Page images

some satisfaction to know the original locality of this MS.: it would be a still greater satisfaction if more could be ascertained about Brithwold. If we suppose him to be the same Brithwold who was bishop of Sherborne from A.D. 1006 to 10461, we might conclude that the MS. was written before A.D. 1006. Wanley dates it a little before the conquest; Dr Bosworth puts it about A,D. 995, or between A.D. 990 and 1030. We may very safely date it, in round numbers, about A. D. 1000. A.D. Wanley suggests that it was copied from one a little older. Whence he derived the notion is not apparent, yet it is almost certain that the Corpus, Bodley, and Cotton MSS. had all a common origin.

II. THE CAMBRIDGE MS.-MS. Ii. 2. 11 in the Cambridge University Library, described by Wanley, p. 152, and in the Catalogue of Cambridge University Library MSS. Vol. II. p. 384. It is a folio volume, on vellum, containing 402 pages of about 23 lines each. Its contents are :—

(a) The four Gospels in Anglo-Saxon, with numerous rubrics, directing when certain portions are to be read.

(b) An Anglo-Saxon translation of the Pseudo-Gospel of Nicodemus. Printed by Thwaites, at the end of his Heptateuchus, published in 1698. There is another copy of this in MS. Cotton Vitellius A. XV. hom. III. (Wanley, p. 218) which is imperfect at the beginning. Junius made a transcript of the Cambridge copy, and collated it with the Cotton MS. The results of the collation are printed by Thwaites, on the last page of his volume. Junius's transcript is now in the Bodleian Library, marked Jun. 74, and is described by Wanley, p. 96. There is also an abbreviated copy of the same story in MS. Cott. Vespasian D. XIV. hom. XXXIII. (Wanley, p. 204). It may perhaps here be worth while to remark a circumstance which seems to have escaped the observation of the editor, viz. that there is a considerable hiatus in the story in the MSS. between the words "nan oder ne dorste" and "Da was hym dær neh sum wer standende," 1. 5, p. 6, in Thwaites. The whole account of Christ's crucifixion is omitted. A note to this effect has, at my suggestion, been made in the Cambridge MS. As the omission there occurs in the middle of a page, it is very probable that the narrative was copied from an older MS. which had lost a few leaves.

(c) The embassy of Nathan the Jew to Tiberius Cæsar, together with the legend of St Veronica; also in Anglo-Saxon. Printed among the Publications of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society; edited by C. W. Goodwin, M.A. Cambridge, 1851; entitled "Anglo-Saxon legends of St Andrew and St Veronica." A fragment of the same story is contained in six leaves at the end of MS. C. C. C.

1 Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. Thorpe, ii. 253. But this Brihtwold is said to have been a monk of Glastonbury; Godwin, de Præsul. Ang. Comment. p. 335.

2 This MS. forms the basis of the text edited by Thorpe, whose account of the MSS. is inaccurate.

3 Or early in 1699. The date is printed 'An. Dom. MDCXCVIII.' I have a copy in which the owner's name and the date 1698 are written on the fly-leaf. Dr. Bosworth's copy has-'Imprimatur, Joh. Meare, Vice-Can. Oxon. Dec. 27, 1697.'

D. 5 (now No. 196) described in Wanley, p. 109; and the former part of it, concerning Nathan's embassy, is also found in MS. Cott. Vesp. D. 14. hom. XXXV. ; Wanley, p. 204. .

At the back of the leaf containing the last few words of this text is the manumission of a certain Reinold, consisting of only a few lines. Wanley prints the whole of it. See also Thorpe's Diplom. Angl. Ævi Sax. p. 622.

It once

Various notes in the MS.-printed by Wanley-tell us its history. belonged to Bishop Leofric, and was given by him to the Church of St Peter the Apostle in Exeter. In 1566, it was given by Gregory Dodde, dean of Exeter, with the consent of his brethren, to Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, who afterwards gave it to the University of Cambridge in 1574. There can hardly be a doubt that this is the identical volume which is mentioned in the catalogue of Leofric's gifts to St Peter's church in the terms: "I. Englisc Cristes boc;" i. e. one copy of the Gospels in English'. Leofric was bishop of Devonshire and Cornwall from about 1046 to 1073. Wanley puts the date of the MS. at about the time of the Norman conquest, but it is probably a little earlier; and we safely assign to it the locality Exeter, and the date about A.D. 1050. It appears to be very accurately written throughout. In the footnotes to the first column it is denoted by the letter A.

III. THE BODLEY MS.-MS. Bodley NE. F. 3. 15, now Bodley 441; described by Wanley, p. 643. It is a folio volume, on vellum, containing 194 leaves. But it must be particularly noted that some of these must have been supplied from the Corpus MS. by Parker's direction in imitation of the old writing, and are valueless. I may mention in particular leaves 57-62, containing Mark i. 1 to iv. 37; leaf 90, containing the last three verses of St Luke; and leaves 192-194, John xx. 9 to the end. Accordingly it will be found that the various readings marked B. in the footnotes to the first 32 pages of this volume are mostly records of blunders. Nothing seems to be known of its history except that it was once in all probability in the possession of Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury. This is rendered probable by the way in which several rubrics have been copied into it from the Cambridge MS. But internal evidence proves its extremely close connection with the Corpus and Cotton MSS., and renders it absolutely certain that these three MSS. are copies from a common original. The Bodley MS. e. g. frequently uses the same contractions as the Corpus MS. in the same places. Throughout page 112 (ch. xiv. 13—22) it only has one different reading, viz. pas for pa in v. 13. The only other variations of any kind on this page are, that it has "him" for the contracted form "hi" four times; also "sittendum" and "twelfum" for "sittendū"

1 Wanley, p. 80; Thorpe, Dipl. Angl. Ævi Saxon, p. 430. 2 Anglo-Saxon Chron. ed. Thorpe, ii. 287; Conybeare's Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon Poetry, p. 198.

3 This MS. forms the basis of the text edited by Junius and Marshall. Parker's edition follows it closely throughout.

and “twelfù”, and, conversely, "su" for "sum"; also "Soplice", "ge-sylþ”, “cweðan”, "Da", for "Sodlice", "gesyld", "cwepan", and "pa"; it accents "án" in v. 18, and puts a stop after "bræc" in v. 22.

The connection between the Bodley and Cotton MSS. is closer still, the former being a mere duplicate of the latter; and hence, in the various readings towards the end of the volume, the letters B. and C. are almost always found together. It follows that the text of the Bodley MS. is as good as that of the Cotton MS., and the remarks of Mr Thorpe in his short preface to his "Anglo-Saxon version of the Holy Gospels" are made at random. He was probably misled by observing some of the mistakes which are to be found in those pages of the Bodley MS. which are written in a modern hand. For example, in i. 43, the word bead (bade) is written bend in the spurious page of the Bodley MS., and is so printed in Parker's edition. Another error, mine modor for min modor, occurs in iii. 34, both in the spurious page of the MS. and in Parker's edition. But such errors must not be allowed to depreciate overmuch the value of such pages of the MS. as are genuine.

In the Bodley MS. the words are commonly written very closely together, and some few words are retained which the Corpus MS. omits. Yet it does not appear that this MS. is really older than the Corpus; on the contrary, it is generally regarded as of later date. The handwriting is certainly not that of Elfric, the scribe of the Corpus MS. In the footnotes to the first column it is denoted by

the letter B.

IV. THE COTTON MS.-MS. Cotton Otho C. 1, in the British Museum; described by Wanley, pp. 211, 212. Very little use seems to have been made of this MS.: it was not consulted by Marshall, and Dr Bosworth gives only one or two readings from it, yet it might be of service for the correction of the texts of St Luke and St John. I quote at length Dr Bosworth's excellent description'.

"A minute description is given of it by Wanley in 1704 [1705], when it was in a perfect state from Mat. xxvii. 6. It was so much injured by the fire, which destroyed many of Sir Robert Cotton's MSS. on the 23rd of Oct. 1731, that what was defective only as far as Matt. xxvii. 6 before that calamity, afterwards looked like a charred mass. Planta, in his Catalogue of the Cotton MSS., describes it as 'once consisting of 290 leaves, but now (1802) so much burnt and contracted as to render the binding of it impracticable.' It was fortunately kept in a case and what was found impracticable by Mr Planta, has been effected under the careful superintendence of Sir Frederic Madden, by whose judicious arrangements many MSS. have been restored, and made accessible to the public. The smallest part of this burnt mass has been carefully mounted on thick folio paper, which is cut away in

1 The Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels; pref. p. xiv.

the middle to fit the injured vellum, and made fast by transparent paper, gummed to the edges of the paper and the vellum; the MS. can, therefore, be easily read on both sides. It is now bound in two large folio volumes. Sir Frederic Madden tells us that twenty-five folios are lost since Wanley described it. The first small fragment of this MS. now remaining is from folio 26, which Sir F. Madden has marked as part of St Mark vii. 22. Such a note deserves the best thanks of all who consult the MS., as it saves much of their time. The fragments increase a little in size from folio 26 to 38. St Luke is nearly complete, and occupies fol. 39-93. St John fills fol. 95-135, and is nearly perfect, especially in the latter part. There are not any rubrical directions, and only a few badly formed capital letters of a dingy red colour in this MS." It is unnecessary to describe the other contents of this MS., as Wanley explains that they have been brought together by a bookbinder, though written by different hands and at different times. But it may be observed that between the Gospels of St Luke and St John is inserted a charter relating to Aldhelm, abbot of Malmesbury in Wiltshire, who was afterwards bishop of Sherborne, in the time of Ine of Wessex, about A.D. 7051. This hint may serve to connect the MS. with the locality of Malmesbury, whilst its internal evidence connects it with the Corpus MS. written at Bath, and even still more closely with the Bodley MS. It is supposed to be coeval with the Corpus MS. In connection with the present work, it is obviously of great importance to explain in full how much of St Mark is left. The following fragments of parts of verses and passages can be read with tolerable ease.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Fol. 32 b. Fr. of C. xii. v. 10-16.

