¹ On Theodore in general see Browne, G. F., Theodore and Wilfrith (London, 1897), esp. pp. 81–99 and 175–84Google Scholar; Deanesly, M., The Pre-Conquest Church in England, 2nd ed. (London, 1963), pp. 104–59Google Scholar; Bolton, W. F., A History of Anglo-Latin Literature I: 597–740 (Princeton, NJ, 1967), pp. 58–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Brooks, N., The Early History of the Church of Canterbury (Leicester, 1984), pp. 71–6 and 94–8Google Scholar. On Theodore's alleged training at Athens, see Cook, A. S., ‘Theodore of Tarsus and Gislenus of Athens’, PQ 2 (1923), 1–25Google Scholar. It should be noted that Theodore's presumed training at Athens is based on a later statement in a letter of Pope Zacharias (Ep. lxxx) dated 748: ‘Theodorus greco-latinus ante philosophus et Athenis eruditus Romae ordinatus’ (S. Bonifatii et Lullii Epistolae, ed. M. Tangl, MGH, Epist. Sel. 1 (Berlin, 1916), 173). Although Zacharias was himself a Greek by birth, his remark probably means no more than that Theodore possessed some Greek literary training. Theodore's Greek background would better be illuminated by study of the various Eastern (Greek-speaking) monastic communities which settled as refugees in Rome in the mid-seventh century, such as that at the Tre Fontane (ad aquas Salvias), which preserved relics of the Persian martyr Anastasius (see below, n. 28): see Ferrari, G., Early Roman Monasteries (Vatican City, 1957), pp. 33–48Google Scholar, and Michel, A., ‘Die griechischen Klostersiedlungen zu Rom bis zur Mitte des 11. Jahrhunderts’, Ostkirchliche Studien 1 (1952), 32–45, at 41 and nn. 90 and 91.Google Scholar

² On Hadrian's African background, see the speculative comments of Cook, A. S., ‘Hadrian of Africa, Italy and England’, PQ 2 (1923), 241–58Google Scholar; on the identity of Hadrian's monastery, described by Bede as monasterio Hiridano quod est non longe a Neapoli Campaniae (HE IV. 1), see Poole, R. L., ‘Monasterium Niridanum’, EHR 36 (1921), 540–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ HE iv. 2 (Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, ed. Colgrave, B. and Mynors, R. A. B. (Oxford, 1969), p. 332Google Scholar): ‘congregata discipulorum caterua scientiae salutaris cotidie flumina inrigandis eorum cordibus emanabant’.

⁴ ibid. (ed. Colgrave and Mynors, p. 334): ‘indicio est quod usque hodie supersunt de eorum discipulis, qui Latinam Graecamque linguam ut propriam in qua nati sunt norunt’.

⁵ ibid. praef. (Albinus), iv.23 (Oftfor), v.3 (John of Beverley) and v.23 (Tobias).

⁶ Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ehwald, R., MGH, Auct. Antiq. 15 (Berlin, 1919), 478 (no. 2)Google Scholar; Aldhelm: the Prose Works, trans. M. Lapidge and M. Herren (Cambridge, 1979), pp. 153–4.

⁷ Hadrian's influence has been suspected in the Campanian pericope-lists found in several early English (Northumbrian) gospel-books such as the ‘Lindisfarne Gospels’ (London, British Library, Cotton Nero D. iv) and BL Royal 1.B. VII. In each case the pericope-lists precede each gospel. The Campanian origin of these lists is indicated by the presence in them of the feast (with vigil) of St Januarius, the patron saint of Naples: see Morin, G., ‘La liturgie de Naples au temps de Saint Grégoire’, RB 8 (1891), 481–93 and 529–37Google Scholar; Gamber, K., ‘Die kampanische Lektionsordnung’, Sacris Erudiri 13 (1962), 326–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Codices Liturgici Latini Antiquiores, 2nd ed. (Freiburg, 1968), pp. 226–30 (esp. nos. 405–6); and Willis, G. G., Further Essays in Early Roman Liturgy (London, 1968), pp. 214–19Google Scholar. The connection, though suggestive, cannot as yet be proved; and one might add that the link would seem stronger if the gospel-books in question were from Canterbury rather than Northumbria.

⁸ Vita S. Wilfridi, ch. 43 (The Life of Bishop Wilfrid by Eddius Stephanus, ed. Colgrave, B. (Cambridge, 1927), p. 88).Google Scholar

⁹ The poem has frequently been ptd; see esp. Liebermann, F., ‘Reim neben Alliteration im Anglolatein um 680’, ASNSL 141 (1921), 234.Google Scholar

¹⁰ On early Anglo-Latin octosyllables, see my remarks in ‘Some Remnants of Bede's Lost Liber epigrammatum’, EHR 90 (1975), 798–820, at 817–19.

¹¹ See further my remarks in ‘A Seventh-Century Insular Latin Debate Poem on Divorce’, CMCS 10 (1985), 1–23, at 8–12.

¹² The poems are listed by Schaller, D. and Könsgen, E., Initia Carminum Latinorum saeculo undecimo Antiquiorum (Göttingen, 1977), nos. 2283, 6189 and 14640 respectivelyGoogle Scholar; they are ptd Kuypers, A. B., The Prayer Book of Aedeluald the bishop commonly called the Book of Cerne (Cambridge, 1902), pp. 132, 124 and 131–2Google Scholar respectively, and Analecta Hymnica Medii Aevi, ed. Dreves, G. M. and Blume, C., 55 vols. (Leipzig, 1886–1922) LI, 301Google Scholar (no. 230), 301–2 (no. 231) and 299–300 (no. 229) respectively.

