorbéni, abbot of Iona (d. 724): see Iona, abbots of Faílbe mac Pípáin, abbot of Iona (d. 679): see Iona, abbots of Feradach mac Cormaic, abbot of Iona (d. 880): see Iona, abbots of Flann mac Maíle Dúin, abbot of Iona (d. 891): see Iona, abbots of Innrechtach ua Finnachtai, abbot of Iona (d. 854): see Iona, abbots of Iona, abbots of (act. 563–927) [group entry]: T. M. Charles-Edwards, xxix.316–21 Kentigern, patron of the diocese (later archdiocese) of Glasgow (d. 612x14): Dauvit Broun, xxxi.333–4; DNB G. W. Sprott Laisrén mac Feradaig, abbot of Iona (d. 605): see Iona, abbots of Máel Brigte mac Tornáin, abbot of Iona (d. 927): see Iona, abbots of Mo Nennus, ascetic and teacher (fl. 5th–early 6th cent.): Elva Johnston, xxxviii.470–1; DNB MB Monan, supposed holy man (fl. 6th–7th cent.): Alan Macquarrie, xxxviii.574–5; DNB MB Nathalan, holy man (supp. d. 452): Elva Johnston, xl.264–5; DNB AFP Odhran, holy man and self-sacrifice (supp. d. c. 563): Marios Costambeys, xli.496 Regulus, supposed founder of the see of St Andrews (supp. fl. 8th–9th cent.): Ursula Hall, xlvi.373–4; DNB MB Ségéne mac Fiachna, abbot of Iona (d. 652): see Iona, abbots of Sléibíne mac Congaile, abbot of Iona (d. 767): see Iona, abbots of Suibne, abbot of Iona (d. 772): see Iona, abbots of Suibne moccu Urthrí, abbot of Iona (d. 657): see Iona, abbots of Ternan, holy man (fl. 6th–7th cent.): Alan Macquarrie, liv.153–4; DNB AFP Virgno, abbot of Iona (d. 623): see Iona, abbots of c. Secular men and women Einarr, magnate (fl. early 890s–930s): Barbara E. Crawford, xvii.1023–4 Erlend, earl of Orkney (d. 1098/9): Barbara E. Crawford, xliii.128–9; DNB J. G. Fotheringham Hákon Paulsson, earl of Orkney (d. c. 1126): Barbara E. Crawford, xxxvi.130–1; DNB A. P. Smyth Macduff, ‘thane’ of Fife (fl. 1057–8): Dauvit Broun, xvii.12; DNB T. F. Henderson Paul, earl of Orkney (d. 1098/9): Barbara E. Crawford, xliii.128–9; DNB J. G. Fotheringham Robert de Brus, supposed nobleman (supp. d. 1094): Emma Cownie, viii.372; DNB Emma Cownie Robert Cumin, earl of Northumbria, magnate (d. 1069): William M. Aird, xiv.623; DNB Mandell Creighton Rögnvald (II) Brúsason, earl of Orkney (d. 1046): Barbara E. Crawford, liv.584–5 Sigurd (II) Hlödvisson, earl of Orkney (d. 1014): Barbara E. Crawford, l.595– 6 Thorfinn Sigurdson, earl of Orkney (c. 1009–c. 1065): Barbara E. Crawford, liv.584–5

224

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) 7. LATER MEDIEVAL SUBJECTS (c. 1080–c. 1450) Ailred of Rievaulx, religious writer and abbot of Rievaulx (1110–67): David N. Bell, i.491–3; DNB WH Bower [Bowmaker], Walter, abbot of Inchcolm and historian (1385–1449): D. E. R. Watt, vi.921–2; DNB T. A. Archer Capgrave, John, prior of Bishop’s Lynn, theologian and historian (1393–1464): Peter J. Lucas, ix.991–3; DNB EMT Dominic of Evesham, Benedictine monk and hagiographer (d. in or before 1150): D. C. Cox, xviii.802 Eadmer of Canterbury, Benedictine monk and historian (b. c. 1060, d. in or after 1126): J. C. Rubenstein, xvii.530–1; DNB G. G. Perry Faricius, doctor and abbot of Abingdon (d. 1117): Peregrine Horden, xix.43–4; DNB WH Fordun, John, chronicler (d. in or after 1363): D. E. R. Watt, xx.355–7; DNB T. A. Archer Geffrei Gaimar, Anglo-Norman poet and historian (fl. 1136–7): Ian Short, xx.265–6; DNB C. T. Martin Gerald of Wales, author and ecclesiastic (c. 1146–1220x3): Robert Bartlett, xx.925–8; DNB H. R. Luard Geoffrey of Monmouth, bishop of St Asaph and historian (d. 1154/5): J. C. Crick, xxxviii.629–32; DNB H. R. Tedder Gui, bishop of Amiens (c. 1014–1074/5): Frank Barlow, xxiv.182–3 Hemming, monastic writer (fl. c. 1095): J. F. A. Mason, xxvi.280; DNB CLK Henry [Henry of Huntingdon], historian and poet (c. 1088–c. 1157): D. E. Greenway, xxvi.413; DNB H. R. Luard Henry [H.] of Saltrey, Cistercian monk and writer (fl. c. 1184): Yolande de Pontfarcy, xlvii.775–6; DNB CLK Higden, Ranulf, Benedictine monk and chronicler (d. 1364): John Taylor, xxvii.49–50; DNB CLK Hugh Candidus, Benedictine monk and chronicler (c. 1095–c. 1160): Edmund King, xxviii.620–1; DNB TFT Ingulf, abbot of Crowland (c. 1045–1109): Edmund King, xxix.294–5; DNB WH Jocelin of Furness, Cistercian monk and hagiographer (fl. 1199–1214): Robert Bartlett, xxi.190–1; DNB J. T. Gilbert John of Tynemouth [Tinmouth], chronicler and hagiographer (fl. c. 1350): John Taylor, lv.795–6; DNB CLK John of Wallingford, historical writer (d. 1258): Simon Lloyd; Rebecca Reader, xlii.624; DNB WH John of Worcester, monk and chronicler (fl. 1095–1140): P. McGurk, lx.292–3; DNB WH Matthew Paris, historian, Benedictine monk, and polymath (c. 1200–59): Simon Lloyd; Rebecca Reader, xlii.620–8; DNB WH Orderic Vitalis, Benedictine monk and historian (1075–c. 1142): J. O. Prestwich, xli.921–2; DNB CLK

225

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Osbern, Benedictine monk, hagiographer, and musician (d. 1094?): J. C. Rubenstein, xli.983–4; DNB CLK Reginald of Coldingham, Benedictine monk and hagiographer (d. c. 1190): V. Tudor, xii.496–7; DNB MB Robert of Shrewsbury, abbot of Shrewsbury and hagiographer (d. 1168): D. H. Farmer, l.454; DNB CLK Roger of Howden [Hoveden], chronicler (d. 1201/2): David Corner, xxviii.463–4; DNB WH Roger of Wendover, historian (d. 1236): David Corner, lviii.106–8; DNB WH Symeon of Durham, monk and historian (fl. c. 1090–c. 1128): Bernard Meehan, liii.581–2; DNB CLK Thomas Elmham, historian (b. 1364, d. in or after 1427): S. E. Kelly, xviii.294; DNB T. A. Archer William Ketel, hagiographer (fl. c. 1100): David Rollason, xxxi.447; DNB CLK William of Jumièges, Benedictine monk and author (fl. 1026–70): Elisabeth van Houts, xxx.828 William of Malmesbury, historian, man of letters, Benedictine monk (b. c. 1090, d. in or after 1142): R. M. Thomson, xxxvi.348–51; DNB Kate Norgate William of Poitiers, priest (b. c. 1020, d. after 1087): Marjorie Chibnall, xliv.682–3 William Worcester, topographer and author (1415–80x5): Nicholas Orme, lx.294–5; DNB James Tait

8. ANTIQUARIES (c. 1450–c. 1750) Astle, Thomas, archivist and collector (1735–1803): Nigel Ramsay, ii.771–3; DNB H. R. Tedder Aubrey, John, antiquary and biographer (1626–97): Adam Fox, ii.907–11; DNB Richard Garnett Bale, John, bishop of Ossory, evangelical polemicist, and historian (1495–1563): John N. King, iii.482–6; DNB Mandell Creighton Boece, Hector, historian and college head (c. 1465–1536): Nicola Royan, vi.418–21; DNB AJGM Bradshaw, Henry, scholar and hagiographer (d. 1513): Joan Greatrex, vii.213; DNB WH Buchanan, George, poet, historian and administrator (1506–82): D. M. Abbott, viii.468–72; DNB AJGM Camden, William, historian and herald (1551–1623): Wyman H. Herendeen, ix.603–14; DNB EMT Coke, Sir Edward, lawyer, legal writer, and politician (1552–1634): Allen D. Boyer, xii.451–63; DNB G. P. Macdonell Cotton, Sir Robert Bruce, first baronet, antiquary and politician (1571–1631): Stuart Handley, xiii.624–9; DNB Sidney Lee Davies, John, clergyman and Welsh scholar (c. 1570–1644): Mihail Dafydd Evans, xv.381–2; DNB A. W. Renton

226

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Day, John, printer and bookseller (1521/2–84): Andrew Pettegree, xv.584–6; DNB H. R. Tedder Dee, John, mathematician, astrologer and antiquary (1527–1609): R. Julian Roberts, xv.667–75; DNB Thompson Cooper Dempster, Thomas, writer (1579–1625): Alexander Du Toit, xv.759–62; DNB Henry Bradley Dering, Sir Edward, antiquary (1598–1644): S. P. Salt, xv.874–80; DNB S. R. Gardiner Dodsworth, Roger, antiquary (bap. 1585, d. 1654): Graham Parry, xvi.440–1; DNB Sidney Lee Dugdale, Sir William, antiquary (1605–86): Graham Parry, xvii.153–7; DNB Francis Espinasse Elphinstone, William, bishop of Aberdeen and founder of the University of Aberdeen (1431–1514): Leslie J. Macfarlane, xviii.326–8; DNB Alsager Vian *Elstob, Elizabeth, Anglo-Saxon scholar (1683–1756): Mechthild Gretsch, xviii.335–7; DNB Leslie Stephen Faussett, Bryan, antiquary (1720–76): Nigel Ramsay, xix.159–60; DNB W. W. Wroth Gale, Thomas, Dean of York and antiquary (1635/6–1702): Nicholas Doggett, xx.303–5; DNB Gordon Goodwin Gibson, Edmund, bishop of London (bap. 1669, d. 1748): Stephen Taylor, xxii.68–75; DNB G. G. Perry Hearne, Thomas, antiquary and diarist (bap. 1678, d. 1735): Theodor Harmsen, xxvi.156–60; DNB H. R. Luard Hickes, George, bishop and antiquary (1642–1715): Theodor Harmsen, xxvii.5–11; DNB W. D. Macray Innes, Thomas, Roman Catholic priest and historian (1662–1744): Brian M. Halloran, xxix.307–8; DNB Thompson Cooper Jones, Thomas, Welsh-language poet and genealogist (1532–1608/9): Daniel Huws, xxx.635–6; DNB DLT Joscelin, John, Anglo-Saxon scholar and clergyman (1529–1603): G. H. Martin, xxx.714–15; DNB E. T. Bradley Junius, Franciscus, philologist and writer on art (1591–1677): Sophie van Romburgh, xxx.834–5; DNB W. W. Wroth Laet, Johannes, merchant and scholar (1581–1649): Rolf H. Bremmer, jun., xxxii.207 Lambarde, William, antiquary and lawyer (1536–1601): J. D. Alsop, xxxii.287–90; DNB Gordon Goodwin Leland, John, poet and antiquary (c. 1503–52): James P. Carley, xxxiii.297–301; DNB Sidney Lee Lhuyd, Edward, naturalist and philologist (1659/60?–1709): Brynley F. Roberts, xxxiii.710–12; DNB DLT Llwyd, Humphrey, antiquary and map maker (1527–68): R. Brinley Jones, xxxiv.174–6; DNB DLT Lye, Edward, Anglo-Saxon and Gothic scholar (bap. 1694, d. 1767): Margaret Clunies Ross and Amanda J. Collins, xxxiv.849–51; DNB W. W. Wroth

227

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Mac Fhirbhisigh, Dubhaltach Óg, scribe and genealogist (c. 1600–71): Nollaig Ó Muraíle, xxxv.387–8; DNB NM Morgan, William, bishop of St Asaph and biblical translator (1544/5–1604): R. Geraint Gruffydd, xxxix.152–5; DNB JEL Nowell, Laurence, antiquary (1530–c. 1570): Retha M. Warnicke, xli.237–39; DNB WH Ó Cléirigh, Míchél, scribe and chronicler (b. in or after 1590?, d. 1643?): Nollaig Ó Muraíle, xli.433–5; DNB NM Parker, Matthew, archbishop of Canterbury and patron of scholarship (1504–75): David J. Crankshaw and Alexandra Gillespie, xlii.707–28; DNB J. B. Mullinger Prise, Sir John, administrator and scholar (1501/2–55): Huw Pryce, xlv.424–5; DNB W. A. J. Archbold Prys, Edmwnd, Church of England clergyman and Welsh poet (1542/3–1623): Gruffydd Aled Williams, xlv.494–5; DNB JEL Rapin de Thoyras, Paul de, historian (1661–1725): M. G. Sullivan, xlvi.68–71; DNB C. H. Firth Rawlinson, Richard, topographer (1690–1755): Mary Clapinson, xlvi.162–4; DNB W. D. Macray Rhys, Siôn Dafydd, grammarian (b. 1533/4, d. in or after 1620): Angharad Price, xlvi.626–7; DNB JEL Roscarrock, Nicholas, Catholic activist and hagiographer (c. 1548–1633/4): Nicholas Orme, xlvii.730–1; DNB W. A. Shaw Salesbury, William, translator and humanist scholar (b. before 1520, d. c. 1580): R. Brinley Jones, xlviii.696–9; DNB DLT Savile, Henry, of Banke, collector of manuscripts (1568–1617): F. J. Levy, xlix.118 Selden, John, historical and linguistic scholar (1584–1654): Paul Christianson, xlix.694– 705; DNB Edward Fry Smith, John, historian (bap. 1659, d. 1715): G. H. Martin, li.205–6; DNB Thomas Seccombe Somner, William, antiquary and Anglo-Saxon scholar (bap. 1598, d. 1669): Peter Sherlock, li.627–9; DNB Thompson Cooper Speed, John, historian and cartographer (1551/2–1629): Sarah Bendall, li.771–3; DNB AFP Spelman, Sir Henry, historian and antiquary (1563/4–1641): Stuart Handley, li.791–3; DNB William Carr Strutt, Joseph, antiquary (1749–1802): Jennifer Harris, liii.120–1; DNB Miller Christy Stukeley, William, antiquary (1687–1765): David Boyd Haycock, liii.231–5; DNB W. W. Wroth Talbot, Robert, antiquary (1505/6–58): James P. Carley, liii.722–3; DNB AFP Talbot, Thomas, antiquary (c. 1535–95x9): Ian Mortimer, liii.725; DNB AFP Thwaites, Edward, Anglo-Saxon scholar (bap. 1671, d. 1711): Margaret Clunies Ross and Amanda J. Collins, liv.732–3; DNB Thomas Seccombe Turner, Sharon, historian (1768–1847): H. R. Loyn, lv.661–3; DNB Thomas Seccombe Twysden, Sir Roger, antiquary (1597–1672): David L. Smith, lv.750–4; DNB Thomas Seccombe

228

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Ussher, James, archbishop of Armagh (1581–1656): Alan Ford, lvi.6–14; DNB Alexander Gordon Vaughan, Robert Powell, antiquary (1591/1–1667): Mihail Dafydd Evans, lvi.198–9; DNB JEL Wanley, Humfrey, Anglo-Saxon scholar (1672–1726): Peter Heyworth, lvii.239–42; DNB W. P. Courtney Wheelocke, Abraham, Anglo-Saxon scholar (c. 1593–1653): Alistair Hamilton, lviii.444–7; DNB D. S. Margoliouth Wiliems, Thomas, Welsh lexicographer (b. 1545/6?, d. in or before 1623?): J. E. Caerwyn Williams, lviii.952–3; DNB JEL

9. MODERN SCHOLARS (c. 1750–) *Bateson, Mary, historian and suffragist (1865–1906): Mary Dockray-Miller, iv.331–3; DNB TFT Bishop, Edmund, liturgical scholar and ecclesiastical historian (1846–1917): R. J. Schoeck, v.864–5 Bond, Sir Edward Augustus, librarian (1815–98): Michael Borrie, vi.509–11 Bosworth, Joseph, Anglo-Saxon scholar (1787/8–1876): rev. John D. Haigh, vi.749–50; DNB Henry Bradley Bruce-Mitford, Rupert Lee Scott, archaeologist and art historian (1914–94): Martin Biddle, xxxviii.459–60 Chadwick, Hector Munro, literary scholar (1870–1947): rev. John D. Haigh, x.840; DNB W. Telfer *Chadwick, Nora, literary scholar (1891–1972): Paul Knobel, x.847–8 Chalmers, George, antiquary and political writer (bap. 1742, d. 1825): Alexander Du Toit, xi.870–2; DNB AJGM Cleasby, Richard, philologist (1791–1847): rev. John D. Haigh, xi.999; DNB Richard Garnett Cockayne, Thomas Oswald, philologist and teacher (bap. 1809, d. 1873): Daniel F. Kenneally, xii.326–7; DNB A. Brodribb Collingwood, William Gershom, author, artist, and antiquary (1854–1932): James S. Dearden, xii.681–3 Craigie, Sir William Alexander, lexicographer and philologist (1867–1957): A. J. Aitken, xiii.967–9 Dasent, Sir George Webbe, Scandinavian scholar (1817–96): rev. John D. Haigh, xv.217–18; DNB Thomas Seccombe Earle, John, philologist (1824–1903): rev. John D. Haigh, xvii.570; DNB Charles Plummer Flower, Robin Ernest William, scholar of Irish literature and poet (1881–1946): Bernard O’Donoghue, xx.177–8; DNB H. I. Bell Foster, Sir Idris Llewelyn, Welsh and Celtic scholar (1911–84): R. Geraint Gruffydd, xix.504–5

229

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. Freeman, Edward Augustus, historian (1823–92): Frank Barlow, xix.920–4; DNB WH Galbraith, Vivian Hunter, historian (1889–1976): R. W. Southern, xxi.293–5 Giles, John Allen, translator and literary editor (1808–84): John Blair, xxii.229–30; DNB WH Gollancz, Sir Israel, literary scholar (1863–1930): rev. William Baker, xxii.708–10; DNB A. M. Hyamson Haddan, Arthur West, ecclesiastical historian (1816–73): rev. Myfanwy Lloyd, xxiv.407–8; DNB WH Hunt, Richard William, palaeographer (1908–79): David Vaisey, xxvii.866–7 Hunt, William, historian and biographer (1842–1931): Robert W. Dunning, xxviii.877–8 Innes, Cosmo Nelson, antiquary (1798–1874): rev. H. C. G. Matthew, xxix.299; DNB W. W. Wroth Jackson, Kenneth Hurlstone, Celtic scholar (1909–91): William Gillies, xxix.509–10 James, Montague Rhodes, scholar and author (1862–1936): Richard W. Pfaff, xxix.723–6; DNB A. F. Scholfield Jones, Gwyn, viking scholar (1907–99): Meic Stephens, xxx.504–5 Kemble, John Mitchell, philologist and historian (1807–57): John D. Haigh, xxxi.153–4; DNB WH Ker, Neil Ripley, palaeographer (1908–82): Teresa Webber, xxxi.388–9 *Law, Vivien Anne, Lady Shackleton, linguistic scholar (1954–2002): Werner Hüllen (online update, October 2006) Lindsay, Wallace Martin, classical scholar (1858–1937): rev. Roger T. Stearn xxxiii.902–3; DNB C. J. Fordyce Lowe, Elias Avery, palaeographer (1879–1969): James J. John, xxxiv.563 Magnússon, Eiríkur, librarian and Icelandic scholar (1833–1913): B. S. Benedikz, xxxvi.137–9 Maitland, Frederic William, legal historian (1850–1906): S. F. C. Milsom, xxxvi.204–10; DNB B. F. Lock Morris, William, designer, author and visionary socialist (1834–96): Fiona MacCarthy, xxxix.317–24; DNB J. W. Mackail Napier, Arthur Sampson, philologist (1853–1916): M. K. C. MacMahon (online update, October 2007) O’Curry, Eugene, Irish scholar (1794–1862): Fergus Kelly, xli.483–4; DNB NM O’Donovan, John, Gaelic Irish scholar (1806–61): Nollaig Ó Muraíle, xli.527–9; DNB NM Pinkerton, John [pseuds. Robert Heron, H. Bennet], historian and poet (1758–1826): Sarah Couper, xliv.373–5; DNB T. F. Henderson Plummer, Charles, historian (1851–1927): R. J. Schoeck, xliv.612–13 Rhŷs, Sir John, Celtic scholar (1840–1915): rev. Mari A. Williams, xlvi.623–4; DNB John Fraser Robertson, Eben William, historian (1815–74), rev. Nilanjana Banerji, xlvii.223; DNB Thomas Seccombe

230

Anglo-Saxon and related entries in the ODNB (2004) Robinson, Joseph Armitage, dean of Westminster and Wells (1858–1933): T. F. Taylor, xlvii.376–8; DNB Claude Jenkins Scott, Sir Walter, poet and novelist (1771–1832): David Hewitt, xlix.490–510; DNB Leslie Stephen Simpson, William Douglas, archaeologist and historian (1896–1968): A. T. Hall, l.718–9 Skeat, Walter William, philologist (1835–1912): rev. Charlotte Brewer, l.817–19; DNB Kenneth Sisam Skene, William Forbes, historian and Celtic scholar (1809–92): rev. W. D. H. Sellar, l.854–6; DNB AJGM Smith, Charles Roach, antiquary (1806–90): Michael Rhodes, li.67–9; DNB W. P. Courtney Stenton, Sir Frank Merry, historian (1880–1967): J. C. Holt, lii.405–7 Stephens, George, philologist and runologist (1813–95): Andrew Wawn, lii.466–8; DNB Henry Bradley Stevenson, Joseph, historian and archivist (1806–95): Francis Edwards, lii.588–90; DNB Thompson Cooper Stevenson, William Henry, historian and philologist (1858–1924): rev. G. H. Martin, lii.612–13; DNB A. L. Poole Stokes, Margaret M’Nair, archaeologist (1832–1900): rev. Marie-Louise Legg, lii.871–2; DNB C. L. Falkiner Stokes, Whitley, Celtic scholar (1830–1909): Nollaig Ó Muraíle, lii.872–4; DNB NM Strachan, John, classical and Celtic scholar (1862–1907): rev. Mark Pottle, lii.992–3; DNB Peter Giles Stubbs, William, historian (1825–1901): James Campbell, liii.217–22; DNB TFT Sweet, Henry, phonetician and comparative philologist (1845–1912): M. K. C. MacMahon, liii.447–50; DNB T. C. Onions Taylor, Harold McCarter, architectural historian (1907–95): Greg Waite, liii.896–7 Thompson, Sir Edward Maunde, palaeographer (1840–1929): Michael Borrie, liv.420–1; DNB F. G. Kenyon Thorpe, Benjamin, Anglo-Saxon scholar (1781/2–1879): rev. John D. Haigh, liv.664–5; DNB Thomas Seecombe Todd, James Henthorn, biblical scholar (1805–69): rev. Sinéad Agnew, liv.883–4; DNB E. M. Todd Tolkien, J. R. R., writer and philologist (1892–1973): T. A. Shippey, liv.902–5; DNB Humphrey Carpenter Turville-Petre, (Edward Oswald) Gabriel, Icelandic scholar (1908–78): Heather O’Donoghue, xliii.907–8 Vigfússon, Guðbrandur, scholar of Icelandic literature (1827–89): rev. Carolyne Larrington, lvi.468–9; DNB F. Y. Powell Wallace-Hadrill, (John) Michael, historian (1916–85): Karl Leyser, xxiv.438–9 Westwood, John Obadiah, palaeographer (1805–93): Yolanda Foote, lviii.318–19; DNB B. B. Woodward

231

Helen Foxhall Forbes et al. *Whitelock, Dorothy, historian (1901–82): Simon Keynes, lviii.692–4 Wormald, (Charles) Patrick, historian (1947–2004): Alex May (online update, January 2008) Wormald, Francis, palaeographer (1904–72): Michael Borrie, lx.331–2 Wright, Joseph, philologist and dialectologist (1855–1930): Arnold Kellett, lx.464–7; DNB J. Boyd

232

Bibliography for 2007 paul g. remley, carole p. biggam, simon keynes, carole hough, rebec ca rushforth, mark blackburn, martha bayless, felicity h. clark and fiona edmonds This bibliography is meant to include all significant books, articles and reviews published in any branch of Anglo-Saxon studies during 2007, as well as entries omitted from previous bibliographies. It excludes reprints unless they contain new material. The year of publication of a book or article is 2007 unless otherwise stated. The arrangement and the pages on which the sections begin are as follows: 1. general and miscellaneous page 237 2. old english language 243 Lexical aspects (Lexicon, 243; Glosses, 248); Phonology, syntax and other aspects, 248 248 3. old english literature 257 General and miscellaneous (including studies treating Old English and Anglo-Latin subjects), 257; Poetry, 260 (General and miscellaneous, 260; ‘Beowulf ’, 263; Other verse, 269); Prose, 274 (General and miscellaneous, 274; Authors and texts, 276) 4. anglo-latin, liturgy and other latin ec clesiastical text s 284 General and miscellaneous, 284; Authors and texts, 287 (Early period (before Alcuin, excluding Bede), 287; Bede, 290; Alcuin, 293; Other pre-Reform authors and texts, 296; Reform period and beyond, 296; Other pre-Conquest authors and texts, 297); Liturgical books, 297 5. palaeo graphy, diplomatic, illumination and related subject s 299 Palaeography and codicology, 299; Diplomatic, 303; Illumination and iconography, 303; Scriptoria, libraries and transmission of non-native texts, 305 6. history 307 General and miscellaneous, 307; c. 400–c. 900, 311; c. 900–c. 1100, 313; Classified subjects, 316 7. numismatics 318 8. onomastics 320 9. archaeolo gy 323 General and miscellaneous, 323; Environment, landscape and agriculture, 327 (Environment, 327; Landscape, 328; Agriculture, 329); Towns and other

233

Bibliography for 2007 settlements, 330 (General and miscellaneous, 330; The South, 330; The East, 333; The Midlands, 335; The North, 335); Ecclesiastical and monastic sites, 336 (General and miscellaneous, 336; The South, 337; The East, 337; The Midlands, 337; The North, 338); Cemeteries and other burials, 338 (General and miscellaneous, 338; The South, 339; The East, 341; The Midlands, 342; The North, 342); Miscellaneous artefacts, 343; Stone, wood and bone, 344 (Stone, 344; Wood, 346; Bone, 347); Metalwork, 347; Ceramics and glass, 351 (Ceramics, 351; Glass, 353); Textiles and leather, 353 (Textiles, 353; Leather, 354) 10. inscriptions (runic and non-runic) and runolo gy 11. reviews

354 355

Paul Remley has served as chief editor of the bibliography and has been responsible mainly for the ten parts of sections 1–4 and 10. Carole Biggam has served as editor of the archaeological entries and has been responsible mainly for the ten parts of section 9. Rebecca Rushforth has been responsible mainly for the four parts of section 5; Martha Bayless, Felicity H. Clark and Fiona Edmonds for the four parts of section 6; Mark Blackburn for section 7; and Carole Hough for section 8. Additional entries have been supplied for section 2 by Thomas N. Hall and Melinda J. Menzer. Additional entries have been supplied throughout by Simon Keynes, Carole Biggam and Paul Remley. References to publications issued in Japan, and elsewhere in eastern Asia, have been contributed mainly by Professor Yoshio Terasawa. Paul Remley has been responsible for co-ordination of the contributions and has prepared the bibliography for publication. The following abbreviations occur where relevant (not only in the bibliography but also throughout the volume): AAe AB AC AHR ANQ ANS AntJ ArchJ ASE ASNSL ASPR ASSAH AST AUON BAR BGDSL BN

Archaeologia Aeliana Analecta Bollandiana Archaeologia Cantiana American Historical Review American Notes and Queries Anglo-Norman Studies Antiquaries Journal Archaeological Journal Anglo-Saxon England Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History Anglo-Saxon Texts Annali, Sezione germanica ns (Università degli studi di Napoli ‘L’Orientale’) British Archaeological Reports Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur Beiträge zur Namenforschung

234

Bibliography for 2007 BNJ CA CBA CCM CCSL CMCS CSASE CSEL DAEM EA EconHR EEMF EETS EHR ELN EME EPNS ES FS HBS HS HZ IF JBAA JEGP JEH JEPNS JMH JTS LH MA MÆ MGH MLR MP MS N&Q NChron NCirc NH NM OEN OMT PBA

British Numismatic Journal Current Archaeology Council for British Archaeology Cahiers de civilisation médiévale Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters Études anglaises Economic History Review Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile Early English Text Society English Historical Review English Language Notes Early Medieval Europe English Place-Name Society English Studies Frühmittelalterliche Studien Henry Bradshaw Society Publications Historische Sprachforschung Historische Zeitschrift Indogermanische Forschungen Journal of the British Archaeological Association Journal of English and Germanic Philology Journal of Ecclesiastical History Journal of the English Place-Name Society Journal of Medieval History Journal of Theological Studies ns The Local Historian Medieval Archaeology Medium Ævum Monumenta Germaniae Historica Modern Language Review Modern Philology Mediaeval Studies Notes and Queries ns Numismatic Chronicle Numismatic Circular Northern History Neuphilologische Mitteilungen Old English Newsletter Oxford Medieval Texts Proceedings of the British Academy

235

Bibliography for 2007 PL PMLA PQ RB RES RGA RS SBVS SCBI SettSpol SM SN SP TLS TPS TRHS YES ZAA ZDA

Patrologia Latina Publications of the Modern Language Association of America Philological Quarterly Revue bénédictine Review of English Studies ns Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, 2nd ed. (Berlin) Rolls Series Saga-Book (London, Viking Society for Northern Research) Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles Settimane di studio della fondazione Centro italiano di studi sull’alto Medioevo (Spoleto) Studi medievali, 3rd ser. Studia Neophilologica Studies in Philology Times Literary Supplement Transactions of the Philological Society Transactions of the Royal Historical Society Yearbook of English Studies Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur

Online journals cited in the bibliography are currently located at the following addresses on the Internet: Cotswold Archaeol. Ann. Rev. Cotswold Archaeol. (Cirencester) www.cotswoldarch.org.uk/ Essays in Med. Stud. Chicago et alibi www.illinoismedieval.org/EMS/index.html Heroic Age Belleville, IL www.heroicage.org/ Internet Archaeol. Univ. of York intarch.ac.uk/ Lit. Compass [Literature Compass] Oxford www.blackwell-compass.com/subject/literature/ Med. Forum San Francisco State Univ. www.sfsu.edu/~medieval/ Med. Rev. [The Medieval Review] Western Michigan Univ. www.hti.umich.edu/t/tmr/ (Kalamazoo, MI) North Amer. Jnl of Welsh Stud. Flint, MI spruce.flint.umich.edu/~ellisjs/journal.html Quidditas Provo, UT humanities.byu.edu/rmmra/

236

Bibliography for 2007 1. GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS Anderson, Douglas A., ‘R. W. Chambers and The Hobbit’, Tolkien Stud. 3 (2006), 137–47 [also esp. on Chambers, Widsith (Cambridge, 1912); Beowulf, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1932); and other works] [Anon.], ‘Donald Bullough, Bibliography 2000–2003’, EME 12 (2003), 337–8 ‘Joan Turville-Petre (née Blomfield), 10 May 1911–9 March 2006’, SBVS 30 (2006), 98–100 [signed by ‘T. T.-P. and D. T.-P.’] ‘Publications of Thomas D. Hill’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 387–98 ‘Tom Shippey: Academic Publications’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al., pp. 357–65 Antonsson, Haki, Sally Crumplin and Aidan Conti, ‘A Norwegian in Durham: an Anatomy of a Miracle in Reginald of Durham’s Libellus de admirandis beati Cuthberti’, West over Sea, ed. Beverley Ballin Smith et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 195–226 [figure of Cuthbert; also on Alcuin, Vita S. Willibrordi (prose and verse)] Arblaster, Paul, ‘Paris 1615–1676’, Woolhampton 1903–2003, ed. Geoffrey Scott, pp. 1–36 [esp. for later cults of Augustine of Canterbury, Edmund, king of East Anglia, et al.; also for Bede, Ecgwine et al.] Arnold, Martin, ‘“Lord and protector of the earth and its inhabitants”: Poetry, Philology, Politics and Thor the Thunderer in Denmark and Germany’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al., pp. 27–52 [esp. on N. F. S. Grundtvig; also for J. Grimm et al.] Ashe, Laura, ‘“Exile-and-Return” and English Law: the Anglo-Saxon Inheritance of Insular Romance’, Lit. Compass 3 (2006), 300–17 [continuity of AS traditions, esp. in twelfth- and thirteenth-century French romance and in thirteenth- and fourteenth-century Middle Eng. sources; online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741– 4113.2006.00330.x] Aealgeir Kristjánsson, ed., ‘Tvö bréf Helga Biskups Thordersen til Gísla Brynjúlfssonar’, Gripla 18, 195–201 [see further stud. and ed. of Gísli’s verse by S. P. Ísaksson, as cited below and in sect. 3cii, with ‘Ælfric’] Baker, Peter S., ‘Typing in Old English Since 1967: a Brief History’, OEN 40.1 (2007 for 2006), 28–37 Battles, Paul, ‘What Is “Middle-Earth”? Origin, Evolution and Mythic Function’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al., pp. 319–42 Bedos-Rezak, Brigitte Miriam, ‘L’au-delà du soi. Métamorphoses sigillaires en Europe médiévale’, CCM 49 (2006), 337–58 [extensive discussion of later cult of Cuthbert; also for AS cult] Bell, David N., ‘What Nuns Read: the State of the Question’, The Culture of Medieval English Monasticism, ed. James G. Clark (Woodbridge), pp. 113–33 [esp. for later fortunes of Alcuin and pseudo-Alcuin] Bishop, Chris, ‘Civilizing the Savage Ancestor: Representations of the Anglo-Saxons in the Art of Nineteenth-Century Britain’, Stud. in Medievalism 15 (2007 for 2006), 55–76

237

Bibliography for 2007 Brown, Jennifer N., ‘Translating Edward the Confessor: Feminism, Time and Hagiography’, Med. Feminist Forum 43.1, 46–57 [esp. in anon. twelfth-century verse by nun of Barking] Bruce, Alexander M., ‘Maldon and Moria: on Byrhtnoth, Gandalf and Heroism in The Lord of the Rings’, Mythlore: a Jnl of J. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Charles Williams and Mythopoeic Lit. 26.1–2, 149–59 Buchloh, Paul G., ‘Angeln: regio oder natio? Eine philologische Betrachtung’, Offa 37 (1981 for 1980), 360–5 [with considerable reference to England] Burgess, Christopher, ‘Anglo-Saxon Pages’, Heroic Age 3 (2000) [online; rev. article treating online resources in AS stud.] Burns, Marjorie, ‘Tracking the Elusive Hobbit (in its Pre-Shire Den)’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 200–11 [OE holbytla as Tolkien’s declared explanation of hobbit] Carroll, Jayne, and Christina Lee, ‘Women in Anglo-Saxon England and the Impact of Christine Fell: Introduction’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 201–5 [introd. to collection of essays] Colls, Robert, ed., see sect. 6a Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo and Mercedes Salvador, ‘Old English Studies in Spain: Past, Present and . . . Future?’, OEN 40.1 (2007 for 2006), 38–58 [includes extensive bibliography] Conti, Aidan, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Wulfstan’ [twelfth-century reception] Crabus, Tobias, see below, with Fleck, Beate Sophie, et al. [figure of Boniface] Crépin, André, in collaboration with Leo Carruthers, ‘Old English Studies in France’, OEN 40.3, 28–30 [includes bibliography] Davis, Glenn, and Robin Norris, ed., The Future of the Past: Anglo-Saxon Studies in the Classroom [= Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2] (Wichita, KS) Denison, David, and Bas Aarts, ‘Richard Hogg, 20 May 1944–6 September 2007’, Eng. Lang. and Ling. 11.3, i–ii Dockray-Miller, Mary, ‘Historical Sources of the Middle English Verse Life of St. Æthelthryth’, ANQ 20.2, 8–11 [later med. sources; also on figure of Edith of Wilton] Donoghue, Daniel, ed., ‘The Year’s Work in Old English Studies 2004’, OEN 39.2 (2007 for 2006), 3–226 Donoghue, Daniel, and R. M. Liuzza, ed., ‘The Year’s Work in Old English Studies 2003’, OEN 38.2 (2007 for 2005), 3–219 Driscoll, Stephen T., ‘Professor Leslie Alcock’, Scottish Archaeol. Jnl 28.1 (2006), v–x Drout, Michael D. C., ‘The Problem of Transformation: the Use of Medieval Sources in Fantasy Literature’, Lit. Compass 1 (2003–4) [Tolkien et al.; esp. for Wanderer, and for Beowulf; online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2004.00101.x] ‘Tolkien’s Prose Style and its Literary and Rhetorical Effects’, Tolkien Stud. 1 (2004), 137–62 [esp. on lexical and semantic influence of OE] ‘A Spliced Old English Quotation in “Beowulf: the Monsters and the Critics” ’, Tolkien Stud. 3 (2006), 149–52 [esp. on Widsith; also on Beowulf, Seafarer and Wanderer] ‘J. R. R. Tolkien’s Medieval Scholarship and its Significance’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 113–76 [includes bibliographies]

238

Bibliography for 2007 Drukker, Tamar S., ‘Historicising Sainthood: the Case of Edward the Confessor in Vernacular Narratives’, The Medieval Chronicle IV, ed. Erik Kooper (Amsterdam, 2006), pp. 53–79 [esp. in twelfth- and thirteenth-century sources] Dutton, Marsha L., ‘The Staff in the Stone: Finding Arthur’s Sword in the Vita Sancti Edwardi of Aelred of Rievaulx’, Arthuriana 17.3, 3–30 [esp. in sect. 4; also for figure of Wulfstan II of Worcester] Evans, Jonathan, ‘Wörter, Sachen und Wahrheit: Philology and the Tree of Language in Tolkien’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al., pp. 243– 74 [esp. in sects. 2–6] Faletra, Michael A., ‘The Conquest of the Past in “The History of the Kings of Britain” ’, Lit. Compass 4, 121–33 [Geoffrey of Monmouth, esp. in treatment of AS hist.; online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00392.x] Fehrenbacher, Richard W., ‘Beowulf as Fairy-Story: Enchanting the Elegiac in The Two Towers’, Tolkien Stud. 3 (2006), 101–15 Fimi, Dimitra, ‘Tolkien’s “ ‘Celtic’ type of legends”: Merging Traditions’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 51–71 [integration with AS borrowings; also esp. on notes by Tolkien for a contemplated ed. of Seafarer, used subsequently by I. L. Gordon in ed. publ. in 1960] Fleck, Beate Sophie, Friedel Helga Roolfs and Gabriela Signori, ed., Das Freckenhorster Legendar. Andacht, Geschichte und Legende in einem spätmittelalterlichen Kanonissenstift. Edition und Kommentar, Religion in der Geschichte 10 (Bielefeld, 2003) [figure of Boniface, occurring in extenso; also includes contributions in introd., pp. 6–12, by Tobias Crabus (esp. for the treatment of Boniface et al.)] Flieger, Verlyn, ‘A Distant Mirror: Tolkien and Jackson in the Looking-Glass’, Stud. in Medievalism 13 (2005 for 2004), 67–78 [esp. on influence of Beowulf; treats film issued in 2001, The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Rings, directed by Peter Jackson] ‘The Curious Incident of the Dream at the Barrow: Memory and Reincarnation in Middle-Earth’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 99–112 [use of OE, esp. in names of characters] Frederick, Jill, ‘In Memoriam: Phillip John Pulsiano (1955–2000)’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr [see sect. 5a], pp. 1–2 Frederick, Jill, Marijane Osborn and Elaine Treharne, ‘In Memoriam: Stephen O. Glosecki (1950–2007)’, OEN 40.3, 3–4 Ganz, David, ‘Donald A. Bullough’, EME 12 (2003), 332–5 Garver, Lee, ‘Seafarer Socialism: Pound, The New Age and Anglo-Medieval Radicalism’, Jnl of Mod. Lit. 29.4 (2006), 1–21 Gillies, Patricia, ‘Anglo-Norman Literature: the Road to Middle English’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 454–88 [esp. on later transmission of OE] Grégoire, Réginald, ‘L’incontro del monaco e del lupo: una tipologia didattica’, Monastica et Humanistica, ed. Francesco G. B. Trolese, 1 vol. in 2 (Cesena, 2003), pp. 577–90 [esp. on figure of Edmund, king of East Anglia] Griffin, Felicity, ‘Offa, Ingvar or Ubba: Which Is It? A Goodie or a Baddie in Southwold’s East Window’, Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. Newsletter 46 (1998), 14–15 [an attempt to identify a figure in a window of St Edmund’s church]

239

Bibliography for 2007 Hall, Mark A., ‘Two Women and a Boat, or a Novel Approach to Engendering the Sutton Hoo Excavations’, Soc. for Med. Archaeol. Newsletter 38, [7–8] [rev. of a recent novel: John Preston, The Dig (London)] Hall, Mark F., ‘The Theory and Practice of Alliterative Verse in the Work of J. R. R. Tolkien’, Mythlore: a Jnl of J. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Charles Williams and Mythopoeic Lit. 25.1–2 (2006), 41–52 Hall, Thomas N., with Melinda Menzer, ‘Old English Bibliography 2005’, OEN 39.4 (2007 for 2006), 3–48 ‘Old English Bibliography 2006’, OEN 40.4, 3–39 Hammond, Wayne G., and Christina Scull, ed., ‘The Lord of the Rings’, 1954–2004: Scholarship in honor of Richard E. Blackwelder (Milwaukee, WI, 2006) Härke, Heinrich, ‘Invisible Britons, Gallo-Romans and Russians: Perspectives on Cultural Change’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 57–67 [esp. on mod. analogues of AS hist. events] Hausmann, Frank-Rutger, Anglistik und Amerikanistik im ‘Dritten Reich’ (Frankfurt am Main, 2003) [esp. for E. Sievers, L. L. Schücking, M. Förster et al.] Hill, Joyce, ‘Donald G. Scragg: a Tribute’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox, pp. 15–27 [includes summary of work by Scragg publ. in 2001– 5, augmenting earlier bibliography cited in ASE 32 (2003), p. 310.] Honegger, Thomas, ‘The Homecoming of Beorhtnoth: Philology and the Literary Muse’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 189–99 [debt to OE] Hostetter, Carl F., ‘Tolkienian Linguistics: the First Fifty Years’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 1–46 [debt to OE] Ísaksson, Sigurjón Páll, ‘W´yeingar Gísla Brynjúlfssonar úr fornensku’, Gripla 18, 89–109 [stud. of Gísli’s trans. of OE prose into mod. Icelandic verse, first publ. in 1853; see also Ísaksson’s new ed. of the verse, publ. in two parts, as cited in sect. 3cii, with ‘Ælfric’] Jackson, Deirdre, Marvellous to Behold: Miracles in Medieval Manuscripts (London) [esp. for figures of Cuthbert, Guthlac et al., in later med. art] Jurasinski, Stefan, ‘Andrew Horn, Alfredian Apocrypha and the Anglo-Saxon Names of the Mirror of Justices’, JEGP 105 (2006), 540–63 Keefer, Sarah Larratt, ‘C. S. Lewis’s “Edgestow” as Homophonic Polysemy’, ANQ 14.3 (2001), 40–5 [OE links of fictive place-name] Kelemen, Erick, ‘More Evidence for the Date of A Testimonie of Antiquitie’, The Library 7th ser. 7 (2006), 361–76 [earliest known use of typeface reproducing AS script, c. 1566; also for Ælfric] King, Andy, and A. J. Pollard, ‘“Northumbria” in the Later Middle Ages’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Robert Colls, pp. 68–87 Kisor, Yvette L., ‘“Elves (and hobbits) always refer to the sun as she”: Some Notes on a Note in Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 212–22 [esp. on OE sunna and mona; also includes extensive discussion of ‘Old English Martyrology’] Kleist, Aaron J., see sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [AS homiliaries in Tudor and Stuart periods] Kowalik, Barbara, ‘Reviving Christian and Druid Ideals in St. Erkenwald’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41 (2005), 225–35 [esp. on treatment of AS background]

240

Bibliography for 2007 Kragl, Florian, ‘Wer hat den Hirsch zum Köder gemacht? Der “Münchner Oswald”, spiritualiter gelesen’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 63, 157–78 [AS background, esp. in sect. 2] LaCelle-Peterson, Mark, ‘Claiming a Place at the Table: Anglo-Saxons in the Liberal Arts Curriculum’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 15–29 Lee, Stuart D., ‘Film and Early Medieval Literature’, Lit. Compass 1 (2003–4) [online: includes OE; DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2004.00101.x] Lees, Clare A., ‘Analytical Survey 7: Actually Existing Anglo-Saxon Studies’, New Med. Literatures 7 (2005), 223–52 Liuzza, R. M., ‘In Memoriam: Nicholas Howe (Feb. 17, 1953–September 27, 2006)’, OEN 40.1 (2007 for 2006), 3–4 Liuzza, R. M., ed., Old English Newsletter 40 (2006–7) Magennis, Hugh, and Jonathan Wilcox, ed., see sect. 3a Marzec, Marcia Smith, ‘“Retrieving the Anglo-Saxon Past”: a Course Plan’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 71–88 Mathieu, James R., ‘Introduction’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 7–13 [in special issue The Future of the Past: Anglo-Saxon Studies in the Classroom; see above with Davis, Glenn, and Robin Norris, ed.] Moffett, Joe, ‘Anglo-Saxon and Welsh Origins in David Jones’s The Anathemata’, North Amer. Jnl of Welsh Stud. 6.1 (2006), 1–18 [online; also esp. on Pound and Auden] The Search for Origins in the Twentieth-Century Long Poem: Sumerian, Homeric, Anglo-Saxon (Morgantown, WV) [esp. on G. Hill, Mercian Hymns, in ch. 4] Netzer, Katinka, Wissenschaft aus nationaler Sehnsucht. Die Verhandlungen der Germanisten 1846 und 1847 (Heidelberg, 2006) [J. Grimm, W. Grimm, K. Müllenhoff et al.] Niles, John D., ‘Land of Contrasts: the Lejre Experimental Centre’, Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, pp. 461–7 [esp. for traditions of Beowulf] ‘Lejre in the Modern Era: the Rise and Fall of a Myth’, Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, pp. 267–86 [O. Worm, L. A. Gebhardi et al.] Niles, John D. et al., see sect. 3bii North, Richard, and Joe Allard, ed., see sect. 3bii Ó Carragáin, Tomás, ‘Éamonn Ó Carragáin: a Bibliography’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 569–72 O’Mara, Veronica, and Suzanne Paul, ‘A Preliminary List of Patristic and Other Authors Cited in the Middle English Prose Sermon: an Introduction to an Online Resource in Progress’, Med. Sermon Stud. 51, 42–79 [http://www.hull.ac.uk/ middle_english_sermons, under heading ‘Sermon Quotations’; extensive citation of Bede] Ouy, Gilbert, ‘Jean Lebègue (1368–1457), auteur, copiste et bibliophile’, Patrons, Authors and Workshops, ed. Godfried Croenen and Peter Ainsworth (Louvain, 2006), pp. 143–71 [later reception of Bede, in sect. 3] Padel, O. J., ‘Obituary: Harold Fox, 1945–2007’, JEPNS 39, 173–4 Pape, Matthias, ‘Das Bonifatius-Gedenkjahr 1954 im allgemeinpolitischen und gesamtkirchlichen Kontext’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al. [see sect. 4bi, with ‘Boniface’], pp. 375–410

241

Bibliography for 2007 Parker, Joanne, ‘England’s darling’: the Victorian Cult of Alfred the Great (Manchester) Piper, A. J., ‘The Monks of Durham and the Study of Scripture’, The Culture of Medieval English Monasticism, ed. James G. Clark (Woodbridge), pp. 86–103 [esp. for later fortunes of Bede and Alcuin] Prescott, Andrew, ‘“Kinge Athelston that was a worthy kinge of England”: AngloSaxon Myths of the Freemasons’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox, pp. 397–434 Rateliff, John D., ‘“And all the days of her life are forgotten”: The Lord of the Rings as Mythic Prehistory’, ‘The Lord of the Rings’, 1954–2004, ed. Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull, pp. 67–100 [esp. in pts. 3–4] Remley, Paul G., Carole P. Biggam, Simon Keynes, Carole Hough, Rebecca Rushforth, Mark Blackburn, Martha Bayless, Felicity H. Clark and Fiona Edmonds, ‘Bibliography for 2005’, ASE 35 (2006), 285–398 ‘Bibliography for 2006’, ASE 36, 235–330 Sabo, Deborah, ‘Archaeology and the Sense of History in J. R. R. Tolkien’s MiddleEarth’, Mythlore: a Jnl of J. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Charles Williams and Mythopoeic Lit. 25.3–4, 91–112 [includes AS] Sanok, Catherine, Her Life Historical: Exemplarity and Female Saints’ Lives in Late Medieval England, Middle Ages Ser. (Philadelphia) [esp. on figures of Werburh, Æthelthryth et al.] Schober, Ludwig, Geschichte des Klosters Sankt Oswald. Von den Anfängen bim zum Dreissigjährigen Krieg (Sankt Oswald, 1997) [figure of Oswald, esp. in sect. 1] Scott, Geoffrey, ed., Woolhampton 1903–2003: a Centenary History (Worcester, 2003) [additional credit (or subtitle) on title page: “The English Benedictine Community of St Edmund (Paris 1615 / Douai 1818)”] Sharpe, Richard, ‘Thomas Tanner (1674–1735), the 1697 Catalogue and Bibliotheca Britannica’, The Library 7th ser. 6 (2005), 381–421 [esp. also on work of J. Leland] Shippey, Tom, ‘Light-Elves, Dark-Elves and Others: Tolkien’s Elvish Problem’, Tolkien Stud. 1 (2004), 1–15 [ælf and similar; also on Tolkien’s ed. of Exodus] Roots and Branches: Selected Papers on Tolkien, ed. Thomas Honegger, Cormarë Ser. 11 (Zurich) [reissued and newly publ. papers] ‘Fighting the Long Defeat: Philology in Tolkien’s Life and Fiction’, Shippey, Roots and Branches, pp. 139–56 [newly publ., rev. version of paper delivered in 2002] ‘“A fund of wise sayings”: Proverbiality in Tolkien’, Shippey, Roots and Branches, pp. 303–19 [esp. on OE proverbs; paper delivered in 2005, newly publ.] ‘Imagined Cathedrals: Retelling Myth in the Twentieth Century’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki [see sect. 3a], pp. 307–32 [esp. on Beowulf; also for Christ I] ‘Tolkien and the Beowulf-Poet’, Shippey, Roots and Branches, pp. 1–18 [newly publ., rev. version of paper given in 2001] ‘Tolkien, Medievalism and the Philological Tradition’, Bells Chiming from the Past, ed. Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel and Begoña Crespo-García [see sect. 2b], pp. 265–79

242

Bibliography for 2007 Smith, Arden R., ‘Tolkienian Gothic’, ‘The Lord of the Rings’, 1954–2004, ed. Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull, pp. 267–81 [influence of Tolkien’s stud. of OE] Smith, Ross, Inside Language: Linguistic and Aesthetic Theory in Tolkien, Cormarë 12 (Zollikofen) [esp. in ch. 5, ‘Invented Languages’] Stévanovitch, Colette, ed., La chronique d’Ingulf. Hauts faits et méfaits des vikings en Angleterre médiévale. Volume offert à Marguerite-Marie Dubois à l’occasion de son 85e anniversaire, Collection Grendel 4 (Nancy, 2000) [reissue of novel by Dubois, Le sang des loups, first publ. in 1945, augmented by explanatory notes and treatments of relevant Latin and OE texts] Stiles, Patrick, ‘Joan Turville-Petre: a Bibliographical Appreciation’, OEN 40.3, 24–6 Sweet, Rosemary, ‘“Truly historical ground”: Antiquarianism in the North’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Robert Colls, pp. 104–25 [esp. in sect. 1] Tolley, Clive, ‘Old English Influence on The Lord of the Rings’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 38–62 Tornaghi, Paola, ‘William Dugdale and MS Harley 1129: an Unpublished SeventeenthCentury Legal Glossary’, Diachronic Perspectives on Domain-Specific English, ed. Marina Dossena and Irma Taavitsainen (Bern, 2006), pp. 69–92 [early stud. of OE] ‘“Certaine things to be considered & corrected in Will. Dugdales Saxon-Lexicon” ’, Words and Dictionaries from the British Isles in Historical Perspective, ed. John Considine and Giovanni Iamartino (Newcastle), pp. 50–80 [also esp. for S. D’Ewes and W. Somner] Treharne, Elaine, ‘Record of the Twelfth Conference of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists at Bavarian–American Centre, University of Munich, 1–6 August 2005’, ASE 35 (2006), 1–6 Waugh, Scott, ‘The Lives of Edward the Confessor and the Meaning of History in the Middle Ages’, The Medieval Chronicle III, ed. Erik Kooper (Amsterdam, 2004), pp. 200–18 [esp. in twelfth- and thirteenth-century sources] Wawn, Andrew, Graham Johnson and John Walter, ed., Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth: Essays in honour of T. A. Shippey, Making the Middle Ages 9 (Turnhout) Whetter, K. S., and R. Andrew McDonald, ‘“In the hilt is fame”: Resonances of Medieval Swords and Sword-Lore in J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings’, Mythlore: a Jnl of J. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Charles Williams and Mythopoeic Lit. 25.1–2 (2006), 5–28 [esp. on Beowulf] Wilson, Susan E, ‘Resurrection: Representation v. Reality in a Miracle of St John of Beverley’, Med. Forum 1 (2002) [online]

2. OLD ENGLISH LANGUAGE a. Lexicon and glosses i. Lexicon Bammesberger, Alfred, ‘Irish: an Antedating’, ANQ 15.4 (2002), 45–7 [phrase mid  am Yriscan mannan in Chronicle]

243

Bibliography for 2007 ‘Das altenglische Adjektiv freom’, Anglia 124 (2006), 581–90 ‘Zur Vorgeschichte von ae. oleccan “schmeicheln” ’, Sprachwissenschaft 31 (2006), 229–36 ‘The Etymology of Germanic *idis-’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 52, 81–9 [ides] Adams, Douglas Q., ‘Etymological Connections of the Tocharian Word for “Village” and the Germanic Word for “House” ’, Jnl of Indo-European Stud. 34 (2006), 390–400 [hosu; also on fleos/flies, rust and other terms] Augustyn, Prisca, The Semiotics of Fate, Death and the Soul in Germanic Culture: the Christianization of Old Saxon, Berkeley Insights in Ling. and Semiotics 50 (Frankfurt am Main, 2002) [esp. in sect. 3, ‘Magic’, on hlot, tan, wyrdstæf and other terms] Bator, Magdalena, ‘The Scandinavian Element beyond the Danelaw’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 167–80 [lexical evidence, predominantly non-onomastic] Battles, Paul, see sect. 1 [middangeard] Bergs, Alexander, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [use of  e] Biggam, C. P., ‘Knowledge of Whelk Dyes and Pigments in Anglo-Saxon England’, ASE 35 (2006), 23–55 [evidence is principally ling. and archaeol.; see esp. on term cornwurma, and also for Aldhelm and Bede] ‘The Ambiguity of brightness (with Special Reference to Old English) and a New Model for Color Description in Semantics’, Anthropology of Color: Interdisciplinary Multilevel Modeling, ed. Robert E. MacLaury, Galina V. Paramei and Don Dedrick (Amsterdam and Philadelphia), pp. 171–87 ‘Anglo-Saxon Plant-Names: How Can They Be Elucidated?’, Contexts of English in Use, Past and Present: a Festschrift for Peter Bierbaumer on the occasion of the Fortieth Anniversary of His Career at the University of Graz, ed. Margit Reitbauer et al. (Vienna), pp. 27–37 Bjorvand, Harald, ‘The Etymology of English ale’, Jnl of Indo-European Stud. 35, 1–8 Breeze, Andrew, ‘Bune “maiden; beloved” in Ancrene Wisse’, SELIM: Jnl of the Spanish Soc. for Med. Eng. Lang. and Lit. 13 (2005–6), 255–7 [argument against derivation from bygen] Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, ‘Old Frisian fule and felo “much, many”: an Idiosyncracy in Germanic and Frisian Perspective’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 46–7 (2005), 31–40 [fela] Bulotta, Donata, ‘Anglo-Saxon Female Clothing: Old English cyrtel and tunece’, Rivista di cultura classica e medievale 49.2, 307–25 Chapman, Don, and Ryan Christensen, see sect. 3bi [noun–adjective compounds in verse] Coates, Richard, ‘The Genealogy of eagre “tidal surge in the river Trent” ’, Eng. Lang. and Ling. 11, 507–23 [esp. on egor] Crépin, André, see sect. 6a [wicing] Crespo García, Begoña, and Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel Fandiño, ‘Enlarging the Lexicon: the Field of Technology and Administration from 1150 to 1500’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 40 (2004), 163–80 [OE terminology, esp. in sect. 3.4]

244

Bibliography for 2007 D’Aronco, Maria Amalia, see sect. 3cii, with ‘medical texts’ [plant names] de la Cruz Cabanillas, Isabel, ‘Shift of Meaning in the Animal Field: Some Cases of Narrowing and Widening’, Bells Chiming from the Past, ed. Isabel MoskowichSpiegel and Begoña Crespo-García, pp. 139–50 [esp. for OE zoological terms] de Tollenaere, F., Etymologica et Lexicographia, ed. Hans Heestermans, Leidse opstellen 28 (Leiden, 1997) [reissued essays; includes OE] Diller, Hans-Jürgen, ‘From mod to emotion (or Almost): the Medieval Gestation of a Modern Concept’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 13–39 Esteve Ramos, María José, ‘Different Aspects of the Specialised Nomenclature of Ophthalmology in Old and Middle English’, Bells Chiming from the Past, ed. Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel and Begoña Crespo-García, pp. 151–67 Expósito González, María Cruz, ‘Some Aspects of Semantic and Lexical Change: from Old to Middle English’, Insights and Bearings: Festschrift for Dr. Juan Sebastián Amador Bedford, ed. Manuel Brito et al. (La Laguna), pp. 63–77 [terms drawn from semantic fields bearing on ‘good feeling’, ‘wealth’, ‘feast’, ‘sound/music’, ‘time’ and others] Fritz, Matthias, ‘Von Katzen und Griechen, Wieseln und Germanen’, Novalis Indogermanica. Festschrift für Günter Neumann zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. Fritz and Susanne Zeilfelder (Graz, 2002), pp. 169–82 [catt, in sect. 3; also esp. on wesle, sects. 1 and 3] Fulk, R. D., see sect. 3bii [ a in Beowulf] Gammeltoft, Peder, and Jakob Povl Holck, ‘Gemsten and Other Old English Pearls: a Survey of Early Old English Loanwords in Scandinavian’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 50–1, 131–61 [gim(m)stan] Green, Eugene, ‘Patterns of Seeking and Breaking Silence in Earlier English’, Studies in the History of the English Language III, ed. Christopher M. Cain and Geoffrey Russom [see sect. 2b], pp. 215–29 [swigian, sect. 3.2.1.1] Gröger, Andreas, Mittelenglische ‘mentale’ Verben. Eine semantische Beschreibung des Wortfeldes der Verben zum Ausdruck mentaler Prozesse und Zustände im Mittelenglischen, auf der Basis des ‘Helsinki Corpus’ und einschlägiger Wörterbücher (Berlin, 2001) [esp. for individual treatments of hycgan/hogian, ongietan, smeagan, undergietan, in ch. 4] Hall, Alaric, ‘Elves on the Brain: Chaucer, Old English and elvish’, Anglia 124 (2006), 225–43 [‘Old English ælfisc, and Worldly Glory’, sect. 2; also esp. for ylfig, and for Aldhelm] ‘The Evidence for maran, the Anglo-Saxon “Nightmares” ’, Neophilologus 91, 299– 317 [mare; esp. for discussion of glossaries and medical texts] Hill, Joyce, ‘Dialogues with the Dictionary: Five Case Studies’, Making Sense, ed. Antonette diPaolo Healey and Kevin Kiernan [see sect. 3a], pp. 23–39 [on Dictionary of Old English] Hough, Carole, ‘Middle English *wrestman’, N&Q 54, 22–3 [esp. for wræ-stan and related terms] ‘Old English weargbeorg’, N&Q 54, 364–5 [also esp. on semantic field of ‘hill’ in place-names, and on S 885]

245

Bibliography for 2007 Huld, Martin E., ‘An Albanian Reflex of Proto-Indo-European *E1ék˘u o-s “horse” ’, ˜ ed. Karlene Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2004), pp. 186–95 [eoh] Janda, Michael, ‘The Religion of the Indo-Europeans’, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, ed. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2006), pp. 1–29 [use of fæ«m and draca in Elene 765b] Kastovsky, Dieter, ‘Middle English Word-Formation: a List of Desiderata’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 41–56 Kjellmer, Göran, ‘Popular Etymology and Language Use: the Case of beanfest’, SN 78 (2006), 59–62 [ben] Kortlandt, Frederik, ‘English bottom, German Boden and the Chronology of Sound Shifts’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 63, 5–8 [botm and related terms; builds on work by G. Kroonen, as cited below in sect. 2b] Liberman, Anatoly, ‘The Relation of English slowworm, Swedish and Older Danish ormslå, Norwegian Dialectal sleva and German Blindschleichte to *slahan “strike”, with a Note on Tautological Compounds’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 46–7 (2005), 119–32 [slawyrm] ‘Some Principles of Etymological Lexicography and Etymological Analysis’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 10 (2005), 159–76 [gierela, heahfore, ifig and other terms] ‘An Additional Note on Tautological Compounds’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 52, 67–73 [esp. for cognates of slawyrm] Lockwood, W. B., ‘On the Philology of cod and stag’, TPS 104 (2006), 13–15 [heort and (hypothetical) *stagga, sect. 2] Miller, D. Gary, Latin Suffixal Derivatives in English and Their Indo-European Ancestry, Oxford Ling. (Oxford, 2006) [includes loanwords from AS period; also esp. for Bede and Alcuin] Moskowich, Isabel, and Begoña Crespo, ‘Lop-webbe and henne cresse: Morphological Aspects of the Scientific Register in Late Middle English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 133–45 [OE terminology, esp. in sect 3.2.2] Moskowich-Spiegel, Isabel, and Begoña Crespo-García, ed., see sect. 2b Nagucka, Ruta, see sect. 2b [compounding] Olsen, Birgit, ‘Some Formal Peculiarities of Germanic n-Stem Abstracts’, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, ed. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2006), pp. 123–42 Philps, Dennis, ‘From PIE *(s)kel- “to cut” to Germanic and Baltic *(s)kel- “to owe”: an Hypothesis Based on the Concept of “Notional Chronology” ’, Jnl of IndoEuropean Stud. 33 (2005), 1–26 [scieran, scyld and related terms] Pons-Sanz, Sara M., ‘An Etymological Note on Two Old English Medical Terms: ridesoht and flacg’, SN 79, 45–53 see also sect. 3cii, with ‘Wulfstan’ [two items; esp. on «ræ-l, and on use of Norsederived vocabulary generally] Porter, David W., see sect. 2aii, with ‘glossaries and glossae collectae’ [sæ-stanas]

246

Bibliography for 2007 Rabin, Andrew, see sect. 3cii, with ‘laws’ [forespreca] Santoro, Verio, Germ. ‘arga-’, iniuriosum verbum. Aspetti etimologici e semantici (Rome, 2002) [‘Testimonianze anglosassoni’, ch. III, for earg and related terms] Sayers, William, ‘Crank and careen’, N&Q 53 (2006), 306–8 [esp. for cringan] ‘“Rollant ferit en une perre bise”: of Stones, Bread and Birches’, Jnl of Indo-European Stud. 34 (2006), 363–80 [cwudu] ‘Celtic, Germanic and Romance Interaction in the Development of Some English Words in the Popular Register’, N&Q 54, 132–40 [wafian, wefan and related terms; also esp. for wimpel] ‘Lubber, landlubber’, N&Q 54, 376–9 [esp. on hypothetical OE *lob, or a similar term] ‘The Old English Antecedents of ferry and wherry’, ANQ 20.2, 3–8 [esp. on ferian, hwer and related terms] ‘Sailing Scenes in Works of the Pearl Poet (Cleanness and Patience)’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 63, 129–55 [OE nautical terminology, esp. in sects. 2.1.2–2.2] Schuhmann, Roland, ‘Zur Runeninschrift auf dem Schildbuckel von Thorsberg und urgerm. *arga-’, Novalis Indogermanica. Festschrift für Günter Neumann zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. Matthias Fritz and Susanne Zeilfelder (Graz, 2002), pp. 453–64 [earg, esp. in sect. 4] Semple, Sarah, see sect. 8 [hearg] Stanley, Eric, see sect. 3bi [sta«ol] Svensson, Ann-Marie, and Jürgen Hering, ‘On the Ambiguity of Germanic burg’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 11 (2006), 35–45 [burh and similar] Thier, Katrin, ‘Talking about Wetlands in the Past’, Archaeology from the Wetlands, Recent Perspectives: Proceedings of the Eleventh WARP Conference, Edinburgh 2005, ed. John Barber et al., WARP Occasional Paper 18 (Edinburgh), pp. 349–54 [terms for wetlands, including mos, mor and fen; publ. of Wetland Archaeol. Research Project] Tolkien, J. R. R., ‘The Name Nodens’, Tolkien Stud. 4, 177–83 [neotan; reissue of stud. publ. in 1932] Tornaghi, Paola, see sect. 1 [early lexical stud. of OE] Toupin, Fabienne, ‘Le préverbe be- du vieil-anglais’, Actes du colloque ALAES, AMAES, GRAAT, ed. Jean-Paul Régis and Toupin [see sect. 2b], pp. 59–79 van Loon, Jozef, ‘Die Repräsentanten von germ. *hruss- “Ross” in den germanischen Sprachen, insbesondere im Alt- und Mittelniederländischen’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 48 (2006), 55–85 [‘Altenglisch’, sect. 2.2.1; esp. on hors, and on Horsa] Vennemann, Theo, ‘Grimm’s Law and Loanwords’, TPS 104 (2006), 129–66 [esp. on bealdor, sect. 6.1.1.3; also in sect. 6.1.3.1] Vijunas, Aurelijus, ‘Old Icelandic gaglvi«r’, Quidditas 28, 131–44 [gagel; online] Witczak, Krzystof Tomasz, ‘A New Look at the Etymology of Germanic *lambaz’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 52, 75–80 [lamb] Zavaroni, Adolfo, ‘Germanic Words for “Heaven”, “Haven”, “Together”, “Good”, “God”: in Search of IE Roots’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 10 (2005), 187–201 [esp. on heofon; also for gædeling, hæf and other terms]

247

Bibliography for 2007 ii. Glosses CONTINUOUS GLOSSES

Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, ‘Footprints of Monastic Instruction: a Latin Psalter with Interverbal Old Frisian Glosses’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Bremmer [see sect. 5a], pp. 203–33 [esp. in sect. 7, ‘Glossed Psalters’; also esp. on missions] Chardonnens, László Sándor, see sects. 3a and 5a [glossed copies of prognostics and, in Gneuss no. 435, Abbo of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, Bella Parisiacae urbis] De Bonis, Maria Caterina, ‘Learning Latin through the Regula Sancti Benedicti: the Interlinear Glosses in London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius A. iii’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 187–216 Griffiths, Alan, ‘The Canterbury Psalter’s Alphabet Glosses: Eclectic but Incompetent?’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 213–51 [treatment of Hebrew alphabet in Vespasian psalter] OCCASIONAL GLOSSES

Di Sciacca, Claudia, see sect. 5d [Isidore, Synonyma] Dolcetti Corazza, Vittoria, see sect. 3biii, with ‘“Physiologus” poems’ [lost AS Physiologus manuscript containing OE glosses] Lendinara, Patrizia, see sect. 4bii [Cameron item C.43 = OccGl 43] McGowan, Joseph P., ‘On the “Red” Blickling Psalter Glosses’, N&Q 54, 205–7 G L O S S A R I E S A N D G LO S S A E C O L L E C T A E

Hall, Alaric, see sect. 2ai Lazzari, Loredana, ‘Isidore’s Etymologiae in Anglo-Saxon Glossaries’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 63–93 see also sect. 4a [Antwerp–London glossaries] Porter, David W., ‘An Unrecorded Old English Compound’, ANQ 19.2 (2006), 3–4 [sæ-stanas, from Antwerp–London glossaries] Sauer, Hans, ‘Old English Words for People in the Épinal–Erfurt Glossary’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, ed. Sauer and Renate Bauer [see sect. 3a], pp. 119–81 b. Phonology, syntax and other aspects Bammesberger, Alfred, ‘Altenglisch æt heafdum und der elliptische Dual’, Novalis Indogermanica. Festschrift für Günter Neumann zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. Matthias Fritz and Susanne Zeilfelder (Graz, 2002), pp. 25–34 ‘Old English Runic Inscriptions: Textual Criticism and Historical Grammar’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, ed. Hans Sauer and Renate Bauer, pp. 69–87 Alcaraz-Sintes, Alejandro, ‘Old English Ditransitive Adjectives’, SELIM: Jnl of the Spanish Soc. for Med. Eng. Lang. and Lit. 13 (2005–6), 9–49 Allen, Cynthia L., ‘Case Syncretism and Word Order Change’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 201–23 [‘Case in OE and ME’, sect. 9.2; also esp. in sect. 9.3, ‘The Objects of Ditransitive Verbs’]

248

Bibliography for 2007 ‘Possessives and Determiners in Old English’, Types of Variation, ed. Terttu Nevalainen et al., pp. 149–70 see also sect. 3, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [use of genitive] Anderson, John M., ‘Let and the “Bare Infinitive”: an Exploratory Exercise in Traditional (Notional) Grammar’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41 (2005), 29–52 [esp. in sect. 2] Antonsen, Elmer H., ‘Proto-Germanic Final /-a/ in Second Syllables’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 52, 23–9 [includes OE] Askedal, John Ole, ‘The Potential Subjunctive in Germanic and the Reportive Subjunctive of Modern German: a Case of Structural Cyclicity?’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 11 (2006), 109–36 [esp. in sect. 8] Baker, Peter S., Introduction to Old English, 2nd ed. (Oxford) ‘The Old English Language’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 272–300 Barrack, Charles M., ‘Grimm’s Law and Verner’s Law: from Typology to Trajectory’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 10 (2005), 67–74 [treatment of north-west Germanic] Bartnik, Artur, ‘Categorial Heterogenity: Old English Determiners’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 75–96 [stud. of prose texts] Bergs, Alexander, and Janne Skaffari, ed., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [lang. of ‘Peterborough Chronicle’] Biberauer, Mary Theresa, and Ian Gareth Roberts, ‘Loss of Residual “Head-Final” Orders and Remnant Fronting in Late Middle English: Causes and Consequences’, Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax, ed. Jutta M. Hartmann and László Molnárfi, pp. 263–97 [esp. in sect. 3.2, “Verb (Projection) Raising Alternations”] Brinton, Laurel J., ‘Pathways in the Development of Pragmatic Markers in English’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 309–34 [includes OE] ‘Rise of the Adverbial Conjunctions {any, each, every} time’, Connectives in the History of English, ed. Ursula Lenker and Anneli Meurman-Solin, pp. 77–96 [includes OE] Cain, Christopher M., and Geoffrey Russom, ed., Studies in the History of the English Language, III: Managing Chaos – Strategies for Identifying Change in English, Topics in Eng. Ling. 53 (Berlin) Callender, Craig, ‘The Progression of West Germanic Gemination’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 12, 187–222 [includes OE] Cannon, Christopher, ‘Between the Old and the Middle of English’, New Med. Literatures 7 (2005), 203–21 [critique of periodization] Ciszek, Ewa, ‘LME -ship(e)’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 179–87 [esp. in sect. 3.1] Coates, Richard, ‘Invisible Britons: the View from Linguistics’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 172–91 Cortés Rodríguez, Francisco J., and Marta González Orta, ‘Anglo-Saxon Verbs of Sound: Semantic Architecture, Lexical Representation and Constructions’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 249–84

249

Bibliography for 2007 Crisma, Paola, and Chiara Gianollo, ‘Where did Romance N-Raising Come from? A Parallel Study of Parameter Resetting in Latin and English’, Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004, ed. Jenny Doetjes and Paz González (Amsterdam, 2006), pp. 71–93 [‘The Noun Phrase in Classical Latin and Old English: an Outline’, sect. 2; also esp. in sect. 3] Crystal, David, ‘The End of Old English?’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 489–98 [esp. on transition to Middle Eng.] Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, ‘“Is this doable?”: Tracing the Expression of “Deverbal Passive Potential” in Old and Middle English’, Tracing English through Time, ed. Ute Smit et al. (Vienna), pp. 33–47 [‘Syntactic and Lexical Expression of “can be verbed” in Old English’, sect. 4; also esp. in sect. 5] Dedieu, Fabienne, ‘L’évolution des intensifs en moyen-anglais’, Actes du colloque ALAES, AMAES, GRAAT, ed. Jean-Paul Régis and Fabienne Toupin, pp. 31–43 [swi«e, ful and others] de la Cruz, Juan, ‘Double Modals in Contemporary English. Where Do They Exist and Why? (The Humanistic View of a Believer in Theoretical Linguistics and AngloSaxon Studies)’, XVIII Congreso de AEDEAN, ed. Ricardo J. Sola et al. (Alcalá de Henares, 1996), pp. 15–34 [publ. of Asociación española de estudios anglo-americanos] Díaz Vera, Javier E., ‘“Remembering” in Old English: the Diachronic Reconstruction of a Verbal Dimension’, Atlantis (Salamanca) 22.1 (2000), 11–30 ‘Lexical and Non-Lexical Linguistic Variation in the Vocabulary of Old English’, Atlantis (Salamanca) 25.1 (2003), 29–38 Dietz, Klaus, Schreibung und Lautung im mittelalterlichen Englisch. Entwicklung und Funktion der englischen Schreibungen ‘ch’, ‘gh’, ‘sh’, ‘th’, ‘wh’ und ihrer kontinentalen Entsprechungen, Anglistische Forschungen 364 (Heidelberg, 2006) [‘Altenglische Handschriften’, ad indicem] Dixon, Robert M. W., ‘Comparative Constructions in English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41 (2005), 5–27 [forms of micel and lytel, in sect. 2] Drinka, Bridget, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [use of perfect] Facchinetti, Roberta, and Matti Rissanen, ed., Corpus-Based Studies of Diachronic English, Ling. Insights 31 (Bern, 2006) [‘Old English and Middle English’, sect. 2] Fellows-Jensen, Gillian, see sect. 8 [Scandinavian and AS lang. contact in East Anglia] Fernández Cuesta, Julia, and Nieves Rodríguez Ledesma, ‘From Old Northumbrian to Northern Middle English: Bridging the Divide’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 117–32 Fikkert, Paula, Elan B. Dresher and Aditi Lahiri, ‘Prosodic Preferences: from Old English to Early Modern English’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 125–50 Fischer, Olga, ‘Grammaticalization and Iconicity: Two Interacting Processes’, The Wider Scope of English, ed. Herbert Grabes and Wolfgang Viereck (Frankfurt am Main, 2006), pp. 17–42 [esp. on position of adjective in OE, in sects. 2–4] ‘The Development of English Parentheticals: a Case of Grammaticalization?’, Tracing English through Time, ed. Ute Smit et al. (Vienna), pp. 99–114 [includes OE]

250

Bibliography for 2007 Fournier, Jean-Michel, ‘From a Latin Syllable-Driven Stress System to a Romance versus Germanic Morphology-Driven Dynamics: in honour of Lionel Guierre’, Lang. Sciences 28 (2006), 218–36 [esp. in sects. 2–3] Francovich Onesti, Nicoletta, Filologia germanica. Lingue e culture dei germani antichi, Lingue e letterature straniere (Rome, 2002) [‘Anglosassone’, sect. 2.7.1; reissue of work publ. in 1991, new to ASE] García García, Luisa, ‘Sobre el vocalismo de los causativos morfológicos en inglés antiguo’, Proceedings of the Twentieth International AEDEAN Conference, ed. P. Guàrdia and J. Stone (Barcelona, 1997), pp. 183–8 [publ. of Asociación española de estudios anglo-americanos] Gas˛iorowski, ‘A Shibboleth upon Their Tongues: Early English /r/ Revisited’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 63–76 Goblirsch, Kurt Gustav, Lautverschiebungen in den germanischen Sprachen, Germanistische Bibliothek 23 (Heidelberg, 2005) [esp. in sects. 2.3.2.1–4] González Orta, Marta María, ‘Argument-Marking and Argument-Adjunct Prepositions within the Lexical Domain of Speech in Old English’, Atlantis (Salamanca) 26.1 (2004), 11–21 Grygiel, Marcin, ‘Semantic Changes within the Domain “Boy” in Panchronic Perspective’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 40 (2004), 153–61 [byre, cnafa, cniht and many others, esp. in sect. 1] Haas, Florian, ‘The Development of English each other: Grammaticalization, Lexicalization or Both?’, Eng. Lang. and Ling. 11, 31–50 [reciprocity in OE, esp. in sect. 5] Harper, M. J., The History of Britain Revealed: the Shocking Truth about the English Language, rev. ed. (Thriplow, 2006) [esp. in chs. 1–2] Hartmann, Jutta M., and László Molnárfi, ed., Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax: from Afrikaans to Zurich German, Linguistik aktuell 97 (Amsterdam, 2006) [esp. in sect. III, ‘Historical Studies’] Heggelund, Øystein, ‘Old English Subordinate Clauses and the Shift to Verb-Medial Order in English’, ES 88, 351–61 Heselwood, Barry, ‘Schwa and the Phonotactics of RP English’, TPS 105, 148–87 [esp. in sect. 2.1] Higham, Nick, ed., see sect. 6b Hines, John, ‘The Writing of English in Kent: Contexts and Influences from the Sixth to the Ninth Century’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 50–1, 63–92 Hoad, Terry, ‘Preliminaries: Before English’, The Oxford History of English, ed. Lynda Mugglestone, pp. 7–31 Hogg, Richard, ‘Old English Dialectology’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 395–416 Hough, Carole, and John Corbett, Beginning Old English (Basingstoke) Ingham, Richard, ‘On Two Negative Concord Dialects in Early English’, Lang. Variation and Change 18 (2006), 241–66 [‘Study 1: NC in Old English’, pp. 244–51; also esp. in appendix A] ‘NegP and Negated Constituent Movement in the History of English’, TPS 105, 365–97

251

Bibliography for 2007 Irvine, Susan, ‘Beginnings and Transitions: Old English’, The Oxford History of English, ed. Lynda Mugglestone, pp. 32–60 Jones, Megan, and Sali Tagliamonte, ‘From Somerset to Samaná: Preverbal did in the Voyage of English’, Lang. Variation and Change 16 (2004), 93–126 [esp. in sect. 2] Kami´nska, Anna, ‘The Word Order of Old English and Old High German NonConjoined Declarative Clauses in Different Text Types’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 49–73 [esp. on clauses in translations] Kastovsky, Dieter, ‘Historical Morphology from a Typological Point of View: Examples from English’, Types of Variation, ed. Terttu Nevalainen et al., pp. 53–80 ‘Typological Changes in Derivational Morphology’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 151–76 [includes OE] Kisbye, Torben, ‘Danelagen: sprogstruktur, befolkningsstruktur’, Nordboer i Danelagen. Den skandinaviske bosættelsestæthed i Danelagen med udgangspunkt i de sproglige vidnesbyrd, ed. Hans Bekker-Nielsen and Hans Frede Nielsen ([Odense], 1982), pp. 43–66 [esp. on the influence of Danish on OE, and the influence of Danes on AS society] Koike, Takeshi, ‘The History of the Genitive Case from the Old English Period Onwards’, Eng. Lang. and Ling. 10 (2006), 49–75 Kortlandt, Frederik, ‘Germanic *e 1 and *e 2’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 49 (2006), 51–4 [includes OE] ‘The Inflexion of the Germanic n-Stems’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 48 (2006), 3–7 [includes OE] ‘Proto-Germanic Obstruents and the Comparative Method’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 52, 3–5 [esp. on work of K. Goblirsch; includes OE] Kristensson, Gillis, ‘A Note on /sk/ in the Dialect of Devon’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 46–7 (2005), 103–7 [includes OE] Kroonen, Guus, ‘Gemination and Allomorphy in the Proto-Germanic mn-Stems: bottom and rime’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 61 (2006), 17–25 [botm/bodan, hrim and others] Laitinen, Mikko, ‘Expressing Human Indefiniteness in English: Typology and Markedness of Pronouns’, Types of Variation, ed. Terttu Nevalainen et al., pp. 203– 39 [esp. in sects. 3 and 5–7] Lange, Claudia, Reflexivity and Intensification in English: a Study of Texts and Contexts, Arbeiten zur Sprachanalyse 46 (Frankfurt am Main) [‘Reflexivity and Intensification in Old English’, ch. 5] Lenker, Ursula, ‘Forhwi “Because”: Shifting Deictics in the History of English Causal Connection’, Connectives in the History of English, ed. Lenker and Anneli MeurmanSolin, pp. 193–227 [esp. on for æ-m, for y and related terms] Lenker, Ursula, and Anneli Meurman-Solin, ed., Connectives in the History of English, Amsterdam Stud. in the Theory and Hist. of Ling. Science, ser. 4: Current Issues in Ling. Theory 283 (Amsterdam) Lerer, Seth, Inventing English: a Portable History of the Language (New York) [esp. in chs. 1–3]

252

Bibliography for 2007 Liberman, Anatoly, ‘Epenthetic Consonants and the Accentuation of Words with Old Closed Vowels in Low German, Dutch and Danish Dialects’, Germanic Tone Accents, ed. Michiel de Vaan (Stuttgart, 2006), pp. 73–83 [includes OE] ‘Palatalized and Velarized Consonants in English against Their Germanic Background, with Special Reference to i-Umlaut’, Studies in the History of the English Language III, ed. Christopher M. Cain and Geoffrey Russom, pp. 5–36 López-Couso, María José, ‘Adverbial Connectives Within and Beyond Adverbial Subordination: the History of lest’, Connectives in the History of English, ed. Ursula Lenker and Anneli Meurman-Solin, pp. 11–29 [esp. on «y læ-s («e)] Los, Bettelou, ‘To as a Connective in the History of English’, Connectives in the History of English, ed. Ursula Lenker and Anneli Meurman-Solin, pp. 31–60 [‘The Categorial Status of the to-Infinitive in Old English’, sect. 2] McFadden, Thomas, and Artemis Alexiadou, ‘Auxiliary Selection and Counterfactuality in the History of English and Germanic’, Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax, ed. Jutta M. Hartmann and László Molnárfi, pp. 237–62 Mailhammmer, Robert, ‘On the Origin of the Germanic Strong Verb System’, Sprachwissenschaft 31 (2006), 1–52 [includes OE] ‘On Syllable Cut in the Orrmulum’, Studies in the History of the English Language III, ed. Christopher M. Cain and Geoffrey Russom, pp. 37–61 [esp. for OE phonology, sects. 1–5] Makashay, Matthew J., ‘Lexical Effects in the Perception of Obstruent Ordering’, Ohio State Univ. Working Papers in Ling. 55 (2001), 88–116 [forms of ascian, tusc, wæps and other terms, in sect. 1] Martín Arista, Javier, ‘Alternations, Relatedness and Motivation: Old English a-’, Where Grammar Meets Discourse: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives, ed. Pilar Guerrero Medina and Estela Martínez Jurado (Córdoba, 2006), pp. 113–32 Martín Arista, Javier, and María Victoria Martín de la Rosa, ‘Old English Semantic Primes: Substantives, Determiners and Quantifiers’, Atlantis (Salamanca) 28.2 (2006), 9–28 Martín Díaz, María Auxiliadora, see sect. 8 [Kentish dialect] Méndez Naya, Belén, ‘“He nas nat right fat”: on the Origin and Development of the Intensifier right’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 191–207 [in sect. 1] Minkova, Donka, ‘Old and Middle English Prosody’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 95–124 Miranda-García, A., and J. Calle-Martín, ‘Yule’s Characteristic K Revisited’, Lang. Resources and Evaluation 39 (2005), 287–94 [esp. on lexical repetition in OE gospels; also for analytic tool, the Old English Concordancer] Moessner, Lilo, ‘The Mandative Subjunctive in Middle English’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 209–26 [in sects. 1–2] Mokrowiecki, Tomasz, ‘The Pre-Verbal i- in Early Middle English: an Analysis of the Formal Parameters of the Prefixed Verbs’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 141–66 [ge- as verbal prefix, esp. in sect. 2]

253

Bibliography for 2007 Molencki, Rafał, ‘The Evolution of since in Medieval English’, Connectives in the History of English, ed. Ursula Lenker and Anneli Meurman-Solin, pp. 97–113 [esp. on si«, si««an and related terms] Moskowich-Spiegel, Isabel, and Begoña Crespo-García, ed., Bells Chiming from the Past: Cultural and Linguistic Studies on Early English, Costerus ns 174 (Amsterdam) Mugglestone, Lynda, ed., The Oxford History of English (Oxford, 2006) Nagucka, Ruta, ‘Metaphorical Aspects of Compounding in Old English’, The Wider Scope of English, ed. Herbert Grabes and Wolfgang Viereck (Frankfurt am Main, 2006), pp. 43–56 Nevalainen, Terttu, Juhani Klemola and Mikko Laitinen, ed., Types of Variation: Diachronic, Dialectical and Typological Interfaces, Stud. in Lang. Companion Ser. 76 (Amsterdam, 2006) Nielsen, Hans Frede, ‘English and the Jutland Dialect; or, the Demise of a Romantic Notion’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al. [see sect. 1], pp. 97–108 North, Richard, and Joe Allard, ed., see sect. 3bii Nykiel, Joanna, ‘Resolution of Ellipsis: Evidence from Old English Sluicing’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 111–25 Ogura, Michiko, ‘Old English Preverbal Elements with Adverbial Counterparts’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, ed. Hans Sauer and Renate Bauer, pp. 101–17 [esp. in OE gospels, sect. 2] ‘Old English agan to Reconsidered’, N&Q 54, 216–18 Ogura, Mieko, and William S.-Y. Wang, ‘Ambiguity and Language Evolution: Evolution of Homophones and Syllable Number of Words’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 3–30 [extensive discussion of OE] Ohkado, Masayuki, see sect. 11 [clause structure] Pearce, Michael, The Routledge Dictionary of English Language Studies (London) [‘Old English’, pp. 130–4; also in entries for ‘Angles’, ‘Anglo-Saxon’ and so on] Phillips, Betty S., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [phonology] Pintzuk, Susan, and Ann Taylor, ‘The Loss of OV Order in the History of English’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 249–78 Platzer, Hans, ‘Cohesion in Old English: a Brief Survey’, Tracing English through Time, ed. Ute Smit et al. (Vienna), pp. 267–94 Postma, Gertjan, ‘Toward a Syntactic Theory of Number Neutralisation: the Dutch Pronouns je “You” and ze “Them” ’, Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax, ed. Jutta M. Hartmann and László Molnárfi, pp. 181–200 [esp. in sect. 6, ‘An Application: the Rise of English “they” ’] Poussa, Patricia, ‘The Relatives Who and What in Northern East Anglia’, Types of Variation, ed. Terttu Nevalainen et al., pp. 321–50 [sects. 1 and 2.5.1] Probert, Duncan, see sect. 8 [lang. change in south-west] Pysz, Agnieszka, ‘Noun Phrase Internal Gender Agreement in Late Old English and Early Middle English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41 (2005), 85–97 ‘The (Im)Possibility of Stacking Adjectives in Early English’, Bells Chiming from the

254

Bibliography for 2007 Past, ed. Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel and Begoña Crespo-García, pp. 15–35 [‘Adjective Stacking in OE: Standard Views’, sect. 2] see also sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [demonstratives] Régis, Jean-Paul, and Fabienne Toupin, ed., Actes du colloque ALAES, AMAES, GRAAT, Tours 2001. Histoire de la langue anglaise. Évolution et système, Travaux de diachronie 3 (Tours, 2006) [publ. of Association des linguistes anglicistes de l’enseignement supérieur and related groups] Ringe, Don, ‘A Sociolinguistically Informed Solution to an Old Historical Problem: the Gothic Genitive Plural’, TPS 104 (2006), 167–206 [includes OE] Rissanen, Matti, ‘From o  to till: Early Loss of an Adverbial Subordinator’, Connectives in the History of English, ed. Ursula Lenker and Anneli Meurman-Solin, pp. 61–75 Roméro, Céline, ‘Syntaxe des perfecto–présents en vieil-anglais’, Actes du colloque ALAES, AMAES, GRAAT, ed. Jean-Paul Régis and Fabienne Toupin, pp. 45–58 Rosenbach, Anette, ‘Emerging Variation: Determiner Genitives and Noun Modifiers in English’, Eng. Lang. and Ling. 11, 143–89 [includes OE] Saibene, Maria Grazia, Le lingue germaniche antiche. Origine e sviluppo (Bologna, 1996) [‘Anglosassone’, ad indicem, with bibliography, pp. 380–1] Sauer, Hans, ‘Sprachwissenschaft’, Einführung in die Anglistik und Amerikanistik, ed. Uwe Böker and Christoph Houswitschka (Munich, 2000), pp. 89–165 [‘Altenglisch (ca. 450–ca. 1100)’, sect. 13.4; also esp. in sects. 12.2 and 14.2–3] Sauer, Hans, and Renate Bauer, ed., see sect. 3a Schmetterer, Viktor, ‘Teaching a Thousand Years of English in Twenty Hours’, Tracing English through Time, ed. Ute Smit et al. (Vienna), pp. 331–43 Schöneborn, Thomas, ‘Primary Adjectives in English and German: Variation and Change in Diachrony and Typology’, Types of Variation, ed. Terttu Nevalainen et al., pp. 99–120 [‘Old/Middle English and Old/Middle High German’, sect. 3.2] Schrijver, Peter, ‘What Britons Spoke around 400 AD’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 165–71 [esp. on earliest AS contacts] Schulte, Michael, ‘Präverbierung in den prosodischen Systemen des Altgermanischen’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 50–1, 5–41 [includes OE] Schwyter, Jürg Rainer, see sect. 3ci [‘slipping’ in OE prose] Scragg, Donald, see sect. 3ci [grammar and textual editing] Seoane, Elena, ‘Information Structure and Word Order Change: the Passive as an Information-Rearranging Strategy in the History of English’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, pp. 360–91 [includes OE] Siguresson, Halldór Ármann, ‘The Nom/Acc Alternation in Germanic’, Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax, ed. Jutta M. Hartmann and László Molnárfi, pp. 13–50 [esp. in sect. 2.3, ‘The Germanic Predicative Nom/Acc Variation’] Smith, Jeremy J., Sound Change and the History of English (Oxford) [‘From Pre-English to Old English’ and ‘From Old to Middle English’, chs. 4–5] Smith, K. Aaron, ‘The Development of the English Progressive: a Felicitous Problem for the Teaching of HEL’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.1, 71–87 [‘The OE Tense and Aspect System’, introd.; also esp. in sects. 2–3 and 6]

255

Bibliography for 2007 Sosa Acevedo, Eulalia, ‘Exploring Semantic and Syntactic Relations within the Old English Verbs of Hearing’, Insights and Bearings: Festschrift for Dr. Juan Sebastián Amador Bedford, ed. Manuel Brito et al. (La Laguna), pp. 317–30 Stevick, Robert D., ‘Diagramming Old English Sentences’, Global Perspectives on Medieval English Literature, Language and Culture, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr, and Richard Scott Nokes (Kalamazoo, MI), pp. 229–59 Suárez-Gómez, Cristina, Relativization in Early English (950–1250): the Position of Relative Clauses, Ling. Insights 49 (Bern) Townend, Matthew, ‘Contacts and Conflicts: Latin, Norse and French’, The Oxford History of English, ed. Lynda Mugglestone, pp. 61–85 Traxel, Oliver M., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [transition to Middle Eng.] Trips, Carola , ‘Syntactic Sources of Word-Formation Processes: Evidence from Old English and Old High German’, Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax, ed. Jutta M. Hartmann and László Molnárfi, pp. 299–328 Tristram, Hildegard, ‘Why Don’t the English Speak Welsh?’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 192–214 van der Auwera, Johan, and Martine Taeymans, ‘More on the Ancestors of need’, Corpus-Based Studies of Diachronic English, ed. Roberta Facchinetti and Matti Rissanen, pp. 37–52 van Gelderen, Elly, A History of the English Language (Amsterdam, 2006) see also sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [grammaticalization] van Kemenade, Ans, and Bettelou Los, ‘Discourse Adverbs and Clausal Syntax in Old and Middle English’, The Handbook of the History of English, ed. van Kemenade and Los, pp. 224–48 van Kemenade, Ans, and Bettelou Los, ed., The Handbook of the History of English, Blackwell Handbooks in Ling. (Oxford, 2006) Van Wijk, Malou, ‘I-Umlaut and Vowel Shift: a GP Account of Diachronic Change’, XVIII Congreso de AEDEAN, ed. Ricardo J. Sola et al. (Alcalá de Henares, 1996), pp. 199–205 [publ. of Asociación española de estudios anglo-americanos] Vezzosi, Letizia, ‘S-Genitive and of-Genitive: Competitors or Complementary Strategies? A Diachronic Analysis’, English Diachronic Pragmatics, ed. Gabriella Di Martino and Maria Lima, Laboratorio 42 (Naples, 2000), pp. 399–432 ‘Himself: an Overview of its Use in Middle English’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 239–56 Warner, Anthony, ‘Parameters of Variation between Verb–Subject and Subject–Verb Order in Late Middle English’, Eng. Lang. and Ling. 11, 81–111 [esp. on ‘V2 order’ in OE, sect. 4] Wawrzyniak, Agnieszka, ‘The Semantic Dissolution of the Structure in ME shulen on its Path to Epistemicity’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 239–47 [‘The Semantic Analysis of sculan in OE: Brief Description’, sect. 2] Weinstock, Horst, ‘Medieval English and German: a Guide to Modern Similarities and Dissimilarities’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, ed. Hans Sauer and Renate Bauer [see sect. 3a], pp. 309–28 [includes OE]

256

Bibliography for 2007 Wełna, Jerzy, ‘Middle English e-Raising: a Prelude to the Great Vowel Shift’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 40 (2004), 75–85 [esp. in sect. 1] ‘Nim or take? A Competition between Two High Frequency Verbs in Middle English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41 (2005), 53–69 [‘Forms of niman in Old and Middle English’, sect. 2; also esp. in sects. 1 and 3] ‘“Now you see it, now you don’t” Once More: the Loss and Insertion of Dental Stops in Medieval English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 41 (2005), 72–84 ‘The Loss of [ei] : [ai] Opposition in Middle English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 3–16 [diphthongs in late OE, sect. 1] ‘The Loss of Liquid [l] in Early English, or What Luick and Jordan Did not Say’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 257–68 Wischer, Ilse, ‘Markers of Futurity in Old English and the Grammaticalization of shall and will’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 165–78 Włodarczyk, Matylda, ‘“More strenger and mightier”: Some Remarks on Double Comparison in Middle English’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 43, 195–217 [esp. in sects. 1–2] Wojtys., Anna, ‘Middle English Prefixal Past Participle Marking in the Midlands’, Studies in Middle English Forms and Meanings, ed. Gabriella Mazzon (Frankfurt am Main), pp. 269–87 [prefix ge-] Yokota, Yumi, ‘Form and Function of Demonstratives in the Middle English Southern Texts and Speculation on the Origin of th-Type Third Person Plural Pronouns in the North and South’, N&Q 53 (2006), 300–3 [includes OE] Yoon, Hyejoon, ‘The Substantive Present Participles in -nd- in Gothic: with the Survey of Other Old Germanic Languages’, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual UCLA IndoEuropean Conference, ed. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2005), pp. 243– 57 Zavaroni. Adolfo, ‘Prenasalized Stops and Possible Semantic Developments from “Bite” to “Take” ’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 12, 277–302 [includes OE] Ziegeler, Debra, ‘Omnitemporal will ’, Lang. Sciences 28 (2006), 76–119 [esp. in sects. 4–6]

3. OLD ENGLISH LITERATURE a. General and miscellaneous Berthoin-Mathieu, Anne, ‘Le sang et la magie dans l’Angleterre du Xe au XIIe siècle’, Le sang au Moyen Âge, ed. Marcel Faure (Montpellier, 1999), pp. 11–18 Biggs, Frederick M., ed., see sect. 5d [apocryphal texts in AS England] Bishop, Chris, ‘The “Lost” Literature of England: Text and Transmission in TenthCentury Wessex’, Text and Transmission in Medieval Europe, ed. Bishop (Newcastle), pp. 76–126 [includes discussion of OE verse, esp. in poetic codices; OE prose,

257

Bibliography for 2007 esp. in Chronicle; Anglo-Latin; and scriptoria and manuscript culture, esp. in connection with Benedictine reform] Black, John R., see sect. 6a [verse and prose on Guthlac] Bradley, S. A. J., N. F. S. Grundtvig’s Transcriptions of the Exeter Book: Grundtvig Archive fascicle 316, nrs 1–8 in the Royal Library Copenhagen: an Analysis, Skrifter udgivet af Grundtvig-selskabet 28 (Copenhagen, 1998) [publ. as a suppl. to Registrant over N. F. S. Grundtvigs papirer, ed. G. Albeck et al., 30 vols. (Copenhagen, 1957–64)] Bredehoft, Thomas A., see sect. 5a [charms] Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, and Kees Dekker, ed., Foundations of Learning: the Transfer of Encyclopaedic Knowledge in the Early Middle Ages, Mediaevalia Groningana ns 9 (Louvain) Bukowska, Joanna, ‘Studies on Old and Middle English Literature in Poland (1910–2006)’, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42 (2006), 405–25 [bibliography] Chardonnens, László Sándor, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, 900–1100: Study and Texts, Brill’s Stud. in Intellectual Hist. 3 (Leiden) [includes treatments of some 170 texts, comprising sixty OE texts (about a dozen of which involve OE glosses accompanying Latin texts) as well as 110 unglossed Latin texts; ‘Text Edition’, pp. 167–500, and ‘Handlist of Prognostics in English Manuscripts of the Ninth to Twelfth Centuries’, appendix 1] ‘Context, Language, Date and Origin of Anglo-Saxon Prognostics’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker, pp. 317–40 see also sect. 5a [prognostics in Gneuss no. 435] Darien, Lisa, ‘Bridging the Gap: Getting Medieval at the Small Liberal Arts College’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 89–106 [emphasis on OE lit.] Deyermond, Alan, ed., A Century of British Medieval Studies, Brit. Acad. Centenary Monographs (Oxford) Díaz Vera, Javier E., ‘Actitudes escribales hacia el inglés antiguo en la Inglaterra normanda’, XVIII Congreso de AEDEAN, ed. Ricardo J. Sola et al. (Alcalá de Henares, 1996), pp. 397–401 [publ. of Asociación española de estudios angloamericanos] Faraci, Dora, ed., Simbolismo animale e letteratura, Memoria bibliografica 42 (Rome, 2003) [esp. in sect. 1, ‘Tradizione medievale’] Foys, Martin K., Virtually Anglo-Saxon: Old Media, New Media and Early Medieval Studies in the Late Age of Print (Gainesville, FL) [esp. on electronic editions and hypertext; also esp. on Bayeux ‘tapestry’, on the AS mappamundi in Gneuss no. 373, and on sculpture] Frank, Roberta, ‘Terminally Hip and Incredibly Cool: Carol, Vikings and AngloScandinavian England’, Representations (Berkeley, CA) 100, 23–33 [publ. version of talk presented, in 2006, at ‘Remakes: a Symposium in honor of Carol J. Clover’] Glosecki, Stephen O., ed., Myth in Early Northwest Europe, Med. and Renaissance Texts and Stud. 320 [= Arizona Stud. in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance 21] (Tempe, AZ) Hall, Alaric, Elves in Anglo-Saxon England: Matters of Belief, Health, Gender and Identity, AS Stud. 8 (Woodbridge) [esp. on charms; also for other medical texts, and for Judith] Hass, Andrew, David Jasper and Elisabeth Jay, ed., The Oxford Handbook of English

258

Bibliography for 2007 Literature and Theology (Oxford) [‘Old English, poetry’, ad indicem; also for prose, esp. in pt. 1] Healey, Antonette diPaolo, and Kevin Kiernan, ed., Making Sense: Constructing Meaning in Early English, Publ. of the Dictionary of OE 7 (Toronto) Horowitz, Michael G., ‘Reply to “Wyrd, Causality and Providence”’, Mankind Quarterly 46 (2005–6), 487–9 [reply to article by I. McNish, publ. in vol. for 2003–4, as cited in ASE 34 (2005), p. 282] Johnson, David F., ‘Digitizing the Middle Ages’, Lit. Compass 1 (2003–4) [includes OE; online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2004.00041.x] Lapidge, Michael, ‘Old English’, A Century of British Medieval Studies, ed. Alan Deyermond, pp. 363–81 Lee, Christina, see sect. 9ei [two entries; allusions to funerary rites in OE and AngloLatin sources] Lerer, Seth, see sect. 2b [‘portable history’ of Eng.] Liuzza, R. M., ‘Scribes of the Mind: Editing Old English, in Theory and in Practice’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox, pp. 243–77 Long, Lynne, ‘Vernacular Bibles and Prayer Books’, The Oxford Handbook of English Literature and Theology, ed. Andrew Hass et al., pp. 54–78 [‘The Early Influence of the Bible on Vernacular Literature’, sect. 2, on prose and verse] McKee, Helen, and James McKee, ‘Chance or Design? David Howlett’s Insular Inscriptions and the Problem of Coincidence’, CMCS 51 (2006), 83–101 [on monograph by Howlett, publ. in 2005] Magennis, Hugh, and Jonathan Wilcox, ed., The Power of Words: Anglo-Saxon Studies presented to Donald G. Scragg on His Seventieth Birthday, Med. European Stud. 8 (Morgantown, WV, 2006) Minnis, Alastair, and Jane Roberts, ed., Text, Image, Interpretation: Studies in Anglo-Saxon Literature and its Insular Context in honour of Éamonn Ó Carragáin, Stud. in the Early Middle Ages 18 (Turnhout) Mitchell, Bruce, and Fred C. Robinson, A Guide to Old English, 7th ed. (Oxford) [includes, as new texts, Maxims II and Wulfstan, Sermo Lupi ad Anglos] Niles, John D., ‘Was there a “Legend of Lejre”?’, Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre [see sect. 3bii], pp. 255–65 Olivares Merino, Eugenio Manuel, ‘Some Notes on the Absence of Horror Literature in the English Middle Ages’, Literatura y estudios culturales, ed. Jesús López-Peláez Casellas and Concepción Soto Palomo (Jaén, 2000), pp. 149–74 [esp. for Beowulf; also on Wulfstan et al., and for Chronicle] Sauer, Hans, and Renate Bauer, ed., ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, Stud. in Eng. Med. Lang. and Lit. 18 (Frankfurt am Main) Scheil, Andrew, ‘Old English Textbooks and the Twenty-First Century: a Review of Recent Publications’, OEN 40.3, 47–59 [esp. on R. Hogg, An Introduction to Old English (2002), and four other textbooks first publ. since 2001] Shaw, Philip, ‘Hair and Heathens: Picturing Pagans and the Carolingian Connection in the Exeter Book and Beowulf-Manuscript’, Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Richard Corradini et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 345–57

259

Bibliography for 2007 Shimogasa, Tokuji, ‘Repetitive Word Pairs in Amis and Amiloun’, Originality and Adventure, ed. Yoshiyuki Nakao and Akiyuki Jimura (Tokyo, 2001), pp. 21–39 [word pairs and word groups in OE prose, sect. 1.1] Signoret, Jean-Olivier, Deo Gubernante. Navigations miraculeuses et miracles marins au Moyen Âge. L’union des cultures païennes et chrétiennes (Villeneuve-d’Ascq, 2002) [esp. on figures of Cuthbert and Guthlac] Sutton, John William, Death and Violence in Old and Middle English Literature (Lampeter) [esp. in Beowulf, Judith and Battle of Maldon; also esp. for Chronicle] Swan, Mary, ‘Old English Textual Activity in the Reign of Henry II’, Writers of the Reign of Henry II, ed. Ruth Kennedy and Simon Meecham-Jones (Basingstoke, 2006), pp. 151–68 [esp. for hagiography and homiletic texts; ‘Principal Manuscripts Containing Old English Texts Produced between ca. 1150 and 1200’, sect. 3] Tamburr, Karl, The Harrowing of Hell in Medieval England (Woodbridge) [‘Providential View and Penitential Mode in the Old English Harrowing of Hell’, ch. 3; also esp. for Bede, and for liturgical texts, here and in chs. 1 and 3] Treharne, Elaine, ‘The Life of English in the Mid-Twelfth Century: Ralph D’Escures’s Homily on the Virgin Mary’, Writers of the Reign of Henry II, ed. Ruth Kennedy and Simon Meecham-Jones (Basingstoke, 2006), pp. 169–86 [esp. on OE and early Middle Eng. texts in Ker no. 209] ‘The Form and Function of the Vercelli Book’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 253–66 Watkins, C. S., History and the Supernatural in Medieval England, Cambridge Stud. in Med. Life and Thought, 4th ser. 66 (Cambridge) [esp. for Ælfric and Wulfstan, in ch. 2; also for Bede, Alcuin et al.] Witalisz, Władysław, ‘“The blood I souke of his feet”: the Christocentric Heritage of Medieval Affective Piety – a Historical Overview’, Global Perspectives on Medieval English Literature, Language and Culture, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr, and Richard Scott Nokes (Kalamazoo, MI), pp. 59–91 [esp. on Dream of the Rood; also for Elene, and for Bede, Ælfric et al.] Wright, Charles D., Frederick M. Biggs and Thomas N. Hall, ed., Source of Wisdom: Old English and Early Medieval Latin Studies in honour of Thomas D. Hill, Toronto OE Ser. 16 (Toronto) b. Poetry i. General and miscellaneous Abram, Christopher, see sect. 4bi, with ‘Aldhelm’ [argument against dichotomization of Anglo-Latin and OE verse] Anlezark, Daniel, ‘Poisoned Places: the Avernian Tradition in Old English Poetry’, ASE 36, 103–26 [esp. in Beowulf and in Solomon and Saturn II; includes discussion of possible influence of Latin epic] Árnason, Kristján, ‘The Rise of the Quatrain in Germanic: Musicality and Word Based Rhythm in Eddic Meters’, Formal Approaches to Poetry, ed. B. Elan Dresher and Nila Friedberg (Berlin, 2006), pp. 151–69 [in sect. 2]

260

Bibliography for 2007 Artelius, Tore, ‘The Framework of Pagan Identity: “Time” in the Southern Scandinavian Late Iron Age’, It’s about Time, ed. Håkan Karlsson (Göteborg, 2001), pp. 1–27 [Beowulf, Ruin and Battle of Maldon, in sect. 4] Biggs, Frederick M., ‘The Dream of the Rood and Guthlac B as a Literary Context for the Monsters in Beowulf ’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 289–301 Bishop, Chris, see sect. 3a [poetic codices] Bravo, Antonio, ‘La ambigüedad de dreorig en la poesía del inglés antiguo’, Proceedings of the Twentieth International AEDEAN Conference, ed. P. Guàrdia and J. Stone (Barcelona, 1997), pp. 99–106 [publ. of Asociación española de estudios angloamericanos] Bredehoft, Thomas A., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [neglected verse, or passage resembling verse, in Chronicle] Carroll, Jayne, ‘Concepts of Power in Anglo-Scandinavian Verse’, Aspects of Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, ed. Brenda Bolton and Christine Meek (Turnhout), pp. 217–33 [esp. on Battle of Brunanburh and Capture of the Five Boroughs; also esp. for A«alsteinsdrápa] ‘Engla waldend, rex admirabilis: Poetic Representations of King Edgar’, RES 58, 113– 32 [esp. in Battle of Brunanburh and Capture of the Five Boroughs; also for Æthelweard, Chronicon] Carruthers, Leo, ‘Poésie, sculpture et reliques chrétiennes dans la tradition anglosaxonne’, Poètes et artistes, ed. Sophie Cassagnes-Brouquet et al. (Limoges), pp. 135– 50 [esp. for Dream of the Rood and Ruthwell Cross; also on Elene, and on Alfred et al.] Chapman, Don, and Ryan Christensen, ‘Noun–Adjective Compounds as a Poetic Type in Old English’, ES 88, 447–64 Conde-Silvestre, Juan Camilo, ‘Verbal Confrontation and the Uses of Direct Speech in Some Old English Poetic Hagiographies’, Bells Chiming from the Past, ed. Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel and Begoña Crespo-García [see sect. 2b], pp. 247–64 [esp. on Elene, Guthlac A and Juliana] Crépin, André, Old English Poetics: a Technical Handbook, Publications de l’Association des médiévistes anglicistes de l’enseignement supérieur, Hors série 12 (Paris, 2005) Davis, Craig R., ‘Theories of History in Traditional Plots’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki, pp. 31–45 [esp. on Beowulf; also for Battle of Maldon] Deskis, Susan E., ‘Echoes of Old English Alliterative Collocations in Middle English Alliterative Proverbs’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 311–25 Díaz Vera, Javier, ‘Presencia de la lengua y literatura anglosajonas en unos inéditos de Saussure sobre leyendas germánicas’, Proceedings of the Twentieth International AEDEAN Conference, ed. P. Guàrdia and J. Stone (Barcelona, 1997), pp. 439–43 [esp. on Deor, Widsith and Waldere; also on Beowulf; publ. of Asociación española de estudios anglo-americanos]

261

Bibliography for 2007 Dockray-Miller, Mary, ‘Female Devotion and the Vercelli Book’, PQ 83 (2005–6 for 2004), 337–54 Drout, Michael D. C., ‘A Meme-Based Approach to Oral Traditional Theory’, Oral Tradition 21 (2006), 269–94 [esp. in sects. 4–5] ‘Possible Instructional Effects of the Exeter Book “Wisdom Poems”: a Benedictine Reform Context’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 447–66 see also sect. 1 [Seafarer, Wanderer and Widsith] Faraci, Dora, ‘Per una determinazione della sfera di fruizione dei bestiari’, Simbolismo animale e letteratura, ed. Faraci, pp. 89–119 [esp. on ‘Physiologus’ poems and Phoenix] Faraci, Dora, ed., see sect. 3a Fisher, Jay, ‘Speaking in Tongues: Collocations of Word and Deed in Proto-IndoEuropean’, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, ed. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2006), pp. 179–96 [esp. on Beowulf] Fox, Michael, ‘Origins in the English Tradition’, The Oxford Handbook of English Literature and Theology, ed. Andrew Hass et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 35–53 [strong emphasis on verse] Fulk, R. D., ‘Old English Meter and Oral Tradition: Three Issues Bearing on Poetic Chronology’, JEGP 106, 304–24 see also sect. 3bii [numbered sects. in poetic codices] Glosecki, Stephen O., ‘Introduction: Myth Theory – Rite Refracted’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Glosecki, pp. xiii–xli [esp. on Beowulf; also for Nine Herbs Charm] Stranded Narrative: Myth, Metaphor and the Metrical Charm’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Glosecki, pp. 47–70 [esp. on Nine Herbs Charm] Glosecki, Stephen O., ed., see sect. 3a Griffiths, Bill, ‘“The start of everything wonderful”: the Old English Poetry of Northumbria’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Robert Colls [see sect. 6a], pp. 33–47 [esp. for Cædmon’s Hymn, Franks Casket, ‘Ruthwell Crucifixion poem’ and Durham; also for Beowulf] Hall, Mark F., see sect. 1 [Tolkien and alliterative verse] Harris, Joseph, ‘Beasts of Battle, South and North’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 3–25 Herschend, Frands, ‘An Emendated Long Line on Rune-Stone Sö 130’, Cultural Interaction between East and West, ed. Ulf Fransson et al. [see sect. 9a], pp. 44–9 [possible influence of OE on continental runic text in verse, sect. 4] Hill, John M., ‘God at the Borders: Northern Myth and Anglo-Saxon Heroic Story’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki, pp. 241–56 [esp. on Beowulf, Battle of Maldon, Battle of Brunanburh and Judith] Magennis, Hugh, ‘Imagery of Light in Old English Poetry: Traditions and Appropriations’, Anglia 125, 181–204 Markus, Manfred, ‘Spotting Spoken Historical English: the Role of Alliteration in Middle English Fixed Expressions’, Corpus-Based Studies of Diachronic English, ed. Roberta Facchinetti and Matti Rissanen [see sect. 2b], pp. 53–78 [esp. in sects. 3 and 5]

262

Bibliography for 2007 Minnis, Alastair, and Jane Roberts, ed., see sect. 3a Mize, Britt, ‘The Representation of the Mind as an Enclosure in Old English Poetry’, ASE 35 (2006), 57–90 Neville, Jennifer, ‘Joyous Play and Bitter Tears: the Riddles and the Elegies’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 130–59 Niles, John D., Old English Heroic Poems and the Social Life of Texts, Stud. in the Early Middle Ages 20 (Turnhout) [reissued essays, several augmented, with two wholly new chs.] North, Richard, ‘Old English Minor Heroic Poems’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. North and Joe Allard, pp. 95–129 North, Richard, and Joe Allard, ed., see sect. 3bii Ortoleva, Grazia, ‘Il lupo nella poesia anglo-sassone’, Simbolismo animale e letteratura, ed. Dora Faraci, pp. 37–59 Pons-Sanz, Sara M., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Wulfstan’ [neglected verse, or passages resembling verse, in Chronicle] Russom, Geoffrey, ‘Evolution of the a-Verse in English Alliterative Meter’, Studies in the History of the English Language III, ed. Christopher M. Cain and Russom [see sect. 2b], pp. 63–87 [esp. in sects. 1–2] Shaw, Philip, see sect. 3bi [Beowulf, Judith and verse of Exeter Book] Shippey, Tom, ‘A Look at Exodus and Finn and Hengest’, Shippey, Roots and Branches [see sect. 1], pp. 175–86 [reissue of rev. article, publ. in 1986, treating editions by J. R. R. Tolkien, publ. respectively in 1981 and 1982] Siebert, Eve, ‘A Possible Source for the Addition to The Grave’, ANQ 19.4 (2006), 8–16 [includes discussion of Soul and Body I] Slatin, Patricia, ‘Heroes on an Indo-European Beach? Reflections on Studies by David A. Krooks and Alain Renoir’, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 11 (2006), 137–61 [includes OE verse, esp. in sect. 2] Solopova, Elizabeth, ‘English Poetry of the Reign of Henry II’, Writers of the Reign of Henry II, ed. Ruth Kennedy and Simon Meecham-Jones (Basingstoke, 2006), pp. 187–204 [esp. on post-Conquest fortunes of OE verse] Stanley, Eric, ‘Sta ol: a Firm Foundation for Imagery’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 319–32 [esp. in OE verse] Treharne, Elaine, see sect. 3a [Vercelli poems] Wright, Charles D., et al., ed., see sect. 3a Wyly, Bryan Weston, ‘Cædmon the Cowherd and Old English Biblical Verse’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 189–218 ii. ‘Beowulf ’ Bammesberger, Alfred, ‘Ealond utan at Beowulf, line 2334a’, N&Q 54, 361–4 ‘Grendel Enters Heorot’, N&Q 54, 119–20 ‘A Note on Beowulf, lines 642–51a’, N&Q 54, 359–61 Acker, Paul, ‘Introduction: Skjöldunga saga and Beowulf ’, ANQ 20.3, 3–9 [see further below, with [Acker, Paul, et al., introd. and trans.] Acker, Paul, trans., ‘The Dragon Episode in Morkinskinna’, ANQ 20.3, 65–8 [later analogue of Beowulf; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry]

263

Bibliography for 2007 [Acker, Paul, et al., introd. and trans.], ‘Skjöldunga saga / “The Saga of the Scyldings”’, ANQ 20.3, 3–33 [trans. from Arngrímur Jónsson’s Rerum Danicarum Fragmenta (completed in manuscript in 1596; publ. in 1950 in ed. by J. Benediktsson), which includes matter attributed to a lost Skjo˛ldunga saga; in first part of special issue of ANQ, an issue treating later analogues of Beowulf, here comprising items by Acker, Bjarni Guenason and C. H. Miller (as cited above and below), these being publ. integrally under title ‘Part I. “Fragments of Danish History” (Skjöldunga saga)’] Anlezark, Daniel, see sect. 3bi [Grendel’s mere] [Anon.], ‘A Partial, Annotated Bibliography of the Beowulf Canon through Today’, The Further Adventures of Beowulf,, ed. Brian M. Thomsen, pp. 253–9 [includes novels, music, cinema, productions for television and comic books] Asma, Stephen T., ‘Never Mind Grendel. Can Beowulf Conquer the Twenty-FirstCentury Guilt Trip?’, Chronicle of Higher Education 54.15 (7 December), B14–B15 [on cinematic treatment by R. Zemeckis] Barber, E. J. W., and P. T. Barber, ‘Why the Flood Is Universal but Only Germanic Dragons Have Halitosis: Using Cognitive Studies to Help Decode Myth’, Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference, ed. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2004), pp. 1–22 Biggs, Frederick M., ‘Folio 179 of the Beowulf Manuscript’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 52–9 see also sect. 3bi [monsters] Bjarni Guenason, ‘Notes’, trans. Sif Rikhardsdóttir, ANQ 20.3, 22–33 [see further above, with [Acker, Paul, et al., introd. and trans.]; trans. of notes extracted from ed. publ. by Bjarni in 1982, with additions by Acker; includes ‘Works Cited’] Bloom, Harold, ed., Beowulf, updated ed., Bloom’s Mod. Critical Interpretations (New York) [wholly new selection of previously publ. essays; supersedes collection publ. in 1987] Bruce, Alexander M., ‘Beowulf 1366a: fyr on flode as the aurora borealis?’, ASNSL 244, 105–9 ‘Evil Twins? The Role of the Monsters in Beowulf ’, Med. Forum 6 [online] Cooke, William, ‘Hrothulf: a Richard III, or an Alfred the Great?’, SP 104, 175–98 ‘Who Cursed Whom, and When? The Cursing of the Hoard and Beowulf ’s Fate’, MÆ 71, 207–24 Crépin, André, ed., Beowulf, Lettres gothiques (Paris) [rev. of ed. publ. in 1991; includes new trans.] Crowder, Ashby Bland, and Jason David Hall, ed., Seamus Heaney: Poet, Critic, Translator (Basingstoke) [trans. of Beowulf, ad indicem, p. 213] D’Arcy, Julian Meldon, trans., ‘The Dragon of Ragnarök’, ANQ 20.3, 68–9 [later analogue of Beowulf; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry] Davis, Craig R., ‘An Ethnic Dating of Beowulf ’, ASE 35 (2006), 111–29 Davis, Glenn, ‘Beowulf in Fourth Period: Anglo-Saxon England in the High School Classroom’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 31–9

264

Bibliography for 2007 Drout, Michael D. C., ‘The Rhetorical Evolution of “Beowulf: the Monsters and the Critics”’, ‘The Lord of the Rings’, 1954–2004, ed. Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull, pp. 183–215 ‘Blood and Deeds: the Inheritance Systems in Beowulf ’, SP 104, 199–226 see also sect. 1 [first and third entries; influence on Tolkien] Falk, Oren, ‘Beowulf ’s Longest Day: the Amphibious Hero in His Element (Beowulf, ll. 1495b–96)’, JEGP 106, 1–21 Fehrenbacher, Richard W., see sect. 1 [influence on Tolkien] Finlay, Alison, ‘Putting a Bawn into Beowulf ’, Seamus Heaney, ed. Ashby Bland Crowder and Jason David Hall, pp. 136–54 Fisher, Jay, see sect. 3bi [collocations of word and deed] Fisher, Matthew A., ‘Working at the Crossroads: Tolkien, St. Augustine and the BeowulfPoet’, ‘The Lord of the Rings’, 1954–2004, ed. Wayne G. Hammond and Christina Scull, pp. 217–30 Fitzgerald, Christina M., ‘Swords, Sex and Revenge: Teaching Beowulf and Judith with Tarantino’s Kill Bill’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 41–55 Forni, Kathleen, ‘Graham Baker’s Beowulf: Intersections between High and Low Culture’, Lit./Film Quarterly 35, 244–9 Frank, Roberta, ‘F-Words in Beowulf ’, Making Sense, ed. Antonette diPaolo Healey and Kevin Kiernan [see sect. 3a], pp. 1–22 ‘A Scandal in Toronto: The Dating of “Beowulf ” a Quarter Century On’, Speculum 82, 843–64 Fulk, R. D., ‘The Origin of the Numbered Sections in Beowulf and in Other Old English Poems’, ASE 35 (2006), 91–109 [includes discussion of Junius poems and verse in Vercelli Book] Archaisms and Neologisms in the Language of Beowulf ’, Studies in the History of the English Language III, ed. Christopher M. Cain and Geoffrey Russom [see sect. 2b], pp. 267–87 ‘The Textual Criticism of Frederick Klaeber’s Beowulf ’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al., pp. 131–53 ‘Old English  a “now that” and the Integrity of Beowulf ’, ES 88, 623–31 ‘Some Emendations and Non-Emendations in Beowulf (verses 600a, 976a, 1585b, 1663b, 1740a, 2525b, 2771a and 3060a)’, SP 104, 159–74 Glosecki, Stephen O., ‘Beowulf and the Queen’s Cup: Determining the Danish Succession’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 368–96 Glosecki, Stephen O., ed., see sect. 3a Glover, Julian, Beowulf, rev. ed. (Stroud, 2005) [adaptation for theatrical performance; rev. ed. of work publ. in 1987] Goffart, Walter, ‘The Name “Merovingian” and the Dating of Beowulf ’, ASE 36, 93–101 Gulludjian, Hagop, ‘On Armenian Parallels to Beowulf ’, Jnl of the Soc. for Armenian Stud. 16, 73–87 Hall, Alaric, ‘Hygelac’s Only Daughter: a Present, a Potentate and a Peaceweaver in Beowulf ’, SN 78 (2006), 81–7

265

Bibliography for 2007 Hall, J. R., ‘Beowulf 2009a: f . . . bifongen’, JEGP 106, 417–27 Hammond, Wayne G., and Christina Scull, ed., see sect. 1 Harris, Joseph, see sect. 3bi [Beowulf and ‘beasts of battle’] Hawes, Janice, trans., ‘Afterword: Amlæd (Hamlet)’, ANQ 20.3, 74–7 [later analogue of Beowulf, as continuation of Scylding history; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry; includes introd. by Osborn] Hellgardt, Ernst, ‘Beowulf Again? Of Course!’, Anglia 125, 304–28 [German-lang. survey treating nine monographs and collections publ. 1996–2005] Hill, John, ‘The Thirteenth Warrior’, Heroic Age 2 (1999) [online; rev. article treating film by J. McTiernan] ‘Beowulf Editions for the Ancestors: Cultural Genealogy and Power in the Claims of Nineteenth-Century English and American Editors and Translators’, Constructing Nations, Reconstructing Myth, ed. Andrew Wawn et al., pp. 53–69 ‘Current General Trends in Beowulf Studies’, Lit. Compass 4, 66–88 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00390.x] Hill, Thomas D., ‘Beowulf ’s Roman Rites: Roman Ritual and Germanic Tradition’, JEGP 106, 325–35 Jurasinski, Stefan, ‘The Feminine Name Wealhtheow and the Problem of Beowulfian Anthroponymy’, Neophilologus 91, 701–15 Kisor, Yvette, trans., ‘Harthgrepa (from Saxo Grammaticus, Gesta Danorum, Book I)’, ANQ 20.3, 61–3 [later analogue of Beowulf; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry; includes introd. by Kisor] Klein, Thomas, ‘Stonc æfter stane (Beowulf, l. 2288a): Philology, Narrative Context and the Waking Dragon’, JEGP 106, 22–44 Larrington, Carolyne, ‘“Beowulf ” (Various Cinemas)’, TLS 19 Nov., 17–18 [rev. of cinematic treatment by R. Zemeckis] Lebecq, Stéphane, ‘Imma, Yeavering, Beowulf. Remarques sur la formation d’une culture aulique dans l’Angleterre du VIIe siècle’, Romans d’antiquité et littérature de Nord, ed. Sarah Baudelle-Michels et al. (Paris), pp. 497–513 [also esp. on Bede, Historia ecclesiastica, and for Stephen of Ripon] Lindow, John, trans., ‘Trolls in the Isefjord’, ANQ 20.3, 49–52 [Danish folktale, a later analogue of Beowulf; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry; includes introd. by Osborn] McGuire, Thomas, ‘Violence and Vernacular in Seamus Heaney’s Beowulf ’, New Hibernia Rev. 10.1, 79–99 Malzahn, Manfred, and Muhammad Abu al-Fadl Badran, ‘Beowulf in Arabia: Teaching Heroic Poetry in a Post-Heroic Age’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, ed. Hans Sauer and Renate Bauer [see sect. 3a], pp. 1–15 Miller, Clarence H., trans., ‘“Fragments of Danish History”’, ANQ 20.3, 9–22 [see further above, with ‘[Acker, Paul, et al., introd. and trans.]’] Mitchell, Stephen A., trans., ‘“The Battle on the Ice”’, ANQ 20.3, 70–4 [later analogue of Beowulf, trans. from fifteenth-century Bjarkarímur; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry; includes introd. by Osborn] ‘Yuletide Beasts at Lejre’, ANQ 20.3, 43–6 [later analogue of Beowulf, trans. from

266

Bibliography for 2007 fifteenth-century Bjarkarímur; see further below, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry; includes introd. by Osborn] Momma, Haruko, and Michael Powell, ‘Death and Nostalgia: the Future of Beowulf in the Post-National Discipline of English’, Lit. Compass 4, 1345–53 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2007.00482.x] Morey, James H., ‘The Fates of Men in Beowulf ’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 26–51 Neville, Jennifer, ‘Hrothgar’s Horses: Feral or Thoroughbred?’, ASE 35 (2006), 131–57 Niles, John D., ‘Beowulf and Lejre’, Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, pp. 169–233 Niles, John D., et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, featuring contributions by Tom Christensen and Marijane Osborn, Med. and Renaissance Texts and Stud. 323 (Tempe, AZ) Norris, Robin, ‘Mourning Rights: Beowulf, the Iliad and the War in Iraq’, Jnl of Narrative Theory 37, 276–95 North, Richard, and Joe Allard, ed., ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories: a New Introduction to Old English, Old Icelandic and Anglo-Norman Literatures (Harlow) Orchard, Andy, ‘Beowulf and Other Battlers: an Introduction to Beowulf ’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard, pp. 63–94 Osborn, Marijane, ‘Legends of Lejre, Home of Kings’, John D. Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, pp. 235–54 [also esp. for Alcuin, and for Chronicle] ‘The Lejre Connection in Beowulf Scholarship’, John D. Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, pp. 287–93 ‘Manipulating Waterfalls: Mythic Places in Beowulf and Grettissaga, Lawrence and Purnell’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki, pp. 197–224 ‘Later Adventures of the Skjöldung Heroes’, ANQ 20.3, 69–70 [introd. to subsection, here at pp. 69–77, in sequence of items publ. integrally on pp. 33–77 of special issue of ANQ, an issue treating later analogues of Beowulf; see further introd. by Osborn, cited below] ‘Monsters of Fjord and Fen’, ANQ 20.3, 42–3 [introd. to subsection, here at pp. 43– 63, in sequence of items publ. integrally on pp. 33–77 of special issue of ANQ, an issue treating later analogues of Beowulf; see further introd. by Osborn, cited below] ‘Part II. Beyond the Mere: Other Versions of Beowulfian Stories’, ANQ 20.3, 33–4 [introd. to items publ. integrally on pp. 33–77 of special issue of ANQ, an issue treating later analogues of Beowulf; see further items (cited above and below) trans. by P. Acker, J. M. D’Arcy, Y. Kisor, Osborn, R. M. Scowcroft, T. Shippey et al.] ‘Three Dragons’, ANQ 20.3, 63–5 [introd. to subsection, here at pp. 63–9, in sequence of items publ. integrally on pp. 33–77 of special issue of ANQ, an issue treating later analogues of Beowulf; see further introd. by Osborn, cited above] Osborn, Marijane, and Bent Christensen, trans., ‘“Skjöld”: a Song by N. F. S. Grundtvig’, ANQ 20.3, 35–42 [later analogue of Beowulf; see further above, with Osborn, sixth entry] Owen-Crocker, Gale R., ‘Beast Men: Eofor and Wulf and the Mythic Significance of Names in Beowulf ’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki, pp. 257–80

267

Bibliography for 2007 Princi Braccini, Giovanna, ‘Alfwalda (“signore degli Elfi”) non epiteto ma vero nome di Beowulf ?’, SM 47 (2006), 253–65 Reitbauer, Margit, ‘Digitizing Beowulf: Computer Assisted Instruction of O.E.’, Contexts of English in Use, Past and Present: a Festschrift for Peter Bierbaumer on the occasion of the Fortieth Anniversary of His Career at the University of Graz, ed. Reitbauer et al. (Vienna), pp. 55–63 Ringler, Dick, trans., ‘Beowulf ’: a New Translation for Oral Delivery (Indianapolis, IN) Roberts, Jane, ‘Understanding Hrothgar’s Humiliation: Beowulf lines 144–74 in Context’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 355–67 Russom, Geoffrey, ‘At the Center of Beowulf ’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki, pp. 225–40 Sarrazin, Gregor, see below with Sayers, William, trans. [Beowulf and Lejre] Sayers, William, ‘Grendel’s Mother (Beowulf) and the Celtic Sovereignty Goddess’, Jnl of Indo-European Stud. 35, 31–52 Sayers, William, trans., ‘Gregor Sarrazin: Three Studies Relating to Beowulf and Lejre (1886–1910)’, rev. John D. Niles, Niles et al., ‘Beowulf ’ and Lejre, pp. 435–47 [includes introd. by Niles] Scowcroft, R. Mark, trans., ‘“The Story of Bran and Sceolang”’, ANQ 20.3, 52–61 [later analogue of Beowulf in extracts from Irish Feis tighe Chonáin (ascribed to the fourteenth or fifteenth century); see further above, with Osborn, Marijane, sixth entry; includes additions by Osborn] Shippey, Tom, ‘Beowulf: a Verse Translation, Revised Edition by Michael Alexander, London: Penguin Classics 2003’, The Wider Scope of English, ed. Herbert Grabes and Wolfgang Viereck (Frankfurt am Main, 2006), pp. 87–91 [rev. article] see also sect. 1 [first and sixth entries; Tolkien and Beowulf ] Shippey, Tom, trans., ‘Juchen Knoop’, ANQ 20.3, 46–9 [local German legend publ. by K. Müllenhoff in 1845, later analogue of Beowulf; see further above, with Osborn, Marijane; includes introd. by Shippey] Steele, Felicia Jean, ‘Dreaming of Dragons: Tolkien’s Impact on Heaney’s Beowulf’, Mythlore: a Jnl of J. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Charles Williams and Mythopoeic Lit. 25.1–2 (2006), 137–46 Thomsen, Brian M., ed., The Further Adventures of Beowulf, Champion of Middle Earth (New York, 2006) [popular fiction augmented by reissue of trans. in prose by J. Earle, first publ. in 1892, with bibliography] Tolkien, J. R. R., ‘Les monstres et les critiques’ et autres essais, ed. Christopher Tolkien, trans. Christine Lafferrière (Paris, 2006) [also esp. for ‘Traduire Beowulf ’, item 2; trans. of work publ. in 1983] Trilling, Renée R., ‘Beyond Abjection: the Problem with Grendel’s Mother Again’, Parergon ns 24.1, 1–20 van Zanten, Arwen, ‘Going Berserk: in Old Norse, Old Irish and Anglo-Saxon Literature’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 63, 43–64 [‘Beowulf and Grendel: Anglo-Saxon Berserkers?’, sect. 3] Walther, Sabine, ‘The Vikings in the Rhinelands according to Latin Sources’, Vikings on

268

Bibliography for 2007 the Rhine, ed. Rudolf Simek and Ulrike Engel (Vienna, 2004), pp. 165–77 [Chlochilaichus and Hygelac, sect. 2; also for Liber monstrorum] Walton, Michael, trans., The Book of ‘Beowulf ’, with ‘The Fight at Finnsburg’, ‘Widsi«’, ‘Deor’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ‘Waldere’ and ‘The Battle of Maldon’, in Modern English Translations (Cayuga, Ont.) Wawn, Andrew, et al., ed., see sect. 1 Wentersdorf, Karl P., ‘The Beowulf-Poet’s Vision of Heorot’, SP 104, 409–26 Whissell, Cynthia, ‘The Flow of Emotion through Beowulf ’, Psychological Reports 99 (2006), 835–50 Wright, Charles D., et al., ed., see sect. 3a iii. Other verse ANDREAS

Garner, Lori Ann, ‘The Old English Andreas and the Mermedonian Cityscape’, Essays in Med. Stud. (Chicago et alibi) 24, 53–63 [online] BA T T L E O F B RU NA N BU R H

Carroll, Jayne, see sect. 3bi Cavill, Paul, see sect. 8 Powell, Kathryn, ‘Ealde u«witan in The Battle of Brunanburh’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 318–36 BA T T L E O F M A L D O N

Altman, Chris, ‘Making Use of the Terrain: Byrhtnoe’s Strategy in The Battle of Maldon’, ANQ 20.1, 3–8 Bruce, Alexander M., see sect. 1 [influence on Tolkien] Dance, Richard, ‘“Wær weare hream ahafen”: a Note on Old English Spelling and the Sound of The Battle of Maldon’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 277–317 Halbrooks, John, ‘Byrhtnoth’s Great-Hearted Mirth, or Praise and Blame in The Battle of Maldon’, PQ 82 (2004–5 for 2003), 235–55 Jorgensen, Alice, ‘Power, Poetry and Violence: The Battle of Maldon’, Aspects of Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, ed. Brenda Bolton and Christine Meek (Turnhout), pp. 235–49 CÆDMON’S HYMN

Frantzen, Allen J., and John Hines, ed., ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’ and Material Culture in the World of Bede: Six Essays, Med. European Stud. 10 (Morgantown, WV) Hines, John, see sect. 4bii Holsinger, Bruce, see sect. 4bii O’Donnell, Daniel P., ‘Material Differences: the Place of Cædmon’s Hymn in the History of Anglo-Saxon Vernacular Poetry’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ed. Allen J. Frantzen and John Hines, pp. 15–50 [esp. in sects. 6–7; also esp. on Aldhelm] Wyly, Bryan Weston, see sect. 3bi

269

Bibliography for 2007 C A P T U R E O F T H E F I V E B O RO U G H S

Carroll, Jayne, see sect. 3bi CHRIST I

Farina, Lara, Erotic Discourse and Early English Religious Writing, New Middle Ages (Basingstoke, 2006) [‘Before Affection: Christ I and the Social Erotic’, ch. 1; rev. version of essay publ. in 2001] Kramer, Johanna, ‘“Eu eart se weallstan”: Architectural Metaphor and Christological Imagery in the Old English Christ I and the Book of Kells’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 90–112 CHRIST III

Arner, Timothy D., and Paul D. Stegner, ‘“Of tam him aweaxee wynsum gefea”: the Voyeuristic Appeal of Christ III’, JEGP 106, 428–46 Shimomura, Sachi, Odd Bodies and Visible Ends in Medieval Literature, New Middle Ages (Basingstoke, 2006) [‘Visualizing Judgment in Anglo-Saxon England: Illumination, Metaphor and Christ III’, ch. 1] CHRIST AND SATAN

Buchelt, Lisabeth C., see below, with ‘Genesis A and B’ [role of memory] DEOR

Dubois, Marguerite-Marie, ‘La légende de Weland, célebrée dans le poème vieil-anglais du Deor et gravée sur le Coffret d’Auzon’, Poètes et artistes, ed. Sophie CassagnesBrouquet et al. (Limoges), pp. 17–23 Kopár, Lilla, see sect. 9giii [figure of Weland] Mostert, Marco, ‘Remembering the Barbarian Past: Oral Traditions about the Distant Past in the Middle Ages’, The Medieval Chronicle IV, ed. Erik Kooper (Amsterdam, 2006), pp. 113–25 [includes close stud. of Deor] DESCENT INTO HELL

Rambaran-Olm, M. R., ‘Is the Title of the Old English Poem The Descent into Hell Suitable?’, SELIM: Jnl of the Spanish Soc. for Med. Eng. Lang. and Lit. 13 (2005–6), 73–85 ‘Two Remarks Concerning folio 121 of the Exeter Book’, N&Q 54, 207–8 D R E A M O F T H E RO O D

Biggs, Frederick M., see sect. 3bi Earl, James W., ‘Trinitarian Language: Augustine, The Dream of the Rood and Ælfric’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 63–79 Ikeda, Tadashi, ‘The Dream of the Rood’: Mysticism in English Literature (Tokyo, 1976) [in Japanese; includes trans.; also esp. on ‘Ruthwell Crucifixion poem’] Marchand, James W., ‘The Leaps of Christ and The Dream of the Rood’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 80–9 [also esp. on Christ II]

270

Bibliography for 2007 Ó Carragáin, Éamonn, and Richard North, ‘The Dream of the Rood and Anglo-Saxon Northumbria’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. North and Joe Allard [see sect. 3bii], pp. 160–88 Orton, Fred, et al., see sect. 9gi Raw, Barbara C., ‘The Cross in The Dream of the Rood: Martyr, Patron and Image of Christ’, Leeds Stud. in Eng. ns 38, 1–15 Rodrigues, Louis J., ‘Further Observations Concerning the Translation of Anglo-Saxon Verse’, Babel (Frankfurt am Main) 52 (2006), 280–7 [emphasis on Dream of the Rood] Szarmach, Paul E., ‘The Dream of the Rood as Ekphrasis’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 267–88 Watts, William H., ‘The Medieval Dream Vision as Survey of Medieval Literature’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 12.2 (2005), 67–94 Wright, Charles D., et al., ed., see sect. 3a ELENE

Hernández Pérez, María Beatriz, ‘Elene as an Agent of Torture: an Anglo-Saxon Depiction of Sanctity’, Insights and Bearings: Festschrift for Dr. Juan Sebastián Amador Bedford, ed. Manuel Brito et al. (La Laguna), pp. 221–32 Janda, Michael, see sect. 2ai E XO D U S

Bammesberger, Alfred, ‘Old English læste near (Exodus, line 308b)’, N&Q 54, 357–9 Shippey, Tom, see sect. 3bi [on ed. by Tolkien, publ. in 1981] F I N N S BU R H F R AG M E N T

Shippey, Tom, see sect. 3bi [on ed. by Tolkien, publ. in 1982] F O RT U N E S O F M E N

DiNapoli, Robert, ‘Close to the Edge: The Fortunes of Men and the Limits of Wisdom Literature’, Text and Transmission in Medieval Europe, ed. Chris Bishop (Newcastle), pp. 127–47 GENESIS A AND B

Buchelt, Lisabeth C., ‘All about Eve: Memory and Re-Collection in Junius 11’s Epic Poems Genesis and Christ and Satan’, Women and Medieval Epic, ed. Sara S. Poor and Jana K. Schulman (Basingstoke), pp. 137–58 Karkov, Catherine E., see sect. 5c [depictions of Eve] GENESIS A

Orchard, Andy, ‘Intoxication, Fornication and Multiplication: the Burgeoning Text of Genesis A’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 333–54

271

Bibliography for 2007 GENESIS B

Langeslag, P. S., ‘Doctrine and Paradigm: Two Functions of the Innovations in Genesis B’, SN 79, 113–18 Mora, José María, and Julia María Fernández Cuesta, ‘Fyre o««e gar: los tormentos infernales en Genesis B 316’, XVIII Congreso de AEDEAN, ed. Ricardo J. Sola et al. (Alcalá de Henares, 1996), pp. 435–8 [publ. of Asociación española de estudios anglo-americanos] GUTHLAC B

Biggs, Frederick M., see sect. 3bi J U D G E M E N T DAY I I

Lendinara, Patrizia, ‘Translating Doomsday: De die iudicii and its Old English Translation (Judgement Day II)’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Beyond, ed. Hans Sauer and Renate Bauer [see sect. 3a], pp. 17–67 see also sect. 4bii [circulation] JUDITH

Callahan, Leslie Abend, ‘Ambiguity and Appropriation: the Story of Judith in Medieval Narrative and Iconographic Traditions’, Telling Tales, ed. Francesca Canadé Sautman et al. (New York, 1998), pp. 79–99 Fitzgerald, Christina M., see sect. 3bii [pedagogical use] Hall, Alaric, see sect. 3a J U L I A NA

Dendle, Peter, ‘How Naked Is Juliana?’, PQ 83 (2005–6 for 2004), 355–70 ‘ M E N O LO G I U M ’ Karasawa, Kazutomo, ‘A Note on the Old English Poem Menologium (3b on  y eahteo«an dæg)’, N&Q 54, 211–15 ‘ P H YS I O LO G U S ’ P O E M S Dolcetti Corazza, Vittoria, ‘Crossing Paths in the Middle Ages: the Physiologus in Iceland’, The Garden of Crossing Paths, ed. Marina Buzzoni and Massimiliano Bampi, rev. ed. (Venice), pp. 225–48 [also esp. on lost AS Physiologus manuscript containing OE glosses] Drout, Michael D. C., ‘“The Partridge” Is a Phoenix: Revising the Exeter Book Physiologus’, Neophilologus 91, 487–503 RHYMING POEM

Abram, Christopher, ‘The Errors in The Rhyming Poem’, RES 58, 1–9

272

Bibliography for 2007 RIDDLES

Afros, Elena, ‘Is cyssa« in Exeter Book Riddle 30a (6b) an Instance of Morphological Levelling?’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 63, 21–8 Alexander, Michael, trans., Old English Riddles from the Exeter Book, 2nd ed., Poetica 11 (London) [includes first trans. here of riddles 21 and 36; rev. treatments of riddles 8, 9, 73 and 75; and an excerpt, in trans., of Dream of the Rood] Denno, Jerry, ‘Oppression and Voice in Anglo-Saxon Riddle Poems’, CEA Critic: an Official Jnl of the College Eng. Assoc. 70.1, 35–47 Fiocco, Teresa, ‘Gli animali negli enigmi anglosassoni dell’Exeter Book’, Simbolismo animale e letteratura, ed. Dora Faraci [see sect. 3a], pp. 133–57 Gwara, Scott, and Barbara L. Bolt, ‘A “Double Solution” for Exeter Book Riddle 51, “Pen and Three Fingers”’, N&Q 54, 16–19 Heyworth, Melanie, ‘The Devils in the Detail: a New Solution to Exeter Book Riddle 4’, Neophilologus 91, 175–96 ‘Perceptions of Marriage in Exeter Book Riddles 20 and 61’, SN 79, 171–84 Murphy, Patrick J., ‘Bocstafas: a Literal Reading of Exeter Book Riddle 57’, PQ 84 (2007 for 2005), 139–60 ‘Leo ond beo: Exeter Book Riddle 17 as Samson’s Lion’, ES 88, 371–87 Neville, Jennifer, ‘Fostering the Cuckoo: Exeter Book Riddle 9’, RES 58, 431–46 see also sect. 3bi Santano Moreno, Bernardo, and Adrian Birtwistle, ed., Enigmas anglosajones del Codex Exoniensis (selección bilingüe) (Cáceres, 1992) Underwood, Richard, see sect. 9gii [Riddle 5, ‘Shield’] RU N E P O E M

Millar, Angel, ‘The Old English Rune Poem: Semantics, Structure and Symmetry’, Jnl of Indo-European Stud. 34 (2006), 419–36 ‘ RU T H W E L L C RU C I F I X I O N P O E M ’ Ikeda, Tadashi, see above, with Dream of the Rood Orton, Fred, et al., see sect. 9gi S E A FA R E R

Fimi, Dimitra, see sect. 1 [notes by J. R. R. Tolkien for contemplated ed.] Garver, Lee, see sect. 1 [trans. by E. Pound] Magennis, Hugh, ‘The Solitary Journey: Aloneness and Community in The Seafarer’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 303–18 S E A S O N S F O R FA S T I N G

Richards, Mary P., ‘Old Wine in a New Bottle: Recycled Instructional Materials in Seasons for Fasting’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist [see sect. 3ci], pp. 345–64 [comparison of structure with OE composite homilies; also for ‘Menologium’ and other verse, and for Wulfstan (esp. in connection with Latin text on Ember fasts) and Byrhtferth]

273

Bibliography for 2007 S O LO M O N A N D S A T U R N I

Bredehoft, Thomas A., see sect. 5a S O LO M O N A N D S A T U R N I I

Anlezark, Daniel, see sect. 3bi Olsen, Karin E., ‘Shining Swords and Heavenly Walls: in Search of Wisdom in Solomon and Saturn II’, Calliope’s Classroom, ed. Annette Harder et al. (Paris), pp. 203–19 WA N D E R E R

Gwara, Scott, ‘Forht and fægen in The Wanderer and Related Literary Contexts of AngloSaxon Warrior Wisdom’, MS 69, 255–98 Sheppard, Alice, ‘A Word to the Wise: Thinking, Knowledge and Wisdom in The Wanderer’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 130–44 WIFE’S LAMENT

Lee, Sung-Il, ‘The Identity of the geong mon (line 42) in The Wife’s Lament (or, “The Lament of an Outcast”)’, Global Perspectives on Medieval English Literature, Language and Culture, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr, and Richard Scott Nokes (Kalamazoo, MI), pp. 175–93 Shimomura, Sachi, ‘Remembering in Circles: The Wife’s Lament, conversatio and the Community of Memory’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 113–29 W U L F A N D E A D WA C E R

Daniëlli, Sonja, ‘“Wulf, min Wulf ”: an Eclectic Analysis of the Wolf-Man’, Neophilologus 91, 505–24 [reissue of essay publ. in 2006] c. Prose i. General and miscellaneous Abram, Christopher, ‘Anglo-Saxon Homilies in Their Scandinavian Context’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 425–44 Anlezark, Daniel, ‘Reading “The Story of Joseph” in MS Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 201’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox, pp. 61–94 [free-standing excerpt from anon. OE trans. of Genesis; also esp. for Ælfric] [Anon.], ‘Introduction’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 1–12 see also sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [N. R. Ker and AS homiliaries] Bredehoft, Thomas A., see sect. 5a [OE homilies in Gneuss no. 39] Brookes, Stewart, ‘Prose Writers of the English Benedictine Reform’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard [see sect. 3bii], pp. 417–53 [esp. on Ælfric and Wulfstan; also for Byrhtferth and for Apollonius of Tyre] Bussières, Michèle, see sect. 5a [anon. hagiographical prose] Chardonnens, László Sándor, see sects. 3a [two items; prognostics] and 5a [also on prognostics]

274

Bibliography for 2007 Conti, Aidan, ‘The Circulation of the Old English Homily in the Twelfth Century: New Evidence from Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 343’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 365–402 [Ker no. 310] Corradini, Erika, ‘Preaching in Old English: Tradition and New Directions’, Lit. Compass 3 (2006), 1266–77 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00381.x] Crick, Julia, ed., see sect. 5b [previously unprinted diplomatic texts; also esp. for Will of Æthelgifu] Dendle, Peter, ‘Cryptozoology in the Medieval and Modern Worlds’, Folklore 117 (2006), 190–206 [encyclopedic prose of Beowulf manuscript, in sect. 2; also esp. on Liber monstrorum] Frantzen, Allen J., see sect. 4a [penitential texts] Gautier, Alban, ‘“Matériau de débauche et mère de tous les vices”: goinfrerie, démesure et luxure dans la littérature homilétique anglaise aux Xe–XIe siècles’, Food and History 4.2 (2007 for 2006), 113–29 [includes brief Eng. abstract] Giliberto, Concetta, ‘The Fifteen Signs of Doomsday of the First Riustring Manuscript’, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 64, 129–52 [esp. in sect. 2, for Ker no. 209, item 33] Heyworth, Melanie, ‘The “Late Old English Handbook for the Use of a Confessor”: Authorship and Connections’, N&Q 54, 218–22 [also esp. for Wulfstan, and for his ‘commonplace books’] Kéry, Lotte, ‘Beten – kämpfen – arbeiten. Zur Deutung der sozialen Wirklichkeit im früheren Mittelalter’, Eloquentia Copiosus, ed. Kéry, assisted by Monika Gussone et al. (Aachen, 2006), pp. 129–48 [esp. on Alfred; also for Ælfric and Wulfstan, and for Abbo et al.] Keynes, Simon, see sect. 6c [esp. on Ælfric and Wulfstan; also for Chronicle and laws] Kleist, Aaron J., see sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ Kleist, Aaron J., ed., The Old English Homily: Precedent, Practice and Appropriation, Stud. in the Early Middle Ages 17 (Turnhout) Magennis, Hugh, and Jonathan Wilcox, ed., see sect. 3a Millett, Bella, ‘The Pastoral Context of the Trinity and Lambeth Homilies’, Essays in Manuscript Geography, ed. Wendy Scase [see sect. 5a], pp. 43–64 [fortunes of OE homiletic; esp. for Æfric and Wulfstan] Miranda García, Antonio, and Javier Calle Martín, ‘Function Words in Authorship Attribution Studies’, Lit. and Ling. Computing 22, 49–66 [esp. on Apollonius of Tyre and OE gospels; also for analytic tool, the Old English Concordancer] Niles, John D., ‘True Stories and Other Lies’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki [see sect. 3a], pp. 1–30 [esp. on legal texts, in sect. 1; also for Ælfric et al.] Richards, Mary P., see sect. 3biii, with ‘Seasons for Fasting’ [OE composite homilies] Rudolf, Winfried, ‘The Source and Textual Identity of “Homily” Napier XXXI: Ælfric and the munuccild of Saint-Maurice D’Agaune’, RES 57 (2006), 607–22 Schwyter, Jürg Rainer, ‘“Slipping” in Old English Narrative and Legislative Prose’, SN 79, 133–47

275

Bibliography for 2007 Scragg, Donald, ‘Rewriting Eleventh-Century English Grammar and the Editing of Texts’, Bells Chiming from the Past, ed. Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel and Begoña Crespo-García, pp. 195–208 Spinks, Bryan D., see sect. 4a [baptism in homilies; esp. for Ælfric, Wulfstan and Vercelli Homilies] Stanley, E. G., ‘Lambeth Homilies: Richard Morris’s Emendations’, N&Q 54, 224–31 [includes sources and parallels in OE prose, esp. in Ælfric] Stokes, Peter A., ‘The Regius Psalter, folio 198v: a Reexamination’, N&Q 54, 208–11 [on text of brief notes in OE added on final leaf] Swan, Mary, ‘Constructing Preacher and Audience in Old English Homilies’, Constructing the Medieval Sermon, ed. Roger Andersson [see sect. 4bii], pp. 177–88 ‘Preaching Past the Conquest: Lambeth Palace 487 and Cotton Vespasian A. XXII’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 403–23 [manuscripts, both dated to c. 1200, containing late copies and reflexes of OE homiletic texts; neither manuscript is treated at length by Ker] see also sect. 3a [hagiography and homiletic texts] Teresi, Loredana, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Ælfric’ [homiletic collection for temporale] Thijs, Christine, ‘Close and Clumsy or Fanatically Faithful: Medieval Translators on Literal Translation’, Transmission and Transformation in the Middle Ages: Texts and Contexts, ed. Kathy Cawsey and Jason Harris (Dublin), pp. 15–39 [esp. for Alfred, Wærferth and Ælfric; also esp. for Rule of Chrodegang, and for Bede] ‘Early Old English Translation: Practice before Theory?’, Neophilologus 91, 149–73 [esp. for Alfred and Wærferth; also on Life of St Chad, and on Bede, Alcuin et al.] Thornbury, Emily V., ‘“Wa Gregorius gamenode mid his wordum”: Old English Versions of Gregory’s Bilingual Puns’, Leeds Stud. in Eng. ns 38, 17–30 [esp. on OE Bede and Ælfric, Catholic Homilies] Treharne, Elaine, ‘The Life and Times of Old English Homilies for the First Sunday in Lent’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox, pp. 206–40 [eight texts, including works of Ælfric and Wulfstan; Vercelli Homily III and Blickling Homily III; and reflexes from the Middle English period] Watkins, C. S., see sect. 3a [supernatural, esp. in Ælfric and Wulfstan] Wright, Charles D., ‘A New Latin Source for Two Old English Homilies (Fadda I and Blickling I): pseudo-Augustine, Sermo app. 125, and the Ideology of Chastity in the Anglo-Saxon Benedictine Reform’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 239–65 ‘Old English Homilies and Latin Sources’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 15–66 see also sect. 9h [esp. on prose Solomon and Saturn; also for Alfred and Ælfric] ii. Authors and texts ADRIAN AND RITHEUS

Hall, Thomas N., ‘Christ’s Birth through Mary’s Right Breast: an Echo of Carolingian Heresy in the Old English Adrian and Ritheus’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 266–89

276

Bibliography for 2007 ÆLFRIC

Anderson, Rachel, ‘The Old Testament Homily: Ælfric as Biblical Translator’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 121–42 Biggs, Frederick M., ‘Ælfric’s Mark, Other Things and Apostolic Authority’, SP 104, 227–49 [Lives of Saints] Bussières, Michèle, see sect. 5a [Lives of Saints] Chardonnens, László Sándor, see sect. 5a [Grammar and other works] Clayton, Mary, ‘Blood and the Soul in Ælfric’, N&Q 54, 365–7 Clayton, Mary, ed., see below with ‘Letter to Brother Edward’ Earl, James W., see sect. 3biii, with ‘Dream of the Rood’ [links to Augustine] Gade, Kari Ellen, ‘Ælfric in Iceland’, Learning and Understanding in the Old Norse World, ed. Judy Quinn et al. (Turnhout), pp. 321–39 [Grammar] Hall, Thomas N., see sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [esp. on use of Paulus Diaconus, Homiliae] Harris, Stephen J., ‘The Liturgical Context of Ælfric’s Homilies for Rogation’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 143–69 Hill, Joyce, ‘Ælfric’s Grammatical Triad’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 285–307 ‘Ælfric’s Manuscript of Paul the Deacon’s Homiliary: a Provisional Analysis’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 67–96 [Catholic Homilies; includes discussion of Gneuss nos. 16, 24, 129, 130, 209, 222, 226, 273, 424, 452, 753, 763, 763.1 and 763.2] Ísaksson, Sigurjón Páll, see sect. 1 [stud. of Gísli’s trans. of OE prose] Ísaksson, Sigurjón Páll, ed., ‘Gísli Brynjúlfsson: W´yeingar úr fornensku. Fyrri hluti: “Frá Abgarus konungi”’, Gripla 17 (2006), 167–92 [new ed. of trans. of latter part (‘De Abgaro rege’) of ÆLS XXIV (DOE ‘Abdon & Sennes’ = Cameron item B.1.3.24) into mod. Icelandic verse, first publ. in 1853; see further next entry] ‘Gísli Brynjúlfsson: W´yeingar úr fornensku. Seinni hluti: “Á trieja sunnudag í föstu”’, Gripla 18, 111–32 [new ed. of trans. of Cameron item B.1.4.4 = ÆHom 4 into mod. Icelandic verse, first publ. in 1853; see also preceding entry and, further, the essay by Ísaksson cited in sect. 1] Kleist, Aaron J., ed., see sect. 3ci Magennis, Hugh, ‘Ælfric and Heroic Literature’, The Power of Words, ed. Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 31–60 [esp. on Battle of Maldon; also for Abbo et al.] Major, Tristan, ‘Rebuilding the Tower of Babel: Ælfric and Bible Translation’, Florilegium 23.2 (2007 for 2006), 47–60 Newhauser, Richard, ‘Augustinian vitium curiositatis and its Reception’, Newhauser, Sin: Essays [see sect. 4a], item XIV, 99–124, with addenda in suppl., pp. 4–5 [Catholic Homilies; repr. of essay publ. in 1988] Nijhuis, Letty, ‘“Sumum menn wile tincan syllic tis to gehyrenne”: Ælfric on Animals – His Sources and Their Application’, Transmission and Transformation in the Middle Ages: Texts and Contexts, ed. Kathy Cawsey and Jason Harris (Dublin), pp. 65–76

277

Bibliography for 2007 Raschellà, Farbrizio D., ‘Old Icelandic Grammatical Literature: the Last Two Decades of Research (1983–2005)’, Learning and Understanding in the Old Norse World, ed. Judy Quinn et al. (Turnhout), pp. 341–72 [Grammar, in sect. 5] Teresi, Loredana, ‘Ælfric’s or Not? The Making of a temporale Collection in Late AngloSaxon England’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 285–310 [esp. on Ker nos. 21, 56 and 153; conclusion regarding Ælfric is mainly negative] Thornbury, Emily V., see sect. 3ci [Catholic Homilies] Upchurch, Robert K., ‘Homiletic Contexts for Ælfric’s Hagiography: the Legend of Saints Cecilia and Valerian’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 265–84 Upchurch, Robert K., ed., Ælfric’s Lives of the Virgin Spouses, with Modern English ParallelText Translations: ‘Julian and Basilissa’, ‘Cecilia and Valerian’ and ‘Chrysanthus and Daria’, Exeter Med. Texts and Stud. (Exeter) [includes ed. and trans. of Latin sources] Whatley, E. Gordon, ‘Hagiography and Violence: Military Men in Ælfric’s Lives of Saints’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 217–38 ALFRED (AND CIRCLE) De Vivo, Franco, ‘Istanze prefative e riscrittura nelle traduzioni anglosassoni d’epoca alfrediana’, The Garden of Crossing Paths, ed. Marina Buzzoni and Massimiliano Bampi, rev. ed. (Venice), pp. 283–97 [esp. on Alfredian prologues] Discenza, Nicole Guenther, ‘Alfred the Great’s Boethius’, Lit. Compass 3 (2006), 736–49 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00343.x] Godden, Malcolm, ‘King Alfred and the Boethius Industry’, Making Sense, ed. Antonette diPaolo Healey and Kevin Kiernan [see sect. 3a], pp. 116–38 ‘Did King Alfred Write Anytthing?’, MÆ 71, 1–23 Harbus, Antonina, ‘Metaphors of Authority in Alfred’s Prefaces’, Neophilologus 91, 717– 27 Heuchan, Valerie, ‘God’s Co-Workers and Powerful Tools: a Study of the Sources of Alfred’s Building Metaphor in His Old English Translation of Augustine’s Soliloquies’, N&Q 54, 1–11 Houghton, John W., and Neal K. Keesee, ‘Tolkien, King Alfred and Boethius: Platonist Views of Evil in The Lord Of The Rings’, Tolkien Stud. 2 (2005), 131–59 [‘Alfred as Interpreter’, sect. III] Irvine, Susan, ‘Old English Prose: King Alfred and His Books’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard [see sect. 3bii], pp. 246–71 Johnson, David F., see below, with ‘Wærferth’ [two entries] Kiernan, Kevin, ‘Remodeling Alfred’s Boethius with the tol ond andweorc of Edition Production Technology (EPT)’, Making Sense, ed. Antonette diPaolo Healey and Kiernan [see sect. 3a], pp. 72–115 Meier, Nicole, ‘Alfred (the Great, King of Wessex)’, Metzler Lexikon englischsprachiger Autorinnen und Autoren, ed. Eberhard Kreutzer and Ansgar Nünning (Stuttgart, 2002), p. 6 Phillips, Philip Edward, ‘King Alfred the Great and the Victorian Translations of His Anglo-Saxon Boethius’, Global Perspectives on Medieval English Literature, Language and

278

Bibliography for 2007 Culture, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr, and Richard Scott Nokes (Kalamazoo, MI), pp. 155–73 Pratt, David, The Political Thought of King Alfred the Great, Cambridge Stud. in Med. Life and Thought, 4th ser. 67 (Cambridge) Szarmach, Paul E., ‘Alfred’s Nero’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 147–67 [Boethius] Szerwiniack, Olivier, ‘Un commentaire hiberno-latin des deux premiers livres d’Orose, “Histoires contre les païens” (suite)’, Bulletin Du Cange / Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 65, 165–207 [Orosius and Boethius, in sect. 7; continuation of stud. publ. in vol. 51 (1992–3), pp. 5–137] Thijs, Christine B., see sect. 3ci [two entries; approaches to translation] Wilcox, Miranda, ‘Alfred’s Epistemological Metaphors: eagan modes and scip modes’, ASE 35 (2006), 179–217 Wittig, Joseph, ‘The “Remigian” Glosses on Boethius’s Consolatio Philosophiae in Context’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al., pp. 168–200 Wright, Charles D., et al., ed., see sect. 3a A N G LO - S A XO N C H RO N I C L E

Allen, Cynthia L., ‘The Case of the Genitive in the Peterborough Continuations’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 57–75 [includes OE, esp. in sect. 3.4] Álvarez López, Francisco Javier, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 755: an Annotated Bibliography of the Cynewulf and Cyneheard Episode from Plummer to Bremmer’, SELIM: Jnl of the Spanish Soc. for Med. Eng. Lang. and Lit. 13 (2005–6), 99–117 Ashe, Laura, see sect. 6d, with ‘Bayeux “tapestry”’ Bergs, Alexander, ‘Spoilt for Choice? Problem with in <ee> Peterborough Chronicle’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 45–56 [includes OE] Bergs, Alexander, and Janne Skaffari, ‘Invitation to the Peterborough Chronicle and its Language’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Bergs and Skaffari, pp. 5– 12 Bergs, Alexander, and Janne Skaffari, ed., The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, Stud. in Eng. Med. Lang. and Lit. 20 (Frankfurt am Main) Bishop, Chris, see sect. 3a Bredehoft, Thomas A., ‘OE y«hengest and an Unrecognized Passage of Old English Verse’, N&Q 54, 120–2 Carroll, Jayne, ‘Viking Wars and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard [see sect. 3bii], pp. 301–50 Drinka, Bridget, ‘The Periphrastic Perfect in Early English: Evidence from the Peterborough Chronicle’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 135–62 [‘The OE Perfect Profile’, sect. 3] Dumville, David N., ‘Vikings in Insular Chronicling’, Dumville, Celtic Essays [see sect. 6a], II, 141–58 [rev. version of stud. also to be publ. in forthcoming collection]

279

Bibliography for 2007 Galloway, Andrew, ‘The Peterborough Chronicle and the Invention of “Holding Court” in Twelfth-Century England’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 293–310 Harrison, Julian, ‘William Camden and the F-Text of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle ’, N&Q 54, 222–4 Home, Malasree, ‘The Peterborough Chronicle in Context’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 13–28 Ingram, James, trans., The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, rev. James H. Ford (El Paso, TX, 2005) [rev. reissue of trans. first publ. in 1823] McCormick, Michael, Paul Edward Dutton and Paul A. Mayewski, ‘Volcanoes and the Climate Forcing of Carolingian Europe, AD 750–950’, Speculum 82, 865–95 [in sect. 2; also there for Boniface and Lull] Murillo López, Ignacio, ‘Cynewulf and Cyneheard: a Different Style for a Different Story’, SELIM: Jnl of the Spanish Soc. for Med. Eng. Lang. and Lit. 13 (2005–6), 87–98 Percy, Carol, ‘“To HEL with PC”: Teaching “The History of the English Language” with the Peterborough Chronicle in North America’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 175–91 Phillips, Betty S., ‘Æ-Raising in the Peterborough Chronicle’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 45–56 Pons-Sanz, Sara M., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Wulfstan’ Pysz, Agnieszka, ‘The Usage of Demonstratives in the Peterborough Chronicle against the Background of the Old English Paradigm’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 57–75 Sims, Lynn, ‘Do the Verb-Movement Patterns in the Peterborough Chronicle Reflect the Influence of a Northern Dialect?’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 111–34 [includes comparisons with preConquest OE texts] Stodnick, Jacqueline A., ‘The Interests of Compounding: Angelcynn to Engla land in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 337–67 ‘Second-Rate Stories? Changing Approaches to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’, Lit. Compass 3 (2006), 1253–65 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00380.x] ten Harkel, Letty, see sect. 6c [Vikings and Eng. ethnic identity] Traxel, Oliver M., ‘Linking Old English and Middle English: the Peterborough Chronicle as an Introductory Tool to the History of English’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 163–74 Van Gelderen, Elly, ‘Accelerated Grammaticalization in the Peterborough Chronicle’, The Language of the ‘Peterborough Chronicle’, ed. Alexander Bergs and Janne Skaffari, pp. 93–110 [includes comparisons with OE] Yoon, Minwoo, ‘Origin and Supplement: Marvels and Miracles in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles and Bede’s “Ecclesiastical History”’, Global Perspectives on Medieval English Literature, Language and Culture, ed. Noel Harold Kaylor, Jr, and Richard Scott Nokes (Kalamazoo, MI), pp. 195–228

280

Bibliography for 2007 A P O L LO N I U S O F T Y R E

Gettliffe, Patrick, ‘Étude d’un extrait des chapitres VII et VIII d ‘“Apollonius de Tyr”’, Actes du colloque ALAES, AMAES, GRAAT, ed. Jean-Paul Régis and Fabienne Toupin [see sect. 2b], pp. 91–7 BEDE

Bredehoft, Thomas A., see sect. 5a Crépin, André, ‘Quelques enseignements tirés de la comparaison linguistique entre l’Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum de Béde et sa version vieil-anglaise’, Actes du colloque ALAES, AMAES, GRAAT, ed. Jean-Paul Régis and Fabienne Toupin [see sect. 2b], pp. 23–30 Major, Tristan, ‘1 Corinthians 15:52 as a Source for the Old English Version of Bede’s Simile of the Sparrow’, N&Q 54, 11–16 Page, R. I., see sect. 10 [account of Imma and its source in Bede, Historia ecclesiastica] Schaefer, Ursula, ‘A Dialogue between Orality and Literacy: Considerations on Linguistic Strategies in the Old English Bede’, Dialogische Strukturen, ed. Thomas Kühn and Schaefer (Tübingen, 1996), pp. 17–33 Thornbury, Emily V., see sect. 3ci BLICKLING HOMILIES

Kleist, Aaron J., ed., see sect. 3ci Thompson, Nancy M., ‘The Carolingian De festiuitatibus and the Blickling Book’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 97–119 [esp. on question of audience] Toswell, M. J., ‘The Codicology of Anglo-Saxon Homiletic Manuscripts, especially the Blickling Homilies’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 209–26 [esp. on question of ‘booklets’] Wright, Charles D., see sect. 3ci [Blickling Homily I] BYRHTFERTH

Stephenson, Rebecca, ‘Reading Byrhtferth’s Muses: Emending Section Breaks in Byrhtferth’s “Hermeneutic English”’, N&Q 54, 19–22 CHARMS

Schulz, Monika, Magie, oder Die Wiederherstellung der Ordnung, Beiträge zur europäischen Ethnologie und Folklore, Reihe A: Texte und Untersuchungen 5 (Frankfurt am Main, 2000) [‘Die Projektilthese: Wi« gescotum’ and ‘Return to Sender: Wi« færstice’, sects. 1.2.2.2.2 and 1.3.2.2] FONTHILL LETTER

[Anon.], ‘Corrigenda’, Anglia 124 (2006), 604 [correcting four typographical errors in stud. by Mechthild Gretsch, ‘The Fonthill Letter: Language, Law and the Discourse of Disciplines’, Anglia 123 (2005), 667–86] Smith, Scott Thompson, ‘Of Kings and Cattle Thieves: the Rhetorical Work of the Fonthill Letter’, JEGP 106, 447–67

281

Bibliography for 2007 GOSPELS

Calle-Martin, Javier, and Antonio Miranda-García, ‘On the Use of ond-Clauses in the Old English Gospels’, SN 79, 119–32 Marqués Aguado, Teresa, ‘Old English Punctuation Revisited: the Case of the “Gospel according to Saint Matthew”’, SELIM: Jnl of the Spanish Soc. for Med. Eng. Lang. and Lit. 13 (2005–6), 51–72 Miranda García, Antonio, and Javier Calle Martín, ‘The Validity of Lemma-Based Lexical Richness in Authorship Attribution: a Proposal for the Old English Gospels’, ICAME Jnl: Computers in Eng. Ling. 29 (2005), 115–29 Zironi, Alessandro, ‘The Evangelic Text as Translation and Interpretative Experience: the Paradigm of the Germanic Languages’, The Garden of Crossing Paths, ed. Marina Buzzoni and Massimiliano Bampi, rev. ed. (Venice), pp. 119–37 [also for Alfredian trans. of Gregory I, Regula pastoralis, and on lexical issues] HEXATEUCH

Withers, Benjamin C., see sect. 5c L A P I DA RY

Giliberto, Concetta, ‘Stone Lore in Miscellany Manuscripts: the Old English Lapidary’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 253–78 L AW S

Eska, Charlene M., ‘Rewarding Informers in Cáin Domnaig and the Laws of Wihtred’, CMCS 52 (2006), 1–11 Grimmer, Martin, ‘Britons in Early Wessex: the Evidence of the Law Code of Ine’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 102–14 Hough, Carole, ‘Women and the Law in Seventh-Century England’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 207–30 Klinck, Anne L., ‘“To have and to hold”: the Bridewealth of Wives and the mund of Widows in Anglo-Saxon England’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 231–45 Oliver, Lisi, ‘Lex talionis in Barbarian Law’, Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual UCLA IndoEuropean Conference, ed. Karlene Jones-Bley et al. (Washington, DC, 2006), pp. 197–217 Rabin, Andrew, ‘Old English forespeca and the Role of the Advocate in Anglo-Saxon Law’, MS 69, 223–54 L E T T E R T O B RO T H E R E D WA R D

Clayton, Mary, ed., ‘Letter to Brother Edward: a Student Edition’, OEN 40.3, 31–46 [Cameron item B.1.8.7 = ÆLet 7; the attribution to Ælfric is now in question] LIFE OF ST GILES

Frankis, John, ‘Languages and Cultures in Contact: Vernacular Lives of St Giles and Anglo-Norman Annotations in an Anglo-Saxon Manuscript’, Leeds Stud. in Eng. ns 38, 101–33 [esp. on unique copy in Ker no. 57; also on Gneuss no. 17]

282

Bibliography for 2007 LIFE OF ST MACHUTUS

Dumville, David N., see sect. 5a LIFE OF ST MARGARET

Frederick, Jill A., ‘Confessional Discourse in an Old English Life of St. Margaret’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 115– 31 [esp. for text in Ker no. 57; Cameron item B.3.3.14 = LS 14] M A RV E L S O F T H E E A S T

Simek, Rudolf, see sect. 5c MEDICAL TEXTS

Bezzo, Luisa, ‘Parallel Remedies: Old English “paralisin tæt is lyftadl”’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 435–45 D’Aronco, Maria Amalia, ‘The Missing Plant Names in the Old English Herbal: When were the Blanks Filled in?’, Contexts of English in Use, Past and Present: a Festschrift for Peter Bierbaumer on the occasion of the Fortieth Anniversary of His Career at the University of Graz, ed. Margit Reitbauer et al. (Vienna), pp. 39–47 The Transmission of Medical Knowledge in Anglo-Saxon England: the Voices of Manuscripts’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 35–58 see also sect. 5a [Ker no. 402] Glaze, Florence Eliza, see sect. 5a [Peri didaxeon] Hall, Alaric, see sects. 2ai [second entry] and 3a [elves in AS medical texts] Maion, Daniele, see sect. 5d [links to ‘Petrocellus’] Van Arsdall, Anne, ‘Challenging the “Eye of Newt” Image of Medieval Medicine’, The Medieval Hospital and Medical Practice, ed. Barbara S. Bowers (Aldershot), pp. 195– 205 [esp. on Herbarium, Bald’s Leechbook and Lacnunga] ‘Medical Training in Anglo-Saxon England: an Evaluation of the Evidence’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 415–34 ‘Reading Medieval Medical Texts with an Open Mind’, Textual Healing, ed. Elizabeth Lane Furdell (Leiden, 2005), pp. 9–29 [Herbarium, Bald’s Leechbook and Lacnunga] ‘ O L D E N G L I S H M A RT Y RO LO G Y ’ Kisor, Yvette L., see sect. 1 [links to Tolkien] Rauer, Christine, ‘Usage of the Old English Martyrology’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 125–46 S O LO M O N A N D S A T U R N

Sauer, Hans, ‘A Didactic Dialogue in Old and Middle English Versions: the Prose Solomon and Saturn and the Master of Oxford’s Catechism’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 363–98 [also esp. on Adrian and Ritheus]

283

Bibliography for 2007 V E RC E L L I H O M I L I E S

Treharne, Elaine, see sect. 3a Zacher, Samantha, ‘Rereading the Style and Rhetoric of the Vercelli Homilies’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist [see sect. 3ci], pp. 173–207 WÆRFERTH

Johnson, David F., ‘Who Read Gregory’s “Dialogues” in Old English?’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 171–204 ‘Why Ditch the Dialogues? Reclaiming an Invisible Text’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 201–16 Thijs, Christine B., see sect. 3ci W U L F S TA N

Conti, Aidan, ‘Revising Wulfstan’s Antichrist in the Twelfth Century: a Study in Medieval Textual Re-Appropriation’, Lit. Compass 4, 638–63 [esp. on Ker no. 310, item 70; online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2007.00439.x] Orchard, Andy, ‘Wulfstan as Reader, Writer and Rewriter’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist [see sect. 3ci], pp. 311–41 Pons-Sanz, Sara M., Norse-Derived Vocabulary in Late Old English Texts: Wulfstan’s Works – a Case Study, North-Western European Lang. Evolution suppl. vol. 22 (Odense) ‘A Paw in Every Pie: Wulfstan and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle Again’, Leeds Stud. in Eng. ns 38, 31–52 [esp. for ostensibly poetic entries in Chronicle, s.a. 959 and 975] ‘A Reconsideration of Wulfstan’s Use of Norse-Derived Terms: the Case of  ræ-l ’, ES 88, 1–21

4. ANGLO-LATIN, LITURGY AND OTHER LATIN ECCLESIASTICAL TEXTS a. General and miscellaneous [Anon.], ed., L’Europa dei secoli XI e XII fra novità e tradizione. Sviluppi di una cultura. Atti della decima Settimana internazionale di studio, Mendola, 25–29 agosto 1986, Miscellanea del Centro di studi medioevali 12 (Milan, 1989) [esp. for Bede, Alcuin, Abbo et al.] Barrow, Julia, see sect. 6c [esp. for Byrhtferth and Wulfstan of Winchester; also on Encomium Emmae reginae] Bon, Bruno, assisted by Anne-Marie Bautier, François Dolbeau, Monique DuchetSuchaux et al., Index Scriptorum Novus Mediae Latinitatis. Supplementum (1973–2005) (Geneva, 2005) [detailed treatments of Abbo, Ælfric, Alcuin, Byrhtferth et al.] Borst, Arno, Computus. Zeit und Zahl in der Geschichte Europas, 3rd ed. (Berlin, 2004) [Bede, Alcuin, Abbo et al., esp. in sects. 1–7; supersedes editions of 1990 and 1999, and Eng. trans. of 1993] Boynton, Susan, ‘Prayer and Liturgical Performance in Eleventh- and Twelfth- Century Monastic Psalters’, Speculum 82, 896–931 [libelli precum, esp. in sects. 2–3; also for Alcuin]

284

Bibliography for 2007 Bredehoft, Thomas A., see sect. 5a [liturgical texts in Gneuss no. 39] Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, see sect. 6b [encyclopaedic texts] Brugnoli, Georgio, and Marco Buonocore, ed., Hermeneumata Vaticana (cod. Vat. Lat. 6925), Studi e testi 410 (Vatican City, 2002) [esp. in introd., sect. 1, for Gneuss no. 807 and other witnesses] Cantelli Berarducci, Silvia, Hrabani Mauri Opera Exegetica. Repertorium Fontium, 1 vol. in 3, Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia 38 (Turnhout, 2006) [esp. for Bede and Alcuin; also for pseudo-Bede, pseudo-Boniface and pseudo-Alcuin] Chardonnens, László Sándor, see sects. 3a [two entries; prognostics] and 5a [grammar (‘Beatus quid est’), liturgical texts and other items in Gneuss no. 435] Clemens, Lukas, ‘Tempore Romanorum constructa’. Zur Nutzung und Wahrnehmung antiker Überreste nördlich der Alpen während des Mittelalters, Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 50 (Stuttgart, 2003) [Bede and Alcuin, esp. in sects. III.1–3] Constable, Giles, ‘Medieval Latin Metaphors’, Viator 38.2, 1–20 [includes citations of Aldhelm, Bede, Willibald, Hygeburh, Ælfric Bata et al.] Dekker, Kees, ‘Anglo-Saxon Encyclopaedic Notes: Tradition and Function’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 279–315 [cluster of notes on biblical topics and metrology in four AS manuscripts; includes ed.] De Paolis, Paolo, ‘I codici miscellanei grammaticali altomedievali. Caratteristiche, funzione, destinazione’, Segno e testo (Cassino) 2 (2004), 183–211 [esp. for Bede and Alcuin] Derolez, Albert, ed., Corpus Catalogorum Belgii. The Medieval Booklists of the Southern Low Countries, 2nd ed., with contributions by Benjamin Victor et al. (Brussels, 1994–) [esp. for later fortunes of Bede et al.; 4 vols. publ. through 2001] Di Sciacca, Claudia, ‘An Unpublished ubi sunt Piece in Wulfstan’s “Commonplace Book”: Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 190, pp. 94–96’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 217–50 Frantzen, Allen J., ‘Sin and Sense: Editing and Translating Anglo-Saxon Handbooks of Penance’, Making Sense, ed. Antonette diPaolo Healey and Kevin Kiernan [see sect. 3a], pp. 40–71 [‘Latin Translations of Old English Texts’, sect. 1, and ‘The Old English Translations of the Latin’, sect. 2] Gorman, Michael M., ‘Frigulus: Hiberno-Latin Author or Pseudo-Irish Phantom? Comments on the Edition of the Liber questionum in Evangeliis (CCSL 108F)’, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 100 (2005), 425–56 [includes argument against debt to Bede and Wigbod] The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages, Millennio medievale 67 [= Strumenti e studi ns 15] (Florence) [esp. for Bede and Alcuin; also for Wigbod, Byrhtferth et al.; repr. papers, with ‘Reconsiderations’, pp. xi–xv] Green, Roger P. H., Latin Epics of the New Testament: Juvencus, Sedulius, Arator (Oxford, 2006) [‘Visigoths, Irishmen and Anglo-Saxons’, in ch. 4 (‘Reception and Influence’), esp. for Aldhelm, Bede and Alcuin] Gretsch, Mechthild, ‘Æthelthryth of Ely in a Lost Calendar from Munich’, ASE 35 (2006), 159–77 [Gneuss no. 855.5; also on obits of other Anglo-Saxons, and on Bede, Martyrologium]

285

Bibliography for 2007 Grondeux, Anne, ‘Les néologismes en per- en latin médiéval’, Bulletin Du Cange / Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 63 (2005), 181–95 [includes Anglo-Latin, esp. in sect 2.2 and in appendix] Guillot, Olivier, Arcana Imperii (IVe–XIe siècle), Cahiers de l’Institut d’anthropologie juridique 10 (Limoges, 2003) [esp. for Bede, Alcuin et al.; reissued papers] Haage, Bernhard Dietrich, and Wolfgang Wegner, assisted by Gundolf Keil and Helga Haage-Naber, Deutsche Fachliteratur der ‘artes’ in Mittelalter und früher Neuzeit, Grundlagen der Germanistik 43 (Berlin) [esp. for Bede and Alcuin] Hall, Thomas N., ‘Latin Sermons and Lay Preaching: Four Latin Sermons from PostReform Canterbury’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 132–70 [texts from Gneuss no. 189; includes ed.] Hen, Yitzhak, Roman Barbarians: the Royal Court and Culture in the Early Medieval West, Med. Culture and Society (Basingstoke) [Bede, Boniface, Alcuin et al., esp. in chs. 5–6] Kottje, Raymund, ‘Bussbücher in mittelalterlichen Bücherverzeichnissen’, Sacris erudiri 45 (2006), 305–26 [esp. for texts in traditions of Poenitentiale pseudo-Bedae and Poenitentiale pseudo-Ecgberhti; also on Theodore, Iudicia] Lazzari, Loredana, ‘The Scholarly Achievements of Æthelwold and His Circle’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 309–47 [esp. on Gneuss no. 775] see also sect. 2aii, with ‘glossaries and glossae collectae’ [influence of Isidore, Etymologiae] Lebecq, Stéphane, see sect. 3bii [Bede and Stephen of Ripon] Lendinara, Patrizia et al., ed., see sect. 6a Lindsay, W. M., et al., ed., Glossaria Latina, iussu Academiae Britannicae edita, 5 vols. (Hildesheim) [repr. of work publ. in 1926–31] McKitterick, Rosamond, Perceptions of the Past in the Early Middle Ages, Conway Lectures in Med. Stud. 2004 (Notre Dame, Ind., 2006) [Bede, in chs. 1–2; also there for Alcuin, Wigbod et al.] ‘The Migration of Ideas in the Early Middle Ages: Ways and Means’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 1–17 [Bede, Alcuin et al.] McNamara, John, ‘Problems in Contextualizing Oral Circulation of Early Medieval Saints’ Legends’, Telling Tales, ed. Francesca Canadé Sautman et al. (New York, 1998), pp. 21–36 [esp. for Bede, Felix and Abbo] Mosetti Casaretto, Francesco, ed., Il riso. Atti delle I Giornate internazionali interdisciplinari di studio sul Medioevo – ‘Homo risibilis’. Capacità di ridere e pratica del riso nelle civiltà medievali (Siena, 2–4 ottobre 2002), Ricerche intermedievali 1 (Alessandria, 2005) [esp. for Bede and Alcuin] Newhauser, Richard, Sin: Essays on the Moral Tradition in the Western Middle Ages, Collected Stud. Ser. 869 (Aldershot) [esp. on penitentials, and for Bede, Boniface et al.; repr. essays, with one rev. (and newly trans.) stud.] see also sect. 4bi, with ‘Theodore’ [penitentials] Reeve, Michael D., ed., Wright, Neil, trans., Geoffrey of Monmouth, ‘The History of the Kings of Britain’: an Edition and Translation of ‘De gestis Britonum’ (‘Historia regum

286

Bibliography for 2007 Britanniae’), Arthurian Stud. 69 (Woodbridge) [esp. on fortunes of Gildas and Bede, and for Historia Brittonum] Richards, Mary P., see sect. 3biii, with ‘Seasons for Fasting’ [esp. on Latin text for Ember fasts in Wulfstan’s ‘Commonplace Book’, and on Byrhtferth] Sansterre, Jean-Marie, ‘“Omnes qui coram hac imagine genua flexerint . . .” La vénération d’images de saints et de la Vierge d’après les textes écrits en Angleterre du milieu du XIe aux premières décennies du XIIIe siècle’, CCM 49 (2006), 257–94 [esp. on anon. Winchester Vita et miracula S. Swithuni (cf. BHL 7943); also for Goscelin et al.] Schaller, Dieter, and Ewald Könsgen, assisted by John Tagliabue, Initia Carminum Latinorum saeculo Undecimo Antiquiorum. Bibliographisches Repertorium für die lateinische Dichtung der Antike und des früheren Mittelalters, suppl. vol. (Göttingen, 2005) [includes suppl. bibliography for verse of Aldhelm, Bede, Alcuin et al.] Scriba, C. J., and P. Schreiber, 5000 Jahre Geometrie. Geschichte, Kulturen, Menschen, 2nd ed., Vom Zählstein zum Computer (Berlin, 2005) [‘Beda venerabilis und Alcuin’, sect. 4.1.2] Sharpe, Richard, ‘The Contribution of Manuscript Catalogues to Identifying Medieval Latin Texts’, Katalogisierung mittelalterlicher Handschriften in internationaler Perspektive, ed. Claudia Fabian and Bettina Wagner (Wiesbaden), pp. 51–60 Spinks, Bryan D., Early and Medieval Rituals and Theologies of Baptism: from the New Testament to the Council of Trent, Liturgy, Worship and Society (Aldershot, 2006) [‘The Western Rites: from John the Deacon to Anglo-Saxon England’, ch. 6, esp. in sacramentaries; also esp. for Bede, and for OE homilies] Vian, Giovanni Maria, Bibliotheca Divina. Filologia e storia dei testi cristiani (Rome, 2001) [Aldhelm, Bede, Alcuin et al., esp. in sect. ‘Il miracolo delle isole’, in ch. 8] Vollmann, Benedikt Konrad, ‘Erlaubte Fiktionalität: die Heiligenlegende’, Historisches und fiktionales Erzählen im Mittelalter, ed. Fritz Peter Knapp and Manuela Niesner (Berlin, 2002), pp. 63–72 [pseudo-Alcuin, in sect. II.3] von der Nahmer, Dieter, Die lateinische Heiligenvita. Eine Einführung in die lateinische Hagiographie, Das lateinische Mittelalter (Darmstadt, 1994) [esp. for Willibald et al.] Williams, Éimear, ‘Bealtaine and Imbolg (Oimelc) in Cormac’s Glossary’, Studia Celtica 39 (2006 for 2005), 123–43 [treatment of Brigit and feast of the Purification in AS calendars] Ziolkowski, Jan M., Nota Bene: Reading Classics and Writing Melodies in the Early Middle Ages, Publ. of the Jnl of Med. Latin 7 (Turnhout) [esp. for Carmina Cantabrigiensia; also for Aldhelm, Alcuin et al.] b. Authors and texts i. Early period (before Alcuin, excluding Bede) ALDHELM

Abram, Christopher, ‘Aldhelm and the Two Cultures of Anglo-Saxon Poetry’, Lit. Compass 4, 1354–77 [includes argument against dichotomization of Anglo-Latin and OE verse; online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2007.00483.x]

287

Bibliography for 2007 Consolino, Franca Ela, ‘Il senso del passato: generi letterari e rapporti con la tradizione nella “parafrasi biblica” latina’, Nuovo e antico nella cultura greco-latina di IV–VI secolo, ed. Isabella Gualandri et al. (Milan, 2005), pp. 447–526 [use of opus geminatum] Glaze, Florence Eliza, see sect. 5a [links to medical texts] Lapidge, Michael, ‘The Career of Aldhelm’, ASE 36, 15–69 Luceri, Angelo, ‘Il carro di venere: tradizione e innovazione in Draconzio, Romuleon 6.72–79’, Nuovo e antico nella cultura greco-latina di IV–VI secolo, ed. Isabella Gualandri et al. (Milan, 2005), pp. 239–54 [Enigma LVIII] Newhauser, Richard, ‘Towards a History of Human Curiosity: a Prolegomenon to its Medieval Phase’, Newhauser, Sin: Essays [see sect. 4a], item XIII, 559–75 [De virginitate; repr. of essay publ. in 1982] Thornbury, Emily V., ‘Aldhelm’s Rejection of the Muses and the Mechanics of Poetic Inspiration in Early Anglo-Saxon England’, ASE 36, 71–92 [Enigmata; also on Bede, Alcuin et al., and on Elene] B O N I FAC E

Aaij, Michel, ‘Boniface’s Booklife: How the Ragyndrudis Codex Came to Be a Vita Bonifatii’, Heroic Age 10 [online; also esp. for Willibald, and for fortunes of figure of Boniface] Airlie, Stuart, ‘The Frankish Aristrocracy as Supporters and Opponents of Boniface’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 255–69 Becher, Matthias, ‘Eine Reise nach Rom, ein Hilferuf und ein Reich ohne König. Bonifatius in den letzten Jahren Karl Martells’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 231–53 Becker, Winfried, Günter Christ, Andreas Gestrich and Lothar Kolmer, Die Kirchen in der deutschen Geschichte. Von der Christianisierung der Germanen bis zur Gegenwart, ed. Peter Dinzelbacher (Stuttgart, 1996) [‘Boniface’, in sect. 2p; also for Alcuin et al.] Felten, Franz J., Jörg Jarnut and Lutz E. von Padberg, ed., Bonifatius. Leben und Nachwirken. Die Gestaltung des christlichen Europa im Frühmittelalter, Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte 121 (Mainz) Freund, Stephan, ‘Bonifatius und die bayerischen Bistümer aus hagiographischer Sicht’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 281–93 Geuenich, Dieter, ‘Bonifatius und “sein” Kloster Fulda’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 295–301 Haubrichs, Wolfgang, ‘Die Missionierung der Wörter. Vorbonifatianische und nachbonifatianische Strukturen der theodisken Kirchensprache’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 121–42 Hen, Yitzhak, ‘Missionaries and Liturgy’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 341–52 [also for Bede, Stephen of Ripon et al.] Lehmann, Karl, ‘“Geht hinaus in alle Welt . . .” Zum historischen Erbe und zur Gegenwartsbedeutung des hl. Bonifatius’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 193–209 Manten, Arie A., Breukelen en omgeving tussen 400 en 1200: middeleeuwse geschiedenis vanuit een

288

Bibliography for 2007 plaatselijke gezichtshoek, Historische reeks Breukelen 3 (Hilversum, 2001) [esp. in ch. 5; also esp. for Bede, Alcuin et al.] Meens, Rob, ‘Aspekte der Christianisierung des Volkes’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 211–29 [also esp. for Willibald et al., and for ‘sermones pseudo-Bonifatii’] Nelson, Janet L., ‘Les femmes et l’évangélisation au IXe siècle’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power [see sect. 6a], item III, 471–83 [also on Alcuin; repr. of stud. publ. in 1986] Noble, Thomas F. X., ‘Boniface and the Roman Church’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 327–39 Nolte, Cordula, ‘Peregrinatio – Freundschaft – Verwandtschaft. Bonifatius im Austausch mit angelsächsischen Frauen’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 149–60 [also for Bugga, Eadburh, Leofgyth et al., esp. as treated in appendix] Nonn, Ulrich, ‘Castitas et vitae fidei et doctrinae – Bonifatius und die Reformkonzilien’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 271–80 Raaijmakers, Janneke, ‘Memory and Identity: the Annales necrologici of Fulda’, Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Richard Corradini et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 303–21 [esp. in Epistola XL; also for Alcuin et al.] Richter, Michael, ‘Sozialkontakte und Kommunikation’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 143–8 [also esp. for Willibald] Schieffer, Rudolf, ‘Bonifatius-Literatur des 19. Jahrhunderts’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 363–73 ‘Neue Bonifatius-Literatur’, DAEM 63, 111–23 [esp. on H. Lutterbach, Bonifatius. Mit Axt und Evangelium. Eine Biographie in Briefen (2004); L. E. von Padberg, Bonifatius. Missionar und Reformer (2003); and H. Wagner, Bonifatiusstudien (2003)] Semmler, Josef, ‘Kloster, Mission und Seelsorge im Frühmittelalter’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 303–25 [also esp. for Willibald et al., and for Bede] Ubl, Karl, ‘Der lange Schatten des Bonifatius. Die Responsa Stephens II. aus dem Jahr 754 und das fränkische Kirchenrecht’, DAEM 63, 403–49 von Padberg, Lutz E., ‘Grundzüge der Missionstheologie des Bonifatius’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 161–91 Yorke, Barbara, ‘The Insular Background to Boniface’s Continental Career’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 23–37 FELIX

Black, John R., see sect. 6a H YG E BU R H

Aist, Rodney, ‘Images of Jerusalem in Hugeburc’s Vita Willibaldi (Eighth Century CE)’, Amer. Schools of Oriental Research Newsletter 56.1–2 (2006), 22–3 L E O F G Y T H ( L E O BA ) Egler, Anna, ‘Schornsheim’, Die Männer- und Frauenklöster der Benediktiner in RheinlandPfalz und Saarland, ed. Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, assisted by Regina Elisabeth Schwerdtfeger (Sankt Ottilien, 1999), pp. 1096–7

289

Bibliography for 2007 ‘Seebach’, Die Männer- und Frauenklöster der Benediktiner in Rheinland-Pfalz und Saarland, ed. Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, assisted by Regina Elisabeth Schwerdtfeger (Sankt Ottilien, 1999), pp. 769–88 L I B E R M O N S T RO RU M

Simek, Rudolf, see sect. 5c STEPHEN OF RIPON

Thacker, Alan, ‘Martyr Cult within the Walls: Saints and Relics in the Roman tituli of the Fourth to Seventh Centuries’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 31–70 [in sect. 7] THEODORE

Elsakkers, Marianne, ‘Gothic Bible, Vetus Latina and Visigothic Law: Evidence for a Septuagint-Based Gothic Version of Exodus’, Sacris erudiri 44 (2005), 37–76 [Iudicia, in sect. 7; also on Alfredian law-codes, in sect. 9] Gaastra, Adriaan, ‘Penitentials and Canonical Authority’, Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Richard Corradini et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 191–203 [‘The Early Irish and Anglo-Saxon Penitentials’, sect. 3; there also for pseudo-Bede et al.] Newhauser, Richard, ‘Towards modus in habendo: Transformations in the Idea of Avarice – the Early Penitentials through the Carolingian Reforms’, Newhauser, Sin: Essays [see sect. 4a], item VIII, 1–2, with addendum in suppl., p. 3 [Iudicia; see further for texts ascribed to Ecgberht of York, and also esp. for Alcuin, De virtutibus et vitiis; repr. of essay publ. in 1989] Voisenet, Jacques, ‘Le tabou du sang dans les pénitentiels du haut Moyen Âge’, Le sang au Moyen Âge, ed. Marcel Faure (Montpellier, 1999), pp. 111–25 [also esp. for penitentials attributed to Ecgberht, and to Bede] WHITBY VITA S . GREGORII

Tuzzo, Sabina, ed., Paolo Diacono, ‘Vita Sancti Gregorii Magni’, Centro di cultura medievale 11 (Pisa, 2002) [esp. in introd., sect. 1; also esp. for use of Bede] W I L L I BA L D

Felten, Franz J., et al., ed., see above, with ‘Boniface’ Haarländer, Stephanie, ‘Welcher Bonifatius soll es sein? Bemerkungen zu den vitae Bonifatii’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 353–61 Lebecq, Stéphane, ‘Paganisme et rites sacrificiels chez les Frisons des VIIe–VIIIe siècles’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al., pp. 111–20 [also esp. for Bede, Boniface et al., and for Willibrord] ii. Bede Andersson, Roger, ed., Constructing the Medieval Sermon, Sermo: Stud. on Patristic, Med. and Reformation Sermons and Preaching 6 (Turnhout) [see esp. ad indicem]

290

Bibliography for 2007 Backus, Irena, ‘The Apocalypse and Prayers of the Saints’, Oratio. Das Gebet in patristischer und reformatorischer Sicht, ed. Emidio Campi et al. (Göttingen, 1999), pp. 163–74 [Commentarius in Apocalypsim, in sect. 2] Becker, Wolfgang, ‘Beda venerabilis (672/73–735)’, Hauptwerke der Geschichtsschreibung, ed. Volker Reinhardt (Stuttgart, 1997), pp. 46–9 Bequette, John, ‘Bede’s Advent Homily on the Gospel of Mark: an Exercise in Rhetorical Theology’, Amer. Benedictine Rev. 57 (2006), 249–66 Bonney, Gillian, ‘La storiografia del venerabile Beda vista attraverso l’Expositio Actuum Apostolorum e la Retractatio’, Historiam perscrutari. Miscellanea di studi offerti al prof. Ottorino Pasquato, ed. Mario Maritano (Rome, 2002), pp. 363–77 Bracken, Damian, ‘Virgil the Grammarian and Bede: a Preliminary Study’, ASE 35 (2006), 7–21 [esp. for De temporum ratione] Breeze, A. C., ‘Bede’s Hefenfeld and the Campaign of 633’, NH 44.2, 193–7 Brown, George Hardin, ‘Bede’s Style in His Commentary on I Samuel’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 233–51 Brown, Virginia, ‘Palimpsested Texts in Beneventan Script: a Handlist with Some Identifications’, Early Medieval Palimpsests, ed. Georges Declercq [see sect. 5a], pp. 99–144 [esp. for copies of works by Bede dated to s. xi–xii] Caprara, Mariangela, ‘Sulla “Candelora”’, ’Aλετες – Alétes. Miscellanea per i settant’anni di Roberto Caprara, ed. Antonio Caprara et al. (Massafra, 2000), pp. 97–130 [De temporum ratione and feast of the Purification, in sect. 2] Chai-Elsholz, Raeleen, ‘Symeon of Durham and the memoria of Bede’, Pecia. Ressources en médiévistique (Saint-Denis) 8–11 (2005), pp. 425–38 Clark, Mark J., ‘Glossing Genesis 1.2 in the Twelfth Century, or How Andrew of St. Victor and Peter Comestor Dealt with the Intersection of nova and vetera in the Biblical Glossa ordinaria’, Sacris erudiri 46, 241–86 [‘Following the Fathers: from Bede to the Twelfth Century’, sect. 2] Constable, Giles, ‘Past and Present in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries: Perceptions of Time and Change’, L’Europa dei secoli XI e XII fra novità e tradizion, ed. [Anon.] [see sect. 4a], pp. 135–70 Courtray, Régis, ‘La réception du “Commentaire sur Daniel” de Jérôme dans l’Occident médiéval chrétien (VIIe–XIIe siècle)’, Sacris erudiri 44 (2005), 117–87 [‘Bède le Vénérable’, sect. I.2] Crépin, André, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Bede’ [comparison with OE trans.] DeGregorio, Scott, ‘Literary Contexts: Cædmon’s Hymn as a Center of Bede’s World’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ed. Allen J. Frantzen and John Hines, pp. 51–79 De Jong, Mayke, ‘Ecclesia and the Early Medieval Polity’, Staat im frühen Mittelalter, ed. Stuart Airlie et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 113–32 [Historia ecclesiastica, in sect. 2] del Giacco, Eric Jay, ‘Exegesis and Sermon: a Comparison of Bede’s Commentary and Homilies on Luke’, Med. Sermon Stud. 50 (2006), 9–29 Follon, Jacques, and James McEvoy, ed., Sagesses de l’amitié, II. Anthologie de textes philosophiques patristiques, médiévaux et renaissants, Vestigia 29 (Fribourg, 2003) [on amicitia spiritualis, in introd., sect. IV.3b]

291

Bibliography for 2007 Frantzen, Allen J., ‘All Created Things: Material Contexts for Bede’s Story of Cædmon’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ed. Frantzen and John Hines, pp. 111–49 Frantzen, Allen J., and John Hines, ed., see sect. 3biii, with ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’ Garipzanov, Ildar H., ‘The Carolingian Abbreviation of Bede’s World Chronicle and Carolingian Imperial “Genealogy”’, Hortus Artium Medievalium 11 (2005), 291–7 [De temporum ratione] Gorman, Michael M., ‘Theodulf of Orléans and the Exegetical Miscellany in Paris lat. 15679’, Gorman, The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages [see sect. 4a], pp. 106–51 [esp. in sects. 1–3; repr. of stud. publ. in 1999, with addenda, pp. xi–xii] Guillot, Olivier, ‘Les saints des peuples et des nations dans l’Occident des VIe–Xe siècles. Un aperçu d’ensemble illustré par les cas des Francs en Gaule’, Guillot, Arcana Imperii [see sect. 4a], pp. 95–137 [Historia ecclesiastica; also for Boniface; reissue of stud. publ. in 1989; ‘Discuzzione’, pp. 133–7] Hallik, Sibylle, ‘Sententia’ und ‘proverbium’. Begriffsgeschichte und Texttheorie in Antike und Mittelalter, Ordo. Studien zur Literatur und Gesellschaft des Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit 9 (Cologne) [‘Beda Venerabilis (Beda der Ehrwürdige): De schematibus et tropis (vor 702 oder vor 735)’; also for Alcuin] Harvey, P. D. A., Maps in the Age of Bede, Jarrow Lecture 2006 ([Jarrow], 2006) [also esp. on Codex Amiatinus] Heil, Johannes, ‘“. . . Auch durch deine Seele wird ein Schwert dringen”. Zur Auslegung von Lk 2, 34–35, in der exegetischen und homiletischen Literatur von der Patristik zum Hochmittelalter’, Maria. Tochter Sion?, ed. Heil and Rainer Kampling (Paderborn, 2001), pp. 37–57 [Commentarius in Lucam] Hines, John, ‘Changes and Exchanges in Bede’s and Cædmon’s World’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ed. Allen J. Frantzen and Hines, pp. 191–220 Hodne, Lasse, ‘Sponsus amat sponsam’. L’unione mistica delle sante vergini con Dio nell’arte del Medioevo. Uno studio iconologico, Palindromos 1 (Rome) [Commentarius in Cantica canticorum, sect. 2.9; also in sects. 2.5–6, and there also for Aldhelm] Holsinger, Bruce, ‘The Parable of Caedmon’s Hymn: Liturgical Invention and Literary Tradition’, JEGP 106, 149–75 [also on OE Cædmon’s Hymn] Johanek, Peter, ‘Die Wahrheit der mittelalterlichen Historiographen’, Historisches und fiktionales Erzählen im Mittelalter, ed. Fritz Peter Knapp and Manuela Niesner (Berlin, 2002), pp. 9–25 [esp. on fortunes of Historia ecclesiastica] LaVere, Suzanne, ‘From Contemplation to Action: the Role of the Active Life in the Glossa ordinaria on the Song of Songs’, Speculum 82, 54–69 [Commentarius in Cantica canticorum] Lejbowicz, Max, ‘Développement autochtone assumé et acculturation dissimulée’, Les relations culturelles entre chrétiens et musulmans au Moyen Âge, ed. Lejbowicz (Turnhout, 2005), pp. 57–81 [Historia ecclesiastica; ‘Discussion’, pp. 79–81] Lendinara, Patrizia, ‘The Versus de die iudicii: its Circulation and Use as a School Text in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 175–212 [also esp. on Judgement Day II, and on glosses in Cameron item C.43 = OccGl 43] see also sect. 3biii, with ‘Judgement Day II’ [Hymnus xiv (‘De die iudicii’)]

292

Bibliography for 2007 Lesieur, Thierry, Devenir fou pour être sage. Construction d’une raison chrétienne à l’aube de la réforme grégorienne, Culture et société médiévales (Turnhout, 2003) [Bede’s use of term aequipollenter and similar, in ch. 2; also esp. for Abbo, in chs. 2–3] Minnis, Alastair, and Jane Roberts, ed., see sect. 3a Moffitt, John F., The Enthroned Corpse of Charlemagne: the Lord-in-Majesty Theme in Early Medieval Art and Life (London) [Historia ecclesiastica, on Arculf, sect. 4.4; also for Alcuin] Nelson, Janet L., ‘Bad Kingship in the Earlier Middle Ages’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power [see sect. 6a], item VIII, 1–26 [Commentarius in primam partem Samuhelis; repr. of stud. publ. in 1999] O’Mara, Veronica, and Suzanne Paul, see sect. 1 [influence on Middle Eng. sermons] O’Reilly, Jennifer, ‘Bede on Seeing the God of Gods in Zion’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 3–29 [esp. in exegetical works] Pucci Donati, Francesca, Dieta, salute, calendari. Dal regime stagionale antico ai ‘regimina mensium’ medievali. Origine di un genere nella letteratura medica occidentale, Testi, studi, strumenti 22 (Spoleto) [‘Dieta e computus in Beda il venerabile’, in sect. II.1] Quinto, Riccardo, ‘Peter the Chanter and the “Miscellanea del codice del tesoro” (Etymology as a Way for Constructing a Sermon)’, Constructing the Medieval Sermon, ed. Roger Andersson, pp. 33–81 [esp. for fortunes of De tabernaculo and De templo] Scully, Diarmuid, ‘The Third Voyage of Cormac in Adomnan’s Vita Columbae: Analogues and Context’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 209–30 [Historia ecclesiastica, in sect. 5] Shanzer, Danuta, ‘Bede’s Style: a Neglected Historiographical Model for the Style of the Historia ecclesiastica?’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 329–52 Story, Jo, ‘Bede, St Cuthbert and the Northumbrian folc’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Robert Colls [see sect. 6a], pp. 48–67 Viciano, Albert, Patrología, Manuales de teología católica (Valencia, 2001) [‘San Beda el Venerable’, sect. III.iii.7] Wallis, Faith, ‘Cædmon’s Created World and the Monastic Encyclopedia’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ed. Allen J. Frantzen and John Hines, pp. 80–110 Ward, Benedicta, see sect. 11 [knowledge and use of psalter; reissue of 1991–2 monograph, publ. in 2002] Wyly, Bryan Weston, see sect. 3bi [account of Cædmon] iii. Alcuin Angenendt, Arnold, ‘Monotheismus und Gewaltmission’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al. [see sect. 4bi, with ‘Boniface’], pp. 39–81 [Epistolae, esp. in sect. 7] Bachmann, Michael P., ‘È esistita un’ars ridendi nel Medioevo?’, Il riso, ed. Francesco Mosetti Casaretto, pp. 65–75 [De rhetorica and De virtutibus et vitiis] Baraut, Cebrià, ‘La intervenció carolíngia antifeliciana al bisbat d’Urgell i les seves conseqüències religioses i culturals (segles VIII–IX)’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Josep Perarnau, pp. 155–93

293

Bibliography for 2007 Becher, Matthias, ‘Karl der Grosse zwischen Rom und Aachen. Die Kaiserkrönung und das Problem der Loyalität im Frankenreich’, Eloquentia Copiosus, ed. Lotte Kéry, assisted by Monika Gussone et al. (Aachen, 2006), pp. 1–15 [Epistolae] Bodarwé, Katrinette, ‘“Schadet Grammatik der Frauenfrömmigkeit?”’, Frauen, Kloster, Kunst, ed. Jeffrey F. Hamburger et al. (Turnhout), pp. 63–73 [In Iohannis evangelium and De virtutibus et vitiis] Cardelle de Hartmann, Carmen, Lateinische Dialoge 1200–1400. Literaturhistorische Studie und Repertorium, Mittellateinische Studien und Texte 37 (Leiden) [Disputatio Pippini regis cum Albino and other works, esp. in sects. 2.2.1–2] Cavadini, John C., ‘Felix of Urgel: His Theology in Contemporary Scholarship’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Josep Perarnau, pp. 87– 108 Cottier, Jean-François, ‘Anima mea’. Prières privées et textes de dévotion du Moyen Âge latin. Autour des ‘Prières’ ou ‘Méditations’ attribuées à saint Anselme de Cantorbéry, XIe–XIIe siècle, Recherches sur les rhétoriques religieuses 3 (Turnhout, 2001) [‘Alcuin’, in introd., sect. II, and also there esp. for Bede] Crivello, Fabrizio, et al., ‘Renovatio. Arte e cultura’, Carlo Magno e le Alpi, ed. Crivello and Costanza Segre Montel (Milan, 2006), pp. 106–31 [also esp. for Bede] de Epalza, Míkel, ‘Elements cristians, islàmics i jueus en l’adopcionisme de Feliu d’Urgell’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Josep Perarnau, pp. 43–71 [esp. in sects. I.1–2] Depreux, Philippe, Charlemagne et la dynastie carolingienne (Paris) [‘Alcuin, maître à penser de Charlemagne’, sect. II.4] d’Onofrio, Giulio, ‘Tempus ridendi. Il riso del filosofo nell’alto Medioevo’, Il riso, ed. Francesco Mosetti Casaretto, pp. 121–76 [Epistolae; also esp. on De virtutibus et vitiis and Disputatio Pippini regis cum Albino] Ganz, David, ‘The Preface to Einhard’s Vita Karoli’, Einhard. Studien zu Leben und Werk, ed. Hermann Schefers (Darmstadt, 1997), pp. 299–310 [also for Bede] Garzya, Antonio, ‘Il modello della formazione culturale nella tarda antichità’, Nuovo e antico nella cultura greco-latina di IV–VI secolo, ed. Isabella Gualandri et al. (Milan, 2005), pp. 3–14 [Esp. on De rhetorica] Grégoire, Réginald, ‘Le risate dei monaci medievali: gli Ioca monachorum’, Il riso, ed. Francesco Mosetti Casaretto, pp. 77–97 [esp. on Alcuinian Propositiones ad acuendos iuvenes] Hartmann, Martina, ‘Concubina vel regina? Zu einigen Ehefrauen und Konkubinen der karolingischen Konige’, DAEM 63, 545–67 [esp. on Epistolae] Holtz, Louis, ‘Alcuin et la réception de Virgile du temps de Charlemagne’, Einhard. Studien zu Leben und Werk, ed. Hermann Schefers (Darmstadt, 1997), pp. 67–80 Koziol, Geoffrey, ‘Truth and its Consequences: Why Carolingianists Don’t Speak of Myth’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki [see sect. 3a], pp. 71–103 Lucken, Christopher, ‘Entre amour et savoir. Conflits de mémoire chez Richard de Fournival’, La mémoire du temps au Moyen Âge, ed. Agostino Paravicini Bagliani (Florence, 2005), pp. 141–62 [De animae ratione]

294

Bibliography for 2007 McGrath, Alister E., Iustitia Dei: a History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification, 3rd ed. (Cambridge, 2005) [sect. 2.2.4] Magnou-Nortier, Elisabeth, ‘L’Admonitio generalis. Étude critique’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Josep Perarnau, pp. 195–242 Marquès, Benigne, ‘Comentaris als textos de la “cèdula” de Fèlix d’Urgell’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Josep Perarnau, pp. 139–47 Meens, Rob, ‘Sanctuary, Penance and Dispute Settlement under Charlemagne: the Conflict between Alcuin and Theodulf of Orléans over a Sinful Cleric’, Speculum 82, 277–300 Mersiowsky, Mark, ‘Preserved by Destruction: Carolingian Original Letters and clm 6333’, Early Medieval Palimpsests, ed. Georges Declercq [see sect. 5a], pp. 73–98 [comparative remarks on early copies of Epistolae] Mosetti Casaretto, Francesco, ed., see sect. 4a Nelson, Janet L., ‘Aachen as a Place of Power’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power, item XIV, 1–23 [repr. of stud. publ. in 2001] ‘Why are there so Many Different Accounts of Charlemagne’s Coronation?’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power, item XII, 1–27 [esp. in Epistolae; newly publ. stud.] see also sect. 6a Newhauser, Richard, ‘The Love of Money as Deadly Sin and Deadly Disease’, Newhauser, Sin: Essays [see sect. 4a], item VII, 315–26, with addendum in suppl., p. 3 [repr. of essay publ. in 1986] Orchard, Andy, ‘Monasteries and Courts: Alcuin and Offa’, ‘Beowulf ’ and Other Stories, ed. Richard North and Joe Allard [see sect. 3bii], pp. 219–45 Patzold, Steffen, ‘Die Bischöfe im karolingischen Staat. Praktisches Wissen über die politische Ordnung im Frankenreich des 9. Jahrhunderts’, Staat im frühen Mittelalter, ed. Stuart Airlie et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 133–62 [esp. for Epistolae] Perarnau, Josep, ‘Butlletí bibliogràfic’, Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Perarnau, pp. 171–228 [reissue of bibliography publ. in 1997 as ‘Feliu d’Urgell. Fonts per al seu estudi if bibliografia dels darrers sexanta anys’, with ‘Complements al butlletí bibliogràfic’, pp. 221–8] ‘Aproximació al nucli doctrinal de Feliu d’Urgell’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Perarnau, pp. 109–37 Perarnau, Josep, ed., Feliu d’Urgell. Bases per al seu estudi, Studia, Textus, Subsidia 8 (Barcelona, 1999) ‘Fragmenta Felicis Urgellensis episcopi ex operibus Alcuini Eboracensis excerpta’, Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Perarnau, pp. 19–31 Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell. La Seu d’Urgell, 28–30 de setembre de 1999. Crònica i estudis, Studia, textus, subsidia 9 (Barcelona, 2000) [esp. on Contra heresim Felicis, Adversus Felicem and Adversus Elipandum; also esp. for Admonitio generalis; includes summaries of discussion and final respostes, pp. 81–4, 148–51, 243–7 and 249–67] Phelan, Owen M., ‘The Carolingian Renewal and Christian Formation in Ninth Century Bavaria’, Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Richard Corradini et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 389–99 [treatment of baptism, esp. in Epistolae]

295

Bibliography for 2007 Pomaro, Gabriella, ‘Dieci anni del progetto “Codex”: esperienze e prospettive’, Conoscere il manoscritto, ed. Michaelangiola Marchiaro and Stefano Zamponi (Florence), pp. 17–34 [problems involving homiletic] Riu i Riu, Manuel, ‘La situació política creada a les terres catalanes i en particular a les comarques del bisbat d’Urgell, en l’època del bisbe Feliu’, Jornades internacionals d’estudi sobre el bisbe Feliu d’Urgell, ed. Josep Perarnau, pp. 19–42 Schefers, Hermann, ‘Einhard und die Hofschule’, Einhard. Studien zu Leben und Werk, ed. Schefers (Darmstadt, 1997), pp. 81–93 [‘Alkuins Briefgedicht 26’, sect. II] Sennis, Antonio, ‘Narrating Places: Memory and Space in Medieval Monasteries’, People and Space in the Middle Ages, 300–1300, ed. Wendy Davies et al. (Turnhout, 2006), pp. 275–94 [Alcuin and issues of ethnic accommodation, in sect. 1] Stevens, Wesley M., ‘“Numerum in se facere”’, Bulletin Du Cange / Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 65, 117–64 [Epistola CXIII, in sect. I; treatment of mathematical vocabulary] iv. Other pre-Reform authors and texts C AT H W U L F

Nelson, Janet L., ‘Bertrada’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power [see sect. 6a], item IX, 93–108 [also for Boniface; repr. of stud. publ. in 2004] ‘FRIDUGISUS’ Busch, Jörg W., Vom Amtswalten zum Königsdienst. Beobachtungen zur ‘Staatssprache’ des Frühmittelalters am Beispiel des Wortes ‘administratio’, MGH Studien und Texte 42 (Hannover) [esp. in chs. 3–4; also for Boniface, Alcuin et al., esp. in ch. 2] Howlett, David, ‘Fredegisus, De substantia nihili et tenebrarum’, Bulletin Du Cange / Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 64 (2006), 123–43 ISRAEL THE GRAMMARIAN

Herbert, Máire, see sect. 5a WIGBOD

Gorman, Michael M., ‘Peter of Pisa and the quaestiunculae Copied for Charlemagne in Brussels II 2572, with a Note on the Codex Diezianus from Verona’, Gorman, The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages [see sect. 4a], pp. 276–98 [also for Alcuin; repr. of stud. publ. in 2000, with addendum, p. xiv] v. Reform period and beyond ÆLFRIC

Hall, Thomas N., see sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [Epistola ad monachos] Æ L F R I C BATA

Gwara, Scott, see sect. 5a [source in Gneuss no. 583] Æ T H E LW E A R D

Carroll, Jayne, see sect. 3bi

296

Bibliography for 2007 Æ T H E LW O L D

Lazzari, Loredana, see sect. 4a [evidence in Gneuss no. 775] BYRHTFERTH

Foys, Martin K., see sect. 5c [cartographic links] Gasparri, Françoise, ‘Sur la terminologie médiévale des écritures’, Bulletin Du Cange / Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 65, 261–77 [treatment of alphabet] Stephenson, Rebecca, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Byrhtferth’ [‘hermeneutic’ style] LANTFRED

Sexton, John P., ‘Saint’s Law: Anglo-Saxon Sanctuary Protection in the Translatio et miracula de S. Swithuni’, Florilegium 23.2 (2007 for 2006), 61–80 REGULARIS CONCORDIA

Grégoire, Réginald, Contributi di storia del diritto monastico e istituzionale ecclesiastico, Bibliotheca Montisfani 27 (Fabriano, 2003) [esp. in sects. VIII.3–4] Yearl, M. K. K., ‘Medieval Monastic Customaries on minuti and infirmi’, The Medieval Hospital and Medical Practice, ed. Barbara S. Bowers (Aldershot), pp. 175–94 [in sect. 4; also for Bede (and pseudo-Bede) on bloodletting] vi. Other pre-Conquest authors and texts ‘BEATUS QUID EST’ Mirto, Ignazio Mauro, ‘Of the Choice and Use of the Word beatus in the Beatus quid est: Notes by a Non-Philologist’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 349–61 C A R M I NA C A N T A B R I G I E N S I A

Ziolkowski, Jan M., see sect. 4a E N C O M I U M E M M A E R E G I NA E

Barrow, Julia, see sect. 6c V I T A Æ D WA R D I R E G I S

Huntington, Joanna, ‘Saintly Power as a Model of Royal Authority: the “Royal Touch” and Other Miracles in the Early vitae of Edward the Confessor’, Aspects of Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, ed. Brenda Bolton and Christine Meek (Turnhout), pp. 327–43 c. Liturgical books C O L L E C TA R

Karkov, Catherine E., ‘Text as Image in Ælfwine’s Prayerbook’, The Power of Words, ed. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox [see sect. 3a], pp. 95–114 Keefer, Sarah Larratt, see sect. 5a [‘Durham ritual’, Gneuss no. 223] Wright, Charles D., see sect. 9h [‘Durham ritual’, Gneuss no. 223]

297

Bibliography for 2007 C O N F R AT E R N I T Y B O O K

Álvarez López, Francisco José, see sect. 5a [Gneuss no. 248] Dumville, David N., see sect. 6b [Durham Liber vitae, Gneuss no. 327] Rollason, David, and Lynda Rollason, ed., see sect. 5a [Durham Liber vitae, Gneuss no. 327] Wareham, Andrew, see sect. 6a [Durham Liber vitae, Gneuss no. 327] C O N S U E T U D I N A RY

Álvarez López, Francisco José, see sect. 5a [Gneuss no. 248] G O S P E L L E C T I O N A RY

Heslop, T. A., see sect. 5c [Gneuss no. 139] Rushforth, Rebecca, St Margaret’s Gospel-Book: the Favourite Book of an Eleventh-Century Queen of Scots, Treasures from the Bodleian Lib. (Oxford) [Gneuss no. 651] GOSPEL-BOOK

Keefer, Sarah Larratt, see sect. 5a [Durham gospels, Gneuss no. 220] H O M I L I A RY

[Anon.], ‘Anglo-Saxon Homiliaries as Designated by Ker’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 493–506 Hall, Thomas N., ‘Latin Sermons for Saints in Early English Homiliaries and Legendaries’, The Old English Homily, ed. Aaron J. Kleist, pp. 227–63 [Esp. in copies of Paulus Diaconus, Homiliae; also for ‘Cotton–Corpus legendary’, and on Ælfric, Epistola ad monachos] Kleist, Aaron J., ‘Anglo-Saxon Homiliaries in Tudor and Stuart England’, The Old English Homily, ed. Kleist, pp. 445–92 Kleist, Aaron J., ed., see sect. 3ci HYMNAL

Keefer, Sarah Larratt, see sect. 5a [‘Durham hymnal’, Gneuss no. 244] L E G E N DA RY

Hall, Thomas N., see above, with ‘homiliary’ [‘Cotton–Corpus legendary’] M A N UA L

Karkov, Catherine E., see sect. 4c, with ‘sacramentary’ [‘Red Book of Darley’, Gneuss no. 111] M A R T Y RO L O G Y

Álvarez López, Francisco José, see sect. 5a [Gneuss no. 248] MISSAL

Karkov, Catherine E., see sect. 4c, with ‘sacramentary’ [‘Red Book of Darley’, Gneuss no. 111]

298

Bibliography for 2007 PONTIFICAL

Keefer, Sarah Larratt, see sect. 6a [treatments of vestments] O’Keeffe, Katherine O’Brien, see sect. 6d, with ‘Goscelin’ [rituals of consecration] P R AY E R B O O K

Crowley, Joseph P., ‘Latin Prayers Added into the Margins of the Prayerbook British Library, Royal 2. A. xx at the Beginnings of the Monastic Reform in Worcester’, Sacris erudiri 45 (2006), 223–303 [includes ed.] P S A LT E R

Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, see sect. 2aii, with ‘glossaries and glossae collectae’ Griffiths, Alan, see sect. 2aii, with ‘continuous glosses’ [Vespasian psalter] Stokes, Peter A., see sect. 3ci [Regius psalter] S AC R A M E N TA RY

Jolly, Karen Louise, see sect. 5a [Gneuss no. 39] Karkov, Catherine E., ‘Text and Image in the Red Book of Darley’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 135–48 [esp. on second pt. of the manuscript (Gneuss no. 111)] Spinks, Bryan D., see sect. 4a [baptismal texts] T RO P E R

Heslop, T. A., see sect. 5c [Gneuss no. 309]

5. PALAEOGRAPHY, DIPLOMATIC, ILLUMINATION AND RELATED SUBJECTS a. Palaeography and codicology Alcamesi, Filippa, see sect. 5d [two items; on Gneuss no. 53, and on Gneuss nos. 120 and 664] Álvarez López, Francisco José, ‘DCL, B IV, 24: a Palaeographical and Codicological Study of Durham’s “Cantor’s Book”’, Bells Chiming from the Past, ed. Isabel Moskowich-Spiegel and Begoña Crespo-García [see sect. 2b], pp. 209–26 [Gneuss no. 248] [Anon.], see sects. 4c, with ‘homiliary’, and 9gi [first entry; Lichfield gospels, Gneuss no. 269] Biggs, Frederick M., see sect. 3bii [BL Cotton Vitellius A. xv] Bishop, Chris, see sect. 3a [later AS scriptoria] Björkvall, Gunilla, ‘The Remnants of Medieval Book Culture in Sweden: a Current Cataloguing Project of Fragments at the National Archives in Stockholm’, ‘Fragmenta ne pereant’. Recupero e studio dei frammenti di manoscritti medievali e

299

Bibliography for 2007 rinascimentali riutilizzati in legature, ed. Mauro Perani and Cesarino Ruini (Ravenna, 2002), pp. 157–68 [esp. on fragments linked to AS mission, in sect. 2] Bredehoft, Thomas A., ‘Filling the Margins of CCCC 41: Textual Space and a Developing Archive’, RES 57 (2006), 721–32 [Gneuss no. 39; esp. for OE Bede, Latin liturgical texts, OE homilies, charms and Solomon and Saturn I] Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, see sect. 6b [manuscript evidence for missions] Brown, Michelle P., Manuscripts from the Anglo-Saxon Age (London) see also sect. 9gi [Book of Cerne and Lichfield gospels (Gneuss nos. 28 and 269)] Bussières, Michèle, ‘The Controversy about Scribe C in British Library, Cotton MSS, Julius E. vii’, Leeds Stud. in Eng. ns 38, 53–72 [also esp. for Ælfric, Lives of Saints, and for non-Ælfrician hagiographical prose] Chardonnens, László Sándor, ‘London, British Library, Harley 3271: the Composition and Structure of an Eleventh-Century Anglo-Saxon Miscellany’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 3–34 [Gneuss no. 435; esp. on prognostics, ‘Beatus quid est’, liturgical texts, glossed prose by Abbo of Saint-Germaindes-Prés and Ælfric, Grammar] see also sect. 3a [two entries; prognostics] Charles-Edwards, Gifford, ‘Insular Display Capitals and Their Origins’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss [see sect. 5c], pp. 228–41 Clemens, Raymond, and Timothy Graham, Introduction to Manuscript Studies (Ithaca, NY) Corradini, Erika, see sect. 3ci [homiletic manuscripts] Crowley, Joseph P., see sect. 4c, with ‘prayerbook’ [Gneuss no. 450] Da Rold, Orietta, ‘English Manuscripts 1060 to 1220 and the Making of a Re-Source’, Lit. Compass 3 (2006), 750–66 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00344.x] D’Aronco, M. A., ‘The Traditional Facsimile: Reproduction or Edition? The Case of MS London B.L. Cotton Vitellius C iii’, Care and Conservation of Manuscripts 6, ed. Gillian Fellows-Jensen and Peter Springborg, pp. 76–83 [Ker no. 402] see also sect. 3cii, with ‘medical texts’ [discussion of manuscripts] Declercq, Georges, ed., Early Medieval Palimpsests, Bibliologia 26 (Turnhout) Dietz, Klaus, see sect. 2b [scribal ‘ch’, ‘gh’, ‘sh’, ‘th’ and ‘wh’] Di Sciacca, Claudia, see sect. 5d [glosses in Gneuss nos. 114, 363 and 415] Dumville, David N., ‘The Corpus of Gaelic Manuscripts of the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries’, Dumville, Celtic Essays, II, 83–90 [Gneuss nos. 19, 25, 45, 148 and 213–14; rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2006] ‘The Palaeography of “The Book of Deer”: the Original Manuscript and the Liturgical Addition’, Dumville, Celtic Essays, I, 183–212 [Gneuss no. 19; rev. version of stud. in forthcoming monograph] ‘Writers, Scribes and Readers in Brittany, AD 800–1100: the Evidence of Manuscripts’, Dumville, Celtic Essays, I, 213–31 [esp. on Latin source of Life of Machutus, and on Collectio canonum Hibernensis; rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2005] see also sects. 6a [collection of recent papers] and 6b [Gneuss no. 327] Fellows-Jensen, Gillian, and Peter Springborg, ed., Care and Conservation of Manuscripts 6: Proceedings of the Sixth International Seminar Held at the Royal Library, Copenhagen, 19th–20th October 2000 (Copenhagen, 2002)

300

Bibliography for 2007 Foys, Martin K., see sect. 5c [Gneuss no. 73] Frankis, John, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Life of St Giles’ [Gneuss no. 17; also on Ker no. 57] Fuchs, Robert, ‘Old Restorations and Repairs in Manuscripts’, Care and Conservation of Manuscripts 6, ed. Gillian Fellows-Jensen and Peter Springborg, pp. 224–41 [Gneuss no. 220] Fulk, R. D., see sect. 3bii [numbered sects. in poetic codices] Gameson, Richard, ‘The History of the Book’, A Century of British Medieval Studies, ed. Alan Deyermond [see sect. 3a], pp. 701–35 [esp. on work of James, Wormald, Ker et al.] ‘The Script of the Original Core’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, I, 58–65 Glaze, Florence Eliza, ‘Master–Student Medical Dialogues: the Evidence of London, British Library, Sloane 2839’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 467–94 [Gneuss no. 498.9; also esp. for Peri didaxeon, and on Aldhelm] Gretsch, Mechthild, see sect. 4a [lost calendar, Gneuss no. 855.5] Gullick, Michael, ‘The Make-Up of the Durham Liber vitae’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, I, 43–57 Gwara, Scott, ‘A Possible Arthurian Epitome in a Tenth-Century Manuscript from Cornwall’, Arthuriana 17.2, 3–9 [esp. on De raris fabulis, Celtic Latin source for Ælfric Bata and the anon. Colloquia e libro ‘De raris fabulis’ retractata, in Gneuss no. 583] Hall, Thomas N., see sects. 4a [Gneuss no. 189] and 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [AS homiliaries and legendaries] Hen, Yitzhak, see sect. 5d [sacramentary and lectionary from AS centre on Continent] Henderson, George, see sect. 9gi [Gneuss no. 848.8] Herbert, Máire, ‘Crossing Historical and Literary Boundaries: Irish Written Culture around the Year 1000’, CMCS 53–4, 87–101 [esp. on Gneuss no. 521 and links to court of Æthelstan; also for tradition of alea evangelii associated with Israel the Grammarian] Hill, Joyce, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Ælfric’ [esp. on Gneuss nos. 16, 24, 129, 130, 209, 222, 226, 273, 424, 452, 753, 763, 763.1 and 763.2] Jolly, Karen Louise, ‘On the Margins of Orthodoxy: Devotional Formulas and Protective Prayers in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College MS 41’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, pp. 135–83 [Gneuss no. 39] Jones, Christopher A., ‘Monastic Identity and Sodomitic Danger in the Occupatio by Odo of Cluny’, Speculum 82, 1–53 [esp. on copy in Gneuss no. 903] Karkov, Catherine E., see sect. 4c, in two entries, with ‘collectar’ [‘Ælfwine’s prayerbook’, Gneuss no. 380] and with ‘sacramentary’ [‘Red Book of Darley’, Gneuss no. 111] Keefer, Sarah Larratt, ‘Use of Manuscript Space for Design, Text and Image in Liturgical Books Owned by the Community of St Cuthbert’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, pp. 85–115 [Gneuss nos. 220, 223 and 244] Keefer, Sarah Larratt, and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, ed., Signs on the Edge: Space, Text and Margin in Medieval Manuscripts, Mediaevalia Groningana ns 10 (Louvain)

301

Bibliography for 2007 Kleist, Aaron J., see sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [later provenances of homiliaries] Lazzari, Loredana, see sect. 4a [Gneuss no. 775] Lendinara, Patrizia, ‘Instructional Manuscripts in England: the Tenth- and EleventhCentury Codices and the Early Norman Ones’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Lendinara et al., pp. 59–113 Lendinara, Patrizia et al., ed., see sect. 6a [manuscript evidence for pedagogy] Maniaci, Marilena, and Giulia Orofino, ed., Le Bibbie atlantiche. Il libro delle Scritture tra monumentalità e rappresentazione (Milan, 2000) [esp. on Codex Amiatinus] O’Keeffe, Katherine O’Brien, see sect. 6d, with ‘Goscelin’ [rituals of consecration in liturgical manuscripts] Pflughaupt, Laurent, Letter by Letter: an Alphabetical Miscellany, trans. Gregory Bruhn (New York) [includes Insular scripts; Eng. trans. of work publ. in 2003] Rambaran-Olm, Mary R., see sect. 3biii, with ‘Descent into Hell’ [Exeter Book] Rollason, David, and Lynda Rollason, ed., The Durham ‘Liber vitae’: London, British Library, MS Cotton Domitian A. VII – Edition and Digital Facsimile with Introduction, Codicological, Prosopographical and Linguistic Commentary, and Indexes, 3 vols. (London) [with contributions by Elizabeth Briggs et al.] Rollason, Lynda, ‘History and Codicology’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Rollason, I, 5–42 Rumble, Alexander R., ‘Cues and Clues: Palaeographical Aspects of Anglo-Saxon Scholarship’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 115–30 Rushforth, Rebecca, see sect. 4c, with ‘gospel lectionary’ [Gneuss no. 651] Scase, Wendy, ed., Essays in Manuscript Geography: Vernacular Manuscripts of the English West Midlands from the Conquest to the Sixteenth Century, Med. Texts and Cultures of Northern Europe 10 (Turnhout) [esp. for Gneuss nos. 98, 639 and 331, Ker nos. 62–4, and on London, Lambeth Palace, 487 (cf. Ker no. 282)] Schipper, William, ‘The Origin of the Trinity College Hrabanus’, The Cambridge Illuminations, ed. Stella Panayatova [see sect. 5c], pp. 45–53 [Gneuss no. 178] ‘Textual Varieties in Manuscript Margins’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, pp. 25–54 [esp. for Gneuss nos. 39, 83, 223 and 297] Shaw, Philip, see sect. 3bi [BL Cotton Vitellius A. xv and Exeter Book] Sims-Williams, Patrick, ‘A New Brittonic Gloss on Boethius: ud rocashaas’, CMCS 50 (2005), 77–86 [Gneuss no. 908] Stokes, Peter A., see sect. 3ci [Regius psalter] Swan, Mary, ‘Mobile Libraries: Old English Manuscript Production in Worcester and the West Midlands, 1090–1215’, Essays in Manuscript Geography, ed. Wendy Scase, pp. 29–42 see also sect. 3a [later twelfth-century copies of OE texts] Teresi, Loredana, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Ælfric’ [esp. on Ker nos. 21, 56 and 153] Thomas, Peter W., Medicine and Science at Exeter Cathedral Library: a Short-Title Catalogue of the Printed Books, 1483–1900, with a List of Tenth- to Nineteenth-Century Manuscripts (Exeter, 2003) [Gneuss no. 258, p. 282] Thompson, Nancy M., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Blickling Homilies’ [Gneuss no. 905; esp. on audience]

302

Bibliography for 2007 Toswell, M. J., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Blickling Homilies’ [Gneuss no. 905; esp. on question of ‘booklets’] Treharne, Elaine, see sect. 3a [two entries; on Ker no. 209 and on Vercelli Book] Withers, Benjamin C., see sect. 5c [illustrated Hexateuch, Gneuss no. 315] b. Diplomatic Biddle, Martin, see sect. 6c [S 1815, lost charter of Edgar] Burton, J. E., ‘Charters in the Durham Liber vitae’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason [see sect. 5a], I, 76–7 [S 1659–61] Coatsworth, Elizabeth, see sect. 6a [wills] Crick, Julia, ed., Charters of St Albans, AS Charters 12 (Oxford) [‘The Will of Æthelgifu’, in introd., sects. 7a–g; also esp. for previously unprinted OE texts in nos. 1a–b, 2, 7a, 14 and 16–17] Hough, Carole, see sect. 2ai [S 885] Hudson, John, ed., see sect. 6a [Abingdon] Kelly, S. E., ed., Charters of Bath and Wells, AS Charters 13 (Oxford) Keynes, Simon, see sect. 6c [early eleventh-century diplomatic texts] Licence, Tom, see sect. 6c [S 535] Lowe, Kathryn A., ‘S 507 and the Abbey of Bury St Edmunds: Manuscript Preservation and Transmission in the Middle Ages’, Care and Conservation of Manuscripts 6, ed. Gillian Fellows-Jensen and Peter Springborg [see sect. 5a], pp. 85–105 Moore, Richard, et al., with Ed McSloy et al., see sect. 9cii [charter bounds between Linslade and Soulbury parishes] Nelson, Janet L., see sect. 6a [wills] Pratt, Simon, see sect. 9cii [S 160] Reynolds, Andrew, see sect. 6a [Avebury region] Reynolds, Andrew, and Alex Langlands, see sect. 9cii [Wansdyke] c. Illumination and iconography [Anon.], see sect. 9gi [first entry; Lichfield gospels, Gneuss no. 269] Brown, Michelle P., ‘The Barberini Gospels: Context and Intertextual Relationships’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 89–116 [Gneuss no. 907] see also sect. 9gi [Book of Cerne and Lichfield gospels (Gneuss nos. 28 and 269)] D’Aronco, M. A., see sect. 5a [Ker no. 402] Department for Culture, Media and Sport [U.K.], see sect. 9h [interlace and zoomorphic decoration on metalwork] Dooley, Ann, ‘Re-Drawing the Bounds: Marginal Illustrations and Interpretative Strategies in the Book of Kells’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, pp. 9–24 [brief remarks on mooted AS links, sect. 1] Foys, Martin K., ‘An Unfinished mappa mundi from Late Eleventh-Century Worcester’, ASE 35 (2006), 271–84 [in Gneuss no. 73; also esp. on possible links to Byrhtferth] see also sect. 3a [mappa mundi in Gneuss no. 373]

303

Bibliography for 2007 Fuglesang, Signe Horn, see sect. 9gi [apparent AS iconographic influence on continental rune-stones] Harvey, P. D. A., see sect. 4bii [maps] Hedeager, Lotte, see sect. 9a [animals in art] Henderson, George, see sect. 9gi [representation of Apostles in AS art] Heslop, T. A., ‘Manuscript Illumination at Worcester c. 1055–1065: the Origins of the Pembroke Lectionary and the Caligula Troper’, The Cambridge Illuminations, ed. Stella Panayatova, pp. 65–76 [Gneuss nos. 139 and 309] Hofmann, Mara, ‘Der “Digital Catalogue of Illuminated Manuscripts” der British Library, London’, Katalogisierung mittelalterlicher Handschriften in internationaler Perspektive, ed. Claudia Fabian and Bettina Wagner (Wiesbaden), pp. 139–43 Hourihane, Colum, ed., Time in the Medieval World: Occupations of the Months and Signs of the Zodiac in the Index of Christian Art, Index of Christian Art Resources 3 (Princeton, NJ) [esp. for Gneuss nos. 334, 337 and 373; also for Junius manuscript] Karkov, Catherine E., ‘Evangelist Portraits and Book Production in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, The Cambridge Illuminations, ed. Stella Panayatova, pp. 55–63 ‘Margins and Marginalization: Representations of Eve in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Junius 11’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, pp. 57–84 see also sect. 4c, with ‘sacramentary’ [‘Red Book of Darley’, Gneuss no. 111] Keefer, Sarah Larratt, see sect. 6a [clerical vestments AS in art] Keefer, Sarah Larratt, and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, ed., see sect. 5a Kessler, Herbert L., ‘The Word Made Flesh in Early Decorated Bibles’, Jeffrey Spier, et al., Picturing the Bible: the Earliest Christian Art (New Haven, CT), pp. 141–68 [Gospel-Book of St Augustine (Gneuss no. 83)] Kühnel, Bianca, The End of Time in the Order of Things: Science and Eschatology in Early Medieval Art (Regensburg, 2003) [esp. on Codex Amiatinus; also for Gneuss nos. 373, 378, 448–9, 526, 893 and others, and for Alcuin, Bede, Byrhtferth et al.] Luiselli Fadda, Anna Maria, ‘The Mysterious Moment of Resurrection in Early AngloSaxon and Irish Iconography’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 149–67 [also esp. for Ælfric, and for Alcuin] Minnis, Alastair, and Jane Roberts, ed., see sect. 3a Morrison, Tessa, ‘An Examination of the Blessing Hand in Insular Art’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 288–300 Moss, Rachel, ed. Making and Meaning in Insular Art: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Insular Art Held at Trinity College Dublin, 25–28 August 2005, TRIARC, Research Stud. in Irish Art 1 (Dublin) [publ. of Trinity College Irish Art Research Centre] Nees, Lawrence, see sect. 9h [esp. on Book of Durrow, Gneuss no. 213] Neiss, Michael, see sect. 9a [animals in art] Neuman de Vegvar, Carol, ‘Remembering Jerusalem: Architecture and Meaning in Insular Canon Table Arcades’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 242–56 Nielsen, Karen Høilund, ed., see sect. 11 [animals in art]

304

Bibliography for 2007 Onians, John, see sect. 9gi [iconography of ‘Romsey roods’] O’Reilly, Jennifer, ‘“Know who and what he is”: the Context and Inscriptions of the Durham Gospels Crucifixion Image’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 301–16 Panayatova, Stella, ed., The Cambridge Illuminations: the Conference Papers (London) Price, Neil, see sect. 9a [Viking art] Pulsiano, Phillip, ‘Jaunts, Jottings and Jetsam in Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, pp. 119–33 [esp. in Gneuss nos. 381, 425, 462, 862, 889–90 and 896; rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2002] Rosenthal, Jane E., ‘An Unprecedented Image of Love and Devotion: the Crucifixion in Judith of Flanders’s Gospel Book’, Tributes to Lucy Freeman Sandler, ed. Kathryn A. Smith and Carol H. Krinsky (London), pp. 21–36 [Gneuss no. 861; also for Gneuss nos. 304 and 315] Schipper, William, see sect. 5a [Hrabanus Maurus, De laudibus S. Crucis, in Gneuss no. 178] Shepard, Dorothy M., see sect. 5d [links to AS illumination in Lambeth bible] Simek, Rudolf, ‘The Earthrim-Dwellers’ Favourite Abode: Crosscurrents between Literary and Iconographic Traditions on Monstrous Races in Medieval European’, The Iconography of the Fantastic II, ed. Attila Kiss et al. (Szeged, 2002), pp. 49– 60 [esp. in BL Cotton Tiberius B. v (Gneuss no. 373); also esp. on Liber monstrorum, and on Marvels of the East] Speake, George, ‘Interlace: Thoughts and Observations’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith [see sect. 9a], pp. 127–31 [principally concerning manuscript illustration and metalwork] Speciale, Lucinia, ‘Dalla lettera all’immagine. La decorazione delle Bibbie atlantiche’, Le Bibbie atlantiche, ed. Marilena Maniaci and Giulia Orofino [see sect. 5a], pp. 65–71 [esp. on Codex Amiatinus] Teresi, Loredana, ‘The Drawing on the Margin of Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 206, f. 38r: an Intertextual Exemplification to Clarify the Text?’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 131–40 ‘Maps and Images: Anglo-Saxon and Early Anglo-Norman mappaemundi’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 341–77 Wilson, David M., see sect. 9a [Viking art] Withers, Benjamin C., The Illustrated Old English Hexateuch, Cotton Claudius B. iv: the Frontier of Seeing and Reading in Anglo-Saxon England, Stud. in Book and Print Culture (London) Wright, Charles D., see sect. 9h [iconography of Alfred Jewel and Fuller Brooch] Žanut, Katja, see sect. 9f [‘Tassilo Chalice style’ and art on AS artefacts] d. Scriptoria, libraries and transmission of non-native texts Alcamesi, Filippa, ‘The “Sibylline Acrostic” in Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts: the Augustinian Text and the Other Versions’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker, pp. 147–73 [esp. in Gneuss no. 53] ‘Remigius’s Commentary to the Disticha Catonis in Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts’, Form

305

Bibliography for 2007 and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 143–85 [esp. in Gneuss nos. 120 and 664] Álvarez López, Francisco José, see sect. 5a [Benedict, Regula, in Gneuss no. 248] Biggs, Frederick M., ed., Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture: the Apocrypha, Instrumenta Anglistica Mediaevalia 1 (Kalamazoo, MI) [rev. and expansion of entries on apocrypha publ. in Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Culture: a Trial Version, ed. Biggs et al. (Binghamton, NY, 1990), pp. 22-70] Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, and Kees Dekker, ed., see sect. 3a Di Sciacca, Claudia, ‘The Manuscript Tradition, Presentation and Glossing of Isidore’s Synonyma in Anglo-Saxon England: the Case of CCCC 448, Harley 110 and Cotton Tiberius A. iii’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr, and Kees Dekker, pp. 95–124 Dolcetti Corazza, Vittoria, see sect. 3biii, with ‘“Physiologus” poems’ [AS transmission of Physiologus] Giliberto, Concetta, ‘An Unpublished De lapidibus in its Manuscript Tradition, with Particular Regard to the Anglo-Saxon Area’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 251–83 Gorman, Michael M., ‘The Earliest Latin Commentary on the Gospels’, Gorman, The Study of the Bible in the Early Middle Ages [see sect. 4a], pp. 423–94 [use of Arnobius, esp. by Bede and Alcuin; corr. repr. of stud. publ. in 2000, with addendum, p. xv] Hall, Thomas N., see sect. 4c, with ‘homiliary’ [Paulus Diaconus, Homiliae] Hen, Yitzhak, ‘Liturgical Palimpsests in the Early Middle Ages’, Early Medieval Palimpsests, ed. Georges Declercq [see sect. 5a], pp. 37–54 [esp. for palimpsest in a sacramentary and lectionary (lower script, s. viii2; from an ‘Anglo-Saxon centre on the Continent’), now Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M. p. th. q. 32 (CLA IX.1441)] Heslop, T. A., see sect. 5c [Worcester] Hill, Joyce, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Ælfric’ [Paulus Diaconus, Homiliae] Holtz, Louis, see sect. 4biii [Alcuin and Vergil] Jones, Christopher A., see sect. 5a [Odo of Cluny, Occupatio] Lazzari, Loredana, see sect. 2aii, with ‘glossaries and glossae collectae’ [Isidore, Etymologiae] Lendinara, Patrizia et al., ed., see sect. 6a Lobrichon, Guy, ‘Riforma ecclesiastica e testo della Bibbia’, Le Bibbie atlantiche, ed. Marilena Maniaci and Giulia Orofino [see sect. 5a], pp. 15–26 [esp. on Codex Amiatinus] Maion, Daniele, ‘The Fortune of the Practica Petrocelli Salernitani in England: New Evidence and Some Considerations’, Form and Content of Instruction, ed. Patrizia Lendinara et al., pp. 495–512 [esp. on Peri didaxeon] Parkes, M. B., ‘History in Books’ Clothing: Books as Evidence for Cultural Relations between England and the Continent in the Seventh and Eighth Centuries’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 71–88 [also esp. for Aldhelm, Bede, Alcuin et al.] Shepard, Dorothy M., Introducing the Lambeth Bible: a Study of Texts and Imagery (Turnhout) [esp. on biblical texts in Gneuss nos. 449 and 934, ch. 5; also esp. for links to AS illumination, in chs. 3 and 6–9]

306

Bibliography for 2007 Swan, Mary, see sect. 5a [Worcester and West Midlands] Thomson, R. M., Books and Learning in Twelfth-Century England: the Ending of ‘alter orbis’, Lyell Lectures 2000–1 (Walkern, Herts., 2006) [‘The Legacy of Anglo-Saxon England’, in ch. 1 (‘A Clash of Cultures? The Impact of the Norman Conquest’)] Treharne, Elaine, ‘Bishops and Their Texts in the Later Eleventh Century: Worcester and Exeter’, Essays in Manuscript Geography, ed. Wendy Scase [see sect. 5a], pp. 13– 28 Twomey, Michael W., ‘The Revelationes of pseudo-Methodius and Scriptural Study at Salisbury in the Eleventh Century’, Source of Wisdom, ed. Charles D. Wright et al. [see sect. 3a], pp. 370–86

6. HISTORY a. General and miscellaneous Ashby, Steven P., see sect. 9giii [two entries; combs as evidence for trade] Ashwin, Trevor, and Alan Davison, ed., An Historical Atlas of Norfolk, 3rd ed. (Chichester, 2005) [esp. in sects. 14–22, including ‘Place-Name Patterns’, sect. 16] Aston, Mick, ‘An Archipelago in Central Somerset: the Origins of Muchelney Abbey’, Somerset Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. 150, 63–71 ‘The Lost County of Winchcombeshire’, Brit. Archaeol. 92, 31–3 [esp. on land ownership] Ballin Smith, Beverley, Simon Taylor and Gareth Williams, ed., West over Sea: Studies in Scandinavian Sea-Borne Expansion and Settlement before 1300 – a Festschrift in honour of Dr Barbara E. Crawford, Northern World 31 (Leiden) Barnwell, P. S., ‘II Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (300–900)’, Ann. Bull. of Hist. Lit. 91, 5–12 [esp. at pp. 11–12] Bedos-Rezak, Brigitte Miriam, see sect. 1 [cult of Cuthbert] Black, John R., ‘Tradition and Transformation in the Cult of St. Guthlac in Early Medieval England’, Heroic Age 10 [online] Blair, John, ‘What Millennium are We Celebrating?’, Oxoniensia 71 (2007 for 2006), 499 [esp. on origins of Oxon.] Breeze, A. C., ‘Britons in West Derby Hundred, Lancashire’, NH 44.2, 199–203 Brown, Pat, ‘An Anglo-Saxon Estate Centre at Great Tey?’, Colchester Archaeol. Group Ann. Bull. 47, 26–33 Brunetti, Giuseppe, ‘Possible Narratives: Re-Telling the Norman Conquest’, The Garden of Crossing Paths, ed. Marina Buzzoni and Massimiliano Bampi, rev. ed. (Venice), pp. 175–84 [esp. on William of Malmesbury; also for Bayeux ‘tapestry’, and on Chronicle] Buchloh, Paul G., see sect. 1 [use of term Angeln] Burton, J. E., ‘Confraternities in the Durham Liber vitae’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, I, 73–5

307

Bibliography for 2007 Campbell, James, ‘Some Considerations on Religion in Early England’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith [see sect. 9a], pp. 67–73 [esp. on evidence of laws and later folklore] Chai-Elsholz, Raeleen, see sect. 4bii [Symeon of Durham and later fortunes of Bede] Chartrand, R., K. Durham, M. Harrison and I. Heath, The Vikings: Voyagers of Discovery and Plunder (Oxford, 2006) [esp. in ch. 1; incorporates material from works previously publ. by Harrison, Heath and Durham] Coates, Richard, see sect. 8 [onomastic evidence for Britons in AS England] Coatsworth, Elizabeth, ‘Cushioning Medieval Life: Domestic Textiles in Anglo-Saxon England’, Med. Clothing and Textiles 3, 1–12 [esp. for evidence in wills] Colls, Robert, ‘Introduction: When Was Northumbria?’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Colls, pp. ix–xiv Colls, Robert, ed., Northumbria: History and Identity, 547–2000 (Chichester) Crépin, André, ‘Témoignages anglais du haut Moyen Âge sur les Vikings dans le nord de la Francie’, Les vikings dans la réalité et la fiction, ed. Peter Andersen and Danielle Buschinger (Amiens, 2006), pp. 54–62 [esp. in Chronicle; also esp. on OE wicing] Crick, Julia, ed., see sect. 5b [St Albans; also esp. for Will of Æthelgifu] D’Aronco, Maria A., ‘The Benedictine Rule and the Care of the Sick: the Plan of St Gall and Anglo-Saxon England’, The Medieval Hospital and Medical Practice, ed. Barbara S. Bowers (Aldershot), pp. 235–51 Dumville, David. N., ‘Annales Cambriae and Easter’, The Medieval Chronicle III, ed. Erik Kooper (Amsterdam, 2004), pp. 40–50 [esp. on Easter controversy, and for treatment of Northumbrian (or English) concerns generally] Celtic Essays, 2001–2007, 2 vols., Stud. in Celtic Cultures 1 (Aberdeen) [reissued papers, rev. throughout for style, and two previously unpubl. essays] ‘Ireland and North Britain in the Earlier Middle Ages: Contexts for Míniugud senchasa fher n-Alban’, Dumville, Celtic Essays, II, 35–71 [esp. on Tribal Hidage; rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2002] ‘Old Dubliners and New Dubliners in Ireland and Britain: a Viking-Age Story’, Dumville, Celtic Essays, I, 103–22 [rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2004] Ellmers, Detlev, see sect. 9a [Late Roman carvings of putatively Germanic ships] Evans, Christopher, ‘Early Boundaries’, Trans. of the Scarborough Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. 37 (2001–2), 5–12 [includes proposed means to distinguish early estate boundaries from mod. anomalies, field boundaries and hedgerows] Faulkes, Anthony, ‘The Earliest Icelandic Genealogies and Regnal Lists’, SBVS 29 (2005), 115–19 [lists reflecting extensive use of AS sources] ‘The Viking Mind, or In Pursuit of the Viking’, SBVS 31, 46–83 Favreau, Robert, see sect. 9gii [portable altars; also for reliquary of Cuthbert, and for Alcuin] Flatman, Joe, see sect. 9a [early med. ships] Fox, Harold, ‘Two Devon Estuaries in the Middle Ages: Fisheries, Ports, Fortifications and Places of Worship’, Landscapes (Macclesfield) 8.1, 39–68 [esp. at pp. 54–8, on ‘Churches, Chapels and Holy Places’]

308

Bibliography for 2007 Gifford, Edwin, and Joyce Gifford, see sect. 9a [ships] Graham-Campbell, James, and Gareth Williams, ed., Silver Economy in the Viking Age (Walnut Creek, CA) Hall, Richard, The World of the Vikings (London) [‘The “Great Heathen Army’ in England’’’, in ch. III, and ‘The Settlement of England’, in ch. IV; also esp. in ch. VII] Hall, Teresa, ‘Keeping the Faith: the Physical Expression of Differing Church Customs in Early Medieval Britain’, People and Places: Essays in honour of Mick Aston, ed. Michael Costen (Oxford), pp. 53–60 Harrison, Mark, Anglo-Saxon Thegn, 449–1066 (Oxford, 1993) Heidrich, Ingrid, Einführung in die Geschichte des europäischen Mittelalters (Bad Münstereifel, 2003) [‘Der keltische und angelsächsische Norden’, in sect. 6, and ‘Die angelsächsischen Könige und der skandinavische Norden’, in sect. 10; also esp. in sects. 7–8 and 11] Higham, Nick, ‘Britons in Anglo-Saxon England: an Introduction’, Britons in AngloSaxon England, ed. Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 1–15 Hills, Catherine, see sect. 9a [second entry; archaeol. evidence and historians] Holman, Katherine, The Northern Conquest: Vikings in Britain and Ireland (Oxford) Hudson, John, ed., Historia Ecclesie Abbendonensis (‘The History of the Church of Abingdon’), Volume I, Oxford Med. Texts (Oxford) [‘Anglo-Saxon Charters’, appendix; vol. II publ. previously, in 2002] Jones, Graham, Saints in the Landscape (Stroud) [esp. for cults of Oswald, Cuthbert et al.] Keefer, Sarah Larratt, ‘A Matter of Style: Clerical Vestments in the Anglo-Saxon Church’, Med. Clothing and Textiles 3, 13–39 [esp. for evidence in pontificals and manuscript art] Kisbye, Torben, see sect. 2b [Danes in AS society] Klinck, Anne L., see sect. 3cii, with ‘laws’ [wives and widows] Kroebel, Christiane, ‘A Hypothesis on the Origins of St Oswald’s Church and Lythe Parish, 650–1100’, Trans. of the Scarborough Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. 40, 6–14 Kruse, Susan E., ‘Trade and Exchange Across Frontiers’, Silver Economy in the Viking Age, ed. James Graham-Campbell and Gareth Williams, pp. 163–76 [includes AS] Lavelle, Ryan, Royal Estates in Anglo-Saxon Wessex: Land, Politics and Family Strategies, BAR Brit. Ser. 439 (Oxford) ‘The King’s Wife and Family Property Strategies: Late Anglo-Saxon Wessex, 871–1066’, ANS 29, 84–99 Lendinara, Patrizia, Loredana Lazzari and Maria Amalia D’Aronco, ed., Form and Content of Instruction in Anglo-Saxon England in the light of Contemporary Manuscript Evidence: Papers Presented at the International Conference, Udine, 6–8 April 2006, Textes et études du Moyen Âge 39 (Turnhout) Loyn, Henry, ‘Anglo-Saxon England’, A Century of British Medieval Studies, ed. Alan Deyermond [see sect. 3a], pp. 7–26 McGrail, Seán, see sect. 9a [ships] Matthews, Stephen, The Road to Rome: Travel and Travellers between England and Italy in the Anglo-Saxon Centuries, BAR International Ser. 1680 (Oxford)

309

Bibliography for 2007 Metcalf, D. M., ‘Regions around the North Sea with a Monetised Economy in the Pre-Viking and Viking Ages’, Silver Economy in the Viking Age, ed. James GrahamCampbell and Gareth Williams, pp. 1–11 Muirden, James, ‘Crooked Churches and Saintly Sunrises’, Church Archaeol. 7–9 (2006 for 2003–5), 33–43 [includes support for hypothesis that churches were built to face the sunrise on the day of their patronal festival] Nelson, Janet L., Courts, Elites and Gendered Power in the Early Middle Ages: Charlemagne and Others, Collected Stud. Ser. 878 (Aldershot) [repr. papers, with one new essay] ‘Peers in the Early Middle Ages’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power, item VI, 27–46 [esp. for Alfred and Æthelstan; also on Alcuin, repr. of stud. publ. in 2001] ‘The Wary Widow’, Nelson, Courts, Elites and Gendered Power, item II, 82–113 [esp. on AS wills; repr. of stud. publ. in 1995] Nightingale, Pamela, ‘Communication through Capital and Trade: Money and the Rise of a Market Economy in Medieval Europe’, Nightingale, Trade, Money and Power in Medieval England [see sect. 6c], item I, 367–89 [esp. in sect. 3; repr. of stud. publ. in 2002] Padel, O. J., see sect. 8 [AS conquest of Devon and Cornwall] Pelteret, David A. E., ‘The Manumissions in the Durham Liber vitae’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, I, 66–72 [esp. on Cameron item B.16.8.3.1 = Rec 8.3.1] Pratt, Simon, see sect. 9cii [town defences at Canterbury; also on Lyminge] Pryor, Francis, Britain in the Middle Ages: an Archaeological History (London, 2006) [‘On Britons, Saxons and Vikings (650–1066)’, pt. 1] Rabin, Andrew, see sect. 3cii, with ‘laws’ [role of advocate in law] Redmond, Angela Z., see sect. 9ev [two entries; Scandinavian settlement in the North; esp. on burials, legal issues and place-names] Reynolds, Andrew, ‘From pagus to Parish: Territory and Settlement in the Avebury Region from the Late Roman Period to the Domesday Survey’, The Avebury Landscape, ed. Graham Brown et al. [see sect. 9bii], pp. 164–80 [evidence for the early med. period is taken from charters and from Domesday Book] Reynolds, Andrew, and Alex Langlands, see sect. 9cii [Wansdyke] Rippon, Stephen, see sect. 9a [esp. on Orwell–Gipping–Lark line as cultural boundary in AS England] Roberts, Brian K., ‘“Between the brine and the high ground”: the Roots of Northumbria’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Robert Colls, pp. 12–32 Rollason, David, ‘Northumbria: a Failed European Kingdom’, Northumbria: History and Identity, ed. Robert Colls, pp. 1–11 Rollason, David, and Lynda Rollason, ed., see sect. 5a [Durham Liber vitae] Rosenwein, Barbara H., A Short History of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (Peterborough, Ont., 2004) [esp. in chs. 1–4; rev. of work publ. in 2002] Scrase, Tony, Somerset Towns: Changing Fortunes 800–1800 (Stroud, 2005) [in ch. 1] Screen, Elina, see sect. 7 [law and numismatics] Skaaning, Poul, Vikingestormen: togter mod Vesteuropa, 793–937 (Viborg, 2006) [‘Angrebene på England’ and ‘Vikingernes engelske nedtur forsættur’, sects. 14 and 28]

310

Bibliography for 2007 Sowerby, Richard, ‘Hengest and Horsa: the Manipulation of History and Myth from the adventus Saxonum to Historia Brittonum’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 1–19 Sparks, Margaret, ‘Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury’, Canterbury Cathedral Chronicle 101, 46–8 Sprague, Martina, Norse Warfare: the Unconventional Battle Strategies of the Ancient Vikings (New York) [‘Knut the Great, 995–1035’, ch. 14; also esp. in chs. 13 and 15, and, for Alfred et al., in chs. 5–7] Story, Jo, see sect 4bii [Bede, Cuthbert and Northumbria] Stottlemyer, Ronald, ‘A Study-Abroad Course in Anglo-Saxon Culture: On-Site Experiential Learning’, Stud. in Med. and Renaissance Teaching 14.2, 107–16 Titford, Cha[rle]s F., ‘Saxon Settlements South of the Thames’, London Archaeologist 1.13 (1971), 296–7 Twigg, George, ‘Saltmaking at Higher and Lower Dirtwich’, Cheshire Hist. 47, 4–21 [esp. at pp. 4–8] Van Arsdall, Anne, see sect. 3cii, with ‘medical texts’ [substantial discussion of AS medicine] Wareham, Andrew, ‘Alliance and Unification Strategies in the libri vitae’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, III, 13–18 Watkins, C. S., see sect. 3a [supernatural in hist.] Weston, Lisa M. C., ‘The Saintly Female Body and the Landscape of Foundation in Anglo-Saxon Barking’, Med. Feminist Forum 43.2, 12–25 [esp. in Bede, Historia ecclesiastica, and in later diplomatic] Wilkinson, Philip, England’s Abbeys: Monastic Buildings and Culture (Swindon, 2006) [‘The First British Monasteries’ and ‘Decline and Revival’, in sect. 2] Williams, Gareth, ‘Kingship, Christianity and Coinage: Monetary and Political Perspectives on Silver Economy in the Viking Age’, Silver Economy in the Viking Age, ed. James Graham-Campbell and Williams, pp. 177–214 [esp. for the Danelaw] Winterbottom, M., and R. M. Thomson, ed., William of Malmesbury, ‘Gesta pontificum Anglorum’ (‘The History of the English Bishops’), 2 vols., OMT (Oxford) [comprising Text and Translation, ed. Winterbottom (with contributions by Thomson), vol. 1, and Commentary, by Thomson (with contributions by Winterbottom), vol. 2] Wiseman, Howard M., ‘The Historicity and Historiography of Arthur: a Critical Review of King Arthur: Myth-Making and History, by N. Higham, and The Reign of Arthur: from History to Legend, by C. Gidlow’, Heroic Age 10 [online; esp. for Gildas and Historia Brittonum, sects. 2 and 3] Wormald, Patrick, ‘Pre-Modern “State” and “Nation”: Definite or Indefinite?’, Staat im frühen Mittelalter, ed. Stuart Airlie et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 179–89 b. c. 400–c. 900 Aaij, Michel, ‘Continental Business’, Heroic Age 10 [online; rev. article treating D. Otten, Lebuïnus, een gedreven missionaris (2006), and (esp. on influence of AS missions) H. R. Drobner, Der heilige Pankratius. Leben, Legende and Verehrung, 2nd ed. (2005)] see also sect. 4bi, with ‘Boniface’ [circle and legacy of Boniface]

311

Bibliography for 2007 Airlie, Stuart, ‘The Aristocracy in the Service of the State in the Carolingian Period’, Staat im frühen Mittelalter, ed. Airlie et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 93–111 [includes AS] Basset, Steven, ‘Divide and Rule? The Military Infrastructure of Eighth- and NinthCentury Mercia’, EME 15, 53–85 Bradley, Ian, The Celtic Way (London, 1993) [esp. on missions; also for Bede et al.] Breeze, Andrew C., see sects. 4bii [battle of Hefenfeld] and 8 [Britons and Anglo-Saxons in Wilts.] Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Continental Mission and the Transfer of Encyclopaedic Knowledge’, Foundations of Learning, ed. Bremmer and Kees Dekker [see sect. 3a], pp. 19–50 Brookes, Stuart, see sect. 9a [Kent] Coates, Richard, see sect. 2b [ling. evidence for Britons in AS England] Downham, Clare, see sect. 6c [Viking conquest of York and aftermath] Dumville, David N., ‘Gaelic and Other Celtic Names in the Ninth-Century “Northumbrian Liber vitae”: Some Issues and Implications’, Dumville, Celtic Essays [see sect. 6a], II, 91–108 [Durham Liber vitae, Gneuss no. 327; rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2006] Feller, Laurent, Église et société en occident du début du VIIe au milieu du XIe siècle (Paris, 2004) [‘La conversion de’Angleterre au VIIe siècle’, in ch. 2; and ‘La Frise et les AngloSaxons’ and L’époque de Boniface’, in ch. 4] Gautier, Alban, see sect. 9a [places for social interaction] Giot, Pierre-Roland, Philippe Guigon and Bernard Merdrignac, The British Settlement of Brittany: the First Bretons in Armorica (Stroud, 2003) [early AS links, esp. in chs. 5–6; also esp. on Gildas et al.; trans. of French-lang. work, thus far unpubl.] Gretsch, Mechthild, see sect. 4a [Æthelthryth et al.] Halsall, Guy, Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West, 376–568, Cambridge Med. Textbooks (Cambridge) [‘Change around the North Sea and the Anglo-Saxon Migration’, in ch. 12; also esp. on Gildas, and on Æthelberht] Higham, Nick, ‘Historical Narrative as Cultural Politics: Rome, “British-ness” and “English-ness”’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Higham, pp. 68–79 [esp. for Gildas et al.] Higham, Nick, ed., Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, Publ. of the Manchester Centre for AS Stud. 7 (Woodbridge) Hines, John, see sect. 4bii [seventh- and eighth-century background] Hough, Carole, see sect. 3cii, with ‘laws’ [women and law in seventh century] Innes, Matthew, An Introduction to Early Medieval Western Europe, 300–900: the Sword, the Plough and the Book (London) [‘Britain and Ireland: Kings and Peoples’, ch. 8] Krüger, Kristina, Orden und Klöster. 2000 Jahre christliche Kunst und Kultur, ed. Rolf Toman (Königswinter) [‘Die angelsächsische Mission’, in ch. 2] Lambkin, Brian, ‘“Emigrants” and “Exiles”: Migration in the Early Irish and Scottish Church’, Innes Rev. 58, 133–55 [esp. on one Berichter, putative AS ecclesiastic in seventh-century Ireland] Lebecq, Stéphane, see sect. 3bii [seventh-century AS culture, esp. at Yeavering] Lobrichon, Guy, see sect. 5d [Codex Amiatinus and ecclesiastical reform]

312

Bibliography for 2007 Loveluck, Christopher, see sect. 9dv [estate organization in the North down to c. 900] Nickel, Helmut, ‘About the Saxon Rebellion and the Massacre at Amesbury’, Arthuriana 16.1 (2006), 65–70 [esp. for Gildas and Historia Brittonum] Orchard, Andy, see sect. 4biii [Offa] Otten, Dirk, see sect. 11 [Lebuinus and AS missions] Parri, Brynach, ‘Fferig: the Lost Kingdom’, Brycheiniog 38 (2006), 23–34 [esp. for relevance to hist. of the Magonsætan] Pratt, David, see sect. 3cii, with ‘Alfred (and circle)’ [political thought of Alfred] Randers-Pehrson, Justine Davis, Barbarians and Romans: the Birth Struggle of Europe, AD 400–700 (Norman, OK, 1983) [‘The Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy and the City of God’, ch. 14] Ryan, Martin, ‘“Ad sedem episcopalem reddantur”: Bishops, Monks and Monasteries in the Diocese of Worcester in the Eighth Century’, Stud. in Church Hist. 43, 114–29 Schieffer, Rudolf, ‘Karl der Grosse und die Einsetzung der Bischöfe im Frankenreich’, DAEM 63, 451–67 [esp. for Willehad, and on missions] Semple, Sarah, see sect. 8 [diminishing use of pagan sites in early AS period] Spiegel, Flora, ‘The tabernacula of Gregory the Great and the Conversion of AngloSaxon England’, ASE 36, 1–13 [cites archaeol. evidence for early AS construction of small huts (or tabernacula), esp. at Yeavering; also for Bede] Steuer, Heiko, ‘Archäologische Quellen zur Religion und Kult der Sachsen vor und während der Christianisierung’, Bonifatius, ed. Franz J. Felten et al. [see sect. 4bi, with ‘Boniface’], pp. 83–110 [missions] Tyler, Damian J., ‘Early Mercia and the Britons’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 91–101 White, Roger, Britannia Prima: Britain’s Last Roman Province (Stroud) [esp. in chs. 7–9; includes extensive discussion of Gildas, in ch. 9] Woolf, Alex, ‘Apartheid and Economics in Anglo-Saxon England’, Britons in AngloSaxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 115–29 c. c. 900–c. 1100 Astill, Grenville, ‘Community, Identity and the Later Anglo-Saxon Town: the Case of Southern England’, People and Space in the Middle Ages, 300–1300, ed. Wendy Davies et al. (Turnhout, 2006), pp. 233–54 Bailey, Keith, ‘Slavery in the London Area’, Trans. of the London and Middlesex Archaeol. Soc. 57 (2007 for 2006), 69–82 [includes evidence from Domesday Book] ‘Buckinghamshire Detached’, Records of Buckinghamshire 47.1, 119–32 [concerns former detached portions of parishes: much of the evidence comes from Domesday Book] Barber, Brian, ‘Doncaster and the Church of St George in the Eleventh Century’, Yorkshire Archaeol. Jnl 79, 326–8 [argues that Doncaster was a significant settlement at the time of Domesday Book, and that its church was a pre-Conquest foundation] Barrow, Julia, ‘Demonstrative Behaviour and Political Communication in Later AngloSaxon England’, ASE 36, 127–50 [esp. on hagiography by Byrhtferth and Wulfstan of Winchester; also for Asser and Encomium Emmae reginae, and for Chronicle]

313

Bibliography for 2007 Bassett, Steven, ‘Boundaries of Knowledge: Mapping the Land Units of Late AngloSaxon and Norman England’, People and Space in the Middle Ages, 300–1300, ed. Wendy Davies et al. (Turnhout, 2006), pp. 115–42 Baxter, Stephen, The Earls of Mercia: Lordship and Power in Late Anglo-Saxon England, Oxford Hist. Monographs (Oxford) Bergs, Alexander, and Janne Skaffari, ed., see sect. 3cii, with ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’ [‘Peterborough Chronicle’] Biddle, Martin, ‘Edgar’s Lost Grant of Exton, Hampshire’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith [see sect. 9a], pp. 75–9 [account of a charter not seen since the eighteenth century, S 1815] Bishop, Chris, see sect. 3a [tenth-century Wessex] Bolton, Timothy, ‘Ælfgifu of Northampton: Cnut the Great’s Other Woman’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 247–68 ‘Was the Family of Earl Siward and Earl Waltheof a Lost Line of the Ancestors of the Danish Royal Family?’, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 41–71 Boyle, Elizabeth, ‘A Welsh Record of an Anglo-Saxon Political Mutilation’, ASE 35 (2006), 245–9 [blindings also recorded in Chronicle, s.a. 1006] Breeze, A. C., ‘Edgar at Chester in 973: a Breton Link?’, NH 44.1, 153–7 Bremmer, Rolf H., Jr, ‘The Gesta Herewardi: Transforming an Anglo-Saxon into an Englishman’, People and Texts, ed. Thea Summerfield and Keith Busby (Amsterdam), pp. 29–42 Brown, Graham, ‘Monastic Settlement and Land-Use of the Marlborough Downs’, The Avebury Landscape, ed. Graham Brown et al. [see sect. 9bii], pp. 181–90 [includes a pre-Conquest sect. drawing on evidence from Domesday Book] Costen, Michael, ‘Anonymous Thegns in the Landscape of Wessex, 900–1066’, People and Places: Essays in honour of Mick Aston, ed. Costen (Oxford), pp. 61–75 Crowley, Joseph P., see sect. 4c, with ‘prayerbook’ [monastic reform in Worcester] Dennis, Chris, ‘Image-Making for the Conquerors of England: Cnut and William I’, Aspects of Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, ed. Brenda Bolton and Christine Meek (Turnhout), pp. 33–52 Downhill, Clare, Viking Kings of Britain and Ireland: the Dynasty of Ívarr to AD 1014 (Edinburgh) [includes chs. on ‘England: from the Conquest of York to the Battle of Brunanburh, 866–937’ and ‘England: from the Battle of Brunanburh to the Danish Conquest, 937–1013’] Dumville, David N., ‘A Pictish or Gaelic Ecclesiastic in Mercia?’, Dumville, Celtic Essays [see sect. 6a], II, 109–113 [Cynath, c. 899–930; rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2003] Evans, Christopher, ‘Saint Helen and Early Estates’, Trans. of the Scarborough Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. 34 (1999 for 1998), 25–35 [church dedications to St Helen in relation to Domesday landowners] Eyre, S. R., ‘Coxwoldshire’, Ryedale Historian 16 (1992–3), 13–20 [evidence for an administrative unit in Domesday Book] Fleming, Robin, ‘Acquiring, Flaunting and Destroying Silk in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, EME 15, 127–58

314

Bibliography for 2007 Fordham, M., ‘Peacekeeping and Order on the Anglo-Welsh Frontier in the Early Tenth Century’, Midland Hist. 32, 1–18 Garnett, George, Conquered England: Kingship, Succession and Tenure, 1066–1166 (Oxford) [esp. in chs. I and III] Gautier, Alban, ‘Palais, itinéraires et fêtes alimentaires des rois anglo-saxons aux Xe et XIe siècles’, Food and History 4.1 (2007 for 2006), 29–44 Giandrea, Mary Frances, Episcopal Culture in Late Anglo-Saxon England, AS Stud. 7 (Woodbridge) Harvey, B. F., ‘Monastic Pittances in the Middle Ages’, Food in Medieval England, ed. C. M. Woolgar et al. [see sect. 9biii], pp. 215–27 [covers period from c. 900] Keats-Rohan, K. S. B., ed., The Cartulary of the Abbey of Mont-Saint-Michel (Donington, 2006) [‘England, rulers of ’, ad indicem, esp. for Edward the Confessor; also for Emma-Ælgifu et al.] Keynes, Simon, ‘An Abbot, an Archbishop and the Viking Raids of 1006–7 and 1009– 12’, ASE 36, 151–220 [includes discussion of laws, diplomatic and coinage (esp. on Agnus Dei pennies of Æthelred); also esp. for writings of Ælfric and Wulfstan, and for Chronicle] Lavelle, Ryan, see sect. 6a [late AS Wessex] Lewis, C. P., ‘Welsh Territories and Welsh Identities in Late Anglo-Saxon England’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 130–43 ‘III The Central Middle Ages (900–1200)’, Ann. Bull. of Hist. Lit. 91, 13–34 [esp. at pp. 13–23] Licence, Tom, ‘Evidence of Recluses in Eleventh-Century England’, ASE 36, 221–34 [includes commentary on diplomatic (esp. in S 535), and on writings of Ælfric; also esp. for Goscelin] ‘The Norwich Narrative and the East Anglian Bishopric’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.2, 198–204 [on an eleventh-century dispute between the bishops of Norwich and the abbey of Bury St Edmunds] Marsden, John, Harald Hardrada: the Warrior’s Way (Stroud) [‘Stamford Bridge’, ch. IV] Matthews, S. J., ‘King Edgar, Wales and Chester: the Welsh Dimension in the Ceremony of 973’, NH 44.2, 9–26 Nightingale, Pamela, Trade, Money and Power in Medieval England, Collected Stud. Ser. 894 (Aldershot) [esp. in items I–VI] ‘The Evolution of Weight-Standards and the Creation of New Monetary and Commercial Links in Northern Europe from the Tenth Century to the Twelfth Century’, Nightingale, Trade, Money and Power in Medieval England, item IV, 192–210 [augmented repr. of stud. publ. in 1985] Nortier, Michel et al., ‘La conquête de l’Angleterre et ses consequences’, Annales de Normandie 56 (2006), 571–2 [pt. of Bibliographie normande for 2003] O’Keeffe, Katherine O’Brien, ‘Leaving Wilton: Gunhild and the Phantoms of Agency’, JEGP 106, 203–23 [letters of Anselm to Gunhild, sometime nun of Wilton] see also sect. 6d, with ‘Goscelin’ Paterson, Bridget, ‘Margaret: Saint and Politician?’, Hist. Scotland 4.5 (2004), 25–31 [St (and Queen) Margaret of Scotland, granddaughter of King Edmund Ironside]

315

Bibliography for 2007 Rex, Peter, Edgar, King of the English, 959–75 (Stroud) Robertson, Nicola, ‘The Benedictine Reform: Current and Future Scholarship’, Lit. Compass 3 (2006), 282–99 [online: DOI 10.1111/j.1741–4113.2006.00319.x] Stephenson, I. P., The Late Anglo-Saxon Army (Stroud) Tanner, Heather J., Families, Friends and Allies: Boulogne and Politics in Northern France and England, c. 879–1160, Northern World 6 (Leiden, 2004) [esp. in ch. 3, ‘The Eleventh-Century Counts’; also esp. on Bayeux ‘tapestry’] ten Harkel, Letty, ‘The Vikings and the Natives: Ethnic Identity in England and Normandy c. 1000 AD’, The Medieval Chronicle IV, ed. Erik Kooper (Amsterdam, 2006), pp. 177–90 [esp. in Chronicle] Thornton, David E., see sect. 6d, with ‘Domesday Book’ [eleventh-century AngloWelsh relations] Tsurushima, Hirokazu, ‘The Eleventh Century in England through Fish-Eyes: Salmon, Herring, Oysters and 1066’, ANS 29, 193–213 Vanderputten, Steven, ‘Canterbury and Flanders in the Late Tenth Century’, ASE 35 (2006), 219–44 [esp. on four letters preserved in Gneuss nos. 368 and 383; includes ed.] d. Classified subjects A N NA L E S C A M B R I A E

Dumville, David. N., see sect. 6a [esp. on Easter controversy] BAY E U X ‘ TA P E S T RY ’ Ashe, Laura, Fiction and History in England, 1066–1200, Cambridge Stud. in Med. Lit. 68 (Cambridge) [‘The Bayeux Tapestry: Performative Text’, in ch. 1; also esp. for Chronicle] Bloch, R. Howard, A Needle in the Right Hand of God: the Norman Conquest of 1066 and the Making of the Bayeux Tapestry (New York, 2006) Coatsworth, Elizabeth, see sect. 9ji Crafton, John Micheal, The Political Artistry of the Bayeux Tapestry: a Visual Epic of Norman Imperial Ambitions (Lampeter) Foys, Martin K., see sect. 3a Hagen, Rose-Marie, and Rainer Hagen, What Great Paintings Say, Volume 1, trans. Iain Galbraith, Karen Williams and Michael Hulse (Cologne, 2005) [sect. 3; subtitle on cover: From the Bayeaux Tapestry to Diego Rivera] Lewis, Michael John, ‘Identity and Status in the Bayeux Tapestry: the Iconographic and Artefactual Evidence’, ANS 29, 100–20 see also ect. 9ji Owen-Crocker, Gale R., ‘The Bayeux Tapestry: the Voice from the Border’, Signs on the Edge, ed. Sarah Larratt Keefer and Rolf H. Bremmer, Jr [see sect. 5a], pp. 235– 58 ‘Dress and Authority in the Bayeux Tapestry’, Aspects of Power and Authority in the Middle Ages, ed. Brenda Bolton and Christine Meek (Turnhout), pp. 53–72 ‘The Interpretation of Gesture in the Bayeux Tapestry’, ANS 29, 145–78

316

Bibliography for 2007 Spear, David S., ‘Recent Publications on the Bayeux Tapestry’, Annales de Normandie 57, 172–8 DOMESDAY BOOK

Bailey, Keith, see sect. 6c [two items; London area and Bucks.] Brown, Graham, see sect. 6c [Marlborough Downs] Close-Brooks, Joanna, see sect. 8 [on place-name Utefel] Evans, Christopher, see sects. 6c [church dedications] and 8 [Domesday wics] Eyre, S. R., see sect. 6c [‘Coxwoldshire’] Reynolds, Andrew, see sect. 6a [Avebury region] Roffe, David, Decoding Domesday (Woodbridge) Thornton, David E., ‘Some Welshmen in Domesday Book and Beyond: Aspects of Anglo-Welsh Relations in the Eleventh Century’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 144–64 Weddell, Peter, and John Allan, see sect. 9cii [Devon] G I L DA S

Deuffic, Jean-Luc, ‘L’exode des corps saints hors de Bretagne: des reliques au culte liturgique’, Pecia. Ressources en médiévistique (Saint-Denis) 8–11 (2005), pp. 355–423 [esp. in sect. 1] Dumville, David N., ‘Post-Colonial Gildas: a First Essay’, Dumville, Celtic Essays [see sect. 6a], I, 1–15 [rev. reissue of stud. publ. in 2006] Higham, Nick, see sect. 6b Howlett, David, ‘Continuities from Roman Britain’, Pagans and Christians, ed. Lauren Gilmour [see sect. 9a], pp. 175–88 [also for Bede et al., and on knowledge of Latin in post-Roman Britain] McKee, Ian, ‘Gildas: Lessons from History’, CMCS 51 (2006), 1–36 White, Roger, see sect. 6b Wiseman, Howard M., see sect. 6a GODODDIN

Clarkson, Tim, ‘The Gododdin Revisited’, Heroic Age 2 (1999) [online; rev. article treating J. Koch, The ‘Gododdin’ of Aneirin: Text and Context from Dark-Age North Britain (Cardiff, 1997); includes AS] GOSCELIN

Licence, Tom, see sect. 6c [treatment of recluses] O’Keeffe, Katherine O’Brien, ‘Goscelin and the Consecration of Eve’, ASE 35 (2006), 251–70 [also for ‘List of Surviving Anglo-Saxon Liturgical Manuscripts with Rituals of Consecration’, appendix, stressing pontificals] HISTORIA BRIT TONUM

Breeze, Andrew, ‘An Emendation to Ruoihm “Thanet” in the Historia Brittonum’, Studia Celtica 41, 234–7 [includes discussion of OE pseudo-etymology of Thanet; also for Asser]

317

Bibliography for 2007 Coumert, Magali, Origines des peuples. Les récits du haut Moyen Âge occidental (550–850), Collection des études augustiniennes, série Moyen Âge et temps modernes 42 (Paris) [chs. IV.3–4; also esp. for Bede, ch. IV.2] Gautier, Alban, Arthur (Paris) [ad indicem; also for Gildas, Bede et al.] Green, Thomas, Concepts of Arthur (Stroud) [ad indicem; also for Gildas, Bede et al.] Jaski, Bart, ‘Aeneas and Fénius: a Classical Case of Mistaken Identity’, Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Richard Corradini et al. (Vienna, 2006), pp. 17–33 [esp. in sect. 6] Nagy, Joseph Falaky, ‘Hearing and Hunting in Medieval Celtic Tradition’, Myth in Early Northwest Europe, ed. Stephen O. Glosecki [see sect. 3a], pp. 121–51 [sects. 1 and 3] Padel, O. J., ‘Evidence for Oral Tales in Medieval Cornwall’, Studia Celtica 40 (2006), 127–53 [esp. on mirabilia-literature, in sect. 2] ‘Geoffrey of Monmouth and the Development of the Merlin Legend’, CMCS 51 (2006), 37–65 [also on Gododdin] Sowerby, Richard, see sect. 6a [AS migrations] Wiseman, Howard M., see sect. 6a

7. NUMISMATICS [Anon.], see sect. 9cii [fifth entry; silver penny of Alfred’s first coinage] Archibald, Marion M., ‘The Evidence of Pecking on Coins from the Cuerdale Hoard: Summary Version’, Silver Economy in the Viking Age, ed. James Graham-Campbell and Gareth Williams, pp. 49–53 [hoard of Viking silver from Lancs.] ‘Pseudo-Kufic Base-Metal Coin Brooches from England’, ‘Magister monetae’: Studies in honour of Jørgen Steen Jensen, ed. Michael Andersen, Helle W. Horsnæs and Jens Christian Moesgaard, PNM Stud. in Archaeol. and Hist. 13 (Copenhagen), pp. 127–38 [publ. of Nationalmuseet (Copenhagen)] Archibald, Marion, and Valerie Fenwick, ‘Archaeology: Marion Archibald and Valerie Fenwick Discuss King Albert’s Penny’, Brit. Museum Mag. 13 (1993), 19 [first known silver penny of Albert, king of East Anglia] Ayre, Julian, and Robin Brown, see sect. 9cii [three Alfredian coins] Bean, Simon C., ‘Coins and Tokens, Pre-Roman to Post-Medieval’, David Griffiths et al., Meols [see sect. 9h], pp. 295–350 [includes AS] Blackburn, Mark, ‘Gold in England During the “Age of Silver” (Eighth–Eleventh Centuries)’, Silver Economy in the Viking Age, ed. James Graham-Campbell and Gareth Williams, pp. 55–98 ‘Presidential Address 2006: Currency under the Vikings. Part 3: Ireland, Wales, Isle of Man and Scotland in the Ninth and Tenth Centuries’, BNJ 77, 119–49 Bornholdt Collins, Kristin, and Elina Screen, ‘New Moneyers in Æthelred II’s Benediction Hand Type’, BNJ 77, 270–6 Cardon, Thibault, Jens Christian Moesgaard, Richard Prot and Philipps Schiesser, ‘The First Recorded Viking Hoard in Normandy’, NCirc 115, 308–9 [Saint-Pierre-des-

318

Bibliography for 2007 Fleurs (deposited c. 895), twelve coins including nine Danelaw imitations of Alfred’s Horizontal type, and nine fragments of ingots] Carroll, Jayne, and David N. Parsons, see sect. 8 [names of AS mints] Clarke, William N., David Symons, ‘The Mint of Aylesbury’, BNJ 77, 173–89 [Æthelred II to Edward the Confessor] Colman, Fran, Mark Blackburn and Kenneth Jonsson, Royal Coin Cabinet, Stockholm, Part V: Anglo-Saxon Coins, Edward the Confessor and Harold II, 1042–1066, with a Supplement to Part VI (Anglo-Norman Pennies), SCBI 54 (Oxford) [the main pt. is by Colman, the suppl. by Blackburn and Jonsson] Cooper, Amy, see sect. 9h [AS and Anglo-Scandinavian coins in Harrogate hoard] Coupland, Simon, Carolingian Coinage and the Vikings: Studies on Power and Trade in the Ninth Century, Collected Stud. Ser. 847 (Aldershot) [repr. papers; ‘Addenda and Corrigenda’, sect. xvi] ‘Carolingian Coinage and Scandinavian Silver’, Coupland, Carolingian Coinage and the Vikings, item XV, 11–31, with ‘Addenda and Corrigenda’, p. 7 [includes AS; augmented repr. of stud. publ. in 1985–6] ‘Charlemagne’s Coinage: Ideology and Economy’, Coupland, Carolingian Coinage and the Vikings, item I, 211–29, with appended ‘Bibliography’, pp. 1–3, and ‘Addenda and Corrigenda’, p. 1 [three AS pennies in Ilanz and Imphy hoards; augmented repr. of stud. publ. in 2005] ‘Trading Places: Quentovic and Dorestad Reassessed’, Coupland, Carolingian Coinage and the Vikings, item XIII, 209–32, with ‘Addenda and Corrigenda’, pp. 6–7 [AS exports, in sect. 3; augmented repr. of stud. publ. in 2002] Davies, John A., and Martin Allen, see sect. 9ciii, with Emery, Phillip A. [Norwich Greyfriars] Gooch, Megan, ‘Notes on the Swordless St Peter Coinage’, NCirc 115, 208 ‘A Seventeenth Agnus Dei Penny of Æthelred II’, NCirc 115, 308 Graham-Campbell, James, ‘The Lost Coin of Æthelred II from Rushen Abbey’, Proc. of the Isle of Man Nat. Hist. and Ant. Soc. 11.4 (2007 for 2003–5), 579–82 Graham-Campbell, James, and Gareth Williams, ed., see sect. 6a Harris, Anthea, see sect. 9h [finds of Byzantine coins imported to AS England] Hatz, Gert, and Gert Rispling, ‘Münzfunde aus Oldenburg in Holstein (1981–1986)’, Offa 52 (1997 for 1995), 153–62 [includes discussion of a penny of King Æthelred II] Hinds, Katie, see sect. 9h [penny of Offa] Jonsson, Kenneth, ‘Does the CNVT REX SW Coin Legend Show that Cnut the Great Ruled at Sigtuna?’, Cultural Interaction between East and West, ed. Ulf Fransson et al. [see sect. 9a], pp. 272–5 [includes discussion of AS influence] Keynes, Simon, see sect. 6c [Agnus Dei pennies of Æthelred] Lamb, Sara L., ‘Anglo-Saxon Silver Pennies’, The Recorder (Worcester, Worcs. Archaeol. Soc.) 55 (1997), 5 [acquisition by Worcs. County Museum of fourteen pennies found near Severn Stoke] Lessen, Marvin, ‘A Parcel of Mid-Eleventh Century Saxon Coins, Mostly of the York Mint’, NCirc 115, 310 [267 coins of Edward the Confessor’s Sovereign/Eagles type to Harold II]

319

Bibliography for 2007 Lyons, Adrian W., and William A. Mackay, ‘The Coinage of Æthelred I (865–871)’, NCirc 115, 71–118 McDonald, Catherine, see sect. 9h [find of silver sceat in Essex] Mays, S., et al., see sect. 9dv [finds of coins at Wharram Percy] Metcalf, D. M., ‘Runic Sceattas Reading epa, Types R1 and R2’, BNJ 77, 49–70 see also sect. 6a [early med. monetized economies] Naylor, John, ‘The Circulation of Early-Medieval European Coinage: a Case Study from Yorkshire, c. 650–c. 867’, MA 51, 41–61 Newman, J., F. Minter and M. Allen, ‘“Mildenhall Area, Suffolk, 2004”, in “Coin Hoards 2007”’, NChron 167, 264 [three pennies of Edmund of East Anglia, deposited in the 860s] Screen, Elina, ‘Anglo-Saxon Law and Numismatics: a Reassessment in the Light of Patrick Wormald’s The Making of English Law’, BNJ 77, 150–72 Steen Jensen, Jørgen, ed., see sect. 11 [single finds] Stewartby (Lord), and D. M. Metcalf, ‘The Bust of Christ on an Early Anglo-Saxon Coin’, NChron 167, 179–82 [on a sceat of Series Q] Taylor, Ruth, ‘Check List of Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Coins from Worcestershire in Birmingham City Museum and Art Gallery’, Worcestershire Archaeol. and Local Hist. Newsletter 17 (1975–6), 3–4 Von Heijne, Cecilia, Särpräglat. Vikingatida och tidigmedeltida myntfynd från Danmark, Skåne, Blekinge och Halland (ca. 800–1130), Stockholm Stud. in Archaeol. 31 (Stockholm, 2004) [esp. on AS coins found in southern Scandinavia; includes Eng. summary] White, A. J., ‘Anglo-Saxon Coins from Lancaster’, Contrebis 11 (1984), 46–9 Williams, Gareth, ‘Coin of King Eadbald of Kent’, Brit. Museum Mag. 34 (1999), 34–5 ‘Paid in Burnt Silver: Wealth and Power in the Viking Age’, Brit. Museum Mag. 37 (2000), 27–9 [includes discussion of coins in relation to the Vikings, esp. in AS England] ‘The Gold Coinage of Seventh-Century Northumbria Revisited’, NCirc 115, 6–8 see also sect. 6a [esp. on Danelaw] Williams, G[areth], and R. Kelleher, ‘“Bamburgh, Northumberland, 2004”, in “Coin Hoards 2007”’, NChron 167, 264 [131 Northumbrian stycas, deposited in the early 850s]

8. ONOMASTICS Andersson, Thorsten, ‘De Germanska -ingi- Namnen’, Namn och Bygd 94 (2006), 5–13 Ashwin, Trevor, and Alan Davison, ed., see sect. 6a [place-names in Norf.] Breeze, Andrew, ‘Britons and Saxons at Chittoe and Minety’, Wiltshire Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag. 100, 199–202 see also sect. 6d, with ‘Historia Brittonum’ [Ruoihm “Thanet” in Historia Brittonum] Briggs, Keith, ‘Seven Wells’, JEPNS 39, 7–44 Brooke, Daphne, see sect. 9dv, with Lowe, Christopher [place-names of southern Annandale]

320

Bibliography for 2007 Carletti, Carlo, ‘Testimonianze scritte del pellegrinaggio altomedievale in Occidente, Roma e l’Italia’, ‘Los muros tienen la palabra’. Materiales para una historia de los ‘graffiti’, ed. F. M. Gimeno Blay and Marià Luz Mandingorra Llavata (Valencia, 1997), pp. 73–102 [inscriptions at Gargano, sect. 10] Carroll, Jayne, and David N. Parsons, Anglo-Saxon Mint Names, I: Axbridge – Hythe, EPNS extra ser. 2 (Nottingham) Cavill, Paul, ‘Coming Back to Dingesmere’, Language Contact in the Place-Names of Britain and Ireland, ed. Cavill and George Broderick, pp. 27–41 [esp. on Battle of Brunanburh] Cavill, Paul, and George Broderick, ed., Language Contact in the Place-Names of Britain and Ireland, EPNS extra ser. 3 (Nottingham) Close-Brooks, Joanna, ‘Utefel: a Domesday Name Located?’, Hampshire Field Club and Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 48, 25–6 [suggestion that the name may join ut ‘outer’ and an element Evel, possibly referring to Everton] Coates, Richard, ‘Verulamium, the Romano-British Name of St Albans’, Studia Celtica 39 (2006 for 2005), 169–76 [includes OE reflex] ‘Invisible Britons: the View from Toponomastics’, Language Contact in the Place-Names of Britain and Ireland, ed. Paul Cavill and George Broderick, pp. 43–55 ‘Azure Mouse, Bloater Hill, Goose Puddings and One Land Called the Cow: Continuity and Conundrums in Lincolnshire Minor Names’, JEPNS 39, 73–143 ‘The Blorenge, near Abergavenny, Monmouthshire/Gwent’, JEPNS 39, 157–8 ‘Bordastubble, a Standing-Stone in Unst, Shetland, and Some Implications for English Toponymy’, Jnl of Scottish Name Stud. 1, 137–9 ‘Fockynggroue in Bristol’, N&Q 54, 373–6 ‘Goldhwite: an Unrecognized Middle English Bird-Name?’, TPS 105, 188–91 [possible AS origin of place-name Goldhwitenest, attested in thirteenth-century document] ‘The Name Bedwyn’, Wiltshire Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag. 100, 198–9 [a Brittonic name attested first in AS sources] ‘Shoreditch and Car Dyke: Two Allusions to Romano-British Built Features in Later Names Containing OE dic, with Reflections on Variable Place-Name Structure’, Nomina 30, 23–33 ‘South-West English dumball, dumble, dunball, “pasture subject to (occasional) tidal flooding”’, JEPNS 39, 59–72 see also sects. 2ai [eagre ‘tidal surge in the river Trent’] and 2b [onomastic evidence for Britons in AS England] Crosby, Alan G., ed., Of Names and Places: Selected Writings of Mary Higham ([n.p.]) Downer, Shane, ‘Place Names and the Reconstruction of Woodland in North Worcestershire’, The Recorder (Worcester, Worcs. Archaeol. Soc.) 54 (1996), 12–13 ‘The Dating of Settlement’, The Recorder (Worcester, Worcs. Archaeol. Soc.) 55 (1997), 10–11 [esp. for treatment of place-names in north Worcs.] Drummond, Peter, ‘Southern Scottish Hill Generics: Testing the Gelling and Cole Hypothesis’, Nomina 30, 85–99 Dumville, David N., see sect. 6b [Celtic names in Durham Liber vitae] Evans, Christopher, ‘The Placename Element wick and the Carucate/Plough Ratio’,

321

Bibliography for 2007 Trans. of the Scarborough Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. 35 (2000 for 1999), 36–41 [includes proposed means of identifying those Domesday wics which are dairy-farms] Faith, Ros, ‘Worthys and Enclosures’, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 21 (2007 for 2006), 9–14 Fellows-Jensen, Gillian, ‘The Scandinavian Element gata outside the Urbanised Settlements of the Danelaw’, West over Sea, ed. Beverley Ballin Smith et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 445–59 ‘Some Thoughts on English Influence on Names in Man’, Language Contact in the Place-Names of Britain and Ireland, ed. Paul Cavill and George Broderick, pp. 97–110 ‘Nordic and English in East Anglia in the Viking Period’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 50–1, 93–108 [strong emphasis on place-name evidence] Fox, Bethany, ‘The P-Celtic Place-Names of North-East England and South-East Scotland’, Heroic Age 10 [contrasts with OE elements, esp. -ham and -ingaham] Griffith, F. M., and E. M. Wilkes, ‘The Land Named from the Sea? Coastal Archaeology and Place-Names of Bigbury Bay, Devon’, ArchJ 163 (2007 for 2006), 67–91 Harding, Stephen, ‘The Wirral carrs and holms’, JEPNS 39, 45–57 Higham, Nick, ed., see sect. 6b Hough, Carole, ‘Bibliography 2006’, JEPNS 39, 151–6 ‘Bibliography for 2006’, Nomina 30, 149–60 ‘Commonplace Place-Names’, Nomina 30, 101–20 see also sect. 2ai [semantic field of ‘hill’ in place-names] Insley, John, ‘The Old English and Scandinavian Personal Names of the Liber vitae to 1200’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, II, 9–12 Jones, Graham, see sect. 6a [saints in place-names] Jurasinski, Stefan, see sect. 3bii [names in Beowulf] Kristensson, Gillis, see sect. 2b [place-names in sk-] Lund, Niels, ‘Vikinger og stednavne, filologi og historie’, Nordboer i Danelagen. Den skandinaviske bosættelsestæthed i Danelagen med udgangspunkt i de sproglige vidnesbyrd, ed. Hans Bekker-Nielsen and Hans Frede Nielsen ([Odense], 1982), pp. 33–42 [concerns Eng. evidence] Magilton, John, ‘The Place-Name Midhurst and Other Minor Names’, Magilton and Spencer Thomas, Midhurst, Chichester District Archaeol. 1 (Chichester, 2001), pp. 137–9 [discussion of Midhurst, Sussex] Martín Díaz, María Auxiliadora, El dialecto de Kent a través del léxico toponímico de la baja Edad Media, Estudios y ensayos, Filología 13 (La Laguna, 2003) Owen-Crocker, Gale R., see sect. 3bii [names in Beowulf] Padel, O. J., ‘Place-Names and the Saxon Conquest of Devon and Cornwall’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 215–30 Potts, W. T. W., ‘Shires and Shireoaks in the Lancaster Region’, Contrebis 11 (1984), 32– 45 Preece, Pat, ‘Fields and Field Names in Some South Oxfordshire Thameside Parishes’, Oxfordshire Local Hist. 8.2, 22–9 Probert, Duncan, ‘Mapping Early Medieval Language Change in South-West England’,

322

Bibliography for 2007 Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 231–44 [extensive use of onomastic evidence] Redmond, Angela Z., see sect. 9ev [second entry; place-name evidence for Scandinavian settlement in the north] Rollason, David, and Lynda Rollason, ed., see sect. 5a Russell, Paul, ‘The Names of Celtic Origin’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, II, 5–8 Semple, Sarah, ‘Defining the OE hearg: a Preliminary Archaeological and Topographical Examination of hearg Place Names and Their Hinterlands’, EME 15, 364–85 [includes argument for diminishing cultic use of sites in early AS period] Springer, Matthias, ‘Zu den frühen Schicksalen des Sachsennamens’, Die Kunde 57 (2007 for 2006), 173–82 [hist. stud. of term Saxo(nes)] Staiti, Chiara, ‘Agilulf e altri. Il lupo nell’antroponimia germanica dei primi secoli’, Simbolismo animale e letteratura, ed. Dora Faraci [see sect. 3a], pp. 197–224 Thier, Katrin, see sect. 2ai [terms for wetlands] Wareham, Andrew, ‘The ordines of the Core’, The Durham ‘Liber vitae’, ed. David Rollason and Lynda Rollason, III, 7–12 Watts, Victor, The Place-Names of County Durham, I: Stockton Ward, EPNS 83 (Nottingham)

9. ARCHAEOLOGY a. General and miscellaneous [Anon.], ‘Excavation and Fieldwork in Wiltshire 2005’, Wiltshire Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag. 100, 232–8 [includes AS] ‘Interim Reports on Recent Work Carried out by the Canterbury Archaeological Trust’, AC 127, 321–32 [includes AS] Bennett, A., ed., ‘Archaeology in Essex 2004’, Essex Archaeol. and Hist. 36 (2007 for 2005), 147–65 [includes AS, esp. in discussion of an early cemetery at Rayleigh reported by M. Roy and T. Ennis] Brookes, Stuart, Economics and Social Change in Anglo-Saxon Kent AD 400–900: Landscapes, Communities and Exchange, BAR Brit. Ser. 431 (Oxford) Capelle, Torsten, ‘Hauszier frühmittelalterlicher Holzbauten’, Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005), 149–56 [of relevance to AS buildings; includes a house-shaped Gosforth hogback] Chapman, Andy, ‘Fieldwork Undertaken by Northamptonshire Archaeology’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 65–6 [includes AS, esp. in discussion of Ely] Chapman, Pat, ed., ‘Archaeology in Northamptonshire 2006’, Northamptonshire Archaeol. 34 (2006), 143–55 [includes AS] Christie, Neil, general ed., ‘Medieval Britain and Ireland in 2006’, ed. Märit Gaimster and Kieran O’Conor with Rory Sherlock, MA 51, 207–302 [includes Portable Antiquities Scheme report, compiled and ed. by Helen Geake]

323

Bibliography for 2007 Clough, T. H. McK., ‘Rutland History and Archaeology in 2004 and 2005’, Rutland Record 26 (2007 for 2006), 217–28 [archaeol. sect. includes AS] Dark, K. R., ‘Back to “The Dark Ages”? Terminology and Preconception in the Archaeology of Fifth- to Seventh-Century Britain’, Jnl of Celtic Stud. 4 (2004), 193– 200 Dickens, Alison, ‘Interesting Projects from Cambridgeshire Archaeological Unit’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 16–21 [includes AS, esp. in discussion of Ely] Driscoll, Stephen T., ‘Leslie Alcock (1925–2006)’, MA 51, 199–203 Dunn, F. I., ed., ‘Recent Work and Discoveries’, Norfolk Research Committee Newsletter and Bull. 11 (1973), 3–8 [includes a report (by Barbara Green) on the cemetery at Bergh Apton] Edwards, B. J. N., ‘Lancashire 450–1050 AD’, Contrebis 1.2 (1973), 12–14 Ellmers, Detlev, ‘Die ersten bildlichen Darstellungen zu Schiff fahrender Sachsen aus dem römischen Trier’, Die Kunde 28–9 (1977–8), 99–103, with plates 1–4 [Late Roman carvings of putatively Germanic ships] Fairclough, John, and Mike Hardy, Thornham and the Waveney Valley: an Historic Landscape Explored (King’s Lynn, 2004) [includes ch. on ‘Anglo-Saxons, Danes and Normans’] Fenton, Mercia, Eric Philpotts, Peter King and Leslie King, ‘The Kinver Edge Region: Interim Report of an Archaeological Survey’, Worcestershire Archaeol. and Local Hist. Newsletter 15 (1974–5), 19–27 [includes AS] Flatman, Joe, The Illuminated Ark: Interrogating Evidence from Manuscript Illuminations and Archaeological Remains for Medieval Vessels, BAR International Ser. 1616 (Oxford) [emphasis on archaeol. evidence for early med. ships] Fransson, Ulf, Marie Svedin, Sophie Bergerbrandt and Fedir Androshchuk, ed., Cultural Interaction between East and West: Archaeology, Artefacts and Human Contacts in Northern Europe, Stockholm Stud. in Archaeol. 44 (Stockholm) Gautier, Alban, ‘Avant le hall Anglo-Saxon: modèles insulaires et évolution des valeurs (Ve–VIe siècles)’, Hortus Artium Medievalium 13.2, 333–45 [the search for places of convivial sociability in England; in French, with brief Eng.-lang. abstract] Gdaniec, Kasia, ‘Fieldwork Projects in Cambridgeshire, 2000–2001’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 22–4 [a list of projects with explanations; includes AS] Geake, Helen, ed., see above, with Christie, Neil, general ed. [Portable Antiquities Scheme report] Gifford, Edwin, and Joyce Gifford, ‘The Sailing Characteristics of Saxon Ships’, Construction navale maritime et fluviale. Approches archéologique, historique et ethnologique. Actes du Septième Colloque international d’archéologie navale = Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Boat and Ship Archaeology, Ile Tatihou, Saint-Vaast-la-Hougue, 1994, publ. directed by Patrice Pomey et Eric Rieth, Archaeonautica 14 (Paris, 1999), pp. 177–84 Gilmour, Lauren, ed., Pagans and Christians: from Antiquity to the Middle Ages – Papers in honour of Martin Henig, presented on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, BAR International Ser. 1610 (Oxford)

324

Bibliography for 2007 Griffith, F. M., and E. M. Wilkes, see sect. 8 [coastal archaeol. in Devon] Griffiths, David,‘The Early Medieval Period’, Griffiths et al., Meols [see sect. 9h], pp. 399–406 [includes AS] Gurney, David, ed., ‘Excavations and Surveys in Norfolk in 2006’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.2, 261–73 [includes AS] Gurney, David, and Kenneth Penn, ed., ‘Excavations and Surveys in Norfolk in 2005’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.1 (2006), 124–37 [includes AS] Hall, Richard, Exploring the World of the Vikings (London) [archaeol. emphasis; includes AS] Hardy, Alan, and Steven Leech, ‘Continuity or Change: Overview of the Saxon and Medieval Evidence’, Settlement on the Bedfordshire Claylands, ed. Jane Timby et al., pp. 199–212 Harrington, Sue, ‘Stirring Women, Weapons and Weaving: Aspects of Gender Identity and Symbols of Power in Early Anglo-Saxon England’, Archaeology and Women: Ancient and Modern Issues, ed. Sue Hamilton, Ruth D. Whitehouse and Katherine I. Wright (Walnut Creek, CA), pp. 335–52 Hässler, Hans-Jürgen, ed., Neue Forschungsergebnisse zur nordwesteuropäischen Frühgeschichte unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der altsächsischen Kultur im heutigen Niedersachsen [= Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005)] (Oldenburg, 2005) [includes AS] Hawkes, Sonia Chadwick, ‘Oxford University Lectureship in European Archaeology (Early Medieval Specialism)’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 153–5 [a paper discovered after Hawkes’s death, written in 1994 at the point of her retirement; its content may indicate her concern for the future of the post] Hedeager, Lotte, ‘Animal Representations and Animal Iconography’, Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005), 231–45 [includes an argument that Germanic animal art played an organizing role in pagan northern cosmology] Henig, Martin, and Tyler Jo Smith, ed., ‘Collectanea Antiqua’: Essays in memory of Sonia Chadwick Hawkes, BAR International Ser. 1673 (Oxford) Higham, Nick, ed., see sect. 6b Hills, Catherine, ‘Anglo-Saxon Attitudes’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 16–26 [overview of archaeol. trends and views in media] ‘History and Archaeology: the State of Play in Early Medieval Europe’, Antiquity 81.311, 191–200 [on the use, or non-use, of archaeol. evidence by historians] Hollinrake, Nancy, ‘Dark Age Traffic on the Bristol Channel, UK: a Hypothesis’, International Jnl of Nautical Archaeol. 36.2, 336–43 [emphasis on archaeol. evidence] Horne, Barry, ed., ‘Oxfordshire’, South Midlands Archaeol. 37, 22–64 [includes AS, esp. in discussion of a settlement at Black Bourton] King, Peter, and Leslie King, ‘The Kinver Edge Region: Second Interim Report of an Archaeological Survey’, Worcestershire Archaeol. and Local Hist. Newsletter 17 (1975– 6), 9–15 [includes AS] Lawson, Graeme, ‘Large Scale – Small Scale: Medieval Stone Buildings, Early Medieval Timber Halls and the Problem of the Lyre’, Archaeoacoustics, ed. Chris Scarre and Lawson (Cambridge, 2006), pp. 85–94

325

Bibliography for 2007 Leech, Stephen, and Alan Hardy, ‘Saxon and Medieval Sites: Archaeological Descriptions’, Settlement on the Bedfordshire Claylands, ed. Jane Timby et al., pp. 159–97 Lewis, Mary E., ‘Impact of Industrialization: Comparative Study of Child Health in Four Sites from Medieval and Postmedieval England (AD 850–1859)’, Amer. Jnl of Physical Anthropology 119 (2002), 211–23 [includes discussion of bone samples from Raunds Furnells, St Helen-on-the-Walls (York) and Wharram Percy] McGrail, Seán, Ancient Boats and Ships, 2nd ed. (Princes Risborough, 2006) [includes discussion of AS and other Viking-Age ships; a rev. and extended version of McGrail, Ancient Boats (Aylesbury, 1983)] MacGregor, Arthur, ‘E. T. Leeds and the Formulation of an Anglo-Saxon Archaeology of England’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 27–44 Martin, Edward, Colin Pendleton and Judith Plouviez, ‘Archaeology in Suffolk’, Proc. of the Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. 41.3, 357–81 [includes AS; with object drawings by Donna Wreathall] Maynard, David, ‘Work of Essex County Council Field Archaeology Unit 2000–1’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 41–58 [includes AS] Medlycott, Maria, ‘Archaeological Fieldwalking in Essex, 1986–2005’, Essex Archaeol. and Hist. 36 (2007 for 2005), 1–9 [includes AS] Murray, Jon, ‘Fieldwork in 1999 by Hertfordshire Archaeological Trust’, CBA, MidAnglia Newsletter May 2000, 11–13 [includes AS] Neiss, Michael, ‘The Ornamental Echo of Oeinn’s Cult (Kontinuitetsfrågor i germansk djurornamentik II)’, Cultural Interaction between East and West, ed. Ulf Fransson et al., pp. 82–9 [animal art dated to the Viking Age; Eng.-lang. stud.] Nielsen, Karen Høilund, ed., see sect. 11 [animals in art] Perkins, Dave, ‘The Long Demise of the Wantsum Sea Channel: a Recapitulation Based on the Data’, AC 127, 249–59 Points, Guy, Yorkshire: a Gazetteer of Anglo-Saxon and Viking Sites ([?Norfolk]) [‘AngloSaxon Churches’ and ‘Illustrative Examples of Stonework’, sects. 1.7 and 1.9] Popescu, Elizabeth Shepherd, and Sarah Poppy, ‘Fieldwork in Cambridgeshire 2006’, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 211–26 [includes AS] Pragnell, Hubert, Architectural Britain: the Saxon Period to the Present Day, rev. ed. (London) [‘Saxon and Norman Architecture’, ch. 1; rev., retitled ed. of work by Pragnell publ. in 1995, rev. in 1999 and 2002] Price, Neil, ‘Motif and Message in Viking Art’, Minerva (London) 18.1, 43–5 Pryor, Francis, see sect. 6a [‘archaeol. hist.’ of Britain] Reynolds, Tim, and Jeremy Parsons, ‘A Selection of Field-Work in Cambridgeshire 1999’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter May 2000, 16–18 [includes AS] Rippon, Stephen, ‘Focus or Frontier? The Significance of Estuaries in the Landscape of Southern Britain’, Landscapes (Macclesfield) 8.1, 23–38 [includes discussion of the Orwell–Gipping–Lark line as a cultural boundary in AS England] Roberts, Brian K., see sect. 6a [Northumbria] Roberts, Judith, ‘Summary of Work from Cambridgeshire County Council AFU’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Bull. Summer 2002, 14–18 [includes AS, esp. in discussion of Chiefs Street, Ely; publ. addressing the council’s Archaeol. Field Unit]

326

Bibliography for 2007 Semple, Sarah, see sect. 8 [on hearg in place-names, and on early cultic sites] Sykes, Bryan, Blood of the Isles: Exploring the Genetic Roots of Our Tribal History (London, 2006) [publ. in North Amer. under title Saxons, Vikings and Celts: the Genetic Roots of Britain and Ireland (New York, 2006)] Timby, Jane, ‘Overview’, Settlement on the Bedfordshire Claylands, ed. Timby et al., pp. 405– 14 [includes AS] Timby, Jane, Richard Brown, Edward Biddulph, Alan Hardy and Andrew Powell, A Slice of Rural Essex: Recent Archaeological Discoveries from the A120 between Stansted Airport and Braintree, Oxford Wessex Archaeol. Monograph 1 (Oxford and Salisbury) [includes ch. on AS evidence by Hardy] Timby, Jane, Richard Brown, Alan Hardy, Stephen Leech, Cynthia Poole and Leo Webley, ed., Settlement on the Bedfordshire Claylands: Archaeology along the A421 Great Barford Bypass (Oxford) [Cover and spine title: A421: Archaeology along the Great Barford Bypass] Webster, Leslie, ‘The Making of England’, Brit. Museum Mag. 8 (1991), 3–8 [discussion of an exhibition of that name] Welch, Martin, ‘Anglo-Saxon Kent’, The Archaeology of Kent to AD 800, ed. John H. Williams (Woodbridge [and Maidstone]), pp. 187–248 ‘Sonia Chadwick Hawkes’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 151–2 White, Roger, ‘The Lingering Death of Roman Britain’, CA 211, 11–18 Williams, Howard, ‘Forgetting the Britons in Victorian Anglo-Saxon Archaeology’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham, pp. 27–41 Wilson, David M., ‘The Recognition of Viking Art’, Cultural Interaction between East and West, ed. Ulf Fransson et al., pp. 312–15 [the recognition, classification and terminology of Viking-Age art] Woodings, R. B., ed., ‘Recent Work and Discoveries’, Norfolk Research Committee Newsletter and Bull. 4 (1971), 11–16 [includes reports on the settlement at North Elmham (by Peter Wade-Martins), and on the cemetery at Swaffham] Zeepvat, Bob, ‘Archaeological Notes’, Records of Buckinghamshire 47.1, 219–35 [includes AS] Ziegler, Michelle, ed., ‘Archaeology Digest’, Heroic Age 3 (2000) [online; includes (under ‘The Anglo-Saxons’): ‘Battle of Hastings Re-Enactment’; ‘Update: Lakenheath Cemetery’; and ‘East Anglian Fenland Village Discovered’] b. Environment, landscape and agriculture i. Environment [Anon.], ‘Saxon Fish-Traps on the Blackwater’, Essex Archaeol. 10 (1993), xiii Dickson, Camilla, ‘Macroscopic Fossils of Garden Plants from British Roman and Medieval Deposits’, Garden History: Garden Plants, Species, Forms and Varieties from Pompeii to 1800 – Symposium Held at the European University Centre for Cultural Heritage, Ravello, June 1991, ed. Dagfinn Moe, James H. Dickson and Per Magnus Jørgensen, PACT 42 (Rixensart, 1991), pp. 47–72 [includes early med.; publ. of European Stud. Group on Physical, Chemical and Mathematical Techniques Applied to Archaeol. (PACT)]

327

Bibliography for 2007 Dobney, Keith, Deborah Jaques, James Barrett and Cluny Johnstone, Farmers, Monks and Aristocrats: the Environmental Archaeology of Anglo-Saxon Flixborough, Excavations at Flixborough 3 (Oxford) Druce, Denise, Dana Challinor, Steven J. Allen and Elizabeth Stafford, ‘Environmental Evidence’, Settlement on the Bedfordshire Claylands, ed. Jane Timby et al. [see sect. 9a], pp. 365–93 [includes AS] Housley, Rupert A., Vanessa Straker, Frank M. Chambers and Jonathan G. A. Lageard, ‘An Ecological Context for the Post-Roman Archaeology of the Somerset Moors (South West England, UK)’, Jnl of Wetland Archaeol. 7, 1–22 Long, Antony J., Martyn P. Waller and Andrew J. Plater, ‘The Late Holocene Evolution of the Romney Marsh/Dungeness Foreland Depositional Complex’, Dungeness and Romney Marsh: Barrier Dynamics and Marshland Evolution, ed. Long, Waller and Plater (Oxford), pp. 188–207 [includes discussion of tidal inlets of Romney and Rye in AS period] McDonald, Alison, The Historical Ecology of Some Unimproved Alluvial Grassland in the Upper Thames Valley, BAR Brit. Ser. 441 (Oxford) [includes AS] Philpott, Robert, see sect. 9h [fishing equipment] Plater, Andrew J., Paul Stupples and Helen M. Roberts, ‘The Depositional History of Dungeness Foreland’, Dungeness and Romney Marsh: Barrier Dynamics and Marshland Evolution, ed. Antony J. Long, Martyn P. Waller and Plater (Oxford), pp. 108–54 [includes evidence for a north-easterly extension of the Foreland in AS period] Serjeantson, D., ‘Birds: Food and a Mark of Status’, Food in Medieval England, ed. C. M. Woolgar et al., pp. 131–47 [archaeol. evidence; includes AS] Serjeantson, D., and C. M. Woolgar, ‘Fish Consumption in Medieval England’, Food in Medieval England, ed. Woolgar et al., pp. 102–30 [includes AS] Stevens, Chris, ‘Lentils as Climatic Indicators?’, The Archaeologist 66, 46 [associated with the warm phase, c. 800/900–1350] Sykes, Naomi Jane, The Impact of the Normans on Hunting Practices in England’, Food in Medieval England, ed. C. M. Woolgar et al., pp. 162–75 [includes archaeol. evidence] The Norman Conquest: a Zooarchaeological Perspective, BAR International Ser. 1656 (Oxford) Waller, Martyn P., and J. Edward Schofield, ‘Mid to Late Holocene Vegetation and Land Use History in the Weald of South-Eastern England: Multiple Pollen Profiles from the Rye Area’, Vegetation Hist. and Archaeobotany 16, 367–84 [includes AS] Woolgar, C. M., et al., ed., see sect. 9biii ii. Landscape [Anon.], ‘Dating Dykes’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Bull. Spring 1996, 5 [recent work provides dates for the Fleam Dyke, in Cambs.] Bapty, Ian, ‘Look on My Works: Finding Offa’, Brit. Archaeol. 97, 20–5 [a summary of archaeol. opinions on Offa’s Dyke, and a case for further investigation] Booth, Paul, et al., see sect. 9cii [upper and middle Thames] Brookes, Stuart, see sect. 9a [Kent]

328

Bibliography for 2007 Brown, Graham, David Field and David McOmish, ed., The Avebury Landscape: Aspects of the Field Archaeology of the Marlborough Downs (Oxford, 2005) [with illustrations by Deborah Cunliffe] Fairclough, John, and Mike Hardy, see sect. 9a [Thornham and the Waveney Valley] Harrison, Sarah, and Tom Williamson, ‘The Supposed Saxon Earthworks at Rendlesham’, Proc. of the Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. 41.3, 351–4 [re-examination of earthworks at Bush Covert, provisionally associated with AS Rendlesham by Rupert Bruce-Mitford] Jones, Richard, and Mark Page, Medieval Villages in an English Landscape: Beginnings and Ends (Macclesfield, 2006) [changes from 800 to 1400 in the former Whittlewood Forest, on the borders of Bucks. and Northants.] Pitts, Mike, ‘Wat’s Dyke Dated: Was It Coenwulf ’s Dyke?’, Brit. Archaeol. 97, 7 [a recent excavation suggests an early ninth-century date] Reynolds, Andrew, and Alex Langlands, see sect. 9cii [Wansdyke] Riley, Hazel, The Historic Landscape of the Quantock Hills (Swindon, 2006) [includes ch. on the early and late med. periods, with an archaeol. emphasis; with illustrations by Elaine Jamieson] Rippon, Stephen, Landscape, Community and Colonisation: the North Somerset Levels During the First to Second Millennia AD, CBA Research Report 152 (York, 2006) [includes early med. period] see also sect. 9a [esp. on Orwell–Gipping–Lark line] iii. Agriculture Albarella, U., ‘Pig Husbandry and Pork Consumption in Medieval England’, Food in Medieval England, ed. C. M. Woolgar et al., pp. 72–87 [archaeol. evidence; includes AS] Carew, Tim, et al., see sect. 9cii [Middx.] Crabtree, Pam, ‘Animals as Material Culture in Middle Saxon England: the Zooarchaeological Evidence for Wool Production at Brandon’, Breaking and Shaping Beastly Bodies: Animals as Material Culture in the Middle Ages, ed. Aleksander Pluskowski (Oxford), pp. 161–9 [Suff.] Evans, J. A., S. Tatham, S. R. Chenery and C. A. Chenery, ‘Anglo-Saxon Animal Husbandry Techniques Revealed th[r]ough Isotope and Chemical Variations in Cattle Teeth’, Applied Geochemistry 22.9, 1994–2005 [evidence from Empingham II and Ketton in Rutland] Sykes, N. J., ‘From cu and sceap to beffe and motton: the Management, Distribution and Consumption of Cattle and Sheep in Medieval England’, Food in Medieval England, ed. C. M. Woolgar et al., pp. 56–71 [archaeol. evidence, including AS] Webley, Leo, ‘Prehistoric, Roman and Saxon Activity on the Fen Hinterland at Parnwell, Peterborough’, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 79–114 [the AS features are interpreted as a charcoal production site] Woolgar, C. M., D. Serjeantson and T. Waldron, ‘Conclusion’, Food in Medieval England, ed. Woolgar et al., pp. 267–80 Woolgar, C. M., D. Searjeantson and T. Waldron, ed., Food in Medieval England: Diet and Nutrition (Oxford, 2006) [emphasis on archaeol. evidence]

329

Bibliography for 2007 c. Towns and other settlements i. General and miscellaneous Evans, J. A., and S. Tatham, see sect. 9eiv [‘local signature’ in population groups] Gardiner, Mark, ‘Review of Medieval Settlement Research, 1996–2006’, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 21 (2007 for 2006), 22–8 Hadley, Dawn, see sect. 9ei [rural settlements and cemeteries] Lewis, C., ‘Discovery and Excavations in 2006’, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 21 (2007 for 2006), 65–80 [includes AS] Ulmschneider, Katharina, ‘The Study of Early Medieval Markets: Are We Rewriting the Economic History of Middle Anglo-Saxon England?’, Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005), 517–31 [evidence from metal-detecting indicates increasing numbers of so-called ‘productive sites’] ii. The South [Anon.], ‘Covent Garden’s Saxon Past’, London Region Archaeol. 2006, 10 [includes discussion of early burials and Middle Saxon occupation] ‘Roman and Medieval London’, London Region Archaeol. 2007, 6–7 [includes AS burials, one – from St Martin’s in the Fields, Westminster – of high status] ‘Survey of the Year’s Archaeological Finds’, London Region Archaeol. 2002, 2–5 and 8– 11 [includes commentary on AS sunken-featured buildings in Hillingdon, Bromley and Hammersmith; settlement evidence from Lundenwic; and fragments of boat timbers from Newham] ‘“Sub-Roman” Britain – and Beyond’, London Region Archaeol. 2005, 8–10 [includes evidence for AS settlement from the Lea Valley] ‘Prehistory’, London Region Archaeol. 2007, 4–5 [records evidence for AS settlement at Hounslow and Hillingdon, including a silver penny of Alfred’s first coinage] Ayre, Julian, and Robin Brown, ‘Bull Wharf ’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Bull. Spring 1996, 10–11 [includes discussion of the AS waterfront and three Alfredian coins] Bennell, Maureen, and Daryl Stump, ‘Evidence for Middle Saxon Occupation at Otford’, AC 127, 432–4 Biddle, Martin, and Birthe Kjølbye-Biddle, ‘Winchester: from Venta to Wintancæster’, Pagans and Christians, ed. Lauren Gilmour [see sect. 9a], pp. 189–214 Bluer, Richard, and Trevor Brigham, with Robin Nielsen, Roman and Later Development East of the Forum and Cornhill: Excavations at Lloyd’s Register, 71 Fenchurch Street, City of London, MoLAS Monograph 30 (London, 2006) [AS evidence consists of pits, robbed Roman walls and pottery; the pottery report is by Lyn Blackmore; publ. of Museum of London Archaeol. Service] Booth, Paul, Anne Dodd, Mark Robinson and Alex Smith, The Thames through Time, the Archaeology of the Gravel Terraces of the Upper and Middle Thames: the Early Historical Period, AD 1–1000, Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 27 (Oxford) [AS evidence includes settlements, as well as evidence from cemeteries drawing on work of Tania Dickinson]

330

Bibliography for 2007 Boyer, P., ‘Excavations at Western International Market’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Region Newsletter Spring 2007, 11–12 [includes AS settlement in Hounslow] Brookes, Stuart, see sect. 9a [Kent] Brown, John, ‘Fieldwork Undertaken by Pre-Construct Archaeology 1999–2000’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 67–77 [includes discussion of Middle Saxon occupation and a seventh-century burial at Covent Garden, Westminster] Butler, Chris, and David Rudling, ‘Barcombe Roman Villa: New Roman Building and Saxon Occupation?’, Sussex Past and Present 111, 12–13 [discovery of a sunken-featured building] Carew, Tim, Barry Bishop, Frank Meddens and Victoria Ridgeway, Unlocking the Landscape: Archaeological Excavations at Ashford Prison, Middlesex, Pre-Construct Archaeol. Monograph 5 (London, 2006) [includes a probable AS hall] Chambers, Richard, and Ellen McAdam, Excavations at Barrow Hills, Radley, Oxfordshire, 1983–5, II: the Romano-British Cemetery and Anglo-Saxon Settlement, Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 25 (Oxford) Cowie, Robert, ‘Saxon London, Concealed Beneath the City Streets’, Discovery! Unearthing the New Treasures of Archaeology, ed. Brian M. Fagan (London), pp. 170–1 Davenport, Peter, Cynthia Poole and David Jordan, Archaeology in Bath: Excavations at the New Royal Baths (the Spa) and Bellott’s Hospital 1998–1999, Oxford Archaeol. Monograph 3 (Oxford) [includes ch. on early med. period] Densem, Robin, ‘London Round-Up: a Selection of Recent Investigations’, CBA, MidAnglia Bull. Summer 1997, 12–16 [includes AS] Fasham, Peter, ‘Banbury Castle: a Summary of Excavations in 1972’, Cake and Cockhorse 5.6 (1973), 109–20 [includes AS structures and finds from two sites] Greenwood, Pamela, and Cath Maloney, London Fieldwork and Publication Round-Up 1995, London Archaeologist 8, suppl. 1 (London, 1996) [includes AS] Greenwood, Pamela, Cath Maloney and T. J. Gostick, London Fieldwork and Publication Round-Up 1996, London Archaeologist 8, suppl. 2 (London, 1997) [includes AS] Helm, Richard, ‘Church Street, Hoo St Werburgh’, Canterbury’s Archaeol. 30 (2007 for 2005–6), 41–2 [includes evidence for AS settlement] Hillelson, David, ‘New Light on an Historic Village: Recent Excavations at Pirton, Hertfordshire’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Bull. Spring 1996, 18–20 [preliminary report on sites going back to the Saxo-Norman period] Holman, Adam, and Charles le Querne, ‘Excavations at The Grove, Watford, 2000’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 8–10 [includes AS occupation and burials] Horne, Barry, ed., see sect. 9a [Black Bourton, Oxon.] Horsey, Ian, see sect. 9eii [Christchurch, Hants.] Jackson, Reg, Excavations at St James’s Priory, Bristol (Oxford, 2006) [three silt-filled depressions yielding finds of Late Saxon pottery] Jones, Richard, and Mark Page, see sect. 9bii [villages in area of former Whittlewood Forest] Keith-Lucas, Fiona, ‘Saxon and Medieval Newham’, London Archaeologist 11.9, 244–6 Kenyon, David, and Martin Watts, ‘An Anglo-Saxon Enclosure at Copsehill Road, Lower Slaughter: Excavations in 1999’, Trans. of the Bristol and Gloucestershire

331

Bibliography for 2007 Archaeol. Soc. 124 (2007 for 2006), 73–109 [possibly an enclosed manorial settlement or farm] Leary, Jim, ‘Excavations at 15–16 Bedford Street, Covent Garden, London’, CBA, MidAnglia Region Newsletter Autumn 2006, 6–7 [includes AS] Lewis, Carenza, ‘Braydon: a Study of Settlement in a Parish-Edge Forest’, Patterns of the Past: Essays in Landscape Archaeology for Christopher Taylor, ed. Paul Pattison, David Field and Stewart Ainsworth (Oxford, 1999), pp. 85–96 [Wilts.; includes AS] Maloney, Cath, and Isabel Holroyd, London Fieldwork and Publication Round-Up 2006, London Archaeologist 11, suppl. 3 (Tonbridge) [includes AS] Millett, Martin, ‘Cowdery’s Down: a Multi Phase Site’, Rescue News 20 (1979), 6 [Hants.; preliminary account of the AS settlement] Moody, Gerald, ‘Prehistoric Crouched Inhumations and an Anglo-Saxon Sunken Featured Building: St Peter’s Road, Margate’, AC 127, 422–3 Moore, Richard, Anni Byard, Sarah Mounce and Stephen Thorpe, with Ed McSloy, Alan Vince and Jen Kitch, ‘A4146 Stoke Hammond and Linslade Western Bypass Archaeological Excavations 2005’, Records of Buckinghamshire 47.1, 1–62 [includes investigation of charter bounds between Linslade and Soulbury parishes] Mudd, Andrew, Bronze Age, Roman and Later Occupation at Chieveley, West Berkshire: the Archaeology of the A34/M4 Road Junction Improvement, BAR Brit. Ser. 433 (Oxford) [an AS presence is indicated by pottery and several pits] Newman, Phil, ‘Secrets of the Sands’, Devon Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 79 (2001), 1 and 8– 9 [evidence of post-Roman settlement at Bantham Ham] ‘Totnes Revealed: New Evidence of the Early Town and its Defences’, Devon Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 73 (1999), 1–3 [includes AS] Norton, Andrew, ‘Excavations at Ireland’s Land, Northmoor, Oxfordshire’, Oxoniensia 71 (2007 for 2006), 169–96 [Late Saxon pits and pottery] Parfitt, Keith, and Stuart Needham, see sect. 9eii [second entry; Woodnesborough, near Sandwich, Kent] Pratt, Simon, ‘St Mildred’s Tannery’, Canterbury’s Archaeol. 30 (2007 for 2005–6), 1–11 [includes a remodelling of the town defences in AS period, and discussion of a possible site for the sanctuary of the nuns of Lyminge (citing S 160)] Preston, Steve, ‘Bronze Age Occupation and Saxon Features at the Wolverton Turn Enclosure, near Stony Stratford, Milton Keynes: Investigations by Tim SchadlaHall, Philip Carstairs, Jo Lawson, Hugh Beamish, Andrew Hunn, Ben Ford and Tess Durden, 1972 to 1994’, Records of Buckinghamshire 47.1, 81–117 [AS features consist of enclosure ditches and a sunken-featured building; includes a substantial AS pottery report by Jane Timby and Paul Blinkhorn] Rady, Jon, and Damien Boden, ‘Kent Schools Project’, Canterbury’s Archaeol. 30 (2007 for 2005–6), 26–9 [includes a sunken-featured building excavated at Ellington School, Ramsgate] Reeve, Jez, ‘English Heritage Greater London Sites and Monuments Record’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Newsletter July 2001, 25–40 [a directory of sites with the evidence recorded for them; includes AS]

332

Bibliography for 2007 Reynolds, Andrew, and Alex Langlands, ‘Social Identities on the Macro Scale: a Maximum View of Wansdyke’, People and Space in the Middle Ages, 300–1300, ed. Wendy Davies et al. (Turnhout, 2006), pp. 13–44 [esp. for discussion of charters and Chronicle, and for Bede] Riley, Hazel, The Historic Landscape of the Quantock Hills (Swindon, 2006) [‘The Migration and Early Medieval Periods: Britons and Anglo-Saxons’, in ch. 4] Rippon, Stephen, see sect. 9bii [North Som.] Scobie, G. D., J. M. Zant and Richard Whinney, The Brooks, Winchester: a Preliminary Report on the Excavations, 1987–88, Winchester Museums Service Archaeol. Report 1 (Winchester, 1991) [includes ch. on AS and med. periods] Seeley, Derek, Christopher Phillpotts and Mark Samuel, Winchester Palace: Excavations at the Southwark Residence of the Bishops of Winchester, MoLAS Monograph 31 (London, 2006) [includes a survey of Late Saxon Southwark, and Saxo-Norman occupation of the site; publ. of Museum of London Archaeol. Service] Slater, T. R., ‘Understanding the Landscape of Towns’, Landscape: the Richest Historical Record, ed. Della Hooke, Soc. for Landscape Stud. ss 1 (Amesbury, 2000), pp. 97– 108 [sect. on AS period reviews archaeol. evidence for towns, esp. from London, Winchester, Southampton and York] Swain, Hedley, see sect. 9eii [St Martin-in-the-Fields, London] Turner, Sam, and Steve Roskams, ‘Excavation and Survey at Mothecombe, September 2004’, Devon Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 90 (2005), 4 [a post-Roman settlement site] Weddell, Peter, and John Allan, ‘Devon Archaeological Society AGM 2003’, Devon Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 85 (2003), 8–9 [consists mostly of a presidential address on Devon’s early towns, including archaeol. and Domesday evidence from Kingsteignton, Crediton, Axminster and Colyton] Welsh, Ken, ‘Heathrow Terminal 5 Archaeology Project’, London Region Archaeol. 2003, 4–5 [includes evidence for AS settlement found near Longford, and in Hillingdon and Havering] Wright, Holly, ‘Archaeological Vector Graphics and SVG: a Case from Cricklade’, Internet Archaeol. 20 [online; Cricklade, Wilts., as site of a burh] iii. The East Crabtree, Pam, see sect. 9biii [Brandon, Suff.] Dale, Ruarigh, David Maynard and Joyce Compton, ‘Archaeology on the Mid-Essex Clay, Investigations on the A130 By-Pass: A12 Chelmsford By-Pass to the A127 Southend Arterial Road, 1991–4 and 1999–2002’, Essex Archaeol. and Hist. 36 (2007 for 2005), 10–54 [includes discussion of an AS settlement at Downhouse Farm, as well as artefacts, esp. pottery] Davies, Gareth, Neil Faulkner and Martin Hatton, ‘Sedgeford Historical and Archaeological Research Project: Interim Report 2005–07’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.2, 232–40 [includes discussion of features of AS settlement, and burials without grave-goods] Davison, Alan, ‘Investigations at Godwick and Beeston St Andrew’, Norfolk Archaeol.

333

Bibliography for 2007 45.2, 141–54 [AS settlement indicated by pottery finds; includes introd. by Andrew Rogerson] Deeves, Simon, ‘Excavation of an Iron Age and Saxon Site at South Willesborough, Ashford’, AC 127, 237–47 Dickens, Alison, see sect. 9a [Ely] Emery, Phillip A., Norwich Greyfriars: Pre-Conquest Town and Medieval Friary, with a major contribution by Elizabeth Rutledge, East Anglian Archaeol. Report 120 (Gressenhall) [includes a coin report by John A. Davies and Martin Allen] Everson, Paul, and Marcus Jecock, ‘Castle Hill and the Early Medieval Development of Thetford in Norfolk’, Patterns of the Past: Essays in Landscape Archaeology for Christopher Taylor, ed. Paul Pattison, David Field and Stewart Ainsworth (Oxford, 1999), pp. 97–106 Harrison, Sarah, and Tom Williamson, see sect. 9bii [Rendlesham, Suff.] Huggins, Peter, and Rhona Huggins, ‘Waltham Abbey’, London Archaeologist 1.11 (1971), 243–8 [includes evidence for AS settlement] Lewis, Carenza, ‘Test Pit Excavation within Currently Occupied Rural Settlement in East Anglia: Results of the HEFA CORS Project in 2006’, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 21 (2007 for 2006), 37–44 [publ. addressing the Currently Occupied Rural Settements project of the Higher Education Field Acad.] ‘New Avenues for the Investigation of Currently Occupied Medieval Rural Settlement: Preliminary Observations from the Higher Education Field Academy’, MA 51, 133–63 [investigations of some Currently Occupied Rural Settlements (CORS); AS evidence has been obtained from three Cambs. villages: Houghton and Wyton; Terrington St Clement; and Ufford] Loveluck, Christopher, Rural Settlement, Lifestyles and Social Change in the Later First Millennium AD: Anglo-Saxon Flixborough in its Wider Context, Excavations at Flixborough 4 (Oxford) Loveluck, Christopher, and David Atkinson, The Early Medieval Settlement Remains from Flixborough, Lincolnshire: the Occupation Sequence, c. AD 600–1000, Excavations at Flixborough 1 (Oxford) Malim, Tim, see sect. 9gii [Cambs.] O’Brien, Leonora, ‘Roman and Medieval Finds at Land East of Mill Lane, Water Newton, Huntingdonshire’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Group Newsletter Summer 2003, 11– 12 [includes AS] Roberts, Judith, see sect. 9a [Ely] Shelley, Andy, ‘Excavations at 34 High Street, Dereham, 2004’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.1 (2006), 60–73 [several linear features and post-holes probably reflect AS occupation] Spoerry, Paul, and Mark Hinman, ‘Early Saxon and Medieval Remains Adjacent to the Round Moat, Fowlmere’, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 135–42 [a sunkenfeatured building and a (possibly contemporary) pony-burial] Wade-Martins, Peter, see sect. 9a, with Woodings, R. B., ed. [North Elmham, Norf.] Wallis, Heather, Excavations on the Site of Norwich Cathedral Refectory, 2001–3, East

334

Bibliography for 2007 Anglian Archaeol. Report 116 (Gressenhall, 2006) [includes discussion of a Late Saxon occupation phase, with a road] Webley, Leo, see sect. 9biii [charcoal production in area of Peterborough] Wilkinson, T. J., and M. J. Jones, ‘The Urban Wetlands of Lincoln, England’, NewsWARP (Exeter) 2 (1987), 21–2 [includes AS; publ. of Wetland Archaeol. Research Project] Wise, Philip J., ‘From Roman Camulodunum to Norman Colecestra: Lost Colchester’, Minerva (London) 18.1, 41–2 Woolhouse, Thomas, ‘Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Boundaries and Burials at the Former Oblic Engineering Site, Church Street, Litlington’, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 115–26 iv. The Midlands Bocock, Sam, and Nicholas J. Cooper, ed., ‘Archaeology in Leicestershire and Rutland 2006’, Leicestershire Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. Trans. 81, 173–235 [includes discussion of an AS phase at Freeschool Lane, Leicester] Chapman, Andy, see sect. 9a [Northants.] Edwards, R. E., see sect. 9gi [Worcester] Evans, J. A., and S. Tatham, see sect. 9eiv [Rutland] Evans, J. A., et al., see sect. 9bii [Rutland] Guilbert, Graeme, see sect. 9eiv [Holme Pierrepont, Notts.] Hawkes, Michael, ‘Early Anglo-Saxon Settlement in the East Midlands’, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 20 (2005), 34 [summary of a thesis] Jones, Richard, and Mark Page, see sect. 9bii [Whittlewood Forest] Main, Olive, ‘Excavations at Polebrook, 2005’, CBA, Mid-Anglia Region Newsletter Spring 2006, 9 Thomas, John, ‘The Archaeology of Historic/Medieval Village Cores: Evidence from Leicestershire and Rutland’, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 21 (2007 for 2006), 34–6 Twigg, George, see sect. 6a [Dirtwich, Cheshire] Watt, Sarah, ed., ‘Herefordshire’, West Midlands Archaeol. 48 (2005), 26–33 [includes discussion of structures of AS date found in Hereford] ‘Worcestershire’, West Midlands Archaeol. 48 (2005), 135–67 [pits, ditches and postholes of AS date found in Droitwich] v. The North Addyman, Peter, ‘Jorvik Ten Years On’, Museum Management and Curatorship 13.1 (1994), 71–3 Fenton-Thomas, Chris, ‘Excavations at The Gardens, Sprotborough, South Yorkshire’, Yorkshire Archaeol. Jnl 79, 231–310 [includes AS and Anglo-Scandinavian phases] Hass, Jeffrey D., Medieval Selby: a New Study of the Abbey and Town, 1069–1408, Yorkshire Archaeol. Soc. Occasional Paper 4 (Leeds, 2006) [includes an account of the preConquest settlement]

335

Bibliography for 2007 Howard, Phil, ‘New Technology to Survey Gefrin’, Archaeol. in Northumberland 17, 4–5 [concerns Yeavering] Johnson, Ben, and Clive Waddington, ‘5000 Years of Lanton, Milfield’, Archaeol. in Northumberland 17, 44–5 [includes evidence for AS occupation, involving sunkenfloored buildings and rectangular, post-built structures] Kirby, M., ‘Smarter Schools PPP Project, Land at Broomhouses, Lockerbie’, Discovery and Excavation in Scotland 7 (2007 for 2006), 48–9 [includes an Anglian hall] Lewis, Mary E., see sect. 9a [Wharram Percy] Loveluck, Christopher, see sect. 9dv [estate organization in the North down to c. 900] Montgomery, Janet, Jane A. Evans, Dominic Powlesland and Charlotte A. Roberts, ‘Continuity or Colonization in Anglo-Saxon England? Isotope Evidence for Mobility, Subsistence Practice and Status at West Heslerton’, Amer. Jnl of Physical Anthropology 126 (2005), 123–38 O’Connor, T. P., ‘Wild or Domestic? Biometric Variation in the Cat Felis silvestris Schreber’, International Jnl of Osteoarchaeology 17.6, 581–95 [some of the experimental material was from Anglo-Scandinavian York] Points, Guy, see sect. 9a [Yorks.] Reeves, Ben, ‘Taking the Lid Off the Bronze Age in York’, Yorkshire Archaeol. Today 13, 11–13 [includes discussion of Anglo-Scandinavian occupation in the area of Lawrence Street] Rushton, Sara, Roger Miket and Christopher Burgess, ed., Bamburgh, with contributions by Miket et al., Archaeol. in Northumberland, Discovery Ser. 1 ([Morpeth]) [includes the Bowl Hole AS cemetery, and the seventh- or eighth-century Bamburgh sword] Shafernich, Sandra Maria, ‘Two Heritage Centres in England’, Museum Management and Curatorship 15.1 (1996), 37–47 [one of the centres is the Jorvik Viking Centre, York] Slater, T. R., see sect. 9cii [York] Smith, Pamela Jane, ‘Roots and Origins: Archaeology and Wharram – an Interview with John G. Hurst’, ed. Carenza Lewis, Med. Settlement Research Group Ann. Report 21 (2007 for 2006), 59–64 Spiegel, Flora, see sect. 6b [Yeavering] Stewart, Ian J., and Cherry Bailey, ‘Castle View Gardens: Lindisfarne’, Archaeol. in Northumberland 17, 9 [evidence for AS settlement in the form of a hearth, a wattle and daub wall and a ditch] Vince, Alan, and Quita Mould, ‘New Thoughts on the Chronology of Saddler Street, Durham: Pottery, Leatherwork and Some Implications’, AAe 36, 79–92 [argument against a tenth-century date for this site, as suggested previously, and for a postConquest date] d. Ecclesiastical and monastic sites i. General and miscellaneous Alexander, Jennifer S., ‘The Introduction and Use of Masons’ Marks in Romanesque Buildings in England’, MA 51, 63–81 [includes sects. on AS quarrying and on Late and Middle Saxon churches]

336

Bibliography for 2007 Baylé, Maylis, ‘L’autel dans les grands édifices religieux d’Angleterre et de Normandie du Xe au milieu du XIIe siècle: quelques réflexions’, Hortus Artium Medievalium 11 (2005), 165–76 McNeill, Tom, Faith, Pride and Works: Medieval Church Building (Stroud, 2006) [includes AS] Wilkinson, Philip, see sect. 6a [abbeys and monastic culture] ii. The South Aston, Mick, see sect. 6a [Muchelney Abbey] Blewett, Phillip, All Hallows by the Tower (Andover, 1990) [includes a sect. on the AS parts of the church] Durman, Richard, see sect. 9gi [Sherborne Abbey] Gilbert, Edward, ‘Pre-Carolingian Work at Deerhurst’, Cahiers archéologiques, fin de l’Antiquité et Moyen Âge 25 (1976), 67–75 Keen, Laurence, and Peter Ellis, Sherborne Abbey and School Excavations 1972–76 and 1990, Dorset Nat. Hist. and Archaeol. Soc. Monograph Ser. 16 (Dorchester, 2005) [includes discussion of burials, ditches and walls; possibly monastic] Tatton-Brown, Tim, ‘A New Survey of the Fabric of the Church of the Holy Trinity, Bosham, West Sussex’, Sussex Archaeol. Collections 144, 129–54 Woolhouse, Thomas, see sect. 9ciii [Litlington, Cambs.] iii. The East Andrews, D. D., ‘Church Miscellany’, Essex Archaeol. and Hist. 36 (2007 for 2005), 166– 72 [includes the discovery of possible AS foundations at Stifford St Mary church] Buckberry, Jo, see sect. 9eiii [churchyard burials in Lincs.] Cessford, Craig, with Alison Dickens, ‘Ely Cathedral and Environs: Recent Investigations’, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 161–74 [Middle and Late Saxon evidence, such as a charnel pit, may relate to the pre-cathedral Benedictine monastery] Davies, Gareth, Neil Faulkner and Martin Hatton, see sect. 9ciii [Sedgeford, Norf.] Gilmour, Brian, see sect. 9eiii [cemetery at St Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln] Waldron, Tony, see sect. 9eiii [St Peter’s, Barton-on-Humber, Lincs.] iv. The Midlands Blockley, Kevin, ‘Pershore Abbey’s Anglo-Saxon Past’, The Recorder (Worcester, Worcs. Archaeol. Soc.) 54 (1996), 11 [Worcs.] Engel, Ute, Worcester Cathedral: an Architectural History, trans. Hilary Heltay (Chichester) [‘The Anglo-Saxon Predecessors’, sect. 6.1; see also in sect. 3 and, esp. for cults of Oswald and Wulfstan II, in sect. 7; trans. and rev. of work publ. in 2000] Gardiner, Rena, Look at Brixworth Church (Blandford, 1995) Gilbert, Edward S., ‘Wystan’s Church, Repton: its Date and Significance’, Cahiers archéologiques, fin de l’Antiquité et Moyen Âge 22 (1972), 237–9 Lewis, Mary E., see sect. 9a [cemetery at Raunds Furnells] Rodwell, Warwick, ‘The Forgotten Cathedral’, CA 205, 9–17 [Lichfield, including the ‘Lichfield angel’ sculpture]

337

Bibliography for 2007 Taylor, H. M., St Wystan’s Church, Repton: a Guide and History, with minor alterations and additions by Martin Biddle, Birthe Kjølbye-Biddle and Stephen Medcalf (Derby, 2002) v. The North Bailiff, I. K., see sect. 9ii [Jarrow] Barber, Brian, see sect. 6c [Doncaster] Buckberry, Jo, see sect. 9eiii [churchyard burials in Yorks.] Daniels, Robin, Anglo-Saxon Hartlepool and the Foundations of English Christianity: an Archaeology of the Anglo-Saxon Monastery, Tees Archaeol. Monograph Ser. 3 (Hartlepool) Lewis, Mary E., see sect. 9a [cemetery at St Helen-on-the-Walls, York] Loveluck, Christopher, ‘Cædmon’s World: Secular and Monastic Lifestyles and Estate Organization in Northern England, AD 650–900’, ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’, ed. Allen J. Frantzen and John Hines [see sect. 3biii, with ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’], pp. 150–90 Lowe, Christopher, Excavations at Hoddom, Dumfriesshire: an Early Ecclesiastical Site in South-West Scotland (Edinburgh, 2006) [a report on this Northumbrian monastery, including an account of the post-Roman stones, by Derek Craig; and an appendix on the place-names of southern Annandale, by Daphne Brooke] Mays, S., C. Harding and C. Heighway, Wharram, a Study of Settlement on the Yorkshire Wolds, XI: the Churchyard, York Univ. Archaeol. Publ. 13 (York) [includes reports on AS human remains, coins and artefacts] Points, Guy, see sect. 9a [Yorks.] Stronach, Simon, ‘The Anglian Monastery and Medieval Priory of Coldingham: urbs Coludi Revisited’, Proc. of the Soc. of Antiquaries of Scotland 135 (2005), 395–422 Swann, A. C., and I. Roberts, see sect. 9ev [Wakefield Cathedral, West Yorks.] Went, D., and M. Jecock, Sockburn Hall, Darlington: an Archaeological Investigation of the Medieval and Post-Medieval Manors and the Setting of the Pre-Conquest Church, Eng. Heritage Research Dept. Report 82/2007 (Portsmouth) [a minster site, the site of a later pre-Conquest church] e. Cemeteries and other burials i. General and miscellaneous Carr, Lydia, ‘Sonia Chadwick Hawkes and the “Three Ships”’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 49–51 [implications for the nature of early burials if the period of AS settlement began with the arrival of warriors in only a few ships] Crawford, Sally, ‘“Gomol is snoterost”: Growing Old in Anglo-Saxon England’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 53–60 [social implications of evidence from early burials] Devlin, Zoe, Remembering the Dead in Anglo-Saxon England: Memory Theory in Archaeology, BAR Brit. Ser. 446 (Oxford) Fern, Chris, ‘Early Anglo-Saxon Horse Burial of the Fifth to Seventh Centuries AD’, ASSAH 14, 92–109 [extensive survey]

338

Bibliography for 2007 Gowland, Rebecca, ‘Beyond Ethnicity: Symbols of Social Identity from the Fourth to the Sixth Centuries in England’, ASSAH 14, 56–65 Hadley, Dawn, ‘The Garden Gives Up its Secrets: the Developing Relationship between Rural Settlements and Cemeteries, c. 750–1100’, ASSAH 14, 194– 203 Härke, Heinrich, ‘Ethnicity, “Race” and Migration in Mortuary Archaeology: an Attempt at a Short Answer’, ASSAH 14, 12–18 Harrington, Sue, see sect. 9a [female burials] Henig, Martin, and Tyler Jo Smith, ed., see sect. 9a Lee, Christina, Feasting the Dead: Food and Drink in Anglo-Saxon Burial Rituals, AS Stud. 9 (Woodbridge) ‘“Wær wæs symbla cyst”: Food in the Funerary Rites of the Early Anglo-Saxons’, At the Table: Metaphorical and Material Cultures of Food in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ed. Timothy J. Tomasik and Juliann M. Vitullo, Arizona Stud. in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance 18 (Turnhout), pp. 125–44 Semple, Sarah, and Howard Williams, ed., Early Medieval Mortuary Practices [= ASSAH 14] (Oxford) Williams, Howard, ‘Cremation in Early Anglo-Saxon England: Past, Present and Future Research’, Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005), pp. 533–49 ‘Emotive Force of Early Medieval Mortuary Practices’, Archaeol. Rev. from Cambridge 22.1, 107–23 ‘Introduction: Themes in the Archaeology of Early Medieval Death and Burial’, ASSAH 14, 1–11 see also sect. 9h [toilet implements in early burials] ii. The South Anheuser, Kilian, and Myrsini Roumeliotou, see sect. 9ji [Headley Drive, near Tadworth, Surrey] [Anon.], see sect. 9cii, in two entries [first entry, on Covent Garden, Westminster; and in second entry, on St Martin’s in the Fields, Westminster] Booth, Paul, et al., see sect. 9cii [cemeteries in upper and middle Thames] Brookes, Stuart, ‘Boat-Rivets in Graves in Pre-Viking Kent: Reassessing Anglo-Saxon Boat-Burial Traditions’, MA 51, 1–18 [these ‘pseudo-boat-burials’ contain fragments of nautical wood and ironwork] ‘Walking with Anglo-Saxons: Landscapes of the Dead in Early Anglo-Saxon Kent’, ASSAH 14, 143–53 [discusses the close correlation of burials with routeways] Brown, John, see sect. 9cii [Covent Garden, Westminster] Brugmann, Birte, Helena Hamerow and Deborah K. Harlan, ‘The Novum Inventorium Sepulchrale: Anglo-Saxon Graves and Grave Goods from Kent in the Sonia Hawkes Archive’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 45–7 [introduces a new online resource for previously unpubl., or inadequately publ., finds of Kentish artefacts (web.arch.ox.ac.uk/archives/ inventorium)]

339

Bibliography for 2007 Burton, Emily, ‘New Discoveries at St Martin-in-the-Fields’, Rescue News 102, 1–3 [early burials include high-status, seventh-century examples from this London site] Cherryson, Annia Kristina, ‘Disturbing the Dead: Urbanisation, the Church and the Post-Burial Treatment of Human Remains in Early Medieval Wessex, c. 600– 1100’, ASSAH 14, 130–42 Hägg, Inga, see sect. 9ji [Mill Hill, Deal, Kent] Hamilton, Derek, Mike Pitts and Andrew Reynolds, ‘A Revised Date for the Early Medieval Execution at Stonehenge’, Wiltshire Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag. 100, 202–3 [offers new dating of c. 660–890 (calibrated date range, with a probability of 95%)] Harrington, Sue, see sect. 9ji [early inhumations in Kent] Hawkes, Sonia Chadwick, and Calvin Wells, ‘The Inhumed Skeletal Material from an Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery in Worthy Park, Kingsworthy, Hampshire, South England’, Paleobios 1.1–2 (1983), 3–36 Henig, Martin, and Tyler Jo Smith, ed., see sect. 9a Holman, Adam, and Charles le Querne, see sect. 9cii [Watford, Herts.] Horsey, Ian, ‘Christchurch’, Rescue News 17 (1979), 3 [Hants.; preliminary account of AS cemetery] Marzinzik, Sonja, ‘Excavating an Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery’, Brit. Museum Mag. 57, 15 [Ringlemere Farm, Kent] Miles, David, Simon Palmer, Alex Smith and Grace Perpetua Jones, Iron Age and Roman Settlement in the Upper Thames Valley: Excavations at Claydon Pike and Other Sites within the Cotswold Water Park, Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 26 (Oxford) [includes Mid to Late Saxon inhumations at Claydon Pike] Parfitt, Keith, and Barry Corke, ‘Ringlemere Farm, Woodnesborough’, Canterbury’s Archaeol. 30 (2007 for 2005–6), 25–6 [includes an AS cemetery] Parfitt, Keith, and Tania M. Dickinson, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Old Park, near Dover, Revisited’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 111–26 Parfitt, Keith, and Stuart Needham, ‘Amber, Gold and a Bronze Age Barrow’, CA 208, 41–6 [Ringlemere Farm, Kent; includes an early AS cemetery] ‘Excavations at Ringlemere Farm, Woodnesborough, 2002–2006’, AC 127, 39–55 [near Sandwich, Kent; includes discussion of an early AS cemetery and a sunkenfeatured building] Peacock, Z., see sect. 9h [Figheldean, Wilts.] Philp, Brian, ‘The Saxon Cemetery at Alkham, near Dover’, Kent Archaeol. Rev. 170, 213–14 [discusses activities of metal-detecting treasure-hunters at the site] Stoodley, Nick, ‘New Perspectives on Cemetery Relocation in the Seventh Century AD: the Example of Portway, Andover’, ASSAH 14, 154–62 Swain, Hedley, ‘London’s Last Roman?’, CA 213, 35–9 [apart from a Late Roman burial, excavations near St Martin-in-the-Fields have produced a pendant of gold and glass, a glass palm cup and a copper hanging-bowl]

340

Bibliography for 2007 iii. The East Blair, Ian, ‘The Prittlewell Prince: an Anglo-Saxon Royal Burial’, Discovery! Unearthing the New Treasures of Archaeology, ed. Brian M. Fagan (London), pp. 106–9 ‘Prittlewell Prince’, CA 207, 8–11 Buckberry, Jo, ‘On Sacred Ground: Social Identity and Churchyard Burial in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire, c. 700–1100 AD’, ASSAH 14, 117–29 Evans, Angela, ‘BM Treasures Return to Sutton Hoo for the First Time Since Their Discovery’, Brit. Museum Mag. 42 (2002), 8 [esp. on new visitor centre at Sutton Hoo] Fell, V., and J. Watson, see sect. 9f [Flixton Park Quarry, Suff.] Filmer-Sankey, William, ‘Was Redwald a European? Sutton Hoo as a Reflection of British Attitudes to Europe’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith [see sect. 9a], pp. 61–6 Gibson, Catriona, ‘Minerva: an Early Anglo-Saxon Mixed-Rite Cemetery in Alwalton, Cambridgeshire’, ASSAH 14, 238–350 Gilmour, Brian, ‘Sub-Roman or Saxon, Pagan or Christian: Who Was Buried in the Early Cemetery at St Paul-in-the-Bail, Lincoln?’, Pagans and Christians, ed. Gilmour [see sect. 9a], pp. 229–56 Green, Barbara, see sect. 9a, with Dunn, F. I., ed. [Bergh Apton, in Norf.] Hall, Mark A., see sect. 1 [novel treating Sutton Hoo excavations] Leahy, Kevin, ‘Interrupting the pots’: the Excavation of Cleatham Anglo-Saxon Cemetery, North Lincolnshire, CBA Research Report 155 (York) [one of the largest known AS cemeteries; the stud. is principally concerned with the pottery] ‘A Warning to the Curious: Digging an Anglo-Saxon Cemetery’, CA 210, 26–31 [Cleatham, Lincs.; esp. on finds of more than one thousand urns] Minter, Faye, and Donna Wreathall, see sect. 9h [Friston, Suff.] Newton, Andrew A. S., ‘Mid-Saxon Burials at Barnwell Road, Cambridge’, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 127–34 Patrick, Philippa, Charles French and Christine Osborne, ‘Rescue Excavation of an Early Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Gunthorpe, Peterborough’, ASSAH 14, 204–37 Penn, Kenneth, and Birte Brugmann, with Karen Høilund Nielsen, Aspects of AngloSaxon Inhumation Burial: Morning Thorpe, Spong Hill, Bergh Apton and Westgarth Gardens, East Anglian Archaeol. Report 119 (Gressenhall) Penn, Kenneth, and David Whitmore, ‘A Seventh-Century Burial at Bayfield’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.2, 212–21 Roy, M., and T. Ennis, see sect. 9a, with Bennett, A., ed. [early cemetery at Rayleigh] Shotliff, Drew, ed., ‘A Selection of Fieldwork from Albion Archaeology’, CBA, MidAnglia Newsletter July 2001, 4–7 [includes a preliminary account of a cemetery at Melbourn, Cambs.] Spoerry, Paul, and Mark Hinman, see sect. 9ciii [possible pony-burial] Vierck, Hayo, ‘Redwalds Asche. Zum Grabbrauch in Sutton Hoo, Suffolk’, Offa 29 (1973 for 1972), 20–49 Waldron, Tony, St Peter’s, Barton-on-Humber, Lincolnshire: a Parish Church and its Community, II: the Human Remains, with contributions by Warwick Rodwell (Oxford) [includes remains from Phase E (c. 950–1150)]

341

Bibliography for 2007 Woodings, R. B., ed., see sect. 9a [cemetery at Swaffham] Woolhouse, Tom, ‘Proto-Christian or Evil Dead?’, Brit. Archaeol. 95, 42–3 [an AS burial in Cambs., dated to c. 700, was reburied with Norman pottery] iv. The Midlands Bond, C. J., ‘Fladbury’, Worcestershire Archaeol. Newsletter 10 (1972), 3 [undated inhumation, without grave-goods, held to be AS] Evans, J. A., and S. Tatham, ‘Defining “Local Signature” in terms of Sr Isotope Composition Using a Tenth- to Twelfth-Century Anglo-Saxon Population Living on a Jurassic Clay-Carbonate Terrain, Rutland’, Forensic Geoscience: Principles, Techniques and Applications, ed. K. Pye and D. J. Croft, Geological Soc. Special Publ. 232 (London, 2004), pp. 237–48 [skeletal Sr isotope characteristics can determine whether or not a group contained exotic elements; the cemetery discussed here is Ketton] Guilbert, Graeme, ‘Excavations at Holme Pierrepont Quarry, Nottinghamshire, in 2002–03: Preliminary Summary of a Multi-Period Palimpsest on the Trent Gravels’, Trans. of the Thoroton Soc. 110 (2007 for 2006), 15–48 [includes early AS burials and a sunken-featured building] Thomas, John, ‘Three Bronze Age Round Barrows at Cossington: a History of Use and Re-Use’, Leicestershire Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. Trans. 81, 35–63 [one of the barrows served as the site of an AS cemetery] v. The North Buckberry, J., see sect. 9eiii [Yorks.] Buckberry, J. L., and D. M. Hadley, ‘An Anglo-Saxon Execution Cemetery at Walkington Wold, Yorkshire’, Oxford Jnl of Archaeol. 26.3, 309–29 Mays, S., et al., see sect. 9dv [Wharram Percy] Points, Guy, see sect. 9a [Yorks.] Redmond, Angela Z., ‘Viking Burial in the North of England’, Dynamics of Northern Societies: Proceedings of the SILA/NABO Conference on Arctic and North Atlantic Archaeology, Copenhagen, May 10th–14th, 2004, ed. Jette Arneborg and Bjarne Grønnow, PNM Stud. in Archaeol. and Hist. 10 (Copenhagen, 2006), pp. 281–9 [publ. of Nationalmuseet (Copenhagen), addressing work of the North Atlantic Biocultural Organization and the museum’s Greenland Research Centre (SILA)] Viking Burial in the North of England: a Study of Contact, Interaction and Reaction between Scandinavian Migrants with Resident Groups, and the Effect of Immigration on Aspects of Cultural Continuity, BAR Brit. Ser. 429 (Oxford) [principally an archaeol. stud., but with sects. on place-names and the law] Rushton, Sara, et al., see sect. 9cv [Bowl Hole cemetery, Bamburgh] Swann, A. C., and I. Roberts, ‘Archaeological Investigations at Wakefield Cathedral, 1974–1995’, Yorkshire Archaeol. Jnl 78, 96–106 [includes pre-Conquest burials, one including a Trewhiddle Style ring, as described here by D. Tweddle] Taylor, G. M., C. L. Watson, A. S. Bouwman, D. N. J. Lockwood and S. A. Mays, ‘Variable Nucleotide Tandem Repeat (VNTR) Typing of Two Palaeopathological

342

Bibliography for 2007 Cases of Lepromatous Leprosy from Mediaeval England’, Jnl of Archaeol. Science 33.11, 1569–79 [one case is from an early med. burial at Wharram Percy] f. Miscellaneous artefacts [Anon.], ‘Finds of 2004’, Cotswold Archaeol. Ann. Rev. 15 (2004) [includes a small AS carved mount, from a cemetery near Malmesbury Abbey; online] ‘Finds of 2005’, Cotswold Archaeol. Ann. Rev. 16 (2005) [includes AS glass and amber beads; online] ‘Finds Return to Bamburgh’, Archaeol. in Northumberland 16, 53 [on the fate of preConquest finds from excavations of the 1960s and 1970s; publ. of the Bamburgh Research Project] Brugmann, Birte, et al., see sect. 9eii [Kentish artefacts] Dale, Ruarigh, et al., see sect. 9ciii [Essex] Fell, V., and J. Watson, Flixton Park Quarry, Suffolk: Investigative Conservation of the AngloSaxon Cemetery Material from Sites FLN 053 and FLN 062, Eng. Heritage Research Dept. Report 43/2007 (Portsmouth) [finds include shields, spears, knives and beads] Gurney, David, ed., ‘Archaeological Finds in Norfolk in 2004’, Norfolk Archaeol. 44.4 (2005), 736–50 [includes AS] Henig, Martin, ‘Historical Archaeology and the British Archaeological Association’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Henig and Tyler Jo Smith [see sect. 9a], pp. 17–25 [includes early studies of AS artefacts] Klein, Holger A., ‘Boxwood Casket: Scenes from the Life of Christ’, Sacred Gifts and Worldly Treasures: Medieval Masterworks from the Cleveland Museum of Art, ed. Klein (Cleveland), p. 133 [?West Midlands, c. 1050; copper alloy and glass inlays] Laing, Lloyd, and David Longley, The Mote of Mark: a Dark Age Hillfort in South-West Scotland (Oxford, 2006) [records Anglian finds from the site, including a runic inscription on bone] Lennartz, Annette, ‘Die Meeresschnecke Cypraea als Amulett im frühen Mittelalter: eine Neubewertung’, Bonner Jahrbücher 204 (2006 for 2004), 163–232 [includes a findlist of Cypraea shells, with some thirty Eng. examples from the fifth century to the eighth] Letch, A., see sect. 9ii [Clacton-on-Sea] Mays, S., et al., see sect. 9dv [Wharram Percy] Roesdahl, Else, ‘English Connections in the Time of Knut the Great: Material from Viborg’, Cultural Interaction between East and West, ed. Ulf Fransson et al. [see sect. 9a], pp. 276–8 [includes pottery, metalwork and bone] Roesdahl, Else, ed., ‘Katalog’, Wikinger, Waräger, Normannen. Die Skandinavier und Europa 800–1200. XXII. Kunstausstellung des Europarates, Grand Palais, Paris 2. April bis 20. Juli 1992, Altes Museum, Berlin 2. September bis 15. November 1992, Nationalmuseet, Kopenhagen 26. Dezember 1991 bis 14. März 1993, [ed. Roesdahl], pp. 223–391 [includes Scandinavian material from England] Taylor, Ruth, ‘Check List of Roman and Medieval Material from Worcestershire in Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery’, Worcestershire Archaeol. Newsletter 14 (1974), 1–3 [includes AS]

343

Bibliography for 2007 Wright, Charles D., see sect. 9h [Alfred Jewel] Žvanut, Katja, ‘The Tassilo Chalice Style: Problems of Interpretation and Definition’, Hortus Artium Medievalium 8 (2002), 273–87 [includes discussion of connections between this style and contemporary AS art, as observed on various objects] g. Stone, wood and bone i. Stone Alexander, Jennifer S., see sect. 9di [quarrying] [Anon.], The Lichfield Angel and the St Chad Gospels ‘TTP’: a Guide for Visitors (Lichfield) [publ. of the Chapter of Lichfield Cathedral (cover title: The Lichfield Angel); contains a small sect. on the ‘Turning the Pages’ digitization of the gospels, Gneuss no. 269] ‘“Find of several lifetimes”: Cathedral Archaeologist’, Brit. Archaeol. 88, 7 [AS carving of an angel from Lichfield Cathedral] Bailey, Richard N., ‘The Winwick Cross and a Suspended Sentence’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 449–72 [also on cult of Oswald] Bailey, Richard N., and Jenny Whalley, ‘A Miniature Viking-Age Hogback from the Wirral’, AntJ 86, 345–56 [includes a petrological note by Alan Bowden and Geoffrey Tresise] Billingsley, John, Stony Gaze: Investigating Celtic and Other Stone Heads (Chieveley, 1998) [carved images of heads in AS use, in chs. 2–3] Bowden, Alan, and Geoffrey Tresise, see above with Bailey, Richard N., and Jenny Whalley [petrological note] Brown, Michelle P., ‘The Lichfield Angel and the Manuscript Context: Lichfield as a Centre of Insular Art’, JBAA 160, 8–19 [esp. for parallels to the sculpture found in the Book of Cerne and Lichfield gospels (Gneuss nos. 28 and 269)] Butler, Lawrence, ‘Recent Archaeological Work in the Dioceses of Ripon and Wakefield 1991–2000’, Yorkshire Archaeol. Jnl 78, 85–110 [includes appendices on AS sculptural fragments from Little Ouseburn and Gilling West] Capelle, Torsten, see sect. 9a [house-shaped hogback] Carruthers, Leo, see sect. 3bi [AS sculpture and poetry] Carter, H. M., ‘Anglo-Saxon Carving from West Mersea Church’, Colchester Archaeol. Group Ann. Bull. 14 (1971), 37 Craig, Derek, ‘Magdalen Field, West Tanfield: a Possible Eremitic Site in Yorkshire’, The Modern Traveller to our Past: Festschrift in honour of Ann Hamlin, ed. Marion Meek ([n.p.], 2006), pp. 94–9 [reconsideration of two AS sculptural fragments] see also sect. 9dv, with Lowe, Christopher [monastic use of stone in Northumbria] Durman, Richard, Ham Hill: Portrait of a Building Stone (Reading, 2006) [includes discussion of AS use of the stone, esp. in Sherborne Abbey, and the Athelney font] Edwards, R. E., ‘Trial Excavation and Salvage Recording at St Oswald’s Almshouses, Worcester (HWCM 9931)’, Trans. of the Worcestershire Archaeol. Soc. 13 (1992), 181– 91 [includes Saxo-Norman or Norman stone mouldings]

344

Bibliography for 2007 Forster, Amanda K., Steatite Vessels in the Norse North Atlantic 800–1400, Finds Research Group Datasheet 34 ([n.p.], 2004) [relevant to finds from York] Foys, Martin K., see sect. 3a [sculpture] Fuglesang, Signe Horn, ‘Runesteinenes ikonografi’, Hikuin 32 (2005), 75–94 [iconography on continental runic memorial stones showing influences from Britain and Ireland] Gittos, B., and M. Gittos, ‘Saxon Cross Fragment Displayed at Dorchester’, Newsletter, the Church Monuments Soc. 4.1 (1988), 15–16 [a cross fragment from Shaftesbury, Dorset] Gondek, Meggen, ‘Investing in Sculpture: Power in Early-Historic Scotland’, MA 50, 105–42 [sect. on Dumfries and Galloway includes Northumbrian connections] Hall, Mark, ‘Exhibition Review: Whithorn’s Medieval Material Culture on Display’, Scottish Archaeol. Jnl 27.1 (2006 for 2005), 89–93 Hamilton-Dalrymple, W. B., ‘The Great Cross at Stonegrave’, Ryedale Historian 10 (1980), 63–9 Hawkes, Jane, ‘Collingwood and Anglo-Saxon Sculpture: Art History or Archaeology?’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 142–52 ‘Gregory the Great and Angelic Mediation: the Anglo-Saxon Crosses of the Derbyshire Peaks’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 431–48 Henderson, George, ‘The Representation of the Apostles in Insular Art, with Special Reference to the New Apostles Frieze at Tarbat, Ross-shire’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 473–94 [includes the Rothbury Cross and the Hedda shrine at Peterborough; also esp. on Gneuss no. 848.8] Henderson, Isabel, ‘New Animal Ornament on the Cross-Slab from Hilton of Cadboll, Ross and Cromarty, Scotland’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 198–214 [includes consideration of influences from eastern England] Johnston, A. G., ‘An Archaeological Detective Story’, Northamptonshire Archaeol. 33 (2005), 158–62 [the Fotheringhay fragments, putatively from an AS cross, are shown to be fakes] Kopár, Lilla, see sect. 9giii [pre-Conquest stone carvings] Mills, Sally, ‘The Mysterious Dragon Slayer Window’, Chronicle: the Jnl of the Yeovil Archaeol. and Local Hist. Soc. 8.5 (2003), 111–13 [on a carving at St Mary the Virgin, Stoke-sub-Hamdon, Som.] ‘St Mary the Virgin, Stoke sub Hamdon: George and the Dragon and Other Stories’, Chronicle: the Jnl of the Yeovil Archaeol. and Local Hist. Soc. 8.6 (2004), 137–40 [includes discussion of a reused pre-Conquest carving] Minnis, Alastair, and Jane Roberts, ed., see sect. 3a Moss, Rachel, ed., see sect. 5c Neuman de Vegvar, Carol, ‘Converting the Anglo-Saxon Landscape: Crosses and Their Audiences’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 407–29 [includes suggestion that vegetal crosses served as weather crosses or processional markers; with a catalogue of non-figural crosses and shafts]

345

Bibliography for 2007 Newman, Phil, ‘Copplestone Cross Witnesses its Third Millennium’, Devon Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 75 (2000), 1 [tenth-century cross with interlace decoration] Onians, John, ‘The Romsey Roods: Christ, Rods and the Geography of Religion’, Pagans and Christians, ed. Lauren Gilmour [see sect. 9a], pp. 215–18 [association of Christ with columns and trees] Orton, Fred, and Ian Wood, with Clare A. Lees, Fragments of History: Rethinking the Ruthwell and Bewcastle Monuments (Manchester) [‘The Ruthwell Runes and The Dream of the Rood’, ch. 7; otherwise, principally a stud. of the artefacts, including a complete photographic record of both crosses] Panter, Ian, and Richard Hall, ‘Gingering up the Viking Age in Lythe’, Yorkshire Archaeol. Today 13, 16–18 [an account of the Lythe hogback (Lythe 29 in the Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture)] Points, Guy, see sect. 9a [Yorks.] Potts, W. T. W., ‘A Fragment of an Anglo-Saxon Cross Shaft from Halton Green’, Contrebis 9 (1981), 18–20 Redknap, Mark, see sect. 9h [sculpture, esp. in early med. Wales and the March] Rendell, Joan, ‘A Saxon Stone’, Search (Banwell, Banwell Soc. of Archaeol.) 20 (1984), 40 [interlace-decorated stone reused in the fifteenth century] Rodwell, Warwick, see sect. 9div [‘Lichfield angel’ sculpture] Watts, Susan, Rotary Querns c. 700–1700, Finds Research Group, Datasheet 38 ([n.p.], 2006) Whitfield, Niamh, ‘A Suggested Function for the Holy Well?’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 495–513 [esp. on AS stone fonts; also for Bede] Williams, Brian C. J., The Story of St Mary and St Hardulph Church: a Cradle of Our Faith (Nottingham, 1996) [contains descriptions and illustrations of the AS sculpture located in the later church; cover title: St Mary and St Hardulph Church, Breedon on the Hill: a History Guide] ii. Wood [Anon.], see sect. 9cii [third entry; fragments of boat timbers from Newham] Brookes, Stuart, see sect. 9eii [first entry; fragments of nautical wood and ironwork] Capelle, Torsten, ‘Anglische, sächsische und angelsächsische Holzschnitzkunst’, Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 53 (1985 for 1984), 117–32 Favreau, Robert, ‘Les autels portatifs et leurs inscriptions’, CCM 46 (2003), 327–52 [esp. on reliquary of Cuthbert; also for Alcuin] Hillam, Jennifer, ‘A Winchester Tree-Ring Chronology and a Medieval Walnut Toilet Seat’, NewsWARP (Exeter) 11 (1992), 16–20 [data from AS and late med. timbers give a tree-ring chronology from AD 443 to 1128, although the seat itself remains undatable; publ. of Wetland Archaeol. Research Project] Malim, Tim, ‘Recent Waterlogged Wood Finds from Cambridgeshire’, NewsWARP (Exeter) 24 (1998), 16–20 [esp. on excavation of an AS well with wattle lining; publ. of Wetland Archaeol. Research Project] Underwood, Richard, ‘The Early Anglo-Saxon Shield: Reconstruction as an Aid to

346

Bibliography for 2007 Interpretation’, The Cutting Edge: Studies in Ancient and Medieval Combat, [ed.] Barry Molloy (Stroud), pp. 134–43 [includes discussion of wooden, leather and iron constituents; also for Riddle 5 in the Exeter Book] iii. Bone [Anon.], ‘Selected Acquisitions: November 1990 to April 1991’, Brit. Museum Mag. 6 (1991), 26–8 [includes an AS ivory plaque depicting Christ in majesty] ‘Spoon Tops Important Anglo-Saxon Finds’, Brit. Archaeol. 90, 6 [a decorated bone spoon from Winchester] Ashby, Steven P., ‘Bone and Antler Combs: towards a Methodology for the Understanding of Trade and Identity in Viking Age England and Scotland’, From Hooves to Horns, from Mollusc to Mammoth. Manufacture and Use of Bone Artefacts from Prehistoric Times to the Present. Proceedings of the Fourth Meeting of the ICAZ Worked Bone Research Group at Tallinn, 26th–31st of August 2003, ed. H. Luik, A. Choyke, C. Batey and L. Lõugas, Muinasaja teadus 15 (Tallinn, 2005), pp. 255– 62 ‘Trade in Viking Age Britain: Identity and the Production and Distribution of Bone and Antler Combs’, Dynamics of Northern Societies: Proceedings of the SILA/NABO Conference on Arctic and North Atlantic Archaeology, Copenhagen, May 10th–14th, 2004, ed. Jette Arneborg and Bjarne Grønnow, PNM Stud. in Archaeol. and Hist. 10 (Copenhagen, 2006), pp. 273–9 [publ. of Nationalmuseet (Copenhagen), addressing work of the North Atlantic Biocultural Organization and the museum’s Greenland Research Centre (SILA)] Bone and Antler Combs, Finds Research Group Datasheet 40 ([n.p.]) Chapman, Andy, Medieval Stylised Chess Pieces, Finds Research Group Datasheet 35 ([n.p.], 2005) [examples, made from antler, bone or jet, date from the eleventh century to the fourteenth] Kopár, Lilla, ‘The Wings of Weland’, The Iconography of the Fantastic II, ed. Attila Kiss et al. (Szeged, 2002), pp. 39–48 [esp. for Franks Casket, and for pre-Conquest stone carvings; also on Deor] Laing, Lloyd, and David Longley, see sect. 9f [runic inscription on bone] Leaf, Helen, ‘Medieval Bone Flutes in England’, Breaking and Shaping Beastly Bodies: Animals as Material Culture in the Middle Ages, ed. Aleksander Pluskowski (Oxford), pp. 11–17 [includes early med.] Pearson, Trevor, ‘Bone Working Debris from Castle Road, Scarborough’, Trans. of the Scarborough Archaeol. and Hist. Soc. 37 (2001–2), 13–14 [perforated bone artefacts identified as blanks for the manufacture of bone beads, dating from the tenth century to the thirteenth] h. Metalwork Adams, Kurt, ‘Portable Antiquities Roundup for Gloucestershire and Avon’, Proc. of the Cotteswold Naturalists’ Field Club 44.1 (2007 for 2006), 31–9 [includes an AS copper-alloy strap-end, a Viking copper-alloy spur and other early med. items]

347

Bibliography for 2007 Ager, Barry, Amy Cooper and Gareth Williams, ‘The Harrogate Hoard: St Peter, Islam and Thor in the Melting Pot’, Brit. Archaeol. 97, 32–3 [a silver cup containing scrap metal from the Viking period] Allen, David, ‘Saxon Bowl Returns to Winchester’, Hampshire Field Club and Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 48, 5–7 [an account of the discovery of the hanging-bowl, and its return by the British Museum] [Anon.], ‘The Winchester Purse Reliquary’, Rescue News 20 (1979), 8 Behr, Charlotte, ‘Using Bracteates as Evidence for Long-Distance Contacts’, Incipient Globalization? Long-Distance Contacts in the Sixth Century, ed. Anthea Harris, BAR International Ser. 1644 [= Reading Med. Stud. 32] (Oxford), pp. 15–25 [includes AS] Biggs, Norman, and Paul Withers, Lead Weights: the David Rogers Collection, Eng. Weights Ser. 6 (Powys, 2000) [includes AS, esp. in sect. b] Blackburn, Mark, see sect. 7 [gold and silver] Blackwell, Alice, ‘An Anglo-Saxon Figure-Decorated Plaque from Ayton (Scottish Borders), its Parallels and Implications’, MA 51, 165–72 Blakelock, Eleanor, and Gerry McDonnell, ‘A Review of Metallographic Analyses of Early Medieval Knives’, Hist. Metallurgy 41.1, 40–56 Bourke, Cormac, ‘The Pommel-Knop of an Early Medieval Sword from Ballyholland Lower, County Down’, Ulster Jnl of Archaeol. 64 (2005), 176–8 [found in a souterrain, and identified as a part of an AS sword of the late ninth or early tenth century] Brather, Sebastian, ‘Von der “Tracht” zur “Kleidung”: neue Fragestellungen und Konzepte in der Archäologie des Mittelalters’, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters 35, 185–206 [interpreting social distinctions through metalwork providing evidence for clothing; includes AS] Brookes, Stuart, see sect. 9eii [first entry; fragments of nautical ironwork] Clegg, Pat, and Sonia O’Connor, ‘Head Start’, Conservation News 20 (1983), 9–11 [esp. on problems of mounting Coppergate helmet for display] Cooper, Amy, ‘The Harrogate Hoard’, CA 212, 26–30 [large Viking hoard, including a Carolingian cup, and AS and Anglo-Scandinavian coins] Department for Culture, Media and Sport [U.K.], Export of Objects of Cultural Interest, 2006–07: 1 May 2006–30 April 2007 (London) [AS items include a gilded mount with interlace decoration (Case 7); a great square-headed brooch (Case 8); and a silver-gilt zoomorphic mount (Case 26)] Edwards, Glynis, ‘The Conservation of Gilded Archaeological Artifacts: its Effects and Implications’, Gilding, Approaches to Treatment: a Joint Conference of English Heritage and the United Kingdom Institute for Conservation, 27–28 September 2000, ed. Jeremy Noel-Tod (London, 2001), pp. 7–12 [includes AS brooches from Appledown, Sussex, and Mucking, Essex, and attached textiles] Egan, Geoff, ‘Later Medieval Non-Ferrous Metalwork and Evidence for Metal Working, AD 1050–1100 to 1500–50’, David Griffiths et al., Meols, pp. 77–188 Ellis, Blanche M. A., Prick Spurs 700–1700, Finds Research Group, Datasheet 30 ([n.p.], 2002)

348

Bibliography for 2007 Gannon, Anna, ‘Pushing Boundaries: Anglo-Saxon Zoomorphic Pins’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 40–9 Gilmour, Brian, ‘Swords, seaxes and Saxons: Pattern-Welding and Edged Weapon Technology from Late Roman Britain to Anglo-Saxon England’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 91–109 Griffiths, David, ‘Early Medieval Material, AD 400–450 to 1050–1100’, Griffiths et al., Meols, pp. 58–77 Griffiths, David, Robert A. Philpott and Geoff Egan, Meols, the Archaeology of the North Wirral Coast: Discoveries and Observations in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, with a Catalogue of Collections, with contributions by Janet Axworthy et al., Oxford Univ. School of Archaeol., Monograph 68 (Oxford) Gurney, David, ed., ‘Archaeological Finds in Norfolk in 2005’, Norfolk Archaeol. 45.1 (2006), 112–23 [AS finds are all metalwork] Harris, Anthea, ‘Britain and China at Opposite Ends of the World? Archaeological Methodology and Long-Distance Contacts in the Sixth Century’, Incipient Globalization? Long-Distance Contacts in the Sixth Century, ed. Anthea Harris, BAR International Ser. 1644 [= Reading Med. Stud. 32] (Oxford), pp. 91–104 [comparing finds of Byzantine coinage in the two countries] Henig, Martin, and Tyler Jo Smith, ed., see sect. 9a Hindman, Sandra, with Ilaria Fatone and Angélique Laurent-di Mantova, Toward an Art History of Medieval Rings: a Private Collection (London) [the private collection of Sandra Hindman, including an AS gold and garnet ring of unstated provenance, and a braided-gold Viking ring, possibly from England] Hinds, Katie, ‘Highlights from the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) in Wiltshire in 2005’, Wiltshire Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Mag. 100, 238–9 [includes an AngloScandinavian buckle and a penny of Offa] Hines, John, see sect. 10 [inscribed lead plaque] Howard-Davies, Chris, see sect. 9ii, with [Various] [Beds.] Kendrick, David, ‘News from the County Museum’, Worcestershire Recorder 76, 6–8 [includes an AS silver-gilt roundel with spiral ornament] Laing, Lloyd, ‘Romano-British Metalworking and the Anglo-Saxons’, Britons in AngloSaxon England, ed. Nick Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 42–56 Leahy, Kevin, ‘Soldiers and Settlers in Britain, Fourth to Fifth Century – Revisited’, ‘Collectanea Antiqua’, ed. Martin Henig and Tyler Jo Smith, pp. 133–43 [reconsideration of metalwork associated with Late Roman Germanic foederati in Britain; includes appendix on the continental background by Barry Ager] Lewis, A. S., ‘The Cuerdale Hoard’, Contrebis 2.2 (1974), 38–40 Lewis, Michael, ‘A New Date for “Class A, Type IIA” Stirrup-Strap Mounts and Some Observations on Their Distribution’, MA 51, 178–84 [previously thought to be AS, this type is now dated to between c. 1070 and c. 1140; discussion includes Late Saxon motifs] Lowe, Jennifer, ed., ‘News from the Portable Antiquities Scheme’, CBA, Wessex News April 2007, 22–4 [includes seventh- to eighth-century skillet, possibly for baptismal use, found near Shalfleet, Isle of Wight]

349

Bibliography for 2007 McDonald, Catherine, ‘The Portable Antiquities Scheme: a Small Selection of Finds in Essex from August 2003 to December 2005’, Essex Archaeol. and Hist. 36 (2007 for 2005), 92–8 [includes an AS button brooch, an Anglo-Scandinavian sword pommel and a silver coin (a sceat)] Marzinzik, Sonja, The Sutton Hoo Helmet (London) Middleton, Andrew, et al., see sect. 9ii [disc brooch] Minnis, Alastair, and Jane Roberts, ed., see sect. 3a Minter, Faye, and Donna Wreathall, ‘A Recent Find’, Newsletter, Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. 65, 9 [copper-alloy figurine from an early AS cemetery at Friston] Moss, Rachel, ed., see sect. 5c Mudd, Andrew, ‘Early to Middle Saxon Iron Smelting Furnaces at the Kitchen Garden, Fineshade Abbey, Northamptonshire’, Northamptonshire Archaeol. 34 (2006), 81–95 Nees, Lawrence, ‘Weaving Garnets: Thoughts about Two “Excessively Rare” Belt Mounts from Sutton Hoo’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 1–17 [adduces parallels for the decoration among artefacts, doubtfully including the Book of Durrow (Gneuss no. 213)] Ottaway, Patrick, ‘Later Medieval Iron Objects, 1050–1100 to 1500–50’, with contributions by David Griffiths, Griffiths et al., Meols, pp. 188–213 Payne, Naomi, ‘Finds Reported to the Portable Antiquities Scheme in 2006’, Proc. of the Dorset Nat. Hist. and Archaeol. Soc. 128 (2007 for 2006), 133–6 [includes early med. openwork pendant, ansate brooch and harness link] Peacock, Z., Barrow Clump, Figheldean, Wiltshire: Investigative Conservation of Anglo-Saxon Metalwork, Eng. Heritage Research Dept., Report 88/2007 (Portsmouth) [metalwork from the early cemetery] Philpott, Robert, ‘Fishing Equipment’, David Griffiths et al., Meols, pp. 279–86 Ravilious, Kate, ‘Spectacular Viking Hoard’, Archaeology 60.6, 9 [Viking-Age hoard found near Harrogate, Yorks.] Redknap, Mark, ‘Crossing Boundaries: Stylistic Diversity and External Contacts in Early Medieval Wales and the March – Reflections on Metalwork and Sculpture’, CMCS 53–4, 23–86 [extensive discussion of AS metalwork] Reed, S. J., G. Juleff and O. J. Bayer, ‘Three Late Saxon Iron-Smelting Furnaces at Burlescombe, Devon’, Devon Archaeol. Soc. Proc. 64 (2006), 71–122 Rees, Helen, ‘The Winchester Bowl Comes Home’, Hampshire Field Club and Archaeol. Soc. Newsletter 47, 2–4 [hanging-bowl, found in an AS grave, returned by British Museum] Rushton, Sara, et al., see sect. 9cv [Bamburgh sword] Schmidt, Berthold, ‘Sächsische, angelsächsische und skandinavische Einflüsse in Mitteldeutschland während des 6. und 7. Jahrhunderts’, Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005), 403–19 [AS influences are represented by saucer-brooches and cruciform brooches] Shearman, Fleur, ‘Behind the Scenes: Fleur Shearman Revives Anglo-Saxon Jewellery’, Brit. Museum Mag. 8 (1991), 9 [conservation of jewellery from burials in Ipswich] ‘Excavation, Examination and Conservation of Anglo-Saxon Jewellery from Bosshall, Ipswich’, Conservator 17 (1993), 26–33

350

Bibliography for 2007 Speake, George, see sect. 5c [interlace and metalwork] Swain, Hedley, see sect. 9eii [St Martin-in-the-Fields, London; pendant and hangingbowl] Thomas, Gabor, Late Anglo-Saxon and Viking-Age Strap-Ends 750–1100, Finds Research Group, Datasheet 32–3 ([n.p.], 2003–4) [publ. in two pts.] Tweddle, D., see sect. 9ev, with Swann, A. C., and I. Roberts [Trewhiddle Style ring from Wakefield Cathedral, West Yorks.] Ulmschneider, Katharina, see sect. 9ci [metal-detecting and early med. markets] Underwood, Richard, see sect. 9gii [iron in AS shields] [Various], ‘Acquisitions’, Brit. Museum Mag. 58, 15–16 [includes seventh-century gold sword-hilt fittings found near Market Rasen, Lincs.] Watt, Sarah, ed., ‘Warwickshire’, West Midlands Archaeol. 48 (2005), 80–107 [includes an early med. dress hook from Bidford-on-Avon] Whitfield, Niamh, ‘The Manufacture of Ancient Beaded Wire: Experiments and Observations’, Jewellery Stud. 8 (1998), 57–86 [includes AS examples] ‘Motifs and Techniques in Early Medieval Celtic Filigree: Their Ultimate Origins’, Making and Meaning in Insular Art, ed. Rachel Moss, pp. 18–39 [includes AS and Scandinavian uses of filigree] Williams, David, Anglo-Scandinavian Horse Harness Fittings, Finds Research Group, Datasheet 39 ([n.p.]) ‘A Seventh Century Metalworking Die from West Clandon’, Surrey Archaeol. Soc. Bull. 400, 9–10 Williams, Howard, ‘Transforming Body and Soul: Toilet Implements in Early AngloSaxon Graves’, ASSAH 14, 66–91 Wilson, David M., ‘Director’s Choice: David M. Wilson Is Fascinated by the Fuller Brooch’, Brit. Museum Mag. 8 (1991), 13 Wright, Charles D., ‘Why Sight Holds Flowers: an Apocryphal Source for the Iconography of the Alfred Jewel and Fuller Brooch’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts, pp. 169–86 [also for prose Solomon and Saturn and Durham collectar (Gneuss no. 223); also esp. for Alfred and Ælfric, and for Asser] Young, Graeme, ‘The Bamburgh Sword’, Archaeol. in Northumberland 17, 51 [includes discussion of two pattern-welded swords and an axe, all found in early excavations] Zori, Davide, ‘Nails, Rivets and Clench Bolts: a Case for Typological Clarity’, Archaeologia Islandica 6, 32–47 [bears on issues in AS archaeol.] Žvanut, Katja, see sect. 9f [decorated metalwork] i. Ceramics and glass i. Ceramics Allen, Michael J., ‘Prehistoric and Medieval Environment of Old Town, Eastbourne: Studies of Hillwash in the Bourne Valley, Star Brewery Site’, Sussex Archaeol. Collections 145, 33–66 [includes Late Saxon pottery] Bailiff, I. K., ‘TL Dating of Medieval Pottery from North-East England Using the PreDose Technique’, PACT (Rixensart et alibi) 7 (1982), 75–80 [includes thermolu-

351

Bibliography for 2007 minescence dating of pottery from Jarrow; publ. of European Stud. Group on Physical, Chemical and Mathematical Techniques Applied to Archaeol. (PACT)] Blackmore, Lyn, see sect. 9cii, with Bluer, Richard, and Trevor Brigham et al. [London] Boyle, Angela, and Anne Marie Cromarty, ‘A Multi-Period Settlement at Bradford’s Brook, Cholsey’, Cromarty et al., Late Bronze Age Ritual and Habitation, pp. 201–24 [AS settlement is indicated by pottery, and by a glass bead] Caruana, Ian, ‘The Anglo-Saxon Pot in the Senhouse Museum, Maryport’, Trans. of the Cumberland and Westmorland Ant. and Archaeol. Soc. 7, 224–5 Cromarty, Anne Marie, Alistair Barclay, George Lambrick and Mark Robinson, Late Bronze Age Ritual and Habitation on a Thames Eyot at Whitecross Farm, Wallingford: the Archaeology of the Wallingford Bypass, 1986–92, Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 22 (Oxford, 2006) [title on spine: Archaeology of the Wallingford Bypass, 1986– 92] Dale, Ruarigh et al., see sect. 9ciii [Essex] Davison, Alan, see sect. 9ciii [Godwick and Beeston St Andrew, Norf.] Entwistle, R. M., and J. Pearson, ‘The Conservation of Sixty-Three Anglo-Saxon Loom-Weights’, Conservator 20 (1996), 37–44 [clay loom-weights from Grimstone End, Pakenham, Suff.] Jackson, Reg, see sect. 9cii [Bristol] Leahy, Kevin, see sect. 9eiii [two items; Cleatham AS cemetery, North Lincs.] Letch, A., ‘A Bronze Age, Roman and Saxon Site at Bishops Park College, Jaywick Lane, Clacton-on-Sea: Excavation 2003’, Esssex Archaeol. and Hist. 36 (2007 for 2005), 55–70 [contains discussion of several AS artefacts, esp. including pottery] Mepham, Lorraine, and Lisa Brown, with Rowena Gale, Andy Russel, Chris Stevens and Alan Vince, ‘The Broughton to Timsbury Pipeline, Part 1: a Late Saxon Pottery Kiln and the Production Centre at Michelmersh, Hampshire’, Proc. of the Hampshire Field Club and Archaeol. Soc. 62, 35–68 [with illustrations by S. E. James; title on cover of jnl is Hampshire Stud.] Middleton, Andrew, Fleur Shearman, Colleen Stapleton and Susan Youngs, ‘The Guilton Brooch: the Earliest Cloisonné Enamel in Western Europe?’, Jewellery Stud. 8 (1998), 27–36 [an AS polychrome Kentish disc brooch] Mudd, Andrew, see sect. 9cii [Chieveley, West Berks.] Müller, Ulrich, Zwischen Gebrauch und Bedeutung. Studien zur Funktion von Sachkultur am Beispiel mittelalterlichen Handwaschgeschirrs (5./6. bis 15./16. Jahrhundert), Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters Beiheft 20 (Bonn, 2006) [includes a sect. on Tating Ware, with Eng. locations] Norton, Andrew, see sect. 9cii [Northmoor, Oxon.] Timby, Jane, and Paul Blinkhorn, see sect. 9cii, with Preston, Steve [occupation near Stony Stratford, Milton Keynes] [Various], ‘The Finds’, Settlement on the Bedfordshire Claylands, ed. Jane Timby et al. [see sect. 9a], pp. 213–302 [esp. in analyses of post-Roman pottery, by Paul Blinkhorn; structural clay and ceramic building material, by Cynthia Poole; and metalwork, by Chris Howard-Davies]

352

Bibliography for 2007 ii. Glass [Anon.], see sect. 9f [first entry; glass beads] Bayley, Justine, ‘Early Medieval Lead-Rich Glass Trinkets’, Research News 6, 24–5 Boyle, Angela, and Anne Marie Cromarty, see sect. 9ii [glass bead] Brugmann, Birte, ‘Zur Datierung von Glasperlen in angelsächsischen Körpergräbern’, Studien zur Sachsenforschung 15 (2005), 119–47 Campbell, Ewan, Continental and Mediterranean Imports to Atlantic Britain and Ireland, AD 400–800, CBA Research Report 157 (York) [includes Germanic glass imports such as claw-beakers and Kempston-type beakers, in a comparison of AngloSaxon with Celtic continental trade] Henderson, Julian, ‘Some Chemical and Physical Characteristics of Ancient Glass and the Potential of Scientific Investigations’, Glass Circle 7 (1991), 67–77 [includes early med. glass] Swain, Hedley, see sect. 9eii [St Martin-in-the-Fields, London; pendant of gold and glass, and glass palm cup] Tyson, Rachel, ‘Glass Objects’, David Griffiths et al., Meols [see sect. 9h], pp. 247–51 [includes beads and pin-heads dating from the tenth century to the thirteenth] j. Textiles and leather i. Textiles Andersson, Eva B., ‘Textile Tools and Production During the Viking Age’, Ancient Textiles, Production, Craft and Society: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ancient Textiles, Held at Lund, Sweden and Copenhagen, Denmark on March 19–23, 2003, ed. Carole Gillis and Marie-Louise B. Nosch (Oxford), pp. 17–25 Anheuser, Kilian, and Myrsini Roumeliotou, ‘Characterisation of Mineralised Archaeological Textile Fibres through Chemical Staining’, Conservator 27 (2003), 23– 33 [concerns material from AS cemetery at Headley Drive, near Tadworth, Surrey] Biggam, C. P., see sect. 2ai [first entry; whelk dyes] Brather, Sebastian, see sect. 9h [metalwork as evidence for clothing] Coatsworth, Elizabeth, ‘Text and Textile’, Text, Image, Interpretation, ed. Alastair Minnis and Jane Roberts [see sect. 3a], pp. 187–207 [esp. on Durham finds and Maaseik embroideries, and on Bayeux ‘tapestry’; also esp. for Historia de S. Cuthberto and Liber Eliensis] see also sect. 6a [domestic textiles] Coatsworth, Elizabeth, and Gale R. Owen-Crocker, Medieval Textiles of the British Isles AD 450–1100: an Annotated Bibliography, BAR Brit. Ser. 445 (Oxford) Edwards, Glynis, see sect. 9h [brooches with attached textiles] Fleming, Robin, see sect. 6c [silk] Foys, Martin K., see sect. 3a [Bayeux ‘tapestry’] Hägg, Inga, ‘Grab 81 von Mill Hill, Deal, Kent / England. Mikrostratigrafische Untersuchung von Fundmaterial aus der angelsächsischen Männerbestattung’, Offa 61– 2 (2007 for 2004–5), 417–34 [analysis reveals the presence of five different fabrics in this burial]

353

Bibliography for 2007 Harrington, Sue, ‘Soft Furnished Burial: an Assessment of the Role of Textiles in Early Anglo-Saxon Inhumations, with Particular Reference to East Kent’, ASSAH 14, 110–16 see also sect. 9a [women and weaving] Keefer, Sarah Larratt, see sect. 6a [clerical vestments] Lewis, Michael, ‘The Mystery of Charles Stothard, FSA, and the Bayeux Tapestry Fragment’, AntJ 87, 400–6 Owen-Crocker, Gale R., ‘British Wives and Slaves? Possible Romano-British Techniques in “Women’s Work” ’, Britons in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Nick Higham [see sect. 6b], pp. 80–90 see also sect. 6d, with ‘Bayeux “tapestry”’ [three items] Spear, David S., see sect. 6d, with ‘Bayeux “tapestry”’ Walton Rogers, Penelope, Cloth and Clothing in Early Anglo-Saxon England, AD 450–700, CBA, Research Report 145 (York) ‘Lifting the Veil on Anglo-Saxon England’, Brit. Archaeol. 96, 16–19 [evidence from archaeol. textiles] ii. Leather Peacock, Elizabeth E., ‘The Conservation and Restoration of Some AngloScandinavian Leather Shoes’, Conservator 7 (1983), 18–23 Underwood, Richard, see sect. 9gii [leather in AS shields]

10. INSCRIPTIONS (RUNIC AND NON-RUNIC) AND RUNOLOGY Bammesberger, Alfred, see sect. 2b [textual issues and grammar in OE runic inscriptions] Clay, Cheryl, ‘Before There were Angles, Saxons and Jutes: an Epigraphic Study of the Germanic Social, Religious and Linguistic Relations on Hadrian’s Wall’, Pagans and Christians, ed. Lauren Gilmour [see sect. 9a], pp. 47–63 [evidence suggesting that some of the native population were familiar with Germanic lang.; also on implications for the migration period] Crépin, André, ‘“Faire, faire faire” dans les inscriptions anglaises du haut Moyen Âge’, Poètes et artistes, ed. Sophie Cassagnes-Brouquet et al. (Limoges), pp. 67–73 Fuglesang, Signe Horn, see sect. 9gi [possible AS iconographic influence on continental stones] Haugen, Odd Einar, ‘The Unicodification of Runic Script’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 46–7 (2005), 87–102 [on Unicode standard; includes AS] Hines, John, ‘An Inscribed Lead Plaque from Holm St Benets, Norfolk’, Nytt om runer 19 (2006 for 2004), 14–15 [unintelligible text, probably of an amuletic/protective type] Laing, Lloyd, and David Longley, see sect. 9f [runic inscription on bone] Marez, Alain, Anthologie runique, Classiques du nord, Racines (Paris) [‘Les textes anglosaxons’, in pt. 2]

354

Bibliography for 2007 Okasha, Elisabeth, ‘Anglo-Saxon Inscriptions Found outside the British Isles’, West over Sea, ed. Beverley Ballin Smith et al. [see sect. 6a], pp. 69–80 Orton, Fred, et al., see sect. 9gi [Ruthwell Cross] Page, R. I., ‘Seeing and Observing’, North-Western European Lang. Evolution 46–7 (2005), 211–25 [esp. for characters on Middle Saxon disc-headed pin from Brandon, Suff.; also esp. for account of Imma in Bede, Historia ecclesiastica, and in OE Bede] Speirs, Douglas, ‘Runic Inscribed Stone (Ninth–Twelfth Centuries AD)’, Hist. Scotland 4.2 (2004), 13 [find from Dalgety Bay; either AS or Scandinavian]

11. REVIEWS Abramson, Tony, Sceattas: an Illustrated Guide (King’s Lynn, 2006): D. M. Metcalf, BNJ 77, 345–6 Alexander, Michael, trans., Beowulf: a Verse Translation, corr. repr., Penguin Classics (London, 2003): Shippey, T., see sect. 3bii Amodio, Mark C., Writing the Oral Tradition: Oral Poetics and Literate Culture in Medieval England (Notre Dame, IN, 2004): L. A. Garner, JEGP 106, 131–4 Arnold, Martin, The Vikings: Culture and Conquest (London, 2006): C. Abram, SBVS 31, 89–91 Baker, John T., Cultural Transition in the Chilterns and Essex Region, 350 AD to 650 AD, Stud. in Regional and Local Hist. 4 (Hatfield, 2006): H. Williams, MA 51, 308–9 Barnes, Michael P., and R. I. Page, The Scandinavian Runic Inscriptions of Britain, Runrön 19 (Uppsala, 2006): K. Holman, SBVS 31, 84–6; S. McLeod, Parergon ns 24.1, 179–81 Bautier, Robert Henri, Anselme Davril et al., ed., L’abbaye de Fleury en l’An Mil. I: Vie d’Abbon, abbé de Fleury, ‘Vita et passio Sancti Abbonis’, par Aimoin de Fleury et pièces annexes. II: Le coutumier de Fleury, ‘Consuetudines Floriacenses antiquiores’, par Thierry d’Amorbach (Paris, 2004): V. Lukas, DAEM 63, 687 Beckensall, Stan, Place Names and Field Names of Northumberland (Stroud, 2006): P. Morgan, Jnl of Scottish Name Stud. 1, 169–74; D. Whaley, Nomina 30, 145–8 Beech, George, Was the Bayeux Tapestry Made in France? The Case for St Florent of Saumur (Basingstoke, 2005): R. H. Bloch, Speculum 82, 161–2; A. Burghart, TLS 20 July, 33; B. Coatsworth, Med. Rev. [online]; R. Gameson, EHR 121, 1162–4; D. Lohrmann, DAEM 62, 869–70 Bell, Tyler, The Religious Reuse of Roman Structures in Early Medieval England, BAR Brit. Ser. 390 (Oxford, 2005): S. Bonde, Antiquity 80, 1021–2 Bergmann, Rolf, ed., Volkssprachig–lateinische Mischtexte und Textensembles in der althochdeutschen, altsächsischen und altenglischen Uberlieferung. Mediävistisches Kolloquium des Zentrums für Mittelalterstudien der Otto-Friedrich-Universität Bamberg am 16. und 17. November 2001, Germanistische Bibliothek 17 (Heidelberg, 2003): A. Quak, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 61, 326–8 Biggam, C. P., ed., From Earth to Art: the Many Aspects of the Plant-World in Anglo-Saxon

355

Bibliography for 2007 England – Proceedings of the First ASPNS Symposium, University of Glasgow, 5–7 April 2000, Costerus ns 148 (Amsterdam, 2003): H. Peters, Anglia 124, 626–8 Blair, John, The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society (Oxford, 2005): M. Ryan, Landscape Hist. 28, 112–13 Bouet, Pierre et al., ed., La Tapisserie de Bayeux. L’art de broder, l’histoire. Actes du colloque de Cerisy-la-Salle (1999) (Caen, 2004): D. Bates, JEH 57, 332; U.-R. Blumenthal, Francia (Munich et alibi) 34.1, 329–34 Bouwer, Heiner, Studien zum Wortfeld um ‘eald’ und ‘niwe’ im Altenglischen (Heidelberg, 2004): J. Grzega, Anglia 125, 122–4 Bredehoft, Thomas A., Early English Metre, Toronto OE Ser. 15 (Toronto, 2005): F. Kemmler, Med. Rev. [online]; S. Kleinman, Comitatus 38, 195–8; D. O’Donnell, Heroic Age 10 [online] Broderick, George, A Dictionary of Manx Place-Names, EPNS popular ser. 4 (Nottingham, 2006): I. A. Fraser, Nomina 30, 143–5; J. King, Jnl of Scottish Name Stud. 1, 174–5; W. F. H. Nicolaisen, Names 55, 295–7 Bruce-Mitford, Rupert, with Sheila Raven, A Corpus of Late Celtic Hanging-Bowls with an Account of the Bowls Found in Scandinavia (Oxford, 2005): M. Ryan, Antiquity 80, 487–8 Brugmann, Birte, Glass Beads from Early Anglo-Saxon Graves: a Study of the Provenance and Chronology of Glass Beads from Early Anglo-Saxon Graves, based on Visual Examination (Oxford, 2004): H. Williams, EME 15, 107–8 Brylla, Eve, and Mats Wahlberg, with Vibeke Dalberg and W. F. H. Nicolaisen, ed., Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Congress of Onomastic Sciences, Uppsala, 19–24 August 2002 I (Uppsala, 2005): W. F. H. Nicolaisen, Names 55, 180–5 Brylla, Eve, and Mats Wahlberg, with Lars-Erik Edlund, ed., Proceedings of the TwentyFirst International Congress of Onomastic Sciences, Uppsala, 19–24 August 2002 II (Uppsala, 2006): R. Nedoma, Studia Anthroponymica Scandinavica 25, 154–6; W. F. H. Nicolaisen, Names 55, 180–5 Bullough, Donald A., Alcuin: Achievement and Reputation, being Part of the Ford Lectures Delivered in Oxford in Hilary Term 1980 (Leiden, 2004): R. Schieffer, DAEM 61, 421–2; C. Veyrard-Cosme, Francia (Munich et alibi) 34.1, 276–8 Carver, Martin, Sutton Hoo: Burial Ground of Kings? (London, 1998): S. Newton, Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. Newsletter 50, 10–11 Sutton Hoo: a Seventh-Century Princely Burial Ground and its Context, with major contributions by Angela Evans et al. (London, 2005): A. Ritchie, AntJ 87, 427–8; M. Rundkvist, European Jnl of Archaeol. 8.3, 308–10; C. Scull, MA 51, 321–2; S. Semple, Landscape Hist. 28, 113–14 Coates, Richard, and Andrew Breeze, Celtic Voices, English Places: Studies of the Celtic Impact on Place-Names in England, with a contribution by David Horovitz (Stamford, 2000): L. Toorians, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 55, 314–17 Cook, Barrie, and Gareth Williams, ed., Coinage and History in the North Sea World, c. AD 500–1200: Essays in honour of Marion Archibald (Leiden, 2006): D. Hinton, EME 15, 246–50; R. Naismith, NChron 167, 331–7; M. Phillips, NCirc 115, 80–2; Lord Stewartby, BNJ 77, 343–5

356

Bibliography for 2007 Corona, Gabriella, ed., Ælfric’s Life of Saint Basil the Great: Background and Context, AST 5 (Woodbridge, 2006): V. Vermassen, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 657–8 Cramp, Rosemary, Wearmouth and Jarrow Monastic Sites I, with contributions by G. Bettess et al. (Swindon, 2005): A. Reynolds, ArchJ 163, 280–1 Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture, VII: South-West England, with contributions by C. Roger Bristow et al. (Oxford, 2006): M. Carver, Antiquity 81.311, 238–40; M. Henig, JBAA 160, 181–2; C. E. Karkov, Speculum 82, 974–6; D. B. McCulloch, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 1343–4; R. Moss, Jnl of the R. Soc. of Antiquaries of Ireland 36, 191–2; T. Pickles, EME 15, 455–7; S. Turner, MA 51, 313–14 Crépin, André, Old English Poetics: a Technical Handbook (Paris, 2005): E. Green, Speculum 82, 170–1; S. Morrison, CCM 50, 73–5 Crouch, David, The Birth of Nobility: Constructing Aristocracy in England and France, 900–1300 (Harlow, 2005): W. Hechberger, DAEM 63, 830–1 Dance, Richard, Words Derived from Old Norse in Early Middle English: Studies in the Vocabulary of the South-West Midland Texts (Tempe, AZ, 2003): H. Peters, Anglia 124, 633–5 DeGregorio, Scott, ed., Innovation and Tradition in the Writings of the Venerable Bede, Med. European Stud. 7 (Morgantown, WV, 2006): [Anon.], MÆ 71, 178–9 Depreux, Philippe, and Bruno Judic, ed., Alcuin, de York à Tours. Écriture, pouvoir et réseaux dans l’Europe du haut Moyen Âge [= Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’Ouest 111.3 (2004)] (Rennes, 2004): É. Palazzo, CCM 49, 177–8 Díaz Vera, Javier E., ed., A Changing World of Words (Amsterdam, 2002): M. Chácon Chácon, Atlantis (Salamanca) 26.1, 119–24 Discenza, Nicole Guenther, The King’s English: Strategies of Translation in the Old English ‘Boethius’ (Albany, NY, 2005): J. Bately, JEGP 106, 528–31; K. A. Lowe, Translation and Lit. 15, 265–8; R. Marsden, Med. Rev. [online] Drout, Michael D. C., How Tradition Works: a Meme-Based Cultural Poetics of the AngloSaxon Tenth Century, Med. and Renaissance Texts and Stud. 306 (Tempe, AZ): H. Maring, RES 58, 715–17 Eaglen, Robin J., The Abbey and Mint of Bury St Edmunds to 1279, Brit. Numismatic Soc. Special Publ. 5 (London, 2006): P. Woodhead, BNJ 77, 346–8 Ecclestone, Martin et al., ed., The Land of the Dobunni: Papers Submitted to Symposia Organized by the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society’s Committee for Archaeology in Gloucestershire and the Council for British Archaeology South-West (?Gloucester, 2003): G. Jones, Trans. of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeol. Soc. 124, 247–50 Enright, Michael J., The Sutton Hoo Sceptre and the Roots of Celtic Kingship Theory (Dublin, 2006): L. Hedeager, Norwegian Archaeol. Rev. 40.1, 110–12; D. Miller, Jnl of IndoEuropean Stud. 35, 189–93; M. Ryan, MA 51, 322–4; M. Smyth, Speculum 82, 697–8 Fairweather, Janet, trans., ‘Liber Eliensis’: a History of the Isle of Ely from the Seventh Century to the Twelfth (Woodbridge, 2005): J. Crenshaw, Med. Rev. [online]; E. W. Dolnikowski, Jnl of Brit. Stud. 45, 875–6

357

Bibliography for 2007 Fennell, Barbara A., A History of English: a Socioloinguistic Approach, Blackwell Textbooks in Ling. 17 (Oxford, 2001): J. C. Conde Silvestre, Atlantis (Salamanca) 24.1, 13–22 Fjalldal, Magnús, Anglo-Saxon England in Icelandic Medieval Texts, Toronto Old Norse and Icelandic Stud. 2 (Toronto, 2005): L. Abrams, Speculum 82, 435–6; M. Clunies Ross, Leeds Stud. in Eng. ns 38, 219–21; C. R. Davis, Heroic Age 10 [online]; A. Liberman, JEGP 106, 377–8; B. A. Saltzman, Comitatus 38, 222–4; M. Townend, N&Q 54, 88–9 Foot, Sarah, Monastic Life in Anglo-Saxon England, c. 600–900 (Cambridge, 2006): C. Corning, Med. Rev. [online] Foreman, Stuart, Jonathan Hiller and David Petts, Gathering the People, Settling the Land: the Archaeology of a Middle Thames Landscape, Anglo-Saxon to Post-Medieval (Oxford, 2002): J. Finch, ArchJ 161, 261–2 Frodsham, Paul, and Colm O’Brien, ed., Yeavering: People, Power and Place (Stroud, 2005): N. J. Higham, NH 44.1, 160–1; D. Hooke, Landscape Hist. 28, 115–16 Fulk, R. D., and Christopher M. Cain, A History of Old English Literature (Oxford, 2003): P. Cardew, Lit. and Hist. 3rd ser. 15.2, 65–6 Galván, Fernando, Literatura inglesa medieval, Filología y lingüística 67 (Madrid, 2001): J. L. Bueno Alonso, Atlantis (Salamanca) 24.2, 251–7 Gammeltoft, Peder, Carole Hough and Doreen Waugh, ed., Cultural Contacts in the North Atlantic Region: the Evidence of Names (Lerwick, 2005): I. Tait, Nomina 30, 126–30 Gammeltoft, Peder, and Bent Jørgensen, ed., Names through the Looking-Glass: Festschrift in honour of Gillian Fellows-Jensen (Copenhagen, 2006): K. Dietz, BN 42, 483–6; C. Hough, Nomina 30, 133–6; P. Vikstrand, Studia Anthroponymica Scandinavica 25, 145–7 Garnett, George, Conquered England: Kingship, Succession and Tenure, 1066–1166 (Oxford): D. Crouch, TLS 6 July, 14 Gautier, Alban, Le festin dans l’Angleterre anglo-saxonne (Rennes, 2006): M. Bayless, Speculum 82, 988–90 Germann, Nadja, ‘De temporum ratione’. Quadrivium und Gotteserkenntnis am Beispiel Abbos von Fleury und Hermanns von Reichenau, Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters 89 (Leiden, 2006): I. Warntjes, DAEM 63, 851–2 Gittos, Helen, and M. Bradford Bedingfield, ed., The Liturgy of the Late Anglo-Saxon Church, HBS Subsidia 5 (London, 2005): L. Bell, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 409–10; R. Marsden, Med. Rev. [online] Graham-Campbell, James, et al., ed., Vikings and the Danelaw: Select Papers from the Proceedings of the Thirteenth Viking Congress (Oxford, 2001): P. Sawyer, EHR 117, 1304–5 Gretsch, Mechthild, Ælfric and the Cult of Saints in Late Anglo-Saxon England, CSASE 34 (Cambridge, 2005): A. J. Frantzen, Anglia 125, 516–18; M. McC. Gatch, Speculum 82, 444–5; J. Hill, N&Q 54, 87–8; M. Swan, RES 57, 568–70; J. Wilcox, EME 15, 251–6 Gryson, Roger, ed., Bedae presbyteri ‘Expositio Apocalypseos’, CCSL 121A (Turnhout, 2001): J. Elfassi, Revue des études latines 83, 276

358

Bibliography for 2007 Guglielmetti, Rossana E., ed., Alcuino, ‘Commento al Cantico dei Cantici’, con i commenti anonimi ‘Vox ecclesie’, ‘Vox antique ecclesie’, Millennio medievale 53 [= Testi 13] (Florence, 2004): [Anon.], SM 47, 1020; A. Bartòla, Bulletin Du Cange / Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 63, 346–9; P. Orth, DAEM 61, 687; A. Simón, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 403–4; C. Veyrard-Cosme, Francia (Munich et alibi) 34.1, 296–8 Hagen, Ann, Anglo-Saxon Food and Drink: Production, Processing, Distribution and Consumption (Hockwold cum Wilton, 2006): R. S. Oggins, Med. Rev. [online] Hall, Richard A., et al., Aspects of Anglo-Scandinavian York, Archaeol. of York, ser. 8: Anglo-Scandinavian York (AD 876–1066) 4 (York, 2004): B. Ambrosiani, Fornvännen 102.1, 53–5 Harbus, Antonina, and Russell Poole, ed., Verbal Encounters: Anglo-Saxon and Old Norse Studies for Roberta Frank, Toronto OE Ser. 13 (Toronto, 2005): M. Heyworth, Parergon ns 23.1, 168–71; F. C. Robinson, JEGP 106, 387–9; H. Wilson, RES 57, 136–8 Hardy, Alan, Anne Dodd and Graham D. Keevill, Ælfric’s Abbey: Excavations at Eynsham Abbey, Oxfordshire, 1989–92, Thames Valley Landscapes 16 (Oxford, 2003): G. Coppack, Church Archaeol. 7–9, 157–8 Härke, Heinrich, Angelsächsische Waffengräber des 5. bis 7. Jahrhunderts, Zeitschrift für Archäologie des Mittelalters, Beiheft 6 (Cologne, 1992): D. Quast, Nachrichten aus Niedersachsens Urgeschichte 63, 160–3 Harrison, David, The Bridges of Medieval England: Transport and Society, 400–1800 (Oxford, 2004): N. P. Brooks, EHR 121, 267–8 Hawkes, Sonia Chadwick, and Guy Grainger, The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Finglesham, Kent, ed. Birte Brugmann, Oxford Univ. School of Archaeol., Monograph 64 (Oxford, 2006): C. Grainge, AC 127, 445–6 Henson, Don, The Origins of the Anglo-Saxons (Hockwold-cum-Wilton, 2006): E. J. Christie, Med. Rev. [online] Higham, N. J., A Frontier Landscape: the North West in the Middle Ages (Macclesfield, 2004): A. Crosby, NH 44.1, 165–7; G. White, Cheshire Hist. 46, 137–8 Hill, Paul, The Anglo-Saxons: the Verdict of History (Stroud, 2006): A. Burghart, TLS 16 Feb., 13; M. Modarelli, Comitatus 38, 235–7 Hillaby, Joe, and Caroline Hillaby, Leominster Minster, Priory and Borough, c. 660–1539 (Woonton Almeley, 2006): R. N. Swanson, Midland Hist. 32, 160–1 Hilton, J. A., Anglo-Saxon Attitudes: a Short Introduction to Anglo-Saxonism (Hockwold-cumWilton, 2006): G. Morgan, Med. Rev. [online] Hines, John, A New Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Great Square-Headed Brooches, Reports of the Research Committee of the Soc. of Ant. of London 51 (Woodbridge, 1997): S. E. West, Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. Newsletter 46, 17–18 Hodges, Richard, Goodbye to the Vikings? Re-Reading Early Medieval Archaeology (London, 2006): T. Pestell, AntJ 87, 428–30 I Deug-Su, L’eloquenza del silenzio nelle fonti mediolatine. Il caso di Leoba, ‘dilecta’ di Bonifacio Vinfrido (Florence, 2004): [Anon.], SM 47, 1018; J. J. Contreni, JEH 56, 762–3; A. Diem, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 529–30; V. Lukas, DAEM 62, 274–5

359

Bibliography for 2007 Iyeiri, Yoko, ed., Aspects of English Negation (Amsterdam and Tokyo, 2005): J. Rudanko, ES 88, 738–9 Johnson, David F., and Elaine Treharne, ed., Readings in Medieval Texts: Interpreting Old and Middle English Literature (Oxford, 2005): R. W. Dance, Med. Rev. [online]; K. Pfeiffer, Lit. and Theol. 20, 473–5; C. J. Rushton, Nottingham Med. Stud. 50, 212–14 Jones, Chris, Strange Likeness: the Use of Old English in Twentieth-Century Poetry (Oxford, 2006): J. Corbett, Translation and Lit. 16, 265–9; C. McCarthy, MÆ 71, 318; H. O’Donoghue, RES 58, 758–9 Jones, Richard, and Mark Page, Medieval Villages in an English Landscape: Beginnings and Ends (Macclesfield, 2006): M. Jones, LH 37, 135–6 Jurasinski, Stefan, Ancient Privileges: ‘Beowulf ’, Law and the Making of Germanic Antiquity (Morgantown, WV, 2006): K. Teo, Comitatus 38, 243–5 Kalinke, Marianne, St. Oswald of Northumbria: Continental Metamorphoses, with an Edition of ‘Ósvalds saga’ and ‘Van sunte Oswaldo deme konninghe’ (Tempe, AZ, 2005): C. Benati, SBVS 31, 117–19; M. Cormack, Speculum 82, 1003–5 Karkov, Catherine E., Text and Picture in Anglo-Saxon England: Narrative Strategies in the Junius 11 Manuscript, CSASE 31 (Cambridge, 2001): É. Palazzo, CCM 47, 312–13 Karkov, Catherine E., Sarah Larratt Keefer and Karen Louise Jolly, ed., The Place of the Cross in Anglo-Saxon England, Publ. of the Manchester Centre for AS Stud. 4 (Woodbridge, 2006): D. Parsons, MA 51, 324–6 Kelly, Richard J., ed., The Blickling Homilies (London, 2003): D. Scragg, Med. Sermon Stud. 49, 71–3 Kelly, S. E., ed., Charters of Abingdon Abbey I–II, AS Charters 7–8 (Oxford, 2000–1): S. Magrini, SM 46, 962–3 Charters of Malmesbury Abbey, AS Charters 11 (Oxford, 2005): D. Anlezark, MÆ 71, 378; D. Banham, LH 37, 65; J. Sarnowsky, HZ 284, 571–2 Keynes, Simon, and Alfred P. Smyth, ed., Anglo-Saxons: Studies presented to Cyril Roy Hart (Dublin, 2006): C. A. M. Clarke, RES 57, 561–2; C. Davis, Med. Rev. [online]; D. P. Kirby, EHR 121, 1161–2; J. Story, MA 51, 318–19 Klein, Stacy S., Ruling Women: Queenship and Gender in Anglo-Saxon Literature (Notre Dame, IN, 2006): D. Anlezark, MÆ 71, 316–17; M. A. Coppola, SM 48, 927–30; C. Esser, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 272–4; M. W. Hennequin, Med. Feminist Forum 43.1, 162–4; C. A. Lees, RES 58, 393–4; I. McNish, Mankind Quarterly 47.1–2, 133–5; S. Rowley, Arthuriana 16.4, 93–4 Kornexl, Lucia, and Ursula Lenker, ed., Bookmarks from the Past: Studies in Early English Language and Literature in honour of Helmut Gneuss (Frankfurt am Main, 2003): W. Viereck, ASNSL 242, 419–20 Lapidge, Michael, The Anglo-Saxon Library (Oxford, 2006): D. Anlezark, MÆ 71, 315–16; L. Bell, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 1338; L. S. Chardonnens, ES 88, 108–12; R. Gameson, The Library 7th ser. 7, 450–2; J. Hill, Anglia 124, 625–6 Lapidge, Michael, et al., ed., C.A.L.M.A. Compendium Auctorum Latinorum Medii Aevi (500–1500), I.5: Augustinus Olomucensis – Barnabas de Riatinis Reginus archiep. (Florence, 2003): J. Pycke, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 201–2

360

Bibliography for 2007 C.A.L.M.A. Compendium Auctorum Latinorum Medii Aevi (500–1500), I.6: Barnabas de Riatinis Reginus – Bartholomaeus de Forolivio. Elenchus abbreviationum (Florence, 2003): J. Pycke, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 201–2 C.A.L.M.A. Compendium Auctorum Latinorum Medii Aevi (500–1500), II.1: Bartholomaeus Fracancianus – Bartolus de Saxoferrato (Florence, 2004): [Anon.], SM 47, 1023–4 Lapidge, Michael, et al., ed. and trans., Bède le Vénérable, ‘Histoire ecclésiastique du peuple anglais’ (‘Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum’), 3 vols., Sources chrétiennes 489–91 (Paris, 2005): [Anon.], SM 47, 1016–17; J. Elfassi, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 206–8 [vol. 1 only]; J. Elfassi, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 1342–3 [vols. 2–3]; A. Zama, SM 48, 166–71 Lebecq, Stéphane, et al., ed., Bède le Vénérable entre tradition et postérité (Villeneuve d’Ascq, 2004): M. Ryan, EME 15, 120–2 Lees, Clare A., and Gillian R. Overing, Double Agents: Women and Clerical Culture in Anglo-Saxon England, Middle Ages Ser. (Philadelphia, 2001): J. L. Nelson, CCM 47, 402–6 Lees, Clare A., and Gillian R. Overing, ed., A Place to Believe in: Locating Medieval Landscapes (University Park, PA, 2006): H. Williams, EME 15, 462–4 Lionarons, Joyce Tally, ed., Old English Literature in its Manuscript Context, Med. European Stud. 5 (Morgantown, WV, 2004): P. O’Neill, Parergon ns 24.1, 210–12 Los, Bettelou, The Rise of the ‘to’-Infinitive (Oxford, 2005): H. De Smet, Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 63, 310–19; R. Facchinetti, ES 88, 492–4; T. Fanego, Jnl of Ling. 42, 211–16 Love, Rosalind C., ed., Goscelin of Saint-Bertin: the Hagiography of the Female Saints of Ely, OMT (Oxford, 2004): M. Giese, DAEM 63, 235; L. G. G. Ricci, SM 47, 956–7 Marsden, Richard, The Cambridge Old English Reader (Cambridge, 2004): J. Kaup, Anglia 124, 630–3; H. Momma, JEGP 106, 386–7 Michelet, Fabienne L., Creation, Migration and Conquest: Imaginary Geography and Sense of Space in Old English Literature (Oxford, 2006): S. Foot, Nottingham Med. Stud. 51, 269–71; S. I. Sobecki, Anglia 124, 628–9 Miller, Sean, ed., Charters of the New Minster, Winchester, AS Charters 9 (Oxford, 2001): S. Foot, Jnl of the Soc. of Archivists 23, 140–1; S. Magrini, SM 46, 972–3 Minkova, Donka, Alliteration and Sound Change in Early English (Cambridge, 2003): K. Hanson, Jnl of Ling. 43, 463–72; M. Markus, Anglia 124, 494–8 Mitchell, Bruce, and Fred C. Robinson, ed., A Guide to Old English, 7th ed. (Oxford): [Anon.], MÆ 71, 370 Muir, Bernard J., ed., The Exeter DVD: the Exeter Anthology of Old English Poetry (Exeter, 2006): P. Cavill, Med. Rev. [online]; J. Roberts, MÆ 71, 360–1 Musset, Lucien, The Bayeux Tapestry, new ed., trans. Richard Rex (Woodbridge, 2005): M. K. Foys, Med. Rev. [online]; R. Gameson, EHR 121, 1517–18 Nash, Walter, A Departed Music: Readings in Old English Poetry (Hockwold-cum-Wilton, 2006): R. Marsden, Med. Rev. [online] Newton, Sam, The Origins of ‘Beowulf ’ and the Pre-Viking Kingdom of East Anglia (Woodbridge, 1993): A. Orchard, Suffolk Inst. of Archaeol. and Hist. Newsletter 37, 11

361

Bibliography for 2007 Nichtweiss, Barbara, ed., Bonifatius in Mainz [= Neues Jahrbuch für das Bistum Mainz 2005] (Mainz, 2005): A. Wendehorst, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 101, 897 Nielsen, Karen Høilund, ed., Nordeuropaeisk dyrestil 400–1100 e. Kr. [= Hikuin 29 (2002)] (Højbjerg, 2002): S. Kleingärtner, Offa 61–2, 463–8 Niles, John D., Old English Heroic Poems and the Social Life of Texts, Stud. in the Early Middle Ages 20 (Turnhout): S. Jurasinski, Med. Rev. [online]; T. W. Machan, Arthuriana 17.3, 108–9 Obrist, Barbara, ed., Abbon de Fleury. Philosophie, science et comput autour de l’An Mil, 2nd ed. (Paris, 2006): [Anon.], SM 48, 490 Ó Carragáin, Éamonn, Ritual and the Rood: Liturgical Images and the Old English Poems of the ‘Dream of the Rood’ Tradition (London, 2005): S. DeGregorio, EME 15, 359–61; B. de Lee, Comitatus 37, 272–5; C. Farr, Speculum 82, 221–2; M.A. Hall, MA 51, 326–7 O’Donnell, Daniel Paul, assisted by Dawn Collins et al., ‘Cædmon’s Hymn’: a Multimedia Study, Archive and Edition (Cambridge, 2005): S. DeGregorio, Speculum 82, 223–4; B. J. Muir, EME 15, 466–9 Ohkado, Masayuki, Clause Structure in Old English (Amsterdam, 2005): A. Pysz, Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42, 531–6 O’Keeffe, Katherine O’Brien, and Andy Orchard, ed., Latin Learning and English Lore: Studies in Anglo-Saxon Literature for Michael Lapidge, 2 vols., Toronto OE Ser. 14 (Toronto, 2004): J. C. Conde Silvestre, Atlantis (Salamanca) 21.1, 143–51; S. M. Pons-Sanz, Med. Rev. [online] O’Neill, Pamela, ‘A pillar curiously engraven, with some inscription upon it’: What Is the Ruthwell Cross?, BAR Brit. Ser. 397 (Oxford, 2005): J. Collard, Parergon ns 24.1, 222–4 Orton, Peter, The Transmission of Old English Poetry (Turnhout, 2000): S. Morrison, CCM 47, 420–2 Otten, Dirk, Lebuïnus, een gedreven missionaris (Hilversum, 2006): M. Aaij, see sect. 6b Otter, Monika, trans., Goscelin of St Bertin: ‘The Book of Encouragement and Consolation’ (‘Liber confortatorius’), the Letter of Goscelin to the Recluse Eva, Lib. of Med. Women (Woodbridge, 2004): P. Hayward, JEH 57, 333–4 Owen-Crocker, Gale R., ed., King Harold II and the Bayeux Tapestry, Publ. of the Manchester Centre for AS Stud. 3 (Woodbridge, 2005): U. Kuder, DAEM 62, 868–9; E. Pastan, Med. Rev. [online] Pasternack, Carol Braun, and Lisa M. C. Weston, ed., Sex and Sexuality in Anglo-Saxon England: Essays in memory of Daniel Gillmore Calder (Tempe, AZ, 2004): E. Treharne, RES 57, 262–4; R. Waugh, JEGP 106, 526–8 Peden, A. M., ed., Abbo of Fleury and Ramsey: Commentary on the ‘Calculus’ of Victorius of Aquitaine, Auctores Britannici Medii Aevi 15 (Oxford, 2003): V. Lukas, DAEM 61, 703–4 Pestell, Tim, Landscapes of Monastic Foundation: the Establishment of Religious Houses in East Anglia c. 650–1200, AS Stud. 5 (Woodbridge, 2004): E. Baker, Church Archaeol. 7– 9, 173–4 Pestell, Tim, and Katharina Ulmschneider, ed., Markets in Early Medieval Europe: Trading and ‘Productive’ Sites, 650–850 (Macclesfield, 2003): M. Gaimster, MA 51, 331–2

362

Bibliography for 2007 Pillonel-Wyrsch, Roland-Pierre, Le calcul de la date de Pâques au Moyen Âge. Analyse et commentaires sur ‘De temporum ratione’ de Bède (Fribourg, 2004): I. Warntjes, DAEM 62, 724–5 Portnoy, Phyllis, The Remnant: Essays on a Theme in Old English Verse (London, 2005): [Anon.], MÆ 71, 180 Pryor, Francis, Britain AD: a Quest for Arthur, England and the Anglo-Saxons (London, 2004): N. Edwards, Studia Celtica 39, 209–11; H. M. Wiseman, Heroic Age 10 [online]; J. Wood, Studia Celtica 39, 211–12 Britain in the Middle Ages: an Archaeological History (London, 2006): M. Horton, TLS 26 Jan., 8 Puhvel, Martin, Cause and Effect in ‘Beowulf ’: Motivation and Driving Forces behind Words and Deeds (Lanham, MD, 2005): R. Dance, ES 88, 724–5 Puhvel, Martin, trans., ‘Beowulf ’: a Verse Translation and Introduction (Lanham, MD, 2006): [Anon.], MÆ 71, 370 Rauer, Christine, Beowulf and the Dragon: Parallels and Analogues (Cambridge, 2000): I. B. Milfull, Anglia 125, 350–2 Reuter, Timothy, ed., Alfred the Great: Papers from the Eleventh-Centenary Conferences (Aldershot, 2003): H. Vollrath, DAEM 62, 429–30 Riché, Pierre, Abbon de Fleury. Un moine savant et combatif (vers 950–1004) (Turnhout, 2004): P. Orth, DAEM 62, 765; P. Racinet, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 100, 913–15 Ringler, Dick, trans., ‘Beowulf ’: a New Translation for Oral Delivery (Indianapolis, IN): C. Larrington, TLS 19 Nov., 17–18 Roberts, Jane, Guide to Scripts used in English Writings up to 1500 (London, 2005): J. Crick, EME 15, 469–70 Rollason, David, Northumbria, 500–1100: Creation and Destruction of a Kingdom (Cambridge, 2003): A. Woolf, Scottish Hist. Rev. 221, 132–4 Rollason, David, et al., ed., The Durham ‘Liber vitae’ and its Context (Woodbridge, 2004): D. B. McCulloch, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 329–30 Rouse, Robert Allen, The Idea of Anglo-Saxon England in Middle English Romance (Cambridge, 2005): H. L. Spencer, RES 57, 128–30; O. M. Traxel, Anglia 125, 352–4; R. Trilling, Med. Rev. [online] Rumble, Alexander R., Property and Piety in Early Medieval Winchester: Documents relating to the Topography of the Anglo-Saxon and Norman City and its Minsters, Winchester Stud. 4: the AS Minsters of Winchester, pt. iii (Oxford, 2002): H. B. Clarke, Jnl of the Soc. of Archivists 25, 96–7 Scarfe Beckett, Katharine, Anglo-Saxon Perceptions of the Islamic World, CSASE 33 (Cambridge, 2003): J. C. Eby, Jnl of Brit. Stud. 44, 615–16; B. Wheeler, Comparative Lit. Stud. 42, 232–4 Scharer, Anton, Herrschaft und Repräsentation. Studien zur Hofkultur König Alfreds des Grossen (Vienna, 2000): D. Pratt, EME 14, 346–8 Scheil, Andrew P., The Footsteps of Israel: Understanding Jews in Anglo-Saxon England (Ann Arbor, MI, 2004): M. Clayton, Med. Rev. [online]; S. M. Jack, Parergon ns 23.1, 207–9; P. E. Szarmach, JEH 57, 115 Schreiber, Carolin, King Alfred’s Old English Translation of Pope Gregory the Great’s ‘Regula

363

Bibliography for 2007 pastoralis’ and its Cultural Context: a Study and Partial Edition, Münchener Universitätsschriften, Texte und Untersuchungen zur englischen Philologie 25 (Frankfurt am Main, 2003): D. Anlezark, MÆ 71, 353–4 Sheppard, Alice, Families of the King: Writing Identity in the ‘Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’, Toronto OE Ser. 12 (Toronto, 2004): K. A. Fenton, Med. Rev. [online]; J. Insley, DAEM 63, 680–1; R. R. Trilling, JEGP 106, 389–92; B. Yorke, Lit. and Hist. 3rd ser. 15.2, 64–5 South, Ted Johnson, ed., ‘Historia de Sancto Cuthberto’: a History of Saint Cuthbert and a Record of His Patrimony, AST 3 (Cambridge, 2002): K. Bate, CCM 48, 409 Starkey, David, The Monarchy of England: the Beginnings (London, 2004): N. Vincent, TLS 9 Feb., 10 Steen Jensen, Jørgen, ed., Single Finds, the Nordic Perspective: Sixth Nordic Numismatic Symposium [= Nordisk numismatisk årsskrift 2000–2] (Skjern, 2006): R. Naismith, NChron 167, 344–6 Stoklund, Marie, et al., ed., Runes and Their Secrets: Studies in Runology (Copenhagen, 2006): K. Holman, SBVS 31, 84–6 Suzuki, Seiichi, The Metre of Old Saxon Poetry: the Remaking of Alliterative Tradition (Cambridge, 2004): T. K. Dewey, Interdisciplinary Jnl for Germanic Ling. and Semiotic Analysis 11, 278–81 Swanton, Michael, English Poetry before Chaucer, Exeter Med. Eng. Texts and Stud. (Exeter, 2002): M. A. Coppola, SM 48, 475–6 Thacker, Alan, and Richard Sharpe, ed., Local Saints and Local Churches in the Early Medieval West (Oxford, 2002): S. Yarrow, JEH 57, 111–12 Tiller, Kate, ed., Dorchester Abbey, Church and People 635–2005 (Stonesfield, Oxon., 2005): C. Holmes, Oxoniensia 71, 511–13 Tinti, Francesca, ed., Pastoral Care in Late Anglo-Saxon England, AS Stud. 6 (Woodbridge, 2006): F. Barlow, EHR 121, 577–9; M. Heyworth, Med. Rev. [online]; M. A. Polo de Beaulieu, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 206–7 Tite, Colin G. C., The Early Records of Sir Robert Cotton’s Library: Formation, Cataloguing, Use (London, 2003): C. T. Berkhout, N&Q 53, 101–2 Tolkien, J. R. R., ‘Beowulf ’ and the Critics, ed. Michael D. C. Drout (Tempe, AZ, 2002): T. Sharp, Med. Forum 5 [online] Traxel, Oliver M., Language Change, Writing and Textual Interference in Post-Conquest Old English Manuscripts: the Evidence of Cambridge, University Library, Ii. 1. 33, Münchener Universitätsschriften, Texte und Untersuchungen zur englischen Philologie 32 (Frankfurt am Main, 2004): M. P. Richards, JEGP 106, 134–6 Treharne, Elaine, ed., Old and Middle English: an Anthology (Oxford, 2000): J. L. Bueno Alonso, Atlantis (Salamanca) 22.2, 195–201 Treharne, Elaine, and Susan Rosser, ed., Early Medieval English Texts and Interpretations: Studies presented to Donald G. Scragg (Tempe, AZ, 2002): O. M. Traxel, Anglia 124, 498–501 Tremp, Ernst, Karl Schmuki and Theres Flury, Karl der Grosse und seine Gelehrten. Zum 1200. Todesjahr Alkuins († 804) (Sankt Gallen, 2004): B. Tock, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 100, 1158–9

364

Bibliography for 2007 Turner, Andrew J., and Bernard J. Muir, ed., Eadmer of Canterbury: Lives and Miracles of Saints Oda, Dunstan and Oswald, OMT (Oxford, 2006): J. Hudson, EME 15, 250–1; J. Rubenstein, Speculum 82, 984–5 Turner, Sam, Making a Christian Landscape: the Countryside in Early Medieval Cornwall, Devon and Wessex (Exeter, 2006): K. Dark, Landscape Hist. 28, 114–15; G. J. Davies, Notes and Queries for Somerset and Dorset 36, 133–4; S. Rippon, MA 51, 309–10 Tyler, Elizabeth M., Old English Poetics: the Aesthetics of the Familiar in Anglo-Saxon England (York, 2006): T. A. Bredehoft, RES 58, 94–5 Tyler, Susan, and Hilary Major, assisted by Harry M. Appleyard et al., The Early AngloSaxon Cemetery and Later Saxon Settlement at Springfield Lyons, Essex, East Anglian Archaeol., Report 111 (Chelmsford, 2005): S. Hirst and G. Malcolm, Essex Archaeol. and Hist. 36, 218–19; A. Reynolds, MA 51, 314–16 Vaciago, P., ed., Glossae Biblicae I–II, Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio Mediaevalis 189A–189B (Turnhout, 2004): P. Orth, DAEM 62, 709–10 von Padberg, Lutz E., Bonifatius. Missionar und Reformer (Munich, 2003): H. Lutterbach, Revue d’histoire ecclésiastique 102, 533–5 Waldhoff, Stephan, Alcuins Gebetbuch für Karl den Grossen. Seine Rekonstruktion und seine Stellung in der frühmittelalterlichen Geschichte der ‘libelli precum’, Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen 89 (Münster, 2003): L. G. G. Ricci, SM 47, 1005–7; H. Schneider, DAEM 62, 712–13 Walton Rogers, Penelope, Cloth and Clothing in Early Anglo-Saxon England, AD 450–700, CBA, Research Report 145 (York): P. A. Henry, MA 51, 316–18 Ward, Benedicta, Bede and the Psalter (Oxford, 2002): M. McNamara, Jnl for the Stud. of the Old Testament 30.5, 126 Wareham, Andrew, Lords and Communities in Early Medieval East Anglia (Woodbridge, 2005): D. Banham, Proc. of the Cambridge Ant. Soc. 96, 233–4; M. Hesse, Landscape Hist. 28, 116 Watts, Victor, ed., The Cambridge Dictionary of English Place-Names, based on the Collections of the English Place-Name Society, with contributions by John Insley and Margaret Gelling (Cambridge, 2004): A. Breeze, MÆ 76, 144–6; S. Brendler, Namenkundliche Informationen 87–8, 331–3 Whaley, Diana, A Dictionary of Lake District Place-Names, EPNS regional ser. 1 (Nottingham, 2006): A. Ellwood, Nomina 30, 131–2; A. Grant, Jnl of Scottish Name Stud. 1, 179–81; I. Whyte, NH 44.1, 159–60 Wilcox, Jonathan, ed., Old English Scholarship and Bibliography: Essays in honour of Carl T. Berkhout, OEN Subsidia 32 (Kalamazoo, MI, 2004): M. Heyworth, Parergon ns 23.1, 238–41; R. Brackmann, JEGP 106, 524–6 Williams, Howard, Death and Memory in Early Medieval Britain, Cambridge Stud. in Archaeol. (Cambridge, 2006): J. Hines, MA 51, 310–12; J. Holloway, Archaeol. Rev. from Cambridge 22.2, 165–71; L. Webster, Antiquity 81.314, 1115–16 Wilson, Susan E., The Life and After-Life of St John of Beverley: the Evolution of the Cult of an Anglo-Saxon Saint (Aldershot, 2006): K. E. Clark, MÆ 71, 188–9; A. Deighton, EHR 121, 1445–7; D. M. Palliser, NH 44.1, 167–9

365

Bibliography for 2007 Wormald, Patrick, The First Code of English Law (Canterbury, 2005): N. Brooks, Canterbury Cathedral Chronicle 100, 48–9 Yorke, Barbara, The Conversion of Britain: Religion, Politics and Society in Britain c. 600–800, Religion, Politics and Society in Britain (Harlow, 2006): J. Röhrkasten, Midland Hist. 32, 160; I. Wood, NH 44.2, 219–20 Young, Jane, and Alan Vince, with Victoria Nailor, A Corpus of Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Pottery from Lincoln, Lincoln Archaeol. Stud. 7 (Oxford, 2005): D. H. Brown, Med. Ceramics 28, 147–9 Zanna, Paolo, ed. and trans., Alfredo il Grande: re e filosofo. La versione in inglese antico dei ‘Soliloqui’ di Agostino, Studi e ricerche (Milan, 2001): A. Bisanti, SM 46, 495–8

366