Fol. 33. Fr. of C. xiv. v. 17—25.

[All the foregoing are mere fragments, with hardly a single complete line.]

C. xiv. v. 27 and 28 complete, but hardly legible in some places. Two words of v. 29: Da sæde.

Fol. 33 b. Fr. of C. xiv. v. 30—38, whole of v. 39, part of v. 40.

Fol. 34. Fr. of C. xiv. v. 41-48, whole of v. 49 and 50, part of v. 51.

Fol. 346. Fr. of C. xiv. v. 53–62, whole of v. 63, part of v. 64.

Fol. 35. Fr. of C. xiv. v. 65-72 (the last verse nearly

whole); C. xv. v. 1, nearly whole.

Fol. 35 b. Fr. of C. xv. v. 2—15.

Fol. 36. Fr. of C. xv. v. 16-25 (verse 20 is nearly whole); v. 26—28 whole; part of v. 29.

Fol. 36 b. Fr. of C. xv. v. 30—32; whole of v. 33; fr. of

v. 34 and 35; verses 36-39 nearly whole; beginning of

v. 40.
Fol. 37.
Fol. 37 b.
Fol. 38.

1 Beda, Eccl. Hist. lib. v. cap. xviii.

Fr. of C. xv. v. 40—xvi. 2.

Fr. of C. xvi. v. 2—11.
Fr. of C. xvi. v. 12-20.

Owing to the very fragmentary character of these passages, and its very close agreement with the text, the various readings recorded from it in the first column (where it is denoted by the letter C.) are very few. By an oversight, none were recorded before the beginning of Chapter XII. Before this point the various readings are only these, viz. P. 60. viii. 6 hig [for last hi].-P. 62. viii. 20. seofan. 21. om. ge. 22. anne.-P. 72. ix. 33. smeada.-P. 76. x. 2. fandiende. 5. heardnysse. 6. wæpned 7 wimman.-P. 78. 18. hi [for hwi].-P. 80. 27. hig. 29. us [for hus]. 30. ecce.-P. 86. xi. 6. hig (twice). Compare the table of Errata at the end of this volume.

V. THE HATTON MS.-This MS., formerly marked Hatton 65, is now marked Hatton 38; it is now in the Bodleian Library, at Oxford, and is described by Wanley, p. 76. It is a neat volume, the leaves of which measure 91 by 6 inches, containing the four gospels, written in an exceeding uniform, upright, and clear hand, but of rather a late date, about the time of Henry II. The Gospels are arranged in the following order :-Mark, Luke, Matthew, and John. It is interesting as shewing how the language began to lose strength in its inflectional forms, as is at once apparent by comparing it with the older text here printed beside it. The rubrics. occurring in it are printed in the right-hand margin. It formerly belonged to the Rev. John Parker, son to Archbishop Parker, whose name-Johēs parker-is written on the back of a fly-leaf. One leaf having been lost," the missing portion (Luke xvi.) was "restored" by Mr Parker.

VI. THE ROYAL MS. This MS. is now in the Royal Library at the British Museum, where its class-mark is Bibl. Reg. 1 A. xiv. It is described by Wanley, p. 181. It is somewhat older than the Hatton MS., and was probably written in the time of Stephen. It contains 175 leaves, each measuring about 81 by 5 inches. 52 Leaves 3-173 are occupied by the Gospels, and contain about 25 lines on a page. The leaves at the beginning and end seem to have formed part of a Latin missal.


The handwriting is in singular contrast to that of the Hatton MS., being bold, hasty, and rough. It may seem fanciful, but it gives the impression of having been written in troublous times, when the object was rather to have a copy for ready use than to spend time in elaborating it. The general agreement of it with the Hatton MS. is very close, excepting that it preserves more archaic forms; and it contains nearly the same rubrics in the same places. It appears by collation that the Hatton MS. was actually copied from it by a scribe who had plenty of leisure. All doubt on the subject is removed by observing that the last seven verses of St Mark's Gospel, omitted by the scribe of the Royal MS., are supplied in it by the scribe of the Hatton MS. in his usual neat hand and with his peculiar spelling. This interesting fact seems never to have been hitherto observed. It proves, moreover, that the scribe of the Hatton MS. had access to some other MS. besides the Royal. The Gospels are in the order-Mark, Matthew, Luke, and

« PreviousContinue »