¹³ See Baesecke, G., Das lateinisch-althochdeutsche Reimgebet (Carmen ad Deum) und das Rätsel vom Vogel federlos (Berlin, 1948), pp. 9–24.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Gottschaller, E., Hugeburc von Heidenheim (Munich, 1973), p. 15.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Lapidge, ‘A Seventh-Century Insular Latin Debate Poem’.

¹⁶ The origins of trochaic octosyllables are not well understood. Bearing in mind Theodore's Greek background, it is possible that some light on this problem may come from understanding Greek rhythmical verse of the sixth and seventh centuries (though it should be stressed that Greek verse with lines of an equal number of syllables is extremely rare before AD 1000 or so): see Meyer, W., ‘Anfang und Ursprung der lateinischen und griechischen rythmischen Dichtung’, in his Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur mittellateinischen Rythmik, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1905–1936) 11, 1–201, esp. 51–62Google Scholar, and ‘Lateinische Rythmik und byzantinische Strophik’, ibid. 111, 98–118, esp. 106–10.

¹⁷ The standard edition of all the various recensions of Theodore's indicia is that by Finsterwalder, P., Die Canones Theodori Cantuariensis und ihre Uberlieferungsformen (Weimar, 1929)Google Scholar; unfortunately Finsterwalder never published his planned second volume of commentary on Theodore's sources. See also Liebermann, F., ‘Zur Herstellung der Canones Theodori Cantuariensis’, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte 43 (Kanonistische Abteilung 12) (1912), 387–409Google Scholar; Le Bras, G., ‘Notes pour servir à l'histoire des collections canoniques: V. ludicia Theodori’, Revue historique de droit français et étranger 4th ser. 10 (1931), 95–115Google Scholar; Levison, W., ‘Zu den Canones Theodori Cantuariensis’, in his Aus rheinischer und fränkischer Frühzeit (Düsseldorf, 1948), pp. 295–303Google Scholar; Kottje, R., Handwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte 3 (1982), 1413–16Google Scholar, s.v. ‘Paenitentiale Theodori’; and Frantzen, A. J., The literature of Penance in Anglo-Saxon England (New Brunswick, NJ, 1983), pp. 62–78.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, p. 287.

¹⁹ An Eadbald presbiter witnesses the confirmation made at the council of Clovesho in 716 (Sawyer, P. H., Anglo-Saxon Charters: an Annotated List and Bibliography (London, 1968), no. 22)Google Scholar and one Eadberht, abbot of an unidentified monastery in Wessex, witnesses charters dated 688 and 704 (Sawyer, ibid. nos. 235 and 245).

²⁰ Sawyer, Anglo-Saxon Charters, nos. 54 and 1175.

²¹ Sweet, H., The Oldest English Texts, EETS o.s. 83 (Oxford, 1885), 159, line 191;Google Scholar cf. also the names Eda (p. 166, line 478) and Eota (p. 159, line 205).

²² Vita S. Gregorii, ch. 12 (The Earliest Life of Gregory the Great, ed. Colgrave, B. (Lawrence, Kansas, 1968), p. 94Google Scholar): ‘post hunc in gente nostra, que dicitur Humbrensium, Eduinus …’.

²³ Bede in his Historia ecclesiastica does not use the word (H)umbrenses, although the word Nordanhymbri is used some 58 times (see Jones, P. F., A Concordance to the Historia Ecclesiastica (Cambridge, Mass., 1929))Google Scholar; Bede does, however, refer to those peoples ‘quae ad Boream Humbri fluminis inhabitant’ (HE 1.15). It would appear from this that Nordanhymbri were distinguished from Hymbri or (H)umbrenses, the former referring to Bernicians, the latter to Deirans; and this distinction in turn has some bearing on the origins of the discipulus Umbrensium.

²⁴ Cf. for example the words ut me in illorum agone Xristo pro uobis agonotheta certantem (Die Canones Theodori, cd. Finsterwalder, p. 334) with Aldhelm, prose Devirginitate, ch. 2 (Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ehwald, p. 230, lines 5–7); studio laboris desudare (ibid.) with Aldhelm, prose De virginitate, ch. 29 (ibid. p. 267, lines 14–15: in practicae conuersationis studio desudans), and the unusual word suggillare, also employed by Aldhelm in his Letter to Heahfrith (Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ehwald, p. 493, line 13).

²⁵ Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, p. 334; cf. the words legum lator largus dator in the poem; cf. also Augustine, Enarrationes in psalmos: ‘fecit reum lex, liberauit lator legis, lator enim legis imperator est’ (PL 37, 1698).

²⁶ Also relevant here is the evidence of Cologne, Dombibliothek 213, discussed below, p. 66. Recall, too, that of Theodore's students Oftfor had studied at Whitby and Hartlepool before going to Canterbury, and that John of Beverley was from Whitby (HE iv.23).

²⁷ The saint in question is St Miles, bishop of Susa in Persia, commemorated on 15 November; see Das altenglische Martyrologium, ed. Kotzor, