>m<

%

910

tv"-\'

tv," \' r;.

m

}

.J-X

mi--"

THE RULE OF St. BENET,

LATIN AND ANGLO-SAXON

INTERLINEAR VERSION.

RIJKSUNIVERSITEIT TE UTRECHT

1897 9603

THE RULE OF St. BENET,

jlyATIN AND ^NGLO-jSAXON

INTERLINEAR VERSION.

PROEFSCHRIFT

TER VERKRIJGING VAN DEN GRAAD
VAN

DOGTOI[ IN DE NEDERLANDSCHE LETTERKUNDE

AAN DE

RIJKS-UNIVERSITEIT TE UTRECHT,
NA. BEKOMEN\'MA.CHTIGING VAN DEN RECTOR MAGNIFICUS

M\'. J. Bapon d\'Aulnis de Bourouill, ^

UOOGLï;l.aAAB IN DF. FACULTKIT DKR REClITSfiELKhatDIlEID
EN

MET ÏOESTEMMING VAN DEN ACADEMISCHEN SENAAT

TEGEN DE BEDENKINGEN DER

FACULTEIT VAN LETTEREN EN WIJSBEGEERTE,
TE VERDEDIGEN

Op Woensdag den 7 November 1888, des namiddags lo 1 uren,

DOOR

HENRI LOGEMAN,

GEBOREN TE HAARLEM.

LONDON,

TRÜBNER & C».

gedrukt ter univ. drukkerij te oxford.

_/lAN mijnen yader

EN

t^an frof. Pr. yj. J-L Pallèe.

"A .

■k. ■ ■

Dit Proefschrift verschijnt te gelijkertijd als een der uitgaven
voor 1888, van de ^^Early English Text Society" te Londen.
De conditio sine qua non oni voor dit genootschap te
tverken is dat de geschriften in H Engelsch zijn opgesteld.
Vandaar dat ik mij in H begin van dit jaar tot de Faculteit
der Letteren en Wijsbegeerte loendde met het verzoek dat
mij vergunning zou ivorden verleend van den regel af te
wijken., die voorschrijft dat een Doctorandus in de Neder-
landsche letterendie taal bezige voor zijne Dissertatie.

De eerste 2^Ucht, die op mij rust is U, M.H. Professoren
der Letterkundige Faculteit tc danken voor de tvelwillendheid,
welke Gij mij betoond heht door dit verzoek terstond toe tc
staan. Gij heht H daardoor mogelijk gemaakt., dat ik mijn
Proefschrift onder buitengewoon gunstige omstandigheden kon
afgedrukt krijgen.

U, Mijne Heeren Leden en Secretaris van het College van
Curatoren., ben ik grooten dank verschuldigd voor de wel-
willendheid., die U, gedurende den buitengewoon langen tijd
van zes jaren., onze Hooge Begeering deed voorstellen wij
het genot eener rijksbeurs te schenken.

Van de nieesten Uwer., M.H. Leden der Letterkundige
Faculteit, mocht ik gedurende mijne Academische loopbaan
in meerdere of mindere mate onderwijs genieten. Aan U
allen mijn dank voor Hvele dat ik van U leerde.

\'Hooggeleerde Galleé, Hooggeachte Promotor, dat uw naam
op het eerste blad mijner Dissertatie voorkomt, bewijst dat er
tusschen ons een inniger hand bestaat dan in den regel den
Student aan zijn Hoogleeraar, zelfs aan zijn Promotor bindt.
Veel zal ik hierover niet zeggen; alleen dit — dat ik geheel
bestaan van mijn studietijd, met al de heilzame gevolgen,
die ik daarvan hoop te ondervinden, aan U heb te danken.
. Als ik ooit mocht blijken te iveteti hoe men iverken moet,
dan heb ik dit van U geleerd. Hooggeleerde Bleek

ntve studie niet die te zijn, tvaarin ik voor mijne Dissertatie
verder wenschte door te dringen, Uu^e voordracht heeft er toe
medegeicerkt, mij met verlangen uit te doen zien naar den
tijd, waarop ik mij weder meer aan studie der Letterkunde
zal kunnen wijden.

Slechts één jaar. Hooggeleerde Brill, oud-hooglecraar te
Utrecht, mocht ik mij onder uwe leerlingen scharen. Een

hartelijk gevoel van tvaardeering voor U, moge hier in een
enkel woord uiting vinden.

Buiten Utrecld vond ik in de Heeren Prof. Dr. A. S. Napier
tc Oxford, en Prof. Dr. P. J. Cosux te Leiden, vriendelijke
gidsen., ivien het nooit te veel loas mij in menige duistere
plaats voor te lichten. Prof. Dr. A. Schröer te Freiburg en
Dr. F. Holthausen te Göttingen, stonden mij weUmllend
een gedeelte van den tekst af, dat door den eersten afge-
schreven, en in H bezit van den anderen was overgegaan.
Aan den Directeur der „E. E. Text Societif\\ den Heer
Dr. Furnivall te Londen ben ik grooten dank verschuldigd,
niet alleen voor zijne vriendelijke bemoeiingen, boven reeds
aangeduid, maar ook voor den tijdroovenden arbeid, dien hij
zich getroost heeft om de Introductie van eenige ingeslopen taal-
fouten te zuiveren. Mijn broeder de Heer W. S. IjOQeman
te Rock Ferry heeft zich zeer aan mij verplicht door het
grootste gedeelte van den tekst lexicographiscU voor mij te
excerpeeren. Ten slotte een woord van dank aan allen die
mij verplicht hebben door H ter leen afstaan van boeken, die
onder hunne berusting of in hun bezit waren; vooral aan:

ï\'

I

I

Dr. Tiele te Utrecht, Dr. du Rieu te Leiden, Dr. Campbell
in den Haag, de Hoogeerwaarde Heer Prenger, Praeses-
Bibliothecaris van het Seminarie te Warmond, en Dr. Tn.
Borret te Heilo.

■ _ Hc behoef hier nauwelijks de voordeelen te vermelden, die

ik getrokken heb van een herhaald verblijf in het British
Museum te Londen en de Bodleian Library te
Oxford. In de niet altijd even gemakkelijk te vinden schatten
van eerstgenoemde bibliotheek ums Mr. Portescue, Super-
intendent of the Reading Room, een beminnelijke Gids.

Hij die veel vriendschap ondervonden heeft is niet gemak-
kelijk uitgeput, waar het er op aankomt daarvan getuigenis
af te leggen. Hier echter slechts een kort woord van dank —
even oprecht als hartelijk gemeend — aan alle Vrienden
gericht, die ik mij te Utrecht zoo onder tijdgenooten als
anderen verworven heb. Mogen die banden gedurende ons
leven nooit verbroken ivorden!

COJ^TENTS.

INTKODTTCTION.

page

Section I. Outlines of the History of Benedictinism in England until

the Reformation.........xv

Section II. Bibliography of the various treatises, found in the Cottonian

MS. Tiberius A. 3.........x=x

Section III. The Latin text. Nineteenth-century editions. Manner

of editing..........xxvi

Section IV. The English text. Manner of editing. The \'Paving

Letters"..........xxx

Section V. The Language of the text. Crude-forms. \' Merography \'
Evidence of the Latin text. English sounds. English in-
flections ..........xxxviii

TEXT.

The Pkologue. It contains a hortatory sermon, admonishing the monks
to pray to the Lord for perfection, to be up and doing, to fear
the Lord, to walk in His paths, and to bear in mind that, like
every beginning, the finding of the way to salvation is difficult i

LATIN LIST OF CHAPTERS.......6

Chapter I. There are four classes of monks. Coenobites, i. e. those who
fight the battle of life under a Rule or an Abbot. The ancho-
rites, who fight alone against the weaknesses of the flesh and
their sinful thoughts. The Sarabaites, a very bad class: they
follow the dictates of their desires; what they wish to do,
they call a holy act; what they do not like, they say is not
allowed. The Gyrovagi, who roam about the country, and who,
addicted to the pleasures of the stomach and the body, are even

worse than the S.arabaite3.......6

Chapter II. Tlie Abbot who is worthy to reign over the monastery
must always remember that he represents Christ. Ho must not
teach anything but the precepts of the Lord. He is responsible
for all that happens in his flock, and must set a good example in
everything. There should bo no distinction of persons in the
monastery, and, above all, one of noble birth should have no
privilege over a menial. The Abbot must always be aware of
the difficulty of his task, and bear in mind that the more im-
portant are tlie things entrusted to his care, the greater are his
responsibilities; .ind earthly cares and worldly considerations
should not distract him from his serious work . . . .11

\' Those showing the order or sequence of the A.-Saxon words in construing
the Latin.

\' Part of a word put for the whole of it, as ^Jra hi pravod.

PAGE

VUl CONTENTS.

Chapter III. When anything of importance is to be dccided upon, all the
monks fehould be consulted; for sometimes God reveals the
truth unto the youngest of the brethren. In minor points the
advice of the elder brethren suffices. The monks should give
their advice in all humility to the Abbot, and not contend with
him. The decision rests in all cases with the latter . . • 17

Chapter IV. Good works are here enumerated. These precepts are
mostly couched in Scriptural language, and always pithily
expressed. The first is: to love God with all one\'s heart, all
one\'s soul, and all one\'s might, and one\'s neighbour as oneself.
The last, never to despair of God\'s mercy.....19

Chapter V urges unlimited obedience on all. Whatever a monk has on
hand, he is to leave that alone, be it finished or not, to obey the
voice of an elder brother. And this obedience will be especially
acceptable to God, if everything be done quickly and without a
murmur...........23

Chapter VI urges silence on all, especially as regards scurrilous matter.

But for wholesome and edifying words the Rule is not so
stringent........... 25

Chapter VII urges humility, for all exultation is a kind of pride . . 27
The twelve degrees of humility are enumerated, of which the first is:

always to have tiie fear of the Lord before one\'s eyes . . 28
The second, to put the Lord\'s pleasure before one\'s own ... 31
The third, to submit to one\'s ehlers for the love of God ... 31
The fourth, to persevere notwithstanding all obstacles . . .32
The fifth, to confess evil deeds and bad thoughts • • • • 33
The sixth, to be content at the meanest labour being imposed upon

one............33

The seventh, not only to say, but to think, that one is inferior to all

others...........34

The eighth, not to do anything but follow the ruling of the ciders . 34
The ninth, not to speak until one is addressed • • • • 35
The tenth, not to laugh at the slightest provocation, and at every-

...........35

The eleventh, to speak humbly, gravely, and not too much . . 35

The twelfth, to show one\'s humility, not only inwardly, but also by

one\'s ways and meek habits.......35

Chapter VIII. In winter, the monks must got up at a fixed time after
midnight, but so that they have had a good night\'s rest. In
summer, the matins, which must be said at daybreak, should
follow immediately on the vigils......37

Chapter IX. The psalms that mu.st be sung at the noctums, as yell as
the responsories and the lessons, are here enumerated. Both
the Old and New Testament should Le re.ad, as well as the
approved commentaries on them . . • • • • ?>7

CONTENTS. IX

page

CuArTER X. In summer lime, the above-mentioned lessons should not be
read, but one of the Old Testament should be said by heart

instead...........39

Chapter XI. On Sundays, the brethren should rise earlier for the
nocturna, in order to get through the special arrangement of
services for that day. The lessons, psalms, and versicles are

then specified..........4°

Chapter XII. The psalms, benedictions, lessons, canticles, etc., to be

said during matins on Sundays.......

Chapter XIII. Matins on week-days. A special psalm for each day.

Especial stress is laid on the Lord\'s prayer being said aloud by

the Prior, so that all may hear it......43

Chapter XIV. On Saints\' days, the vigils should be said as on Sundays;

and only the special psalms, antiphons, and lessons of the day are

to be said..........45

Chapter XV. When the Alleluia is to be said, depends on the time of

year. On Sundays, it should always be said .... 45
Chapter XVI. In accordance with the words of the prophet: \' Seven
times a day have I praised thee,\' we must observe this sacred
number, and we shall be doing so, if we keep the seven canonical

hours...........46

Chapter XVII. The psalms, hymns, lessons, etc., to be said at Prime,

Tierce, Sext, None, Vesper, and Compline .... 47
Chapter XVIII. The order and number of tho psalms to be said.

S. Benet allows every one to have another arrangement, if only
the whole Psalter be distributed over each week. In former
times, he adds, it used to be the [iractice of our Holy Fathers to
do all this in one day........48

Chapter XIX. As we believe in the omnipresence of God, and that
His eyes look alike on the good and the evil, let us take care
that, during the divine office, our mind finds utterance in our
words . . ... . . . . . . .52
Chapter XX. Our prayer should be short and reverent, and pure,

unless it should be prolonged by divine inspiration ... 53
Chapter XXI. Deans should be chosen solely from the larger congre-
gations. Only humble men should be elected, and, should they
become tno proud, they must be deposed, just like the Provost,

after being rebuked three times......53

Chapter XXII. Each monk is to sleep in a separate bed, but all, if
possible, ill one hall. If there are too many, let there bo ten or
twenty together under the supervision of an elder. A candle
must burn in the dormitory until morning . . . .54
Chapter XXIII. If any brother does not observe the precepts of the
Rule, he must bo rebuked if necessary twice, secretly, and after

CONTENTS. IX

page

that, publicly. If he do not then mend, he shall be excom-
municated, and lastly, be subjected to corporal punishment . 55
Chaptee XXIV. The degree of punishment is to be in accordance with
the gravity of the guilt. For instance, for very light offences
the culprit is deprived only of the right of sitting at table, etc.. 56
Chapteb XXV. The brother who is guilty of a graver fault, must be
excluded both from the table and from the oratory. No one
p-ossing him may ask a blessing on his head or on his food ". 56

Chapter XXVI. Those that presume to have any intercourse whatever
with an excommunicated brother, should suffer the same ex-
communication .........SJ\'

Chapter XXVII. The Abbot, whose duty it is more to look after
weak souls than to tyrannise over strong, should remember the
example of the Good Shepherd, and imitate it . . . ,57
Chapter XXVIII. When a brother has been rebuked repeatedly, when
he has suffered the penalty of excommunication and corporal
punishment, when the Abbot\'s and the brethren\'s prayers have
been of no avail, then, and not until then, let the Abbot act
upon the Apostle\'s precept \' Put away the evil one from among
yourselves,\' and expel him ...,,,. 59

Chapter XXIX. A brother who has been expelled the monastery, should
be allowed to return into the lowest place if he promises to mend,
and this for three times ; after that, however, no return should

be possible..........60

Chapter XXX. Young boys should be rebuked in a different manner,
for they do not see the gravity of the penalty of excommunica-
tion. Let them be punished by fasting, or the rod ... 60

Chapter XXXI. On the qualities of the Cellarer. He must be a wise,
temperate, and God-fearing man, and must, above .all, be
humblo. If a brother asks of him what he cannot give, let him
not laugh at the brother, but in all humility refuse it. If the
congregation be a large one, helpers should be given him . . 61

Chapter XXXII. The use of the property of the monastery is to be
entrusted by the Abbot to monks on whose qualities he can
depend. A register should be kept by the Abbot, in order to see
that he gets back all that he gives......63

Chapter XXXIII. The monks are not to give anything away, or get any
property, except with the consent of the Abbot. Even their
own will, or their own body, is not in their power. All things

must be common unto all........63

Chapter XXXIV. Every\'one must receive the necessities of life in
accordance with his wants. This is not meant to advocate
favouritism, but merely consideration for the infirmities of the
weak. On no account should complaints be heard ... 64

CONTENTS. IX

page

Cih^teb XXXV. Every brother is to serve in turn in the refectory for a
week. During his time of sei-vice let him take a slight meal an
hour before the others, so that he do not feel faint, and let him
serve his brethren without murmuring. All things are to be
washed and cleaned on Saturday before a brother makes place

for. his successor.........65

Chapter XXXVI. A cell should be set apart for the sick, and a
brother, careful, diligent, and God-fearing should be appointed to
serve them. Over and above this, they are specially entrusted

to the Abbot\'s care.........67

Chapter XXXVII. With regard to old men and children, the rule
should not needlessly be applied in all its severity, especially
as to matters of nourishment . . . . . , . 68
Chapter XXXVIII. A weekly reader must be appointed, who is to begin
on Sunday. Silence should prevail at meals. Only those are
to be elected to this office, whose singing and reading will
edify the others ......... 69

Chapter XXXIX. At meals there should always be two dishes to chooso
from. Under circumstances of hard work or the like, the
Abbot may order more food to be given ; but let .all be mindful
not to be overtaken by gluttony. No flesh of a quadruped is to

be eaten, except by the sick or the infirm.....70

Chapter XL. A hemina^ of wine is supposed to be sufficient each day
for every monk. Abstinence, however, is recommended. The
Prior of the monastery has it in his power to regulate this, in
accordance with the situation of the convent, and the work of

the inmates......... . /i

Chapter XLI. The time of meals is to be regulated according to the time
of year and the heat. All is to be arranged so as not to

necessitate the use of a lamp.......73

Chapter XLII. Before compline, speaking should be rare; after that,
silence is not to be broken, except there be guests, or by express
command of the Abbot ........ 74

Chapter XLIII. Whatever work they have on hand, when the bell
rings, either for divine office, or for meals, the brethren should
hasten to the proper place. He who does not come, or comes

too late, should be punished befittingly.....75

Chapter XLIV. Of the manner in which the excommunicated should
make satisfaction. He is to lie, prostrate on the ground, before
the door of the oratory, and at the feet of all who pass him.
The Abbot must decide how long this is to last ... 78
Chapter XLV. Those who make a mistake in reading psalms, etc., should
be severely punished, unless they humble themselves. The

younger brethren should bo whipped.....79

■ A Roman liquid measure.

PAGE

xu contp:nts.

Chapter XLVI. If any one trespasses in any way, he is to be chastised
severely, should his guilt be made known by another. He
need not make it known publicly, but must at least acquaint

the Abbot with it.........80

Chapter XLVII. The time for the divine offices is to be fixed by the

Abbot, or by those whom he names ...... 80

Chapter XLVIII. Division of the day, as regards manual labour : Work
in the morning, then reading: a little rest or reading after
dinner, then work again. This arrangement is somewhat
difFerent in winter-time. During Lent there is more reading
than usual, as also on Sundays. No excessive amount of work
should be laid on the shoulders of the delicate . ... 81

Chapter XLIX. During Lent, when we must wash away all sins of
other times, especial sanctity of behaviour is enjoined : Absti-
nence, special prayers, and offerings. But everything should
be done with the knowledge of the Abbot .... 84
Chapter L. Those brothers who are far away from the monastery should
keep the hours of divine offices, in the fear of God, and with

bended knees, as best they can ......85

Chapter LI. He who has been sent away fiom the monastery for ono
day only, should not presume to eat cn his way, unless bidden

by the Abbot to do so........86

Chapter LII. The oratory is to be used for no other purpose than that

of praying..........86

Chapter LIII. Guests should always be received by the Prior .nnd the
brethren, for in them Christ is received. As a rule, fasts may be
broken on account of the guests. Their feet should be washed.
There must be a separate kitchen for guests, and some beds
* should always remain prepared for them ..... 87

Chapter LIV. A monk is not to receive any presents whatever, or

give them to any brother, unless the Abbot allow him to do so. 90
Chapter LV. On the clothing to be used by the monks. No general
rule is laid down ; all particulars are left to the Abbot, as too
much depends on the temperature in- each country to allow of
general regulations. The bedding is to be frequently looked

after by the Abbot.........91

Chapter LVI. If there are guests, they should sit at the Abbot\'s table,
which he is always at liberty to invite one or more of the

brethren to..........94

Chapter LVII. Artisans should work in their own branch of handicraft,
unless they pride themselves too much upon it. The price of
their articles, which must be sold without defrauding the
* monastery, should always be .1 little cheaper than in the

secular market.......... 94

CONTENTS. IX

PAGE

Chapter LVIir. No easy entrance into the Order is to be granted to a
new comer. He must prove himself worthy of being received,
by very great patience and humility. He must be diligently
watched. The Kule must be read to him once, and then again,
.ind once more, after long intervals. If he still persevere, he
must make the promise of stability, moral conversion, and
obedience, orally and in writing. All his property is to be given
up to the monasterj", and he must exchange his garments for

the monastic dress.........95

Chapter LIX. Noblemen who offer their sons, should make a written
promise that they will never give them anything. They are
allowed, however, to make a gift to the monastery of whatever
they please. The poor simply offer their sons before witnesses 99

Chapter LX. If a priest should wish to dwell in the monastery, he
can do so, under condition that he submit to the Rule. No
preference is to be given to him over any of the brethren . .100
Chapter LXI. Pilgrims should be received for as long as they like.

If they find fault with any arrangement of the monastery,
let the Abbot weigh their words well. If they be of evil
manners, let them be asked to depart. The Abbot must not
receive an inmate from another monastery without his Abbot\'s

consent...........101

Chapter LXII. The monk who has been chosen by the Abbot to be
ordained a priest, should abstain from feeling pride, and except
when oflBciating at the altar, should keep in the ordinary place
which is his by order of entrance into the monastery . .103
Chapter LXIII. All must keep to the place appointed to them. Age is
here never a consideration, only order of entrance, special
merit, or the ruling of the Abbot, whose appointments should
be just, and give no cause for complaint. The brethren are to
call one another by the reverential names of Frater, Nonnus.
The younger brother nmst always ask a blessing of the elder . 104
Chapter LXIV. The Abbot should be elected unanimously, or by the
more wholesome counsel of part of the community. If it
comes to the knowledge of any one that a bad Abbot has been
chosen anywhere, let the Bishop appoint a worthy substitute.
In all points the Abbot must be a good man. He must remember
that he has one day to render account of his management, and
must bear in mind that his task is to benefit the monks rather

than to be their bead........106

Chapter LXV. Scandals, arising through the appointment of a Provost,
should be avoided. The Provost must not think that he is not
more subject to the Abbot, after he has been ordained by him.
The first four times the Provost is to be admonished, if refractory.
The fifth time he must be deposed......109

PAGE

xiv CONTENTS.

Chaptkb LXVI. a wise old man is to be appointed gatekeeper, and if
he wants help, he can have it from one of the young men. The
monastery must be so constituted that every requisite is
there, so that the monks need not go abroad, to the detriment of
their souls. The Rule should be read frequently to the brethren 112
Chapter LXVII. Prayers are to be said for all those that go on a
journey. No one is to speak to another of his adventures on
a journey; nor is any one to leave the monastery, be the
distance ever so small, without the consent of the Abbot . . 113
Chaptee LXVIII. All that a brother is enjoined to undertake, he must
try to do, even if it should seem to liim to be too muuh. Let

him trust to God and obey.......114

Chapter LXIX. No one is to defend another in the monastery, not

even if they are of near kindred . . . . . .114
Chapter LXX. No one is to strike another. Lads under fifteen years
of ago must be watched diligently, but if they are treated too
severely, let the offender suffer the penalty enacted by the Rule 115
Chapter LXXI. The brethren must be obedient, not only to the Abbot,
but to one another. A brother who refuses to do penance, and

remains refractory, should be expelled.....116

Chapter LXXII. Good zeal leads to God, and to life eternal. Let no
one do what he tiiinks is good for himself, but only what is
profitable to another. Let Christ be loved above all . .117
Chapter LXXIII. Epilogue. The Rule is not intended to be exhaustive
in its teaching. The reader is referred to the writings of the
Holy Fathers, the rule of S. Basil, etc.

To those that live up to this Rule, the Kingdom of Heaven is
always open..........117

Notes.............119

INTEODUCTION.

I. Outlines of the History of Benedictinism in
England until the Reformation.

The Latin convent rule, known tinder the name of the
Rule of S. Benet, was written by that Saint about the year
516 a.b.^ Saint Benedict was not the first who found it
necessary to lay down rules for monks to live by. He wrote
only for those \'qui régulas nigris monachis ediderunt\' (i.e.
those that were afterwards called Black Friars, and Bene-
dictines). Dugdale, on the page cited below, enumerates some
six and more fathers who were the authors of Rules. Of
these we may especially mention S. Basilius, and refer the
reader to page 118^ infra, where Benedictus of Nursia
himself speaks of the Regula sanctis patris nostri Basilii,
as \'bene viventium et oboedientium monachorum instituta
virtutum.\'

According to the commonly accepted idea, Pope Gregory
the Great introduced Benedictinism, along with Christianity,
into England in the year 596, when Augustine, prior of the
Monastery of S. Andrew at Rome, came across with several

\' See Dugdale\'s Monasticon, ed. 1817 and 1846,1, p. xxiii. S. Benedictus pater
noster .... regulam monachorum edidit circa annum Christi 516.

" I here give the translation from the Durham MS., Bb. i. 6 (see
Wanley, p. 298), a collation of which was not given by Professor Schröer :
\' Eac swylce ])!Efa haligra faedera lif. 7 heora drohtnunga. 7 se regol ures halgan
faîder basilii hwœt is hit elles butan ge timbrunga haligra manna. 7 Ôœra
muneca ]> (read ])e) wel 7 rihte libba\'ö, 7 ge hersume synd.\' See A. Schröer,
Die Angelsächsischen Prosabearbeitungen der Benediktinerregel, Kassel,
i88!;-i888, p. 133. I may here thankfully mention the service rendered me
by the Eev. Canon D. Greenwell, Librarian to the Dean and Chapter of
Durham Cathedral, who, on my applying for the loan of the MS., volunteered
to transcribe the whole of the Ben. Ilule contained in it, and who, assisted
by the Rev. J. T. Fowler, Librarian to the University of Durham, did so
entirely as \' a labour of love.\' Let me here publicly thank the reverend
gentlemen for this extraordinary kindness.

xvi HISTORY OF BENEDICTINISM. [l.

other Benedictine monks ^ Hook adds that \'Before Dun-
stan\'s time we may doubt the existence anywhere in England
of the Benedictine Eule in its completeness.\' Lingard^
argues against this. According to this learned historian,
Benedictine writers have unsuccessfully tried to establish and
maintain that S. Gregory was a Benedictine himself. According
to him, it was not until Wilfrid\'s time (latter half of the seventh
century) that the monks of Britain got acquainted with the
Rule of S. Benedict. Be this as it may^, all are ag\'reed in
attributing a high character and a great authority to the
Rule in England when once introduced.

A few notes on the fate of the Benedictines in England
may -be convenient to the reader. Dugdale, in his great
collection of materials for the study of Monasticism in England,
says^;—

\' Très autem apud nos célébrés fuerunt raonachismi vcteris reformationes. . . .
Altera sub Dunstano fuit, in consilio Wintoniensi anno 965 regnante Edgaro,
magnificeutissimo coenobiorum instauratore. Tunc prirnum monachis praescripta
fuit constitutio generalis tarn ex Benedicti Regula quam ex veteribus con-
suetudinibus contexta quae dicta est Eegularis Concordia Anglicae nationis

If this \' Regularis Concordia \' is not Dunstan\'s, it owes its
origin at least to his mind, which pervades the time in which
he lived. His was the age of the revival of monasticism.
It is Dunstan\'s mind that speaks through Eadg-ar\'s mouth
when the latter prompts Aethelwold to a translation of the
Benedictine Rule®. What Dunstan aimed at, was to lead
back monastic life to its original purity and severe discipline
in accordance with the Rule of S. Benet, and to infuse the
spirit of monasticism into the whole of the English Church.
When, after sundry vicissitudes, Dunstan came to power
shortly after Eadgar\'s accession, \'the reforms sadly wanted

• See Smith and Cheetham, Diet, of Christ. Antiquities ; and Hook, Church
Dictionary, in voce.

\' Alterthiimer der Angelsächsischen Kirche. Deutsch von Dr. F. H., in
Rom. Breslau, 1847. When writing, I had not the English ed. at my disposal.

\' This is not the place for further investigations of the matter. I refer
to Lingard, pp. 64, 70, and 72.

\'\' Monasticon Anglicanum, I, p. xiii.

^ See infra, Ch. II of this Introduction, sub I.

° See Schiöer, Die Prosabearbeitungon, pp. xiii-xviii ; infra, p. xxxiv.

HISTORY OF BENEDICTINISM. XVll

were carried into effect. And his faithful friend Aethelwold
followed in his footsteps

The institution of several affiliated congregations, as those
of the Cistercian and Cluniac monks, shows on tho one
hand great interest in Benedict\'s Regulations ; on tho other
hand, however, the fact that this revival was deemed necessary,
clearly indicates that here and there the observance of the
llule had gradually become laxer. The same may be said
with regard to the Councils held every now and then at
London, and in other places. When we find one synod
revive an enactment that no meat shall be eaten, it is a
sure sign that for some time this precept had not been
observed About the year 1431 we find that degeneration
bad again set in, and that a reform was contemplated. At a
meeting\' in Westminster Abbey between King Henry V and
the Abbots and prelates of the Order of Black Monks, more
than 360 in number, a reform was decidcd upon

Coming a hundred years down, we now approach Henry the
Eighth\'s time, the age of the decline of monasticism, tho time
when monasteries were to be dissolved, along with the ties
that had bound Henry VIII to Rome. Tliat corruption, had
set in, is a fact rccog-nised alike by both Roman Catholic and
Protestant writers. \' It is not pretended that every single
community of the very numerous houses in Eng\'land,\' says
Weldon \'where the Rule of S. Benet was followed, was at the
time of its dispersion in the highest state of regular discipline,\'
and :—

^ I cannot but refer to B. ten Brink\'s words on this subject, which are
very characteristic (Engl. Litt. Geschichte, 1877, I, p. 129); to, Cockayne,
Leechdoms, III, p. 412 ; and Bishop Stubbs, Memorials of S. Dunstan, Intro-
duction, passim, but especially pp. cv and cviii.

" \' Sana de constitutione quam paulo ante concilium fecerant abbates ordinia
S.ancti Benedicti per Angliani constituti de camibus non comcdcndis sacro
approbante concilio his verbis diffinitum est.\' Luard, Annales Monastici, II,
318; Annales do Waverleia, Mccxxxvii. For other councils, see ib., IV,
547-550-

" See Dom. Bennet Weldon, a Chronicle of the English Bened. Monks, etc.,
preface, p. vii, who quotes Thomas W.alsingham, Histona Anglicana, ed. 1864,
P- 337-

^ Ib., p. xii.

\' Liber Monasterii de Hyde, by E. Edwards. Preface, p. Ixiii.

b

xviii HISTOEY OF BENEDICTINISM. [r.

\' The complaints\'—against the inmates, as will be seen, of not a very serious
nature—\' relate for the most part to certain anticipations by some of the more
youthful monks of the teachings of what has lately been called muscular
Christianity, as shown in their addiction to the practice of long-bow archery in
the Hyde meadows, and to that of keeping late hours, sitting for long discussions,
sometimes to the hour of eight in the evening and even beyond it (and, it is
much to be feared, occasionally over a potation to freshen their talk), instead
of betaking themselves to bed immediately after supper, according to the good
wont of their predecessors.\' ^

And now a complaint on the part of the Roman Catholics,
which is at the same time a serious accusation :—

\' In estimating the case with which so many venerable monasteries were
overthrown, it must be borne in mind that for some years previous to their
final suppression, many steps had been taken by those in power to render that
suppression more easy. One of these, and perhaps the chief, was the appoint-
ment by the Court of compliant and suborned men, already apostates at heart,
to highest positions in the religious houses. No one was more prominent in
this disgraceful intrigue than the highest ecclesiastical authority in the
kingdom, the primate Cranmer.\'

As a proof of this, D. Weldon^ instances the case of a
man who Avas recommended for a vacancy, and who was—
in an introductory letter quoted—said to be \' very tractable,
and as ready to set forward his prince\'s causes as no man more
of his coat\' (1538). And the late Professor Brewer, a Protestant
historian of Henry VIII has an admission bearing- on this
subject, when He says: (Nothing) . . . . \' warrant(s) us in
believing that the era preceding the Reformation was more
corrupt than that which succeeded it.\'

We now understand tho preamble of the Act 27 Henry YIII,
intitlcd \' An act concerning\' the suppression or Dissolution of
certain Religious houses and gevcu to the Kings Highness
and to his Heirs for ever.

\' For as much as manifest sinne, vycyolis carnal and abominable living
ys daily used and comitted in such littell and small abbayes and priories
and other religious houses of monkes chanons and nonnes where the con-
gregation is under the number of xii\' etc.

How the new hope to which Mary\'s accession gave birth

^ Weldon, pref., p. xiii.

^ The Reign of Henry VIII, from his acct ssion to the death of Wolscy, by
the late J. S. Brewer, M.A., ed. by James Gairdner, of the Public Record
Office, I, 1884 ; see p. 600.

\' Monasticon Anglicanum, Appendix to Vol. VlII, p. 1654.

XXll THE MS. TIB. A. 3. [ll.

was cut short with the end of her brief reign, and the
succession of the Protestant Elizabeth, who undid all, and how
the Benedictines fared unto this very day, all this and more
the curious may pursue in the works I have cited in the
foot-notes. I may fitly close this section of the introduction
by two more passages from Professor Brewer\'s book, which
are worth quoting:—

\'The greater monasteries were necessarily modified by the circumstances
of the times, and their religious characters impaired. They admitted a
number of lay inmates, or, at least, kept open house for persons not connected
with their foundations\' (I, p. 50) and (ib., p. 51) :

\' That in so large a body of men, so widely dispersed, seated for so many
centuries in the richest and fairest estates of England, for which they were
mainly indebted to their own skill, perseverance, and industry, discreditable
members were to be found (and what literary chiffonier, raking in the
scandalous annals of any profession, cannot find filth and corruption) is
likely enough, but that the corruption was either so black or so general as
party spirit would make us believe, is contrary to all analogy, and ia un-
supported by impartial and contemporary evidence^.\'

11. BiDLIOGEArHY 01\' THE various treatises, FOUND in
tiie COTTONIAN MS., TiD. A. 3.

The manuscript from which the present copy of the
Benedictine Ilule is taken, is the Cotton MS., Tiberius A. 3.
It is described by "VVanley on pp. 193^-199 of his catalogue.
The MS. is slightly injured, but has been rebound and
beautifully pasted up. At p. 198, section LXI, Wanley records
the very gaps that I have noted below (on p. i, 11. i, 2, etc.),
so that these injuries must be anterior to him, and therefore
also to the fire of 173J.

The MS. is a miscellaneous one, containing a varied col-

Just now a notice reaches me of a book only recently published, \'Henry VIII
and the English Monasteries; an attempt to illustrate the History of their
Suppression.\' By Francis Aidan Gasquet. Vol. I. The book, which lays
blame on Protestants as well as on Roman Catholics, is characterised as being
most conscientiously fair.\' For a full statement of the case against the
monasteries, I refer the reader to Ch. V of R. W. Dixon\'s History of the
Church of England. Vol. I, 1878 (London: Smith, Elder, and Co.).

Wanley, by a misprint, 793.

b 3

XXll THE MS. TIB. A. 3. [ll.

lection of interlinear versions, prayers, confessions, and other
treatises. The authorities of the great public libraries are not,
so far as I know, keeping registers of the MSS. published or
transcribed. The work in arrear is of course enormous;
but an inverted Wanley to begin with,—to which the present
is a humble contribution — would be an invaluable boon to
students of the Oldest English, and would be a foundation
for librarians to work upon. I therefore proceed to give notes
of where tho various pieces in the MS. Tiberius A. 3 are
printed, if they have been edited at all; and I hope that all
who have ever turned over the leaves of MSS. to hunt for
unpublished matter, Avill be glad of my attempt; especially
those who have dihgently copied out page after page, only
to find that this had been already done by some one else.
Since Wanley\'s time the pagination of the MS. has been
slightly altered, and my . statements refer to this new
pagination.

That some one will take this work up for all MSS. is
a consummation devoutly to be wished.

The greater part of the MS. was copied out by Junius
(see below, p. xxxii, on the value of these transcriptions),
and his copies are kept in the Bodleian Library, at Oxford.
It is to the various MSS. of this collection that the words
\' MS. .lunius\' (infra) refer.

Contents of the MS. Tiberius A.

No. I (fo. 3). Rcgularis Concordia Anglicae Nationis
Monaehorum Sanctimonialiumque.

MSS. Jun. 52.109 (now = No. 46). Wanley, pp. 92 and 99. VII.

Of this, the Latin text has been printed in full at least twice: (a) in R. P.
Clem. Reyneri Apostolatus Benedictinorum, and (h) in the later editions
of tho Monasticon Anglicanum, see edd. 1817, 1846, I, p. xxvii. The
Anglo-Saxon text has never been printed in full. Besides the smaller
quotations given from it by Wanley himself, other extracts have been put
in type several times. Selden printed the prologue and the greater part
of the epilogue in his notes to Eadmer. See his Works, ed. 1726, II
(tomus 2),pp. 1612-1621 (see MS. Junius, 18 ; Wanley, p!\'io3). Selden,
in accordance with the usage of his time, \' edits\'\' the MS., and though

^ he does not mention the MS. from which his text is taken, it is highly
probable that our MS. is the one. Th. Wright, in his Biographia Litt.

\' See Skeat, Preface to the Gospel of S. Matthew, p. viii.

XXll THE MS. TIB. A. 3. [ll.

Brit., Anglo-Saxon period (I), p. 459, prints the iith chapter by way of
specimen. Quite recently the prologue and part of the first chapter have
been published—critically edited, as the title page says—by Dr.
Edward Breck, \' Fragment of Aelfric\'s translation of Aethelwold\'s De
consuetudine Monachorum,\' etc., Leipsic. W. Drugulin\'s printing
office, 1887.

An edition of the whole text is preparing by Mr. W. S. Logeman. I may
here add that the work is generally supposed to be one of Dunstan\'s,
but it has been attributed also to Aelfric, whilst of late, independently
of each other, Professor A. Ebert (Allgemeine Gesoh. der Litt. des
Mittelalters III, p. 50(3), and the above-named Dr. Breck, have fathered
it upon Aethelwold, Abbot of Abingdon, and afterwards Bishop of
Winchester.

II-XVII, inclusive, are all of a nature that makes us turn to
Cockayne\'s Leechdoms (London, 1864-1866) to sec if any are
l)rinted in it. As a matter of fact, I find the following state
of affairs :—

No. II (fo. 27 b). Lkchdoras, III, 198.

MS. Jun. 43. Wanley, p. 88.

No. Ill (fo. 32 b). Leechdoms, III, 184 (without the
Latin text).

MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 89 (imperfect? Wanley).

No. IV (fo. 35 b). Unprinted^ (biit copied by me for
publication).

MS. Jun. 43. Wanley, p. 88.

No. V (fo. 36). Unprinted.

No. VI (fo. 36 b). Unprinted.

No. VII (fo. 36 b). Leechdoms, III, 150.

MS, Jun. 44, Wanley, p, 89,

No. VIII (fo. 37). Unprinted, but copied for publication.

MS, Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 89, sub VIII,

No, IX (fo, 37 b). Leechdoms, III, 154 and 168.

MS, Jun. 43, W.anley, p, 88, sub II .ind V. There is, however, a dis-
crepancy in the two concluding pas.sages of the texts. Having at the
moment of writing no access to either MS., I am unable to solve the diffi-
culty, which was peril ap.s also felt by Wanley, At least, he says, very
prudently; \' Idem Codex, inquit, ch, Junius,\' etc.

No, X (fo, 39 b), Leechdoms, III, 176.

MS, Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 89, sub V,

\' I consulted Professor Napier on. this subject. He was so kind as to
put lus bibliographical knowledge at my disposal whenever I wished to draw
upon it.

XXll THE MS. TIB. A. 3. [ll.

No. XI (fo. 40). LeecMoms, III, 180.

MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 89, sub IX.

No. XII (fo. 40 b). Leecbdoms, III, 180.

MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 89, sub VII.

No. XIII (fo. 40 b). Leechdoms, III, 146.

MS. Jun. 41, sub II. Wanley, p. 87.

No. XIV (fo. 41). Leechdoms, III, 156.

No. XV (fo. 41 b). Unprinted (copied).

MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, pp. 89 and 90, sub XI.

No. XVI (fo. 42). Unprinted (copied).

No. XVII (fo. 42 b). Leechdoms, III, 144.

MS. Jun. 41. Wanley, p. 87.

Nos. XVIII-XX, and Nos. XXIII, XXIV incbisive, (If.
43-44), are small tracts, very short notes, in fact (\' Notulae\'
Wanley), on Adam, Noah, Fasting, the Virgin\'s Age, and on
Crime. They are shortly to appear in the Anglia XI.

No. XVIII.

MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 90, sub XIV.

No. XXI is Latin (fo. 43 b).

No. XXII (fo. 44). Leechdoms, III, 228 (i)artly, only, and
from the MS. Caligula A. XV).

No. XXIII.

MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 90, sub XIV.

No. XXV (IT. 44-57). A collection of confessions and prayers
as yet unprinted. They will shortly appear in the Anglia.
Only the latter part (Wanley, p. 196), beginning : \' Dait sceal
ge]>encan,\' also appearing in an Oxford MS. (Wanley, p. 51),
was used by Thorpe in Ancient Laws, II, 260.

MS. Jun. 63. Wanley, p. 93.

No. XXVI (ff. 57-60 b). \'Missa, cum rubrieis Saxonice.\'\'
I am not aware that it has been printed.

No. XXVII (fo. 60 b) has been published several times; see

Wiilker\'s Grundrisz, p. 476 (III, § 568).

MS. Jun. 66. Wanley, p. 95. Zupitza (Zeitschr. f. D. lU. 31. 28 ff.)
has recently treated of the relation of the two MSS. known to exist. I

, must here mention a note in the preface to W.mley\'s Catalogue.
Amongst some books that used to be in the library of Clirist Church,
Canterbury, he names (p, 8) a \' Locutio Latina glosata Anglice, ad
instruendos pueros (forte Aelfric Bata).\' I have no means of de-

n.] THE MS. TIB. k. 3. xxill

termining whether this is the identical copy that is now in the
Cottonian Library. It would seem not, from the fact that it is mentioned
as a separate book, whereas both the Oxford and the London copies are
part of a collection of treatises. The query rises, were they always
so 1 The Oxford MS. is to be published by Zupitza.

Nos. XXVIII-XXXI (fo. 65). Latin.
No. XXXII (fo. 65b). Leechdoms, III, 238 (hero, as in
some of the cases quoted before, only as \' variae lectiones \').
MS. Jun. 41. Wanley p. 87. See Wiilker\'s Grundrisz, III, § 571;

Anglia X, p. 457 ff.
The notae that Wanley mentions on p. 196 b of his catalogue (Nota de
Archa noe, de S. Petri Ecclesia, et de Templo Salomonis, Saxoiiice,
fo. 73 h) have not yet been printed, but I presume they are
shortly to ai)pear in the Anglia (xi). MS. Jun. 44. Wanley, p. 90,
sub XIV.

No. XXXIII (fo. 73 b). Cockayne\'s Narratiunculae, p. 39 ;
of. Wiilker\'s Grundrisz, § 602.

No. XXXIV (fo. 77 b). Aelfric\'s Homilies (ed. Thorpe),
II, 240.

No. XXXV (fo. 83). Is in Napier\'s ed. of Wulfstan\'s
Homilies.

MS. Jun. 69. Wanley, p. 95.

No. XXXVI (fo. 87). Kemble\'s Salomon and Satm-n, p. 84.

MS. J un. 69. Wanley, p. 96. It will be included in Professor Napier\'s
first volume of Homilies, to be edited for tlio Early English Text
Society.

Nos. XXXVII-XLVIII (fo. 88 b), inclusive, will all be
found in Professor Napier\'s Wulfstan.
No. XLIX(fo. 93 b). Latin.

No. L (fo. 94 b). I. Edited in Thorpe\'s Anc. Laws, II, 260.
Nos. 2-6 inclusive are also to be found there, but printed
from other MSS. See above, under No. 25.
MS. Jun. 59. Wanley, p. 93.

No. LI (fo. 97). Printed by Kluge, Internationale Zeit-
schrift für Vergl. Sprachforschung, cd. Techmer, II, 118.
MS. Jun. 52. Wauley, p. 92.

Nos. LH and LIII (fo. 101 b). So far as I know, un-
piinted. One would expect these to be included in Cockayne\'s
Leechdoms.

No. LIV (fo. 102). See Kluge, E. Stud., VIII, 472. It
contains a reminiscence of the A.-S. poem, the Seaforer.

XXll THE MS. TIB. A. 3. [ll.

No. LV (fo. 103). \'Que sunt instrumenta Bonorum,
Latins et eadem Saxonice. Sectio excerpta ex Regula
S. Benedicti,\' says Wanley. It is a copy of chapter four,
of the work which, as I have said above (p. xv) and below
(p. xxxi), has been edited, with some variae lectiones. by
Professor A. Schröer ; but he has not given a collation qf this
Tiberius MS.

Nos. LVI, LVII (fo. 105). These will probably be included
in Professor Napier\'s collection of Homilies.

MS. Jun. 48 (by a misprint in Wanley: 47). Wanley, p. 90 (for No.
LVII).

No. LVIII (fo. 106). Leechdoms, III. p. 386. Sec
Wanley, p. no (C. C. C. C. L. 12).

No. LIX (fo. 106). See Wülker\'s Grundi-isz, §§ 564-566,
P- 475-

No. LX (fo. 107 b). \' Votiva Laus.\' Latin.

No. LXI (fo. 118). This is our Benedictine Rule. See
below, sections III and IV.

MS. Jun. 92. Wanley, p. 103. Junius copied only part of the gloss
into a printed text: \' Regula S. Benedicti Latine Duaci impressa, A. D.
1611, Saxonice per Junium glossata ex Cottoniano codice qui inscri-
bitur, Tiberius A. 3.\' When preparing my text for the press, I was not
in a position to compare Junius\'s copy.

No. LXII (fo. 163 b) Regulae S. Fulgentii Latine, cum
interlineata versione Saxonice.\'

MS. Jun. 52. Wanley, pp. 91, 92. Wanley, in bestowing this name on
this collection of monastic precepts, evidently followed Junius, who,
at the beginning of his copy, says: Benedicti regulam interlineatam,
quam habet Cottonianus codex qui insoribitur, Tiberius A. 3, mox
excipiunt S. Fulgentii regulae, similiter interlineatae.

The Precepts, as in the present MS., begin thus :—
\'DICEBAT VERO SANCTU3 FUIiGENTIUS.

\' Juxta\' regulam patrum vivere semper stude ; maxime autem secundum
sancti confessoris tui benedicti; Non declines ah ea in (luoquam: nec
illi addas quippiam, nec minuas; Totum enim quod suflicifc habet, et
nusquam minus habet; cujus verba atque imperia sectatores suos per-
ducunt ad celi palatia;\' and then follows immediately—

\'A KALENDIS AÜTEM OCTOBRIS USQUE IN PASCHA\'
\' hora nona hoc faciunt,\' etc.

\'These words; \' A kalendis autem Octobris,\' etc., to the end of our

\' I leave out the interlinear gloss, and here tacitly correct the Latin. Theso
rules will be printed separately elsewhere.

XXll THE MS. TIB. A. 3. [ll.

so-called Eegulae S. Fulgentii, at fo. i68 b, form part of a treatise
l)rinted in Migne\'s Patrol. Cursus completus, Vol. 66, p. 938, where
it is headed : Ordo Monasticus S. P. Benedicto attributus. It is this
fact that makes it all but necessary for me to say a word on the
subject.

The reason why these Precepts liave been ascribed to S. Benet seems to
be this. A monk at S. Germain du Pré \' stated that they were found
in a \' vetus quoddam MS. Cassinense,\' which enjoys a high reputation
for genuineness.

This circumstance seems to have been sufficient reason for Arnoldus Wion
to print the Precepts with the edition of the Benedictine Rule in 1593
at Venice, and thus silently\'^ sanction S. Benet\'s authorship. The
argument is, however, a very shallow one, and so long as no other
proofs are adduced, \' hoc opusculum non pro vero fetu magni S. Benedicti
vendere praesumimus \' (Migne, Vol. 66, p. 938).

The words at the beginning: JuHa regulam to celi palatia, he.ided
by Dicebat vero sanctus Fulgentius, and especially the latter, must
have given rise to Junius\'s error.

Nos. LXIII and LXIV (fo. 168 b) are Latin monastic precepts
vvbich, variis lectionihis, also occur in MS. Titus A. 4, II\'. 107
and 117.

No. LXV (fo. 174). \' Actbelwoldus de consuetudine mona-
chorum Saxonice.\' It has been printed by A. Schröer,
Englischc Studicn, IX, 291. See E. Breck, as quoted supra,
passim.

MS. Jun. 52. Wanley, p. 91.

No. LXVI (fo. 177) is a Latin fragment, and, I think,
unprinted.

No. LXVII (fo. 178). This did not originally belong to
the MS. It most probably belonged to MS. Tib. A. 6. See
Wanley\'s note, and Prof. Earle\'s ed. of the two parallel
Chronicles, p. xxv (Oxford, 1865). See Wanley, p. 84 (MS.
Laud, G. 36, II).

MS. Jun. 66. Wanley, p. 95. It appears from Wanley\'s note that in
his time it belonged to MS. Tib. A. 3.

No. LXVIII (fo. 179). See Leechdoms, III, 218.

No. LXIX (fo. 179 b). Latin, and, so far as I know, not
printed.

\' R. P. Jacobus du Brevil monachus S. Germani a Pratis; see Migne,
Vol. 66, note at the end of the tre.itise there, p. 942.

I have not seen this edition, but presume that Wion does not expressly
attribute tho Precepts to S. Benet.

XXVI THE LATIN TEXT. [ill.

III. TfjE Latin Text. Nineteentii-centuky Editions.

Manner of Editing.

We have already seen (p. xv) that S. Benedict of Nursia
wrote his Rule about the year 516. No earlier writers have
yet been pointed out as his sources. It is quite probable that he
had none The Ride no doub t originated in the saint\'s desire
to provide his own followers with a code of laws to live by.
However much he venerated his foregengan, as the conditions
under which his monks lived differed from those of his
predecessors, he must have been mainly, if not quite, original in
the choice of his precepts. No doubt, his reading the works of
a S. Basil and others may have made him feel the desira-
bility of writing regulations of his owTi. But I should be
surprised to hear that after-search had established a definite
and direct relationship of matter between our Rule and any
one of the works whose key-note it has more or less struck^.

The number of commentaries that our Rule has called forth
would seem to be legion. This Introduction is hardly the
place for their enumeration. Neither can we allow ourselves
to copy out the encomia of which S. Benedict and his followers
can boast. Suffice it to refer for these to Migne, (see below)
volume 66, which contains the greater part of these encomia,
and references to more works on the subject.

Our Latin text has been edited several times. Apart from
the older editions, such as the one of 1593 (printed at Venice
by Fr. Arnoldus Wion), I here enumerate those nineteenth
century edd. that have come to my knowledge:—

(a) Migne. Patrologiae Cursus Completus, vol. 66, p. 21 j
(T., Regula S. Bencdicti cum commcntariis.

These commentaries make the edition a very useful one.
However, the work is very difficult to be got at, its enormous
bulk—over 200 volumes—makes few persons care to buy it.

^^gee Gudranger, as quoted infra,\' sanctus spiritus per beatum Bencdictum
. . . Kegulam Monachorum edidit\' (p. vi).

\' See however: Concordia Reguhirum, auctoro S. Benedicto, . . . auctore
Fr. Hugone Menardo . . . Parisiis, 1638.

III.1 LATIN RULE. MODERN EDITIONS. XXVll

(b) Oueranger. Encliiridion Benedictinum, complectens
Regulam vitam et Laudes sanctissimi occidentalium mona-
clioruin Patriarchae, accednnt Exercitia S. Gertradis Magnae et
Blosii speculum. Andegavi. Typis Cosnier et Lachese.
mdccclxit, contains page i, ff. Regula S. Patris Benedicti
Juxta exemplar Cassinense.

(c) Pax. Monastic Gleanings. No. i.

The Rule of Our most holy Eather S. Benedict, patriarch
of monks ; in Latin sind English. Translated by A Monk of
S. Augustine\'s Monastery, Ramsgate. London, Burns &
Gates, 1872.

{d) Regula Sancti Patris Benedicti juxta antiquissimos
codices recognita, a P(atre) Edmunde Schmidt. Cum Pcrmissu
Superiorum. mdcoclxxx. Ratisbonae, Neo Eboraci et
Cincinnati!. Sumptibus, Cliartis et Typis Eriderici Pristet,
S. Sedis Apostolicae Typographi.

This contains twenty-two pages of Prolegomena, in which tho
author treats of the relations of the MSS., and in which ho
wishes to establish that S. Benet prepared two drafts of his
Rule. The work appears to be printed privately. At my
request, however, the author kindly placed a copy at my
disposal, for which I hero beg to thank him most heartily.

(e) The Rule of our Most Holy Father S.aint Benedict.
Edited, with an English translation and Explanatory Notes
by A Monk of S. Benedict\'s Abbey, Fort-Augustus. Jussu
Superiorum. London, Burns & Oates, 1886.

{ƒ) \' Die Wintcney Version der Regula S. Benedicti,
lateinisch und englisch zum crstenmale herausgegeben\' has
just appeared at Halle (M. Niemeyer), with a most inter-
esting Preface. Before the work was published, the editor,
IIciT Dr. A. Schröer, professor at the Uiiivorsity of Freiburg,
presented mo with a copy of the advancc sheets of the text.
For this com-teous act I here express my sincere gratitude,
as well as for other kindnesses received at that gentleman\'s
hands.

The English work is a thirteenth century text, taken from
the MS, Cott. Claud. D. HI, whence the Latin text is abo
transcribed.

xxviii the latin text. [hi.

Herr Schmidt used fifteen Latin texts for his edition ;
Professor Schröer only those four of which he published the
Anglo-Saxon version As Herr Schmidt used a collation of
our codex (Schmidt = F) as well as one of the MS. Tib. A. IV
(= Schröer\'s T, Schmidt\'s G), the total number of Latin codices
to which I shall subsequently have occasion to refer"" to is
nineteen. I designate them as follows :—

A. Cod. Tegernseensis. Royal Libr., Munich (elm. 19408).

B. „ Mondseensis. R. and Imp. Libr., Vienna (2332).

C. „ Fuldensis. Bibl. Fuld. (D. 3).

D. „ Parisien.sis. Nat. Libr. (4208).

E. „ Frisingensis. Royal Libr., Munich (elm. 6255).

F. „ Londinensis L Cott. Libr., Tib. (A. 3).

G. „ Londinensis II. Cott. Libr., Tit. (A. 4).

H. „ Veronensis I. City Library.

I. „ Bruxellensis. Library of the Dukes of Burgundy (8305).

K. „ Romanus. Vatican Cod. Lat. 5949.

L. „ Einsidlensis, No. 236.

O. „ Oxoniensis. Bodl. Libr., Hatton MS.

P. „ Faucensis. Library of the Cathedral Chapter at Augsburg.

Q. „ Veronensis II. Library of the Cath. Ch. at Verona."

R. „ Sangallensis. Chapter Library, 916.

S. is Schröer\'s C Winteney Version. MS. Cott. Claud. D. IIL Cf. p. xxvii.

T. „ A. (MS. C.C.C.C. 178). Schröer, Prosa Bearb., p. xix
(Anglia, vi. 430).

U. „ 0. (MS. C. C. C. 0. 197). Schröer, ib., p. xxi.

W. ,, Wells fragment, belonging to the Dean and Chapter of Wells
Cathedral. Schröer, ib., p. xxv.

For further particulars about MSS. A-R, the few privileged
persons who possess the book may be referred to Schmidt\'s
Preface, pp. xii-xv, from which part of the above has been ab-
stracted. For G, see also Schröer», Die Prosabearbeitungon,
p. xxiii. For F, see supra, Ch. II. The collation of our text,
undertaken for Herr Schmidt by a friend, appears to be rather
incorrect.

It must not be supposed that there are no more Latin
texts than those enumerated. I have casually come across
others in the Library of Durham Cathedral, in the Lambeth
Pajacc Library, in the Phillips Library at Cheltenham, and

^ See A. Schröer, Die Pro.sabearbeitungen der B. R., p. xxvi, and now tho
above-mentioned preface, p. xi.

III.] XXIX MS. SPELLINGS OF LATIN.

(of the fourth chapter only) in MS. Tib. A. 3, fo. 103 (see
above, p. xxiv).

In the MS. Tib. A. 3 (fo. 118, above, p. xxiv), our Latin text
occurs in an exceedingly corrupt state. \' Scatetque mendis,\'
justly observes Schmidt (p. xiii). Gueranger, Schmidt,
Migne, etc., have, in their editions, largely deviated from the
MS. readings. Lower down in this Introduction, in §§ 7 and 8
of No. V, some remarks will be found bearing on the edition
of the Latin text, to which I beg to refer the reader. It
will be seen from those, what my position is with regard
to hitherto prevalent modes of editing- Latin texts. The
principles there stated have led me to deviate as little
as possible from the MS. readings, nay, I have tried to
keep to them always, except in cases where their spelling
would make the text absolutely unintelligible to the ordinary
reader. No one will for a moment feel doubts as to the
meaning of clehead, prospiciad, /lalbatis, etc., but I deem it
possible that the spelling medicehtr, as lemma to he smeege
(96. a), might throw those off the track who did not at
the moment think of the phenomenon which will be found
discussed, infra. No. V, § 63. Hence, such spellings have
been banished from tho text, but I have been careful to mark
these divergencies in the foot-notes, whereas the spelling
ditlerences whose meaning was obvious, I have put in the
text itself.

I have adhered to the paragraphs of the MS., as well as to
its peculiar^ punctuation. Tho contractions have all been
expanded and to denote them, the letters not actually found
in the MS. are printed in Iloman typo, whereas the rest of
the Latin text is in italics.

In tho first few pages of this Rule, some gaps occur; see
the Text, p. i ff., passim. Tho Latin letters, so far as they
may be supposed to have disappeared, arc added in brackets.
The headings of the chapters are almost always majuscules in

• So peculiar that I afterwards, but too late, wished I had adopted a less
embarrassing plan.

\' I am unable to agree with E, Kolbing, E. Stud., Ill, 469 note, in so far as
he says that it is unnecess.ary to denote these contractions.

xxx ADDED LATIN WORDS. [iV.

black ink, but mostly tinged with red. The first line, or part
of it, of the Latin text in each chapter is usually also in
capital black letters, no red ink being applied here. In this
edition they have been denoted by small capitals. The illumi-
nated capitals found in the MS. at the beginning of the
chai)ters are mostly of a red, green, or blue colour; once or
twice they have been forgotten. The glossator or glossators
has or have sometimes added Latin words in the line of the
gloss above the Latin Those additions are sometimes words
that also occur in other Latin texts, so that we may suppose
the then glossator to have copied these from another Latin
text. In this case the added word has been inserted in the
text, and in the Latin foot-notes attention has been drawn
to this by the words: added or supplied by glossator. Of a
different nature are the words that are scribbled over the
Latin text, without being at all found in the other texts.
They may be termed Latin glosses, and though comparatively
rare, are found, e.g. where the word dehere or dehemus (see text.
Cap. IV, passim) is added to explain the infinitive used as
an imperative. Of this nature is the gloss t plane to sane
(78. 17). These words, although Latin, are always put in
the line above, as partaking of the nature of glosses. They,
too, may be due to more than one scribe, but they are
now found in the MS. in the characteristic handwriting of
the Anglo-Saxon scribe. Attention has mostly been drawn to
these additions in the Anglo-Saxon foot-notes.

IV. The Anglo-Saxon Text. \' Manner of Editing.

The \'Paving Letters.\'

The prose paraphrases of the Rule of S. Benet in Anglo-
Saxon that have been edited by A. Schröer^ have no connection

\' Our MS. is ft copy; so that if more than one glossator has been at work—
which I have every reason to believe—the external traces of, their work
are effaced. The reader will see that the existence of more than one glossator
must be assumed, by referring to the work, and especially the notes (e. g. note
to 10. 7, p. 121 ; and 47. 3, etc.)

^ (a) Bibliothekder Angelsächsischen Prosa, vonC. W. M. Grein, fortgesetzt
von R. P. Wülker, Zweiter Band: Die Angelsächsischen Prosabearbeitungen

n-.] THE ANGLO-SAXON TEXT. XXXI

whatever with the present interlinear text. Of course, some
words are the same, both in the interlinear and paraphrastical
translations, but the greater number of them are different.
This constitutes the principal claim of our text to a separate
edition. It would be an interesting task to compare the
vocabulary of the two versions together. There is no doubt
that where the meaning of an Anglo-Saxon word can be
demonstrated from glosses, there is a chance of its being the
correct one. But still the glossator may have misunderstood
his Latin a fact of very frequent occurrence; and in some
cases, through lack of other instances, we may be unable to
control his rendering, which, of course, is not checked by any
context. But in the case of a running text, the translation,
even if corresponding word for word, is free, and we cannot
.ilways depend on the translated word being an exact equiva-
lent of the original. Where we have an interlinear transla-
tion—a sort of crib—as well as a paraphrase, we may be
certain that those words which occur in both translations are
accurate renderings.

So far as I am aware, the thirty-ninth chai)ter, which
Thomas Wright published in big \' Biographia Britannica
Literaria\' (I, p. 442, Latin and gloss), is the only part of tho
present Bcnedictine llule that has been edited, excepting, of
course, the few specimen lines that may bo found in Wanley\'s
and in other catalogues. But tho MS. appears to have been
extracted from for lexicographical purposes, and consequently
words and phraseological quotations from it are to be found in
tho various A.-S. dictionaries. Part of the glossing was eopicd
into a Latin printed text by the indefatigable Junius. His
texts, however useful they may be to the student of litera-
ture, should not bo used for linguistic purposes. Junius

•lur Benedictiner Regel. Herausgegeben von A. Schröer. Kassel, 1885-1888.
(i) Die Winteney-Versiou der Regula S. Benedicti, Lateinisch und Engli^i.
Mit Einleitung Anmerkungen, Glossar und einem Facsimile zum ersten Malu
herausgegeben von Dr. M. M. Arnold Schröer. Halle a.-S. Max Niemeyer,
1888. See supra, p. xxvii.

^ It seems like biting sarcasm when in the historical tract in MS. Faustina,
A. lo we read of the \' scearppanclan %vitan J)o . .. J)isse engliscan gefeodnesse
ne behofiun\' (Cockayne, Leechdoms, III, 440; i.e. the keen-witted sages
that... do not need this English translation.)

xxxii junius untrustworthy. [lv.

appears to enjoy the reputation of being a faithful copyist,
but when collating his copy of the so-called \' Regulae
S. Fulgentii\' (above, p. xxiv) with the MS., I observed that
this reputation was entirely unfounded He adds words not
in his MSS. He leaves out words found in his original,
or transposes them. He does not distinguish between \'S and
f, which he consequently uses indiscriminately He en-
tirely disregards the punctuation of the MS., and he adds
numbers of chapters after his own pleasm-e or notions of how
they ought to have been. Lastly, he corrects his text without
giving the reading of the MS.

The convent to which this MS. belonged is not known.
Nor is there any author on whom we have reason to father
our version. The likelihood indeed is that this interlinear
version gradually developed, so that it cannot be assigned to
any one person.

The object of this edition is to furnish the student with a
text as it is found in the manuscript, with all its gaps, im-
perfections, and absurdities. I am of opinion that however
stupidly a scribe may have mangled his original, the reading
of the MS. is still the only thing of which we are sure. I
have tampered so little with tho MS. that I have left
even the most palpable errors unchanged ; here, however,
I have followed the example set by former editors, and
starred the forms which without doubt arc merely clerical
errors. It need hardly, be said that I should not have
followed this plan, were this text destined for the use of
those desirous of learning the rudiments of Anglo-Saxon.
Moreover, if the present were the only version extant, I might
have taken into consideration the wants of those students who
wished to read this text for the \' realia,\' and I should thus

\' See H. Sweet, Introduction to Gregory\'s Pastor.il Care, p. xix, whose sole
blame is that Junius \' sometimes swerved from the path of literal accuracy in
a few unimportant particulars.\' See, on the contrary, Zupitza, Zeitschrift für
Deutsches Altertum, 31. 2 ; Brede, Fragment, etc. (supra, p. xxi), p. 5.
MucLean, Anglia, 6. 448.

^ It is gener.^lly assumed that the scribes themselves did not distinguish
between the Ö and p, and used them promiscuously. But if even any dis-
tinction is to be found, editors should take care not to obscure this find by not
adhering strictly to the writing of the MSS.

MANNER OP EDITING. IV.] XXXUl

have been compelled to make a more or less readable text of
it. But for this there is, of course, no occasion. Those who
wish to read S. Benet\'s precepts for the sake of their contents
will find their wishes gratified in the present volume by-
looking up the Latin text; and if any one desires to read it in
Anglo-Saxon, the very handy editions of Professor Schröer are
now available. There can be no doubt, to my thinking, that
it must be the aim of an editor to give the text as the
manuscript records it. Of course he may then set to work
and, by dint of exterior and interior criticism, try to eliminate
some mistakes, but—in the case of an edition like tho present
—I am of opinion that this should be done in foot-notes.
Nothing can be gained by imprudently introducing one\'s own
—if I may so express it—one\'s own Anglo-Saxon amidst the
language—though a corrupted specimen of it—of our fore-
fathers. Indeed a great deal may be lost—unity.

Now, doubtless, it may be objected that when, e. g. the
word gchetrode is found in the MS. as geheorode, there can be no
doubt that this was not a mistake, but simply a hhmder, and
that therefore no purpose is served by retaining it in the text.
True, partly 1 But even here there is this consideration, that
to watch the mistakes of scribes is not without interest, for
the study of culture in a given period.

In accordance with the principles laid down, I have given
the text of this Eulo exactly as it is found in tho IMS. Only
the following must be observed. The which is in tho
MS. written undotted, has been printed with a dot over
it. Absolutely wrong forms are starred. Elucidations to
forms in any way remarkable, will be found in the foot-notes,
or in those at the end of the volume or, when tho matter is
one of phonological or grammatical interest,in the fifth division
of this Introduction. Italics denote tho expansions of tho
scribal contractions, when no foot-note is appended. Other-

\' In moat cases attention has been drawn to these by the words see note.
The editor is sorry to own that, owing to a want of foresight, no very definite, at
least no very scholarly, principle can be laid down as to what notes may be
found at the foot of the page, and what at tho end of the volume. As a rule,
palneographical notes are at tho bottom of tho page, and elucidations of
different nature on p. 119, etc. But various causes prevented this rule being
always adhered to.

XXXIV THE ANGLO-SAXON RULE A COPY. [IV.

wise, those letters are italicised to which attention has been
called in the foot-note. Thus \\(Bt means that the MS. has
the contraction \'f, as no foot-note is there. But the letters
nee in gemincQ (1.6) are italicised merely to call the attention
to the note. Whenever I have thought it necessary to
propose an emendation, it has been only when some reason
for the corruption could be adduced, either from a graphical
error, or a psychical process. But where these reasons were
more or less obscure, I have stated them in words.

Our Anglo-Saxon text is a copy, i.e. the glosses have not
been put over the Latin text only in our MS. Both have
been copied from another text or from other texts, most likely
at the same time, and possibly by the same scribe. The
chances are—indeed, there is every reason to believe—that our
MS. was copied often. That the last copyist had an interlinear
translation before him, is evident from the frequent occurrence
of wrong forms that can only be explained by influence of the
lemma on the gloss, or vice versa (see foot-notes, passim).
AVhen an original Latin text was first glossed, we may
a priori assume two possibilities. Either the glosses were
copied into our original Latin from a ready-made Anglo-
Saxon translation, or the glossators worked without a model
of any kind.

Let us consider the first assumption. If this were true, the
Anglo-Saxon text must have been supplied cither from the
text commonly attributed to Aethelwold^, or from some other
hitherto unknown text. We need, of course, not speak of the
latter possibility, as the establishment of this point, as well as
its rejection, are utterly beyond determination. As to the
text edited by Schröer, it is not likely to have been the
original, for, as we have already seen, the vocabulary of the
two is somewhat different.

We are therefore led to the theory of the gloss-origin.
And, indeed, even if we could have for a moment thought of
the other theory, the evidence in favour of th\'e former is
so overwhelming that there can be no doubt about it; and I

1 Thus Schröer, ib., p. xvii. I am not sure tliat lie has established his point.

OKiaiN OF ENGLISH TEXT, XXXV

iv,j

liave but to refer to tbe appearance of the text, passim,
without entering- into particulars in any "way.

We find then that our version developed,—just like the glos-
saries that Hemy Sweet has so ably treated of in his Oldest
English Texts, p, 7—out of a few interlinear glosses, that have
multiplied gradually until, in our IMS,, the Latin is very nearly
fully-glossed, every copyist having contributed some more
glosses to those which he found in his original. The scribe of
our MS. has also acted as a glossator. His work can be traced,
e.g, in the words gesawen and viszm (as its lemma, 13. 3),
that he himself put instead of the ealra, omnium, which is
a misreading that does not belong to the text.

That we can still be positive about the fact that more than
one scribe has been at work is rather curious, considering that
through the last copy all external traces of former glossators
are lost. Yet a place like (13. l)

Icorn forebeon i. cnihtum
preesse disci^mlis

can hardly be otherwise explained than as the work of two
glossators.

The \'Paving\' Letters,

Those who happen to have looked into tho text of our Rule
before reading this part of the Introduction will have been
struck at seeing numerous letters enclosed—in our print\'—
in square brackets spread all over the volume. In the notes
they will be found referred to as \'paving letters\' or \'gloss-
letters.\' The word, as well as the matter, I now proceed to
explain.

As to the letters themselves, they are found in our IMS.
Tib, A. 3, over most of the Latin words, both in our Benedictine
Rule, and in those tracts that Wanley styled the Regulae
S. IVjgentii (supra, p, xxiv), but, so far as I have been able
to find out, they do not occur anywhere else. No one I
could consult—I may thankfully and especially mention Dr,
E, IMaunde Thompson, now Chief Librarian of tho British

^ Not so iu the MS. See uext paragraph,
c a

IV.] PAVING OR SEQUENCE LETTERS. xxxvii

Museum—knew of their existence in any other manuscript.
The only man who mentions them is that accurate worthy,
"VVanley, who, at p. 199 of his Catalogue, speaking of these
letters, says: \' N.B. Super voces Latinas, exaratas esse Literas
Saxonicas, quae, quo ordine construendae sunt, ostendunt.\'
Had Wanley written in English, his would have been the
task, which now devolves upon a foreigner, of bestowing an
Eng-lish name on these \' Literae.\'

He would, no doubt, have followed the ordinary school-crib
ordo, which gives the English construing\' order of a Latin
author, and would have called these unfortunate waifs \' order-
or sequence-lQit&TB.^ But when I talked to Dr. Thompson
on the subject, he said that the Rugby boys\' slang term for
this process was paving—paving smooth (I suppose) the
rough road of learning Latin. The term struck me as a
happy one, suiting Wanley\'s construendae, and so I adopted it,
though perhaps without due consideration of how it would
puzzle readers to whom \' paving-\' sugg-ests only laying- stones
on a carriage-road or a footpath.

That Wanley is right in saying that these \'paving\' or
sequence letters show the order of construing Latin into Anglo-
Saxon, is not so apparent at first sight as on closer investiga-
tion. The idea must have been, of course, to put the letters
o^er these words that wanted construing, in such a way
that they had but to be arranged in the alphabetical order
thus indicated, in order to yield an intelligible meaning ^
Now it is, e. g. not clear why the scribe at one time
begins with a and goes on to the end of the alphabet,
whereas at another time he proceeds only as far as g or or
almost any letter, and begins again at a. The Latin wanted
\' paving,\' not the gloss-tcxt. A friend suggested to me that
it must have been the Anglo-Saxon text whose syntactical
word-order was thus pointed out. \' In order to get an
Anglo-Saxon translation, not glosses\' — thus my friend
writes—\' some one put in those " paving-" letters to indicate
the word-order of the vernacular text. A later copyist, not
being able to read the text well, copied the paving letters,

\' See below, V, § 6.

IV.] PAVING OR SEQUENCE LETTERS. xxxvii

but omitted the glosses.\' I am inclined to think that this
view is not correct. It must be admitted that the several
blunders—see the starred forms—for which we must blame
one or more of the scribes, point to an imperfectly legible
text ^ at one time or another. But is it likely that the gloss
should have been unintelligible so wholesale, and the paving
letters quite clear? Must we not a priori accept the fact
that the Latin text stood in need of comment ? What could
have been the object of him who thus tried to transmute
the interlinear translation into a more or less paraphrastical
one ? I do not wish to lay undue stress on the fact that
the gloss-letters are in Latin characters, like the Latin
text, whereas the A.-S. text is naturally written in A.-S.
characters. I only say that, although it perhaps remains an
open question, the likeliest thing seems to be, that we must
look upon the gloss-letters as \' paving\' the Latin text.

At one time we find two gloss-letters over one Latin
^ord, not only where this is glossed by two Anglo-Saxon
ones, but also where only one A.-S. rendering is given. At
another, a few non-paved words may be seen intervening
between two sets of paved ones. Sometimes these non-paved
words must bo taken into account when construing the
sentence, whereas a little further on wo may find an instance
where they need not be taken into consideration. From this
it is clear that, whatever explanation we fall back upon to
solve the difficulty—and none other but the one propounded
h Wanley seems plausible, or even possible—we must not
strain it; we must rather be content to apply the key some-
what loosely; for there can bo no doubt that our \' paving\'
letters have suffered by the frequent transcribing which our
text has undergone. In consequence of this wo may expect:—
a- Letters to have been put over tho wrong words ;
A Letters not to have been transcribed ;
y. Letters to have been misunderstood as part of gloss-
words, which in reality are nothing but gloss-letters ;

\' To this cause the same gentleman also "attributes the phenomena I have
^wcussed below, V, § 4.

IV.] PAVING OR SEQUENCE LETTERS. xxxvii

8. Parts of a word—initial letters, mostly—to have been
taken as \' paving\' letters, and written separately accordingly.

For the case of a, I refer the student to the text passim.
For j3, I would remind him of the fact that unless this
assumption be right, the frequent occurrence of a single gloss-
letter over a Latin word, amidst a number of non-paved
Latin words, cannot be explained. Of the cases under y an^ 8
some instances should be adduced:—asutol, esefor, clrenc, ada,
l(Bt, which must be read respectively as [a.] sutol, [e.] se for
(ma) [d.] renc (cf. note to 69. i^), -[a.] -Sa, etc., whereas in
Ji algena (sanctorum) the ease would seem to lie the other way
about.

All this tends to make it tolerably certain that Wanley\'s
supposition is correct, however many difficulties we may find
in our way. In the MS. the gloss-letters are always found
over the Latin words, sometimes by the side of the A.-S.
gloss (either before or after it), sometimes under it, or even
over it. To print them in exactly the same place was not
feasible, as that would have taken up too much space. I have
therefore had to make shift, and to print them in the same
line with the A.-S. glosses : this was at once practical, and in
accordance with tho principle followed throughout in this
edition, that whatever must be held to belong originally to
the Latin text, whether written by the Latin scribe or by the
last glossator, is put in the line of the lemmata, whereas all
that partakes of the nature of the g-loss—whether A.-S., Latin,
or \' paving\' letters—has been put in the line assigned to the
glossarial renderings.

V. The Language op the Text. Crude Forms. \' Mero-
graphy.\' Evidence of the Latin Text. English
Sounds. English Inflections.

§ I. The language of the present text will be considered in
this chapter in its most striking peculiarities. In all essentials,
I think, we shall find it a document of the later periods of
Anglo-Saxon. External criticism cannot be called in to bear

v.] LANGUAGE OF THE TEXT. xxxix

out this statement, for, as we have seen, there is no person on
whom to father it, nor is there any external reason to attri-
bute it to an inmate or to inmates of any particular convent.
Considering\' that the only evidence we have—the palaeography
of the MS.—gives us the limit of about 1020-1030, and
further remembering that we have some reason to believe
that the MS. was copied more than once, we may perhaps
roughly assign it to the first years of the eleventh century.

§ 2. The text will not be treated exhaustively. Such
treatment had better be reserved for the works of a standard
author of the period. Now that we have a statistical grammar
of two representative works of King Alfred\'s, in Prof. Cosijn\'s
Altwestsachsische Grammatik, it is highly desirable that some
one should take up this labour and commence a similar work
for, say, Aelfric. A work which is fit for such treatment
should yield material not only for phonetic studies, but also
for the study of inflections, and also of syntax. Our text
lacks the former to a certain extent, and the latter altogether.

§ 3. For the want of inflections, to a certain extent, I
refer to what in a letter to the Academy (for July 21, 1888),
and borrowing a term from Sanskrit philology, I have
called \'crude forms.\' A glossator wishes to write down the
sense of the Latin word merely as an aid to his memory ; and
without regard to either number or case, he just jots down the
word—no more. It is not so much the nominative which he
selects, as\' the word\' in the abstract, which of course in Teutonic
philology always coincides in form with the nominative.
I shall here enumerate some cases of crude forms:—

siSfmt (itinera, 3. 12), twyfeald (dupplici, 13. 17), hjrde
(pastoris, 12. 8 ; 17. 5), leas (gewitnesse ; falsum testimonium,
19. 13), ImictenfcBsten (quadragesime, 45. 13, etc.), vers
(versuum, 50. 2), mid gewunelic Jjeaw (68. 5, 6 ; probably mid
was added afterwards to indicate the case; more solido),
geioordenum forecnyll (facto primo signo, 83. 11), %ora9 (iratum,
116. 13).

Here the crude form is always singular, as also where we
find limc, neuter plural, glossed by tho neuter singular (5. 3).
But once I found \' utentibus\' glossed by hruccndas (93. 6),

xl CRUDE FORMS—\' MEROGRArHY.\' [v.

which looks very miach like a plural crude form. This may be
also the case with helochi (preceptis, 21. 17 ; 55. 13 ; and also
54 2).

Conversely we find a singular glossed by a plural \\xv gyraeleas-
tum, (42. 7), and a nominative by a genitive in ealra heardnesm
(96. 7), but these must surely be due to a mistake. A
similar occurrence is when verbal forms are glossed\' by
infinitives. "We cannot be astonished at this, if we think of
what a school-boy in the present time, who had to prepare
a piece of Latin for translation, would do. Suppose he found
the form taxavimus in his text; the ending would naturally
be clear to him, and he might ask, What is taxare, and having
remembered it, or having been told, he would perliap write
down toe write, if he took the ending into consideration, but it
is quite possible that he would jot down to lorite only. In the
same way we must bear in mind that it was quite as often
the aim of the glossators to aid their own memory, as to
further the use of the text by others. This is lost sight of,
I think, by those scholars, who look upon any gloss as a
mistake which does not in all particulars of tense, person, or
number, case, etc., correspond with the lemma. For instances,
see lean (fueris, 75. 4), underfon (subjaceat, 91. 8), and infaran
(96. 13 ; ingredere, which, however, may not be in point,
as the glossator was liable to the mistake of looking upon
wgredere as an infinitive). See note to (97. 2).

§ 4. A phenomenon akin in character to the above, is one
which, for want of a better name, I was forced to call \' mero-
graphy,\' because only part of the gloss was in these instances
written. It would seem as if the glossator, when writing
down only a few letters, thought: \'If I see but this part,
I shall remember the whole easily enough or, in cases whero
the ending is given only: \' I know the word well, it is only
the case which I am in doubt of.\' Hence, we find forms like
the following^:—

hecumsj\\ (5.17), aem tigad (5. 17), lear?e5 (10. 8),/oJ- ma (23.
5), eal dre (26. 11), /dajd dre^ (28. i), hired f/m«(28. 9), mon^ees,

\' The parts which I supply are printed in Roman characters.

\' The h is here, possibly, a corruption of a \' paving\' letter h.

v.] ABSENCE OP SYNTAX. xH

mon^5 es (39, lo), on œnde byrdnesse (41. 15), eatl modnesse
(53. 8), under fo (56. 13), ge msen mmunge (? 70. 5 ; of. 69. 6,
or must we read gesomnungel), lecimeii dum (? 75. "a),
sin gendra (77. 5), rsed ati (83. 17), anfeald lice (101. 16),
genan (probably a mistake for genam ian ; 105. 17),
wege dihta-S (110. 16, xj^jpra vost (111. 9), to wurpon. nesse
(113. 15).

Perhaps also in rihtwisnesse (injustitias 33. 11, but it may
more likely bave been understood by the glossator as: in
justifias), and in geunrotsadecl (62.18) which must be supposed
to stand for geunrotsad or geunrots^r/.

See, for another view of the origin of these glosses, IV,
p. xxxvii, note.

§ 5. As regards the lack of syntax, it is but natural that
syntax could not be expected in a collection of glossarial
renderings, constituting a text, like the present. Slight traces
of it may however be found, as when a gloss follows the
government of a preceding English word, instead of the
lemma, e.g. heardlices, as gloss to asperum (6. 4), being
^ genitive dependent on the words eenig fine, going before.
Cf. also the following :—on dam, referring to liiioe (mascu-
hiie, 14, 13), but gloss to in qua ; lareoivlicum hi fylian
^\'^Qole (magistram sequantur regulam, 18, 9); which may be
also owing to the tendency in Latin, of mixing up dative and

accusative forms.

In J)am gercBddtm (qua perlecta, 4L 13), the gloss is wrongly

put in the masculine ; the glossator evidently thinking of the

Oodspelle which goes before ; whereas in reality the qua refers to
lectio.

§ I must remind the reader, at this point, of how
narrowly we have missed possessing a valuable contribution
to the study of English syntax in our document. If we had
W the original, instead of a much defiled third or fourth-hand
^opy, how the \' paving \' letters would repay tho trouble of an
investigation ! For there can bo little doubt that if wo could
re-arrange the Latin words in the alphabetical order of
t^e original position of these paving-letters, we should
^ind that the words were then put in the Anglo-Saxon word-

xlii EVIDENCE OF THE LATIN TEXT. [v.

order, or nearly so. Why this is not now the case, may be
seen above, p. xxxvii.

§ 7. In making my choice as to what I should take up
and what reject, I have been guided by the principle of
noting only that which may be thought in any way to supple-
ment Sievers\'s Standard Gi-ammar. It is to his second edition
that my quotations of his sections refer, which, however, I
do not always cite. I also give what is characteristic of the
period to which the present text belongs.

In what follows, the evidence will be found to be based,
with one or two exceptions, on material drawn from our Old
English text. But, when lately investigating this matter,
I came to the conclusion that a careful analysis of a Latin
text may sometimes yield valuable matter for phonetic in-
vestigation too. In a letter to the Academy ^ for Sept. 22, 1888,
I tried, to lay down the general principles by which we
should be guided when working at a Latin text for this
purpose. What will be found there, may be summarised as
follows :—Where we know a Latin text to be written in the
country whose language we arc investigating—in our case,
English,—and where we know that the spelling-differences
presented by the text under consideration are deviations from
the ordinary Latin taught in the Middle Ages; that is, where
we have reason to suppose that the peculiar spellings in this
text are due to an English scribe, we may take those Latin
spellings into account to corroborate the evidence of the
spelling in our English text.

Now although our MS. dates from tho eleventh century,
i.e. about four centuries after the reported introduction of
Benedictinism into England, yet the ultimate source is a
Latin original. The fact, however, that tho other MSS.
appear not to present the peculiarities of this manuscript,
enables us to rely more on the following evidence, especially
in conjunction with that of the Anglo-Saxon. I have here
brought together the little evidence that our text yields.
But rny knowledge of Middle Latin is so slight that I am by

\' See also the subsequent numbers of that periodical.

v.] EVIDENCE OF THE LATIN TEXT, xliii

no means confident of having been at all consistent in distin-
guishing between what is general, and what is peculiar to the
English scribe, (See above, p, xxix,)

§ 8. That ae becomes e (passim) is, of course, quite general,
but perhaps the reverse process may be thought to illustrate
what will be found stated below in § 15, Cf, desidermnt (24,13),
itcBm (31. 13), occupcentur (82, 4,) The general levelling of
unstressed vowels may be perhaps exemplified by corda (19.
10), murmurantis (25. 10, 11), opore (35. 16), leganter (38. 15),
memoriter (39, 16), etc. As to what has been said of the
possible existence of nasal vowels, if any importance is to be
attached to the examples in §§ 41, 70, we may here instance
atiphona (43. 7), emendaverit ( = 59. 4), injugat (80. 16,
etc.). Do, perhaps, spellings such as complefori, subsellis,
vermm (40. 11, 46, 6, 50, a, for completoriis, etc,) prove that
our scribe was accustomed to indicate vowel-length by
doubling tho letter ?

As to § 42, cp. sowpno (2, 9, 28. 2), comtempnentes (28. 16,
where p is added below the line), amplicet—applicet (21. i), etc.

For the pronunciation of b = v, cf. in our text hahitavit
(3. 16, etc.), which, however, is of very frequent occurrence
(as in the 0,S. Heliand, e,g. bar=far). See Sweet, O.E.T,,
p. 185. If, as I have reason to suppose, this change obtains
only in this ending, -abit, -avit, I doubt whether it is any-
thing but a graphical, or a continually occurring, blunder.

As to § 50, see dehead (63. 12), prospiciad (68. 14), capud
(73. 15), hospidtm (75. 8), deliquid (79. 15), and compare jube
addare, which is, of course, jubeat dare (91. 5). Hence in
(64. 14) I put agad in the text, not agat, on account of the
deo following.

Medicetur (96. 2, J\'set he sma;ge, \'W^^-=meditetur, is equally
interesting, as the word secende=setende (below, § 63). Ad
§ 66, cf. 5?>;i^=sciens (97. 5).

As to § 72 compare habbatis (79. 8), coherceat (15. 12), in has
^ignato (75. 3 = in {y)assignato\\ as well as omnibus (MS., evi-
dently a corruption of ominibus=hominibus, 30. 6), ospitum
(61. 15), ospite (88. 12), abita^it (91.11), ortu{^) (112. 15), etc.;
nichihm (4, 8) is, I believe, quite common elsewhei\'e.

v.] ANGLO-SAXON VOWELS. xlvii

We shall now have to examine the Ang-lo-Saxon text.

§ 9. Sounds.—a. Stressed short a before nasals has passed
through the second o-stage (Sievers, § 65), and has again become
a. passim, e.g. underfangen (97. 4), langsummn (97. 7). Stressed
short a otherwise placed is stable; the only cases where it is
found as 0 are ut to foranne (65. 16; cf. § 20), and tipaJiofen-
nesse (22. 7).

Half-stressed and unstressed a passes into e and 0. Cf.
andsweras (3. l), andswore (112. 6, 112. 9), and for the latter
case eadmodren (14. 9), forhicgendm (15. 4), witen (72. 13),
and befrinonne (26. 12).

§ 10. o. Stressed short 0 is sometimes found as eo before
r, ƒ, and : feorwyrde (interitum, 57. 5), godes leaf (ambrosi-
anus, 38. 7, but /(/and lofsang, passim), to geleohgenne (92. 8).
I also find 0 represented by u, stmce (36. 10) and liicaS
(110. 12), which latter is possibly a mistake for lociad.

§11. Stressed long 0 is represented by, possibly its umlaut,
e in werigende {vagari, 112. 17), but 11 in du — do (103. 7).

§ 13. Unstressed 0 becomes a in abhade (116. a ; Latin
influence?). It is rendered by u, e.g. in furSur (26. 13), and
often by e in the case of the ending -cest of the superlatives
(e. g. leofedan, 3. 9, etc.). Cf. also nygeSa (37. 4), nigeda
(37. 11).

.§ 13. u. There is little to be said of the zi\'s in stressed
syllables : on a possible nasal u, see below, § 41.

M, in unstressed syllables, is represented by 0 in hoh/olnesse
(54. 1 and 57. 18), and by a in o^ravt (14. 9).

§ 14. E, M. Genetically speaking, e is either palatal or
guttural. Traces of this may be seen \'in the fact that g is
retained longer before guttural e\'s than before palatal ones,
where it soon runs into the palatal spirant (j). Thus we
find the prefix ge- (=ga) unswervingly represented in this
way. It is not until the end of the eleventh century that wo
find it represented by i (Vices and Vertues, ab 1200, passim,
icleped, idon, etc.).

§ 15: Short e, stressed, half-stressed, and unstressed, very
frequently becomes <e ; conversely in all three positions is
often written e. The natural inference is, that the two sounds

v.] ANGLO-SAXON VOWELS. xlvii

have run together, and are assimilated. In fact, three
originally different vowel values may be said to have dwindled
down into one. e=West Teutonic ie = a i, and e=a=.
W. S. a before non-nasals palatal vowels (Sievers, § 49;
Sweet, History of Engl. Sounds, second ed., § 413).

Cp. andehjrdnesse (14. 3), (slfrcemedne (20. 5), celles (28. 4),
UgcBnge (86. 3), Jjcence (104. 16).

w(pfyils (32. 14), monffces (39.10), hifande (68. 1), Jiei asjjenda
(98. 9), etc. In eelm\'^ssan (99. 16), and in h^ftem^t (76.5), the
non-italicised symbol may owe its sound to a confusion with
mcesse, -mcesf, due to and explained by popular etymology.

§ 16. —Both short and long ce are often found in our
text represented by a. parrihte (23. 16), sifajye (28. 13},
/near (36. i), mdau (72. 10), »lage (72. 15). They are also
written e: seigd (2. 18), stepe (31. 9), gemmlica (communis,
34. I a), geedhht (51. 17), eftcrfdige (54. 10), afQ.red (prostratus,
78. 11), and lastly, both short and long cb is expressed by the
symbol ee : geedleelde (51. 3), gejjeef 16).

§ 17. is m possibly in eall/jeodscipa (89. 5), if it is not
a mistake, influenced by call-, gehealdenne (61. a), which must
then be supposed to be wrong for gelealde (but cf. note, infra,
on p. 123), and perhaps in teaUic, = ifEUic (54. 7).

§ 18. is ^ in gptes (94. 5).

An i has developed after along 0 in the case of/<ci aspendce
(98. 9). It may be due to the analogy of the e in some cases,
e.g. aweig (1. 7), etc., where a g followed.

§ 19. E has developed into ea in f&ilaspreocala (35. 5; cf.
infra § 30) ; into eo in the same woiUfealasjircocala, as well as
in beotwnx (51. 8), and in neodbehtofe (69. 14, but regularly
lehefe, 81. 14, etc.).

§ 20. e becomes 0, modunga (fomenta, 59. 11), and possibly
in vt to foranue (65. 16), where, however, the 0 may equally
Well be the representative of a ; cf. § 9).

§ 21. e has become j/ in lid leii/ten (adquiritur, 65. 9), and
i in cetliwigan (92. i6).

§ 22. ^ in unstressed syllables is very frequently represented
by a ; thus in forosjorcec (1. 2), forsaglatolice (18. 7), forViheon
(11. 9, 24. 13), for&hradian (55. 4, formscawunga (73. 11);

v.] ANGLO-SAXON VOWELS. xlvii

in the following two verbal forms: he gemuna (meminerit,
16. 14), of acerfa (amputet, 108. 11); then in the gen. sing,
m. g. lareowas (10. 8, etc.), lehoclas (22. 2).

Conversely, the ending -as of the plural being written -es
occasioned the corruption asynilrodest (56. 9).

§ 23. This a for e is most probably phonetically correct in
the above-mentioned cases. Into smeageuda. (26. 11), Mceddra
(28. 7), it may be from the influence of the respective lemmata.
The lemma has probably also influenced the gloss in the case of
gexcrita (32. 5, scriptura).

§ 24. Syncope of e follows the rule as laid down by Sievers
(§§ 144, 293). Hence we find forms like regolicere [6S. 10),
regollicere (103. 15), by the side of regolicre (113. 16, 115.
16), etc.

§ 25. I, Y. Although of different origin, these two vowels
may, in the stage to which the language of the present Text
belongs, be safely considered together, as they are both levelled
under one sound, probably the i. That this should bo under
the former sound, is first of all made likely by such spellings
as forjjig (17. 16), ingehide=ingehygde (94. 12), in both of
which cases the ig, i rei)resonts the long z, and is secondly
borne out by the subsequent history of the letters, both of which
are diphthongised into the present I. Hence we find such
spellings as kiti (genus, 10. 6), cinehehn (31. 14), mycel having
again (cf. Sievers, § 31 note) become micel (72. 15, etc.).

§ 26, I, y are rendered by u, in wursan (11. 4), and in cwude
(24. 14), oferfull (71. 9), gtfxiUan (81. 4).

§ 27. efor i resp. y is found in the following instances:—
i), smeSe (officium, 23. \\),Jjen{g) (71. \']), tender (75. 17),
gement (decreverit, 78. 17), hegeme (intendat, 96.5), ^tc.

§ 28. For an apparently long » in Ulic, see § 42.

§ 29. EA, EO. That these were stressed on the second ele-
ment, in the period to which this text belongs, and that, con-
sequently, the first e had become a half-vowel is, to my think-
ing, beyond doubt. I adduce in support of it the following
forms:—iornfidlestan (1. 12), iarcie (16. 17), which may easily
be multiplied from the present and other texts, code is spelt
(58. 17) gode, and in conjunction with forms like gereordgenne

v.] ANGLO-SAXON VOWELS. xlvii

(74. a), hadgenne (107. 4), but especially gebisgode (82. 4,
which cannot be anything- but gebisiode, cf. also below, § 68/).
I have no hesitation in looking upon this gode as a ease in
point. See Sievers, § 21 a, anm. 2, and § 214, sub 7.

§ 30. ea and eo interchange. See neonoan (24. 8), and for
feola, feala, supra, § 19, Paul Beitrage 4. 345, 6. 55. The
former is found monophthongised in a great many cases in
full syllables, as well as in half, and unstressed ones. The
monophthong e thus bom, is sometimes found interchanged
with ee.

nextan (4. 6), ege (13. 13 hh), gejjehte (19. 7), hlehtregamene
(21.11).

Jjch (21. 17), seel (58. 8, 102. 8, etc.).

Jjrege (15. 9) and prmiungan, (59. 7) foreglmvUce (18. 7),
glxwnesse (58. 9, 59. 14).

gimh&lice (63. 9) and gimlcBslic (MS. gtinlaslic, 62. 2), as
against gemeleasan (15. 3) and passim.

§ 31. Tho spelling scame7t{76. 11) and gescad (109. 2), etc.,
is no monophthonging at all, because tho vowels never were
diphthongs, see § 66. Salmos (51. 9) is Latin influence.

§ 32. In aiuhoyrde (presentem, 30. 11) and bejjyrfendra
15)> probably through e, is represented by

§ 33. eo is e in ceriende (20. 15), and possibly in ataridd
(89. 10), but sec note. Ilcnce in ci/rigende (55. 12), eo
l^ecomes y.

^^forranc (29. 13) and forsig (64. 13) eo has become 0,

§ 34. U, in consonantal value, presents the usual contrac-
tions: noIdon{2. \'j),SHtol{9. \']\\gesuinlad (29.10 ; d.gesiciduM,
11), for which see Sievers, § 172 note, who does not men-
tion ucan (52. 7), iieujjena (66. 12), and sec note to moxican
(52. 4).

It is superfluous in hwiwrmlenne (107. 11), whilst dxyrnyssum

(32. 12)^ aidealde (91. 4, etc.), Jjea\\\\f(estnpse (100. 13), are

Mistakes due to tho misreading of r(jt), /(f) and A respectively
for

^"^awi/rtlian-^awyriicaUan (108. 7) a mistake, or the outcome

a phonetic process ?

§ 35- I, in consonantal value, need not be treated separately.

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

as it has become identical in sound, as well as mostly in
symbol, with the spirant palatal g, for which see below, § 68.
Thus we find geornlice (23. 2), as well geoncl (11. 4);
iornfullestan (1. 12), as well as iond (50. i).

§ 36. R is omitted, whether phonetically or graphically it is
difficult to say, foahrcedigende (106. li), tohedde (109. 15,
injiati), Mcce (32. 9), b(sd (54. 7). B is inserted in mcesse-
preostrum (100. 10, see note, but preosta 101. 6), (stbredendrum
(32. 13), hefgran (65. 7, cf. 66. 9), and of course by mistake
in frynd (20. 11, inimicos).

§ 37. We may further note a case of svarabhakti in meri-
genlicum (66. 13), and merrigenlice (37. 14), as also two
instances of metathesis, heBrdlicor (24. 6), and wryUa (33. 16,
etc.). In the case of merrigenlice it is also possible that the
ig, resp. rig, represents only the vocalisation of the g. Cp. the
spelling meriendlice (44. 7, 45. 16, 46. 4).

§ 38. L has disappeared in cefioyrde (16. 6), and has been
doubled m welleornia]) (100. 4).

§ 39. M. Apart from the ending of the dative plural, where
an older -urn is usually supposed to have dwindled down into
-an, m is often found represented by n. Graphically speaking,
the difference is so slight that e. g. in a word like toyhie (fer-
vore, 9. 19) we must perhaps assume a scribal error; on the
other hand, forms such as ])an (40. 4, 99. 2) and medenlicum
may be phonetic.

A ease of assimilation may occur in belippendan-=lelim-
pendan {7B. 11, but see note). For lUic=lim{p)lic (21. 11),
see § 42.

§ 40. N. Not written in fndung (9. 19), windriicen (20. 13),
drihtelican (50. 1), gedihtere {^l. 4; nL gedihtenre bO. 17), cere
(semel, 54. 7), JjcarJlices (82. 3), si gejmda (injungatur, 84. 3),
wacmodes (84. 5)> etc.

Added in gejjeomlan (57. 14), and assimilated to d in edde-
byrdnesse (78. 17), doubled in inn code, which was misunder-
stood or mistranscribed and written m? neode (103. 18).

§ 41. Misreading a word so as to put an n where it was
not, or vice versa, is admittedly of very frequent occurrence,
owing to the fact that n is often denoted by a stroke over

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

the preceding letter. All our instances may he due to this.
But if Sievers is right in assuming the existence in early
Teutonic of nasalised vowels (ib. 45. 5), and if Zupitza\'s
account of Kent. Glosses 795 streak■= strengt, etc., is correct^—
that is, if we may lay down the principle that certain sound
values are thus symbolised in a preceding letter, it is just
possible that some of the cases above indicated owe their
origin to this principle, and that this aided the spreading of
the then only apparent loss of n. Cf. § 70.

§ 42. p. Omitted in cam dorn (abbreviated in the MS. as
cä do, 14. 6); i§l (jactantiam, 23. 7), gelimlic (96. 3) This
last word occurs also (21. 11) under the form Ulic, where
the sign of length ~ must be taken as indicating m.

§ 43. An epenthetical p obtains in hiftem-^re (dulcius, 3. 8).
No doubt under the influence of the lemma a js is retained
in psealmas (38. 7). The word reps = Latin responsorium is
perhaps another instance of metathesis, as to which see
Sievers, § 204. 3; otherwise the form may be explained as
representing ri\'(s)j!3(on)s(orium) and not 7-e5^(onsorium).

§ 44. B. Tho close relationship that exists between m and
its corresponding stoj) h explains at once forms like cmfaran
(83. 6), and perhaps also gemi/sgunge (occupationem, 89. 16),
and si forhamcd [^b^imcvtiuY, 71. 12), although in the latter
word a mixing up with hcemed is the more probable origin
of the extant form.

§ 45. b is misread as h in heode (56. 8), and hetelictm
( = betehtum, 31. 1).

§ 46. F, V. In the instances to be mentioned lower down,
both 1\' and v express the voiced labial spirant, and hence
they are here mentioned together—vers, verse (41. 7, 47. 13,
2, etc.), in each case as gloss to a Latin versus (or oblique
cases), the writing of v may be due to Latin influence. Not
so inpravoste (54. io),pravosium (104. 4),2}ravostscire15);
see also se sylva (12. 16), and iveoiiedes (62. i), and compare
Sievers\'s remark that this representation by v is characteristic
of the oldest English (§ 192. 2).

\' Daa n behielt natürlich in allen diesen fallen seine gutturale natur,

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

§ 47. An original voiced ƒ (= Gothic h, or Latin ƒ) before
n admittedly often becomes m,\' especially in the later period\'
(Siev., § 193. 3, and see note). Bearing this in mind, we must
be struck to find stefne and efiium constantly, which forms
are indicative of an older period; and on the contrary, the.^
following English adaptations of the Latin word antiphona:
antiphonas (81. i), antipJionam (41. i) ; antemn (79. i), antemne
(38. 5); antemp (56. 10, 79, 12), and autempne (42, I2 ; 43. 4),
§ 48, Are any traces found of an interchange between
/and w ; and is this phonetic, or, as is certainly very possible,
merely graphical ? The constancy of the occurrence of the
gloss anfealde to potesiate in our text (which I have starred ;
91. 4, and passim) would almost make me inclined to think
that the change was phonetic. If so, we may look upon liw
(61. 13) as an analogue. Here, however, the w has been
changed into ƒ (contemporarily).

ƒ is dropped \\u fröre (solacio, 10. i), and has been added, no
doubt erroneously, in yfefle (31. 5).

§ 49. T. The resemblance in shape of this symbol to
c may often account for forms like the following: orsecleua
(9. 18}, uncrwnan (109. 6). Whether wice (poena, 25, 13),
secende (ponens, 28. 14) must not be viewed in a different
light, is a matter ^vhich will be found treated of below,

§ 63).

§ 50. Traces of the voicing of final t to d are numerous:—
gemed (modus 45. 8, 72. 14), gild (33. 10), tramod (118, 2),
Of this last word, Schröer\'s texts have on p, 133 of his edition,
tramet, which is also in the Durham MS, in the corresponding
passage on fo. 123 b. Schröer asks (glossary, in voce) if tho
word is masc. or neuter. The following references may give
an answer to this question. Gospel of S. Matthew, ed. Skeat,
p. 2,1. 10: trametas 1 woegas \\ stige •. tramites; and Prudentius
glosses, Germania 23, p. 398 b. trametas: paginas.

t, the outcome of the combination -te}», becomes voiced in
the following cases: si gehcd (emendaverit, 25. 13), anded
(confitebitur, 29, 14), agild (deliquerit, 80, 4), heed (91, 3)
and as the result of -de]; being contracted iu: asend (mittit,
36. 13), lad (ducit, 117. 3).

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

Observe the spelling geledt (impediatur, 87. 4).

§51. t is dropped very frequently. Finally in geJjeaJi
(17. 14), higeleas (75. 17). Cp. also sceornesse (39. 13),
crcejican (= craiftiean, 94. 10), swa (ƒ swa (94. 5), etc.

Inwardly in drihue (1. 8), tihende (suadentem, 4. 7), tearim
(61. I, probably a mistake for tear lum) influenced by the
thought oi tearum — \\s.c.vim\\s\', wccmas (82. 3).

Initially it is, with a following <?, misread for a: in ^\'telendne
{ — telendne, detractorem, 20. 15), and ^arlicor (= teartlicor,

115.5).

§ 52. t is found added after s in geivist (38. 6), in cost
[certainly in (88. 3), and probably also (20. 7), if paccm may
be taken to mean jiacis osculmn\\, and through a mixing up
of forms in asyndrodest (=asyndrodas, privati, 56. 9). Owing
to influence of the lemma, it is added in pemant (serviant,
65. 15). See a very interesting article, Mod. Language
Notes I, 3, and ib. I, 97.

§ 53. t becomes d in si gesci/rd (53. 13), tourd mend (87. 15),
and also in swa liivccd szva (1. 11). This latter instance,
unlike the former which is isolative (Sweet, H. E. S., § 47),
is combinative, influenced by the following s. Other combi-
native changes of t, but through a preceding s, are found
in these words: apreht (78. 10, 98. 7), and prengeslan (1. 9).
Instead of becoming }), tho t of st is dropped in eet uyxaii
(2.7)- , .

§ 54. D. This sound is very frequently unvoiced. Myrrent
(stirpator, 62. 3), manifealt (113. 15). It is retained etymo-
logically in pemildsa (39. 7). The frequently occurring forms
abbot in the nominative as well as in the oblique cases (c. g.
79. 8, 80. 15, etc.) are not likely to be all due to the form
of the lemma ; they may on the contrary present examples in
point here.

llUiiclipol (35. 11) and stunitneelum (38. 10) may be
instanced as exemplifying the unvoicing of a d at the end
of a syllable, and tho following words as a specimen of the
same process inwardly, so far as they may be thought to
indicate phonetic and not merely graphical changes.

fotum (alimentis, 68. 15), wi\'S meten (mercedi, 85. 13,

d 2

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

probably a blunder), atreogenlic (agenda, 37. la), to motgenne
(superbiendi, 110. 4, cp. § 69), stete (111. 15). For the ap-
parent change aid into g, see below, note to 5. 9 (p. 119).

§ 55. d is represented by 9 in the following cases : (eftvyrÏÏe
(16. 7), heon gesœid (22. 3), heladod (65. 6, 65. 13). See for
îoidscrijjel (10. 16, 17), where d is influenced by the fol-~
lowing s, § 53 above. Owing to the want of length-desig-
nation in our MS. it is difiicult to decide whether wiâ-
here represents tviâ or tcîâ. In the former case the change
would be combinative and internal ; in the latter isolative
and external (Sweet, H. E. S., § 46. ƒ).

§ 55. The close relationship existing between the d and n,
n being formed exactly in the place of the d but with free
breath-passage, throws more or less light on the following
instances, most of which, if not all, may represent truly pho-
netic changes. See also below, § 92.

ahlicenHum earum (2. 10), timdgan (3. 3), angdfullum (13.
3), gewitendilicuni (16. 11), menen^lice (44. 7, etc.), ion (per,
49. 2), etc. etc. See Sievers, § 198.

d is represented by n in gegearcou (exibetur, 25. 3), is doubled
in gejjreadd (104. 6), and assimilated to n in cxmenne, etc.
(95. 11).

§ 57. i», D. The sound symbolised by these letters is in our
text\'often found represented by d. Cp. nytwyrdnymm (19. 6,
65. 14), sodes (89. 7), laigd (98. 2), sede (115. 15). This d
by unvoicing becomes if in underfeld (16. i), det (108. 6, where
the possibility of Latin influence is not excluded). It is
assimilated to t in eettan (77. 16).

Jj, â, as sign of the 3 p. s. are often omitted ; cp. saig
(24. 9), etc.

Inwardly,^ has disappeared in sioyrian (59. 14), and possibly
in lareoio. So says Sweet, as regards this last word, in the
Anglia, III, p. 152. But is this derivation con-cct? Speak-
ing a prion, a }i is more likely to be added by analogy than to
disappear phonetically between r and a rowel \\ lateoiv from
ladjjeow is no fit analogue. Or must we presuppose, for a
transitional stage, *laJ)reow ? Even then our swy^rian is but
a meagre analogue, occurring as it does only once or so, as

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

against the constancy with which lareow obtains. On the
whole, Reimann (Die Sprache, etc., cp. § 64, p. 36),—who
assumes larjjeow to be a twelfth century neologism,—seems
to me most likely to have hit the mark.

Original dh is represented by dd in anddettan (21. 15),
]i is written ƒ in dcefnysse (55. 5), a very probable phonetic
interchange.

§ 58. s. S is assimilated to t in Uettian (33. 3), and is
prothetic—if phonetic in this place, which is at least doubtful
—in stalu [ — talu, detractionis, 110. 7).

§ 59. c, K. Both these symbols express either a guttural or a
palatal voiceless stop. In our text the following words occur
with k by the side of forms with initial c. ofkyrfes (abscisionis,
60. 2), gekynd, (5. 14), kyS (69. 10), leon gekydde (29. 9),
ki/re (18. 4), kpi (9. 17), kin (10. 16), kapitol (47. 9), etc.

c is sometimes voiced: hegimd (76.4), drencg (potus, 78. i),
godgtindre (81. 10), gemhig (84. 4), siohigan (109. 3)\'.

c is represented by t in fcete (37. 13) and gcferlcetenn
(102. 13). For the reverse process, see § 49 above, and for
the explanation, § 63 below.

§ 60. As regards the pronunciation of this c, I have
already stated that it is either palatal or guttural. The
guttural pronunciation occurs of course before guttural vowels,
and possibly also in a few cases before ])urely palatal vowels,
but only when the c is there owing to a secondary develop-
ment. Thus, when we find re glossed by Jnnce (33. 9), it
is difficult to believe that the <?, which has grown out of g,
and is thus a purely guttural stop, can be palatal in the
oblique cases. Before guttural vowels a palatal pronunciation
is not likely to have obtained.

§ 61. What is the nature of this palatalisation? Sievers
expressly and distinctly states, in various sections of his
grammar, that the palatal c=isch (§ 196. 3), i.e. a \' pronuncia-
tion • resembling the present English ck^\' (§ 206, anm. 3).

\' Sievers does not restrict his statement to any later period. The following
may therefore he of interest. That this assibilation of the c cannot be
established for the older periods—I here refer to the Corpus Glossary—may
be seen from Dieter, § 43, who gives mcr(x (Wr. W., 32. 25) as representing

liv ANGLO-SAXON PALATALISATION. [v.

However strange it may be that the author of the \' Grund-
ziige der Phonetik\' must have here made the slip of con-
founding palatalisation with its consequence, assibilation,
the fact is proved by referring to p. 62 of the third edition
of the Grundziige, where a correct statement is given. But
the words quoted above still stand in the A.-S. grammar, and
the wrong notion there expressed, pervades the whole treat-
ment of the c.

§ 63. Let us examine the facts on which Sievers\'s theory
is based. They are :—

(1) The transition of ort-geanl into orceard, afterwards
orcerd, ordceard.

(2) Tho transition offetian into fecc{e)an.

Now the interchange of guttural c and t, i, e. of the voice-
less guttural and dental stops, is no matter of wonder; and
as such, the matter might be explained without more ado\';
but there is more which tends to explain the change. A
palatal c, as in A.-S. rice, before having attained the present
stage of pronunciation—assibilation to tsch in rich—must
have passed through the tj stage—i.e. exactly through the
place where the ig (i. e. t^) of origeard must have been formed.
No wonder then, that t palatal vowels, or rather t palatal
semi-vowels, should be confuscd in writing with c palatal
vowels, i.e. semi-vowels. Hence the transition of ortgeard
into* orceard. Hence possibly also the form fcccean by the
side of fetian, although the possibility of two distinct verbs
being apparently merged into one is not excluded^. Thus
then I believe with Sievers, that orceard proves a pronuncia-
tion oftjard, but no more. I shall no\\v examine the re-
maining grounds against this supposition. The c originally
sufficed because, as is very likely (Siev., § 206), palatalisa-
tion is an Anglo-Saxon phenomenon. But when the palatals
began to develope, k was sometimes used to denote the
guttural sound. This at least is very probably the meaning

the middle Latin mercem. If c had then been Ucli, the scribe would not have
had recourse to the unusual tz to express this sound, then so akin to that
of c. ^

^ See Mod. Language Notes II. 222, III, 126, 192.

^ Whence does Bosworth-ToIIer get his preterite,/cc/t^e ?

v.] PALATALISATION. Iv

of k (Sievers, § 207); but that the distinction was not always
kept up, that is, that the distinction was evidently too
delicate to be palpable to the untrained ear, is clear from the
list of words above, § 59, where the h occurs before vowels
originally palatal as well as those originally guttural. But
however rough and obtuse an ear may be, the distinction be-
tween k and tsj must be sure to be heard and to find expression
consistently. How then was it afterwards expressed? By
the adding of 1i to the palatal c; but this did not happen
until the beginning of the Middle English period (Koch,
§ 172 fF.). I do not believe that the cJi of the Northumbrian
documents represents Uj, but I wish to reserve my judgment
aintil the grammar of these texts, which may be expected from
the hands of Professor Cook, has placed before us the necessary
material on this subject.

§ 63. We may now safely conclude that the evidence in
Anglo-Saxon does not do more than prove that palatal c=ij
at tho utmost, not yet tsj. See also on this subject the
remarks of Professor March, Englische Studien, I. 315.

Hence it is that I have left the above-mentioned forms
foite, geferlcetenne, etc., unstarred, since they are just as likely
to represent the palatal c, as would be done by this symbol
itself, and it is probably owing to this confusion of c and t
that wc find such forms as loice, secende, cp. supra, § 49.

§ 64. A word must be said about tho c-epenthesis, although,
of this phenomenon proper, I havo not found an instance in
our text. Traces of it may, however, be perhaps discovered.
For instances of it, see Sievers^ § 210; Cosijn, Altwests,
gramm. I, § 131, i.e. Sweet, Pastoral Care, p. 482 f.;
Zcuner, Die Spracho\' des Kentischen Psalters, § 39; Dieter,
Spracho und Mundart der ältesten lünglischen Denkmäler,
§ 45. P- Ö3 ; Reimann, Die Spracho der Mittelken tischen
Evangelien, § 28, sub 3 ; Schröer, Die Winteney-Version der
R. S. B., p. xxvii, etc.

§ 65. What is the nature of this epenthesis, i.e. what is
hero the sound of 5c ? I think that c must bo supposed to
indicate the change of s (not only of so as Zeuner has it,
note 2 on J). 80) into the palatal sibilant, and I am hai)py

Ivi C-EPENTHESIS. [V.

to find that the only writer who does speak of the nature of
the sound—Reimann, 1.1.—is of the same opinion. It is
curious that so far as my instances go, the older periods
present this insertion only between s and I, m or n, not before
p and t^, as in modern South German. Here stein and spalte
become ^ stein and ^palte; there it is only such words as snulen
which would become scnulen. Now in German this s from s
has run into the sound so, (etymologically) sch = sk. In modern
English an original sk has often also become \'sc?\' (i.e the
palatal sibilant), as in shadow from scadu. In. § 31, I have
stated that the spelling seamen^ etc., does not present a case
of monophthonging. This must be now further explained.

§ 66. If the above view of the c-epenthesis be accepted,
we need not be surprised to find this c written so com-
paratively rarely. Even in Anglo-Saxon times we may safely
assume pronunciation to have been in advance of spelling,
so that when the former began to change, the latter followed
only tentatively, and not always consistently. Suppose there-
fore, that the sound-change, under certain conditions, of s to
sc = s were pretty general, it is quite possible that in the
majority of cases it should yet be written s, especially since
the difference between the two is not so very great. Now the
sk before palatal vowels would easily become stj (cf. §§
60-63); and owing to the presence of the it would
further dwindle down to ^

If it be objected that I here give a pronunciation to the
c, which was denied it in the §§ cited, I must emphatically
state that this is owing to the influence of the That a
stop should be slun-ed over sooner hekoe^n two contimiants
than that at the beginning of a syllable (ri-ce) a tj should
develop a sibilant, no one will care to deny, I think. Another
possibility must here be disposed of. Could sk have developed
into i through the intermediate stage of (=« the un-

\' I now find ccesclra (castellum) in the Northumbrian Gospel of S. Mattliew,
21. 2.

\' By k in^the rest of this section I denote the guttural voiceless stop, and
by rf the palatal sibilant.

\' See Mod. Langu.igd Notes, as quoted in § 52.

v.] C-EPENTHESIS. IvÜ

voiced palatal spirant). It is possible, but not likely. Spellings
like scJiyldo (Mt. prologue 17. 12) and hischead (corr. from
higschad. Praef. Eusebii, 9. 13), as well as sgiire -monn (dis-
pensator, Luke 12. 42) in the Northumbrian Gospels, would
indeed seem to favour this view, but for a reason pointed
out above, I do not wish to lay too much stress on these
forms. For my own self, I am inclined to look on the above
forms as all indicating the pronunciation syldo (= sgyldo),
lisead, mremonn, etc. But there is more. Do spellings like
schammn occur ? i. e. sch before guttural vowels ?

As to sk before the guttural vowels, whatever may have
originally been the impetus that set sk changing into what
is now spelt see (Sievers, § 76), it did change in this direction,
and as soon as forms like sceamti, sceadu, had developed them-
selves, the way was open to change in tho same manner as the
sk before palatal vowels. Sievers, in reply to Kluge (Anglia,
V, anz. 83) has treated of these ea\'s, etc. in the Beiträge,
(Paul and Braune) 9. 305 f. His reasonings have not con-
vinced me, and I continue to hold with Kluge that the ea
in sccamu is no real diphthong. ■ Thus we find that ce in
sceop is the symbol for one sound (just as sk in shall is
the expression for only one sound), and tho 0 has not become
diphthongized by the palatal e, i. e. tho stress is on the 0.
Now when the palatal i, as developed out of s in the caso
of scniden, had come to bo expressed by sc, and when tho
sound thus symbolised was also expressed by sce^, we need
not be surprised to find that the j-sound originally expressed
by the e now got sufiiciently known to be inherent in tho
symbol sc ( = •<) and that consequently a return to the spelling
scame may gradually be observed. This is what I meant
above when saying that slight traces of the c-epenthesis
might perhaps be found in our text.

§ 67. I have said that wc must expect to find sc written
for s only rarely, whereas it may have been pronounced
so much oftener. We may now go further, and say that

■ This nearly always in conjunction with a and o, so that they can be
looked upon as the diphthongs ea and eo, which by this time had also the
stress on the d and 6.

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

a spelling mcennisiiesse (68. ii) need not be a mistake for
mcenniscnesse, as s ]:)robabIy had here the value of L See
vi\\.so fl(eslican\'^, Cui-a Past. 234. 14. (Cosijn, I, § 131.)

Cosijn (I, p. 133) instances menniseu, -escu from the Pastoral
Care (71. la), without sc making the preceding vowel long
through position. Was sc already palatal i ?

§ 68. G. The following selection of forms, which might
easily be multiplied, bears out the various statements of Sievers
in his Grammar on the pronunciation of this letter:—beiym
(47. 7), aiyldenne (19. 4), \'^-asmaidan (29. 11, read .asmaiand =
asmeagend), adli (morbida, 60. 4), scyldine (36. 3), sade (36. 6),
gesaiff (22. 3), secce (38. 12), crcpftlcan (94. forlncgende
(12. 14), miderfmnc (16. 12), Jnnce (33. 7), etc. etc. The com-
bination hg occurs twice: geleohgenne (92. 8), gelohgenlican
(63. 5). See also above, § 29. As regards the transition of
g to w, it is exemplified in our MS. e.g. in suwian (11. 5,
cf. Siev., §§ 214. 8, 416. 8), but the form forgcewa^ (107.
14) by the side oi foYgceian (75. 8) is rather curious. (Cf.
note to 86. 17.)

§ 69. To one statement of Sievers\'s (§ 216, 3) I must take
exception. He says: ^ dg has caused eg in micgern, fat (for
*midgern, O. H. G. mittigarni), which is extant in com-
paratively late texts only. This transition presupposes for
\' its time (tenth century) a pronunciation of eg as dz! I

must claim for this eg the pronunciation tj, and refer my
readers to § 63. O.H. G. mittigarni presupposes A.-S. \'^mid-
gern. This would readily become ^mitgern i. e. mitjern;
see above, § 62, where I have shown how this combination
could bo written micgern.

The pronunciation of eg as dz is therefore not proven.

1 Thia word lias lately been treated of by Osthoff (Beiträge, 13. 401 fT.;
Bee especially p. 407). I suppose that the Kentish word flwc, which Kluge
cites in his new ed. of his Etymol. Wörterbuch, is part of ßcnchaman in the
1 Kentish Psalm 143. Zupitza, Z.f.D.A. 21. 12, thinks that this is a mistake.

The suggestion may be hazarded that c { = f) should stand for sc, but I c^mot
support this spelling at present, except by the selfsame wordsßercce derccedum,
which Zupitza instances from the Kentish Glosses, and by the Northumbrian
oncceccen hid (denegabitur, Luke 12. 9). Cp. perhaps the spelling j^cJerfeteßasÖ^
\'=ßierfcteßcesa (71. 11), for the d presupposes an a, rather than ca.
\' Cf. motgennc^modgcnne (110. 4), and r/emodiffeline (114. 10).

xlviii ANGLO-SAXOX CONSONANTS. [v.

§ 70. N, i.e. guttural n. This is usually, and in our MS.
also continually, expressed by the letters ng, no. While re-
ferring the student to § 41, I may here comment on the
possibility that there may be something more than mere
accident in the occurrence of the following iorms:—

forspennigiim (11. 3), geondsprecend ( = geondsprengend, 12.
i), ^gesjimd (i.e. geswin-S, 82. 5; cp. 80. 2), ghiran (106. ii),
etc. etc. In the first two instances g and c, in the last two
n, may denote what I have written n,—See Zeimer, Die
Spraclie des Kent. Psalters, § 33.

§ 71. limidbm (59. i) is not an adverbial dative, then u
is here denoted by m.

Note also ajiingede (84. ^) = ajligede, alinge (78. 10), alenge
(79. 4), and caniincas (41. 5) by tho side of the more usual
vanticas.

§ 72. II. We find an h added in some words, e.g. in Jiccfle-
mmst (76. 5), upahresred (94. 14).

On the other hand we find: efenlyitan (consortes, 6. T4),
nexode (molliti, 10. 9), ofreow (19. 8), wilce (26. 11), icanon
(30. 13), wcelreoiv (58. 13), rcegelhuse (98. 15), reor/(108. 8),
rcedlice (109. 13), lyst (auditus, 113. j 2), etc. Tliis dropping of
the h most likely denotes a voicing of the liw; this is also
expressed by the following spellings, aihvhejjcra (81. 11) and
wJieennc (103. 2).

h is misread as h in \'^hmd (promptus, 35. 6) and * hada (14. 7).
§ 73. Doubling ofconsonants, and conversely haplography^,
is exceedingly frequent in our text. I am not sure that in
each ease a phonetic corresponding process is thereby inti-
mated. I select the following instances:—

goddra (53. 17), fett (pedes, 66. 2), estmettas (20. i), be-
healdenne (29. 6), aworpones (34. 8), hederne (80. 2).

§ 74. Ini\'LECTIONS. I begin my notes on the inflections
by giving a couple of instances of the absolute cases. They
are of course imitations from the Latin, and although not
restricted to interlinear translations, they are very frequent
there, owing to influence of the lemmata.

\' The writing of one symbol instead of two.

Ix ANGLO-SAXON INFLECTIONS. [V.

aw{ec)cendutlie gewrite (3. 8), rihtwisnesse dihtendre (14. 2),
gedihtenre endebyrdnyssei^^. 17), etc. etc.

§ 75. Substantives. Nominative, intingu (occasio, 91. 6,
misreading ?). Twice I have noticed the use of an accusative
instead of a nominative case, neode (57. 19) ^xA forgimeleaste
(68. 8). See, however, (69. 16), where neod under the same
circumstances is used in the nominative case.

Genitive, crceftis (22. 11), biscojois (107. 8). This ending
-is may be owing either to influence of the respective lemmata,
or it may be the natural reflex of -ys, which is very common
in some texts. See Sievers, § 44, anm. 2. Is brewer (13. 12)
perhaps wrongly influenced by the preposition 07i ?

Dative and Instrumental, geheda (orationi, 21. gebeda
(oratione, 21. 14), eallra sawla (anima, 19. 11), dara (noxa,
56. 17), are instances of a dative form, which (only in the two
last words) may be due to Latin influence.

Accusative.—repse (Si quis dum pronunciat responsorium,
79. 11). "Whence this dative form? Is this (as well as the
accusatives instead of nominatives recorded above) to be
looked upon as a trace of the mixing up of forms, to which
Sievers, § i, anm. 2, has drawn attention?

§ 76. Nom. Acc. Plural.—hrodra (fi-atres, 57. 19), gebrodra
(73. 13), gehrodran (3. 9, 105. 3), hehoda (13. 4, 13. 6, etc.),
andstceras (3. l), kynna (9. 15), and other instances probably
exemplify this same principle.

§ 77. If we did not find the words geongra cildra (pueri
parvi, 106. 11), I should be inclined to look on cildra (pueris,
105. 14) as a misreading for cildru=.cildrum.

§ 78. The dative plural ends in -on, -an, -im, passim. There
is no need to give instances, lleofonum (28. 8, 36. 9) may be
a dual (Kluge, Beitr. 8).

§ 79. Of dative forms of the Adjectives we notice the
following, which are worth mentioning:—orsorgi (securi, 10.
3), Avhich i may be due to the Latin ending^, and forms
like ungehyrsumude (12. 8), gecwemlice (78. 5) as exemplifying
the form-mixing spoken of above.

§ 80. Of plural forms compare the following :—godu (13. 2),

I Another possibility is, that, with tlie ge following, the word may be orsorgige.

v.] ANGLO-SAXON NUMERALS AND PRONOUNS. Ixi

femm (35. id), fiurhtogenes (74. ii), sinderlices (85. i), in most
of which, cases the presence of the lemmata makes us doubt
whether the changes are not merely graphical blunders.

§ 8i. The dat. plur. ends in -an, -um.

§ 82. As regards the Numerals, a form sex, which, if ifc is
not caused by Latin influence, resembles the Northumbrian, is
found (reference missing).

§ 83. Of the Ordinals, I note the following forms which
are not found in Sievers, or of which he doubts the cor-
rectness :—

9. nygejjan, nigejmn (37. 4, ii).

30. pritteoga (43. 9).

40. feowerteogada (43. 10).

50. fifteogada (42. 13, 43. \\o), \\(f),jxftugedan

(43. 6).

60. syxteogada (42. 11, etc.).

70. seofonteoda (42. 14).

80. hundeahieoda (43. 13), hindealdoda (43, 13).

90, kundnigcnteoda (43. 14, 51. 3), liundnigentedSan (76.
3)-

100. hundteontiga 7 eahtateodan (48. 16), hundteonteodan
(49. 16, 17),

§ 84. Pronouns, In c, us, y, as possible pronominal gloss
to nobis, see below, notes to (27. 2). Inc may be a pronoun
(19. 5), but there is no coiTcsponding lemma. A peculiar
case of a declined \'genitive\' (see Sweet, A,-S, Reader\'^, p, lix)
is found (54, 3), abhodes heores (abbatis sui),

pis (a neutral singular) is gloss (5, 3) to the neuter ]}is.

Seo, as a masculine pronoun, occurs (43, 11) and (70, 4), and
possibly also (36. 13), It thus bears out tho statement of
Sievers, § 337, aum, 2. Conversely se would seem to be a
feminine pronoun in se romanisca ladung (aecclesia, romana,
44. 3).

§ 85, Verbs, Only a few verbal forms are interesting
enough to bo noted. Of these we find the following third
persons: beheald (respicit, 30, 16), stynt (97, i), and some
others where there is no suffix (see Cosijn, Altwestsaehsische
Grammatik, I, § 148, p, 200). stoeg (118. 5), sceig (30.6), etc.

Ixii PRONOUNS, FUTURE PARTICIPLE. [V.

§ 86. Of plural forms, the corrupt ^sed gat (22. 2) points to
stcgat, which antiquated form (Sievers, § 360) may itself
have been the cause of the corruption ; cf. secgat (17. 17).

§ 87. Of infinitival forms, we may notice hatian (jubere,
11. 17), which, however, is probably a mistake for hatau-,
geciaii (vocari, 17. 17), which, according to Sievers, § 408. 3,
is mostly found as eigan. The rarer forms in -on occur
pretty frequently. See, for instance, ahyrdon (2. 12), and
unwrigon (33. 7), as infinitival gloss to the imperative revela
(supra, § 9). Of infinitives in -a, I found lysta oStSe gehyra
(audire, 21. 12).

§ 88. Of the verb sculan, the text has the following notable
forms :—scel (debet, 26. 3, 102. 8), scell (69. 2), scyll (112. 7),
scealan (debent, 81. 9), and scealan as infinitive (32. 10).

§ 89. The \' participium necessitatis,\' which Sievers mentions
in § 350 as found in later texts, and as formed after the Latin,
occurs pretty frequently in om- text. For the form given by
him we may instance to campiende (5. 14), to specende (26. 7),
to smeagenda (a is owing to the lemma, requirenda, 26. ii), to
andedende (46. 10).

Ey the side of this we find even more frequently, however,
forms in -enne, e.g. to canqnenne (1. 9), etc.

§ 90. That this future participle should also be found
declined might be expected. Accordingly we have eardigendes
(5. 11), and he gegearnendum to rade gehroâra (de adhibendis ad
consilium fratribus, 17. 10). In this case to is, as a matter of
course, suppressed (31. 5, I find ^arceriende, for ariende or
œriende,—as gloss to parcendo : here to would also seem to be
omitted).

§ 91. The same notion is sometimes expressed by adjectives
in -lie, e.g. ]ja sendlican (dirigendi, 113. 4), on donlicum
Jmgum (in faciendo, 23. 12), which same ending I have once
found glossing a present participle, hecumendlicum (87. 12).
Here supervenientes was possibly mistaken for snperveniendi.

§ 92. \' Formed on the pattern of the Latin : \' these words of
Sievers\'s convey the impression that Latin only is answerable
for the development of this d. I think that, viewed in the
light of § 56, d will probably prove to be of a purely phonetic

v.] THE DIALECT OF THE TEXT. Ixiii

origin. When once the d began to develop phonetically,
its growth and spreading may have been aided by a more
or less conscious association with the Latin participle; but
I hold that analogy and phonetics both share the paternity
of the new form.

§ 93. I may here mention Leo7i gelogodre (reponantur,
98. 15). How the passive voice of a verb can be glossed by
what is apparently the dative feminine of a past participle, I
am unable to understand. W\'ith partial dittography the same
ending is probably found in hehi/d{dad)edre (100. i, a). See
however note on p. 124, Compare (26. 16) where the infini-
tive aperire, which may be construed in a passive sense, is
glossed by an apparently masculine dative [geopenodnm).
Equally strange datives occur (66. 15) pa iiigangcndum, (74.
la) Jja gehyrendnvi, and (87. 12) qfer hecumendlicum. But
they may perhaps exemplify the mixing up of datives and
accusatives, which is characteristic of the later Anglo-Saxon.

§ 94. To any one who has looked into the text, or into
the foregoing many Kenticisms must be apparent at a
glance. Thus we have the e=.(B [supra, § 15, etc.; Sievers,
§ 151, i); the e=y (§ 37, Siev. § 154); absence of diph-
thongisation of e into ea (§ 30, Siev. § 157. a), to mention
only tho most striking peculiarities. But it will also have
been seen that these do not appear throughout, and that
Wcst-Saxon influence is traceablc. Now has a Kentish text
been copied by a West-Saxon scribe or vice versa? I think
a case like hetehtim (31. i), which was misread as hetelicim, is
singularly instructive. Telendue, ( = ta;lendne) which was mis-
read as (Blendne (20. 15), tells tho same tale. An interchange—
graphical—of h and h, te and a, and of h, and It is quite
common. Was it not the strange forms hetehtim, telendue,
instead of letcchtum, tcelendne, which led to the confusion ?
If so, the Kentish text must have been the original, and
tho West-Saxon the copy.

r I r\' \' -■«.>».- ■ ■■■

THE RULE OF S. BENET.

(fo. 118 a.) In nomine doiv/ni nostki lesu che/sn Incipit ee(gule) I

forasprœc fœderes Jjses haligan Jiœs eacligostan benedictes
VROI.OGUS PATUIS EXIMII BEATISSIMI BEl^\'EDlCTl)

hlyst cala bearii beboda larcowes 7 aliyld eare
Ausculta fili pkecepta magistri et inclura) aurem

heortan Jjiiire 7 myiicgiincge arfestes fœderes lustlice
cordis tui et ammoniti^onem) pii patris libenter

underfoh 7 frerafi gefyll pcet to liim Jjurh gehyrsum-
excipe et effica{citer) comple ut ad eum per oboedi- 5

nesse geswince geliwyrfe fcrj^am Jjurli iingehyrsumnesse asolcenesse
entie lahorem redeas a quo ■ per inoboedientie desidiam

pe Jju aweiggewite eoriiostlice nu min aprœc is asend

recesseras ; « Ad t[e) ergo nunc meus sermo dirigitur

swa wiS c\\vej)eude *aj)enum lustuni drihne cristo

quisquis alren{un)tians propriis voluptatibus donimo c/iristo

Jjamso^\'iin cînge to campieune geliyi-sumncsse J^a J^rcngestan

vero régi militaturus oboedienlie fortissijna

7 J)a jjurli beorli<an wœpna swa underfeiist calra œrest \\>œt
atqm precla{ra) arma assumis. In primis ut 10

Jju swa liwœS swa to donne );u on god fram liim beon
quicquid agendum. in[choas) lonum; ab eo per-

gefrenimed Jjam iornfullestan gebedo bid se })c us iallinga

ßci instantissima oratione dep{oscas). ut qui nos iam

bearua gemedemode on getele getellan ut \\>œt lie na sceole
in fdiorum dignatus est nume[ro) computare ; non debeat

5. fremßjSeQ note. 6. gestvince, nce not clcar. l^iat 8 oî asolcenesse not
at ail clear. 8. a/ienum, read awenum. 9. />am-, a inay be œ. iï of
soSan may be d. 10. heorhtan, tan is by no ineans clear. 11. After
on part of the MS. is torn away. 12. After iirf, part of the MS. toruaway.
13. xit, Latin in glossator\'s hand. It is in none of the other texts.

1. re not very clear. 3. Au-sculta in two Unes by way of illumination
by the side of In nomine—forasprœc—prologus—fili. 5, 6. ohoedientic,
\'ÛS:. oedientie inoboedientie, inoedientie. 7. / of not clear.

2] Exhortation to live up to the precepts of Holy Scripture.

sehwsenne be urum yfelum da beon £>-eunrotsode swa soSlice
aUquando de malis act{ibus) wostm contristari; Ita tnim
\\am on celcere tide be his on us is to earciemie 1

ei omni tempore de bon is) suis in nobis parendum

Iij\'rsumienne \\)oet he ne na \\>cet an swa swa yrre foder his

est; ut non solum ut irat{i(s) pater suos non

otSer hwile beam beerfwerdige ah swa swa egeful hlaford
aliquando Jilios exheredet, sed neo[v£) metue^us domiwus
swa geyrsod fram yfelum urum he swa swa J)a wyr

5 irritatus a malis nostris ut nequissiinos

Jjoowan to J^am ecan na betaece to wite we ]7e him fylian
servos perpetuam tradat ad poenam qui eum sequi
noldan to wuldre uton arisan set ijyxan set sumon cyrre
noluerint ad gloriam; ExMrgamus ergo tandem aliquando

aw . . cendum us gewrite 7 secgendum hit is us

excilante nos scriptura Ac dirente ho{ra) est jam nos

of slgepe uparisan geopenedum eagum un . .

dc sompno surgere. Et apcrtis oculis nost7\\is) {ad d)(iijl- ^

\' cundan leohte mid ablicendum earum 7 utan gehyran jjagod
10 cum lumen; attcnitis aurihus audiamus divina (co)-

awilice clipiende hwset us niyngie stefn to dseg
tidie damans quid nos ammoncat vox dicens. hodi[e si vpcem

gcgehyraS nelle ge ahyrdon eowre heortan eft

ejus audieritis nolite obdurare ccrda vestra. [et) iterum ;

se \'Se liaefS euran to geliyranne gehyre hwait
Qui\' hahet aures audiendi; audiat quid sjjiritus {dic)at

gelaSungu?» 7 la hwaet sajigtS cumatS la gebcam gehyraS
aecclesiis; Et quid dicit; Venite filii uudile me

, . . htnes ege 7 ic Itere eow yrnaS Hfes leoht j^a hwile Se
15 {tiiijiorem cZomim doctbo vos; Currite dum lumtn vite

ge habbaS Jjystru deatSes eow J^jet ne gegripan 7 secende
habetis {ne) tenebre mortis vos comprehendant; Et querens

nieniu folce he fias Sine clypaS his wi yhtau
domlnus {in) multitudine populi mi haec clamat 02)erarium

t seig(5 la hwylc is man se So wyle lif 7
mum {ite)rum dicit. Quis est homo qui vult vitam et

1. After dadim part of the MS. torn away. 4. One letter erased helween
offer and hwile. 5. After wyr pait of the JIS. torn away. 6. to?, very
indistinct. 8. In aic ... ccndum two letters indistinct, probably aiceccemlum.
9. u of geopcnedum reads like an f. Read urum. 11. Read dughivamlice.
l."). Read drihlnes. 18. t, last letter of e/t.

7. s of exsiirffatJitis add. afterw.ards. 8. dicente, see note.

Live uprightly, and peacefully, and the Lord\'s eyes shall [3

rest on thee.

gewilniiS ... on dagan gode \\)cet gef ]5a geliyrende andsweras
cupit {vi)dere dies bonos ; quod si tu audiens respondeas.
. . . gt5 pc gode gif Jju wilt habban ]pœt socSe lif 7 \\>œt
Ego {di)cit tibi deus ; Si vis habere veram et pev-

ece lif ... eond tundgan ]7ine fram yfele 7 f>iiie

petuam vitam {proh)ibe lingmim tuam a mala et labia

weleras 7 ]>cet bi na sprecan . . . n gecyr fram yfele 7 do
tua ne loquantViV {dol)um ; Veverle a mala et fac

god smea oîS\'Se sec sibbe . . . ylig liyre 7 ]>Qnne J^as
lonum. inquire pacem {et) sequere earn ; Et cum haec 5
\'J)incg gedotS eagau mine ofor 7 mine earan to eowrum

feceritis. oeidi mei super {v6)s et aures mee ad preces

benum 7 œr J^onne gcclypian nie ic sccge eow sefre ic her eom
îjestras. Et -antequam me in{to)cetis dicam volts. Ecce adsum;
est luftempre . . . ere stefne gelacSgendrc la go

Quid dulcius nobis {ah h)ac voce dommi invitantis nos

leofestan gebro\'Sra« efiie mid his iirfœstnesse geswutulaS
/ratres karissimi ; Ecce dcmonstrat

us lifes weg be^yrdum mid geleafan oSSe mid

nobis tZominus viam vite; Succinctis {e]rgo fide vel obser- lo

gehealdsimnesso goddra daeda lendenum . . . . u gebroht

vantiix honorum acluum lumhis (îi.)ostr?s peiducaium
bodung utan gau liis siSfcet \\œt wo gearuiau Line se IS0
cvangelii pergamus itinera ejus %it {^i^icreamur eum qui nos

geclipodo on his rice geseou . . 11 îfœs rices lioallo on inue gyf
vocavit. In regno suo videre; {In) cujus regnt tahcrnacido si

(Ij^g wo wyllaS buton midgodumdœdum yrneude nateshwon

\'\' volumus habitare. nisi illuc bonis actilus currendo minime

no bits becumen* abutan axau mid j^am witigan drihten

pervenitur; Sed interroyemus cum pxophcta Jominum. 15
secgendo him la hwa wuiiaS on ÎSinau inne oStSe

dicentes ei Domine quis hahitavit in tahemaculo tuo aut

la hwa gerestS on ÎSinro haligan dune œftcr J^yssore nx-
quis requiescet in monte sancto suoi Post hanc interro-

1. Itcad (jeseon. 2. lîead sœiffS or sœffÔ. 3. eond, see note. 4. Read
facn. 5. ylig, read fylig. 8. esi, ô in MS. ; Latin in glossator\'s hand.
In no other text. . . . ere, readpissere. 9. n oi gchroiSnin erased. 11. . . «,
read urum. gelroht, see note. 13. . . n, read on. 15. abidctn, read
utan.

1. aiidleris would seem to have been corrccted into audiens. 5. et (after
^«cem) pasted over. 11. a of otserrctM^ia corr. from e. 12. Erasure of one
letter after lergamvs. 17. e add. above line {requiescef).

IS 2

4J The blameless, the just, the honest, shall dwell with tlie Lord.

unge uton gehyran andswariende 7 gesutuliende

gationem fratres avdiamus domnum respondentem et oslendentem

his liealle oSSe innes 7 seccende se (Se ingœ))
nobis viam ipsius tabernacuU ac dicentem ; Qui ingreditur

butan smittan swylce wyrcS rihtwisnesse 7 se ÎSe sprye\'S sotS-
sine macula et operatur justitiam f Qui loquitur veri-

fœstnesse heortan on his 7 se ÎSe na dej? facn on his tungan
tatem in corde sua qui non egit dolum in lingua sua
se Se na dyde nextan his yfel se ÎSe hosp na underfencg
6 Qui nan fecit proximo suo malum, qui obprobrium nan accepit

agen his nextan se \'Se ]3onc awyridan deofol sum Sine
adversus proximum suum. Qui malignum diabolum aliqua

tihende him sylfan mid his sylfan tihtinge fram gesih\'Sum
suadentem sihi cum ipsa suasione a conspectibus cordis

forseonde se gewrohte his lytlan hwœdan gejjohtas

sui respuens deduxit ad nicldlum. et parvulos cogitatus ejus

7 heald betsehte non

tenuit et allisit ad c7jristu?rt ; Qui timentes doramnm de bona

hi sylfe j^ane detS upahafene fia sylfan on
Î0 ohservantia sua non se reddunt elatos sed ipsa in

hira sylfan goda na fram liim sjlfan niagon beon

se bona non a se posse sed a domino fieri

ahwenende 7 hi rnserslaîS

existimantes. et operantem in se doxsnnxxm magnificant. illud cum

na us

proplieta dicentes. non nobis dorame non nobis, sed nomini tuo

ah fortSan paulus se apostol be his bodunge
da gloriam. Sed nec paulus apo^iolus de predicatione sua

him sylfan ah fnr\'Sam ne tealde
\'5 sibi aliquid imputavit dicens; Gra.i\\a dei sum. id quod

se Se wuldraS . wuldrie ho

sum; Et iterum ipse dicit. Qui gloriatur in domino glorietur ;

Jjanon sseigtS" ssede

Unde et dominus in evangelio ait; Qui audit verba mea

ic *oiilocie hine wisum were

hœc et facit ea similabo eum viro sapienti. qui edificavit ^

9. hetmhte, first t not clear. 18. Above ea the gloss is partly cut away;
an h is recognisable, and part of a letter which looks like g, so h\\g ? Itead
onlicie.

8. pa)\'riiIoi>,MS.pa: vuliis. 13. «erf, MS. se. 18. a of ea partly cut away.

Those who serve the Lord shall inherit the Kingdom [6

of Heaven.

comon flodas bleowan
domum. suam supra petram. Venerunt flumina. flavermd venti

7 hi getspurnon on Sam huse 7 hit ne feoll for})am ]3e

et impegerunt in domum illam et noa cecidit; quia fun-

Kit wses gestaSelod ofor ]5am stane }?is gefyllende

data erat super petram; Ilcec complens cZominus/

anhidiaS mid daedmn

expectat nos cotidie. 7iis suis siwciis monitis faclis nos

we sculan foi J)i for bote

respondere dehere. Ideo nobis propter emendationem ma^orurn 5
j^ises lifes dagas to fyrstum sind to alsetenne
/lujus vite dies ad inducias relaxantur; dicente apoB\\.olo;

nyte g« la \\>mt ge godes ge]7yld eow

An nescis quia patientia dei vos ad penitmtiam te

Ifet f)a synfiillan

adducit; Nam pius cZominiis dicit; Nolo mortem peccatoris.

]5ce!< he gecyrre J^onwe we axiaS

scd ut convertatur ot vivat: Gum ergo interrogassemus
1)0 wunungum

cZominum fratres de hdbitatore tabemaculi ejus, audivimus ro
eardigendes behod ah gyf we gefylliiS wunigendes ]3enunge
habitandi preceptum. Sed si comjdeamus habitatoris officium.

we beoS sin to gereccanne

erimus heredes regni celorum; Ergo ^we^^arajicJa sunt

7 lichaman * luiHgre beboda gehirsumncsse

corda et corpora nostra sancte preceplorum obedientie

to campiende 7 \\>a:t hwonlic ]>a:t ]5e on us gekynd acumenlic
militanda et quod min\\xs hahet in nobis natura possibile.

ac uton biddan his gife \\)a!t he iarcie fultum

rogemus dommnm ut gratie sue jubeat nobis adjutoriiwi 15

jjeninn 7 gif fleonde helle wite life we wyllatS
ministrare; Et si fugientes gehenne poenas ad vitam volumus

becum to Sam ecan tigaS 7 j^a liwile ajt Insum

pQxvenire jmyetuain. dum adhuc vacat. et in hoc corpo-

lichanmn l^e we sin calle J^as Jjinc jjurh |>isne leohtes weg
re sumus: et ha:c omnia pe.v hanc lu^is viam

7. Second e of nylegela, being written too close upon tlie l, is not quite clear.
8./a, read/CCS. 17. Read Jecimo»». iigaS, oi wmligaiS.

7. ros, not in other texts ; te is crossed out. 10. habiiatore, MS. hcthita-
torum; see note. 16. Jubeaf, MS. habeat, a wrong transcription tor jubeat,
which all other texts have 1 The gloss /(ct he iarcie would lend support to
this view.

6] S. Benet\'s intention to gather together a number of men

who shall serve the Lord.

geffllâii ys to yrnaiine 7 is to donne nii

v[acat) imphre currendum ct agendum est modo. (120 a.)

pa;i hit on ecnesse framme is to settanne fram

quod in perpetuum nobis expediat; Constituenda est ergo a

us drihten]ices scole |?eowdomes on Sœre we hihtaS senig {sine
nchis dominiei seola servitii. in qua institutione, nihil

heardlices senig us to gesettanne we liopiaS 1 gif

aspevum nihilqwe grave nos constituturos speramus; Sed etsi

hwset litles for^step\'S sti\'Slicor dihtende rihtwisnesse gescad for
5 quid paululum restrietius dictan\'.e aequitatis ratione pvopter

bote oSSe drohtnunge so\'Öre lufe for\'SstypS

emendationem vitiorum. vel eonversationem caritatis pvccesserit
]?œrrihte ac ]:)u na forfleo hœle se tSe

non ilieo pavore pQxterritus réfugias viam salutis que

nis buton mid stige to onginnenne mid forSsteppinge

non est nisi anjusto initio ineiinenda ; Frocessu vero

drohtnunga heortan ouunasecgendlicere lufe

conversationis et fidei dilatato corde inenarrabili dilectionis
werednesse urnen beboda godcs fram big

10 dulcedine curritur via mandatorum dei. ut ab ipsius
œfre lareowdorac oS

nunquam magisterio discedentes. in ejus doctrina usque ad

deajî on minstre se f>urhwunigendc prowungum
mortem in monasterio j)erseverantes. passionibus chr\'isii
jpiirli gef>yld pcet we beon dnelnimende rices his
^jer patimtiam 2)artici2)emur. ut et regni ejus mereamnr
efenlyttan

esse consortes. Amen. Explicit peologus eegule beati bene-

15 dicti abbatis. pateis monaciioeuji.

I. De generihus monachorum vel vita.
II. Qualis debeat esse abba.
III. De adJnbendis ad consilium fratrihus.
ƒ///. Que sint instrumenta honorum operum.
20 F. De oboedientia discipulorum qualis sit.

5. fortSsteptS, probably copied here by mistake by scribe, who must have seen
it a line lower down. Cf. infra, note to 1. 3 {hihtatS). 7- Jxerrihtc, of or a
not clear; first r, but for context, might have been put down as/, the I of ilico
being blende^ with it.

6. eonversationem, MS. conservationem. 7. pavore, MS. pavorcm. 9 0
of dilatato corr. from a. 19. Q of Que wrongly rubricated in the MS. as T),

Latin List of Chapters. [7

(120 b.) 7Y. De tacitumüate. |

VII. De humilitate.
VIIL De officiis diuinis in noctibvs.
IX. ■ Quanti psalmi dicendi sunt noctumis horis.

Qualifer aestatis tempore agatur noctuma laus. 5
XI. Qualiter dominicis diebus vigiliae agantur.

XII. Qualiter matutinorum sollempnitas agatur.

XIII. Qualiter privatis ditlus matutini agantur.
XIIII. Qualiter in s&ncivrum nataliciis vigilie agantur.

XV. Quihus temporibus alleluia dicatur. 10

XVI. Qualiter divina opera per diem agantur.
XVII. Quanti psalmi per easdem horas dicendi sunt.
XVIII. Quo ordine ij)si psalmi dicendi sunt.
XIX. De disciplina psallendi.

XX. De reverentia orationis. 15

XXI. De decanis monasterii qualis deheant esse.
XXII. Quomodo dormiant monachi.
XXIII. De excommunicatiom culparum.
XXV. Qualis debeat {esse) modus excommunicationis.
XXVI. De graviorihus culpis. 20

XXVII. De his qui sine jussione ahhatis [junguniur) excom-
municaiis..

XX VIII. Qualiter debeat abba sollicitus esse circa excommunicatos.
(121 a.) XXIX. De his qui sepius correpti non emendaverint. |

A\'A\'A". Si deheant iterum recipi fratres exeumtes de monasterio.
XXXI. Pueri minori œtate qualiter corripiantur ; 25

XXXII. De cellarario monasterii qualis sit ;
XXXIII. De ferramentis vel rebus monasterii ;
XXXIIII. Si quid debeat monachus y^roprium habere ;
XXXV. Si omnes aequaliter debeant necessaria accipere ;
XXXVI. De septimanariis coquine; 3c

19. XXV. Tliis is a mistake for XXIV, and the mistake is continned
throughout in this list, so that ch. XLIIII given lower down (De his qui
etc.), ought to be ch. XLIII. esse not in the MS. 21. XXVII. A word
erased after al)bal!s, ftTohahly Junguntur, wliich is therefore added in brackets.
22. XXVIII. communicatos, o of os corr. in MS. from i by writing 0 over i.
24. Scc(md e oi deheant above line.

8] Latin List of Chapters, continued.

XXXVII. De injirmis fratribus.

XXXVIII. De senibus vel infantibus.
XXXVIIII. De ebdomedario lectore.

XL. De mensura ciborum.
5 XLI. De mensura potus.

XLII. Quibus horis oporteat /ratres rejlcere.
XLIII. Ut jyost completorium nemo loquatur. et post cenam
ad lectionem audiendam ab omnibus occurratur;
XLIIIl. De Ms qui ad opus dei vel ad mensam tarde
{oceurrunt),

XLITII, De Ids qui excommunicantm quomodo satisfaciant.
10 XLV. De Ids gui fulluntur in monasterio.

XLVI. De his ^\'ui in lenibus rebus delinquuntm.
XLVII. De signijlcanda hora operis dei.
XL VIII. De opere manuum cotidiano.
XLV 11II. De observatiom quadragesime.
15 L. De fratribus qui longe ab oratorio laborant aut in

via sunt.

LI. De fratribus qui non longe satis projiciscuntur.
LII. De oratorio monasterii.
LIII. De hospitibus suscipiendis.

LI III. Ut non debeat monachus litteras vel eulogias suscipere.
20 LV. De vestiariis et caleiariis fratrum.

m

LVI. De mensa abbatis.
LVII. De artificibus monasterii.
LVIII. De disciplina mscipiendorum fratrum.
LVI III. De fdiis nobilium aut pauperum qui ojferuntur.
LX. De sacerdotibus qui voJuerint in monasteriishabitare.
LXI. De monachis peregrinis.
LXII. De sacerdotibus monasteni.

8. occiirrunt supplied here as the reading of all the MSS, used by Schröer.
Cf. A. Schröer, Die Winteney-Version der Regula S. Benedicti, p. Jo. "The
text of the Winteney Version (S = Schröer\'s C) has occurrerint, and our text
(fo. 146 b) has veni-unt. From XLIII down to tho closing of the bracket the
omission in flie MS. has been supplied from our text (corrected). 12.
XLVII. The heading for this chapter not being in our MS., it is supplied
from the readings of the other MS.; cf. Schröer, W. V., p. 96.

Four classes of monks: 1. Those who live under a rule; [9

2. Hermits;

LXIII. De ordine congregationis.

LXIIII. Be ordinando abbati.

LXV. De prepodt\'} monasterii.

LXVI. De ostiariis monasterii.

LXVII. De fratrihus in viam direetis. 5

LXVIII. Sifratri in2)ossibilia jubentur.)

[LX Villi.) ut in monasterio non présumât alter alterum defendere.

{LXX.) Ut non jx\'Gsumat 2>assim quisquam alium cedere.

{LXXI.) Ut ohoedientes sibi sint invicem fratres.

{LXXII.) De zelo bono quern dehent monaclii habere. lo

{LXXIII.) De eo quod non omnis justitie observatio in hac sit
régula constituta.

(121 b.) Expliciunt capitula. Tncipit liber Beaji Benedicti |

Abbatis. Pateis Eximi monaciioecrji/ Militum CiiE/sri.

De Genebibus. Eorum vel vita.

feower kynna [b.] [c.] beon [a.]sutol is
Monachorum quattuor genera esse manifestum est. 15

\\>œt forme mynstermainia -lœt is mynsterlic campieude [li.]
Primum coenohitarum hoc est monasteriale militans

nnder regule. oîSSe abbude. [b.] sySSan \\>œt oîSer kyn is
sub régula vel abbate-; Deinde secundum genus est

dan.* orsGclena ]><xt is wcstjjcnsetlena. [g.] })issera [li.] })aîSo na
anachoritarum id est heremitarum horum qui non

drohtnunge *wyhie mid niwum [p.] ac mid mynstres [o.]fadunge
conversationis fervore novitio ; sed monasterii pvobatione

[u.] *landsumere [h.] leornodon ongean ]7one deoful \' mrenigra
diutuma didicerunt contra diabolum muUorum 20

18. Before dan. erasure (see note). r/./>i$fcra added in margin, possibly by
the original glossator, 19. Read wyhnc. no midl c may liave been tliere,
but it has been made into first stroke of m, which now, by mistake, of course,
looks like m with four strokes, 20, Read lancsumere.

7. LXVIIII and following numbers are not in the MS,; nt in monasterio
etc., the title of ch. LXF////follows in our MS. directly after the ad mmsam
tarda of the title of ch. XLIIII, without a capital letter or rubric being used
for ut, so that it looks like one chapter. A page must have been skipped here,
12. Expi.iciunt, JIS. expljcit, 18, horum added in marg,, possibly by
glossator, 10. convcrsalionis, MS. conversionis.

10] 3. Sarabaites, who liv3 apart, following their own inclinations ;

[1.] mid fröre, eallunga gelserede [i.] winiian [q.] bene getyde
solacio jam docti jmgnare ; et bene instructi

of broSorlicere feerrEedene. to anfealdan gewinne westenes

fraterna ex aci\'e ad singularem imgnam heremi

georsorgi. ge buton frofre oSres mid anre [t.] hand
securi jam sine consolations alterius sola manu

[u.] oStSe [u.] earme agean leahtras flsesces [i.] oSSe gejjohta
vel hracldo contra mtia car-nis vel cogitatlonum,

gode gefultumiandum [v.] winnan [q.] y ni nihtsumiaS
5 deo auxiliante pugnare sufficiunt ;

pcet Jîridde [c.] [d.] pœt atelicost [b.] kiii [a.] sylfde-
Tertium vero monachorum teterrimum genus est. sarabai-

mera [a.] pa on senigum regole na afatidode uel oSSe afundennessa
tarum. qui nulla regula approbati experientia

lareowas [h.] [n.] [m.] ofenes. [n.] ahge . . des on gekynde
magistri sicut aurum fornacis; sed in plumbi natura

nexode [i.] J^a git. [r.] mid weorcum. healdende [o.] weorulde.
molliti adhuc operibùs servantes seculo

[p.] truwan. leogan. [b.] gode Jpurli scere [a.] sjnd acnawene
10 fidem. mentiri deo pev tonsuram noscuntur ;

]Da twyfealde J^reofealde oSSe soSes anlepie gangende ambulantes
Qui bini aut terni. aut certe singuli sine

butan hyrde hig on drihtenlicum heordum. ac lieora agenum
pastore, non dominicis sed suis

beclysde fore œ heom is gewilnunga. lust

inclusi ovilibus pvo lege eis est desideriorum voluptas.

ponn£ hi hwset wenaS tellaS oSSe geceosan pcet secgafj halig
cum quicquid putaverint vel elegerint. hoc dicunt sanctum

7 poet pc^t lii nella\'s peet 7 hi wenaS
15 ot quod noluerint. hoe putant

feorSe soSlice kin is [a.] pa:t is genemned witS

tum vero genus est monachornm quod nominatur gyro-

scrij)el J^a on eallon heora life geond misHce soiru j^rim

vagum. qui tota vita sua p&r diversas provincias. ternis

1. fröre, i. e. frofre, and see note on this word, bene, Latin copied into
gloss. 7. n in cenigum of irregular shi\\.pe. rel, Latin; see note.

11. gangende in the MS. is gloss to ambulantes, which has been put in by
glossator spontaneously. It is not found in the other texts. 17. Uncertain
whether scira or sciru.

2. Erasure after heremi ? 13. eis above the line. 16. est above the
line and erasure.

and, 4. The vagrant monks.—The Abbot is Christ\'s substitut3. [11

oSer feoweni dagum geond mistlicora Jpi\'nga hus cumliSiaS
aut quatemis diehus per diversorum cellas hospitantur

sefre worigende 7 nsefre staSolfaBste ageiium lustum
semper vagi et numqtiam stabiles, et pvopriis volup-

7 gyfernesse 7 forspenuigum J^eowgeiido geond ealle ]7inc
tatibus et gule illecehris servientes et per omnia

wursan Jjam sylfdenierum fiara enlra drolitnungc be Sajre
deteriores sarabaitis; De quorum omnium miserrima conver-

earmrestan betere bit is suwian jjonne sprecan. jjisum forlaitenum

satione melius est silere quam loqui; His ergo ommissis; 5
[c.] to [e.] mynstermanna [d.] "^at strengoste [d.] kyn

ad cenohiturum . fortissimum genus

[c.] gediliten [b.] fultuiniendmn [h.] [a.] uton cuman.
disponenium. adjuvante cZomiwo veniamus; Qvalis

debeat esse abbas. (CaP. IL)

se abbud seSe forabeon [d.] wyrSe is [e.] [f.] on mynstre [li.]
Abba qvi peeesse dignvs est monasterio. semper

gemunon [a.] sceal ])at he is gessed 7 naman o33fe [ni.]
meminisse dd>€t ^-uod cZicitur et nomen majoris 10

middajdum [m.] 7 gefyllan [k.] [e.] [b.] [li.] don
factis implere; Chr\'v&ii enim agere

[c.J spehniga [f.] [a.] he is *gely\'sfc t5a;nne his [i.]
vices in monasterio creditur. quando ipsius

he is geciged to forenaman secgendum [a.] [k.] [e.J go undcr-
vocatur pvonomine. dicentc apostolo; Acce-

fcngon gast gewyscednysse on tSam we cleopiatS

pisiis sjjiritum adoptionis ßliorum; in quo clamamua

arwurSa fa?der [a.] [a.] 7 forS [c.] naht [Ii.] butan [g.] bebode [g.]
abba pater; Ideóquc. abbas nihil extra preceptum 15

[g.] ]>a2t feorsi [h.] na sceall[h.] ocSSe lajran. [d.] [a.] oSSe
rfomiju quod absit debet aut docere. aut

gesettan [e.] oSSe [f.] hatian [f.] ahsi ha5s [b.] Iiis [b.] oSSe [c.]
constituere vel jubere. sed jussio ejus. vel

lar [c.] * hysn [0.] godcundro [e.] rilitwisncsse [e.] leornincg
doctrina. fermenturn divine justitiae in disci-

1. offer, read offffe ; feowerti, read12. Eead gchift. 18. lym,
read bijrma ( = beorma) ?

5. Er. of one letter (e ?) after evgo. 7. dum crossed oxit before -te of
adjuvante. 13. pro added afterward«.

12] The Abbot should teach only the precepts of the Lord, [Ch. II.

ctiihtas[g.] [dm.] [p.] ge|jancum geondsprecend niyudig fcig[a.]
pulorum meritibus conspergatur ; Memor sit

sefre [b.] pœt [u.] [e.] his lare [g.] [g.] oÖSe [h.] leorninc cnihta
semper, abbas quia doctrine sue vel discipvlorum

gehyrsumnesse [h.] œghwsetSera [k.] [k.] on Ö\'am egesfullan [l.j
oboedientiae. utrarumqvA rerum in tremendo

dome [1.] gode to donne he[e.] is he[e.] is[e.] o3âe [f.] 7 wite [a.]
judicio dei. facienda erit ] er\'it discusio. Sciatque (122 b.)

se abbod [b.] gyltes [d.] byrdes onsigan [c.] [f.] swa hwœt on

5 abba culpe pastoris incumbere quicquid in
sceapum [g.] se hiredes ealdor [g.] nytwyitSnesse hwonlicor swa

ovibus paterfamilias- utüitatis minus potuerit

mseg gemetan swa micel [d.] eft [d.] * srig [c.] he biS gif unstilre
invenire) \'Tantum iterum liber erit. si inquieto

otStSe ungebyrsumude [g.] hyrde [e.] eelc. [f.] geornfulnyssa
vel inohoedienti gregi pastoris fuerit omnis diligentia

biS forgifen 7 gif adiigum [c.] heora [c.] dtedum [c,] call [b.]
attributa. et morbidis earum actibus universa

by® [a.] [b.] gyraan gegearcod liyrde [e.] lieora [e.] on dome [g.]
\'o fuerit cura exhibita. pastor eorum in judicio

drihtnes tolysed [f.] ut *\\>œt *ece mid J)am witigan
doïor.ni absolutus dicat cum propheta dommo ;

[b.] J>ine rihtwisnysse [b.] ic ne be bydde on minre hecrtan
Justitiam tuam non abscondidi in corde meo.

J)iiie [e.] soSfsestnesse [e.] 7 halwendan [f.] [f.] Jjinre ic saede
veritatem tuam et salutare tuum dixi.

big [g.] forhicgende [h.] forsawon [g.] 7 [a.] }>onne [b.]
ipsi autem ccntempnentes spreverunt me. Et tunc

set nyxtan [e.] uugehyrsuman gymene [f.] bis [f.] sceapum to wito
\'5 demum inoboedientibus cure suae ovibus: pena

[a.] biS heoni swySrenda sesylva [c.] [c.] deaS [b.] poixne
sit eis prevalens ipsa mors; Ergo cum

œnig [g.] underfehS [f.] naman [i.] [h.] J^aîs abbodes. on twyfeald
aliquis suscipit nomen abbatis. ■ dupplici

I. dm stands above g, p under g, both to the right. See note on geond-
uprecend. 7. srig, read friij. ll. «< in line of gloss by hand of glossator,
/at ece, i. e./ ece, read secce ?

10. MS. earum, an 0 above the a, which does not seem to me to be
one of the \'paving\' letters, but a correction by glossator of earum into
eorum.

i

by deeds rather than by words. [13

he sceal [a.] lare [e.] his [d.] leorn [e.] [c.] forebeoii i. ciiihtuiii
debet doctrina suis preesse discipulis.

\\>mt is ealle [b.] godu. [b.] 7 haiige middsedum [e.] swySor
id est omnia bona ct sancta /actis amplius

J^asnne [f.] [f.] mid -wordum he atiwlge angitfullum leorniccnihtum
quam verbis ostendat; ut capacibn^ discijndis

beboda [i.] mid wordum [k.] his foresette [g.] }>am heard

mandatöL cJomim verbis pixponat. duris vero

heortan [d.] bilehwitum mid his [c.] dseilum [c.] ]?a godcundan
corde et simplicioribus factis suis divina 5

beboda [b.] lie geswuteliatS ealle ]?inc. [b,] ]>e leorninccnihtum.
precepta demonstret; Omnia vero que discipulis

he lajrajcS beon [h.] wiSrsede on Iiis dsedum he gebicnige na
docuerit esse contraria in suis factis indicet non
to donne pat oSrum bodiende [in.] he sjlf [k.] wiSercora
agenda ne aliis predicans ipse reprobus

ne si gemett ]>a:t ahwenne him na secge fc.] syngendum
inveniatur nequando Uli dicat dms peccanti.

to livvi na Su oySst rilitwisnyssa mine 7 J)u underfoehst
Quare tu enarras justitias meas. et assumis 10

gewitnysse mine J>urh J)inne muS ^u hatodest steore
testammtum meum per os tuum Tu, vero odisti disciplinam

7 Su awurpe sprajca mine ^bestände 7 ])a ge on breSer J)ine3
) et projecisti sermones meos post te et qui in fraivis tui
ege mot gcsawe on Sinon ege beain ne gesawe b^i l^i
oculo festucam videbas. in tuo trabem non vidisti ;
[a.] Na si [c.] fram him [b.J had on mynstre [d.] [a.] asyndrod
A^on ab eo persona in monasterio discematur.

na si an swiSor gelufod mid goduni dsedum oSSe gehyrsum-
7ion unus plus amctar bonis actibus aut oboedi- 15

nesse *a;nne oSer butan ]3ane])e he met beteran ne si
entia quam alius nisi quem invenerit meliorem; Non

forasett se oaSelborenne ]3eowdome ge [c.] cyrrendum [e.] buton
preponatur ingenuus ex servitio convertenti. nisi

1. leorn, which belongs to cnihtum, has been put before foreheon. For
leorninccniht ? .12. tSu not quite clear, a stroke running through ff
and along the top of the «, making it look like a. lestande, read lejlan
Se. 16. W7ine, read Jxsnne.

12. weos, MS. 7npo. jiosi <e, MS. jiOff^e. 15. bonis,\'MS. acitoiiis ] clearly
jlhe scribe\'s eye was caught by the next word.

14] In Christ all are equal: the Abbot to have no partialities.

wenunga sum gesceadwislic [f.] intinga [e.] wunige Jjoei [a.]
forte aliqua mtionahilis causa existât ; Quod

gif biö rihtvvisnesEe dihteudre [c.] J)am [b.] abbude sewen ge. [a-]
si ita justitia dictante ahhati visum fuerit.

fg.] be sumere be sendebyrdnesse \\œt [b.] liedo elles
et de cujus libel ordine id faciat; Sin alias ;

agenre [a.] higehealdan [b.] stowa forSam SAva ]?eowa [g.] [b.] swa
propria teneant loca. quia sive servus sive

fiœc[h.] ealle [d.] on chris^e an. [e.] Ipe we sin[a.] 7 under ane
S liber ; omnes in chriaio unum sumus. et sub uno

dribtene gelicne [b.] J^eowdomes ca?n. dom [b.] 7 we aberat5 for\'Çam
(Zoinmo œqualem servitutis militiam hajulamus. quia

]3ü *]3e is mid gode *bada *anstangynnes [b.] an [b.]
non est apud drnm pdvsonarum acceptio ; Soliim modo

[a.] Sisum dœle [c.] mid him [d.] he tosyndni]? gif beteran
in hae parte apud ipsum discernimur. Si meliores

oSnnn [b.] [h.] on goduj?4 weoi-cum [b.] 7 eadraodren we beocS
cdiis in o^eribus bonis et humiliores inveni-

geinette gelic [b.J [a.] si fram him [g.] eallum [d.J [k.J soîSlul\'u
10 amur; Ergo equalis sit ab eo omnibus karilas ;
au sigegearcod on eallum Eefter[b.] gearnunge steor[f.]
Una prebeatur in omnibus sccundum mérita disciplina; In
lare [b.] witodlice on bis se abbod [e.] apostolice [a.] sceall
doctrina namqne sua abbas upostolicam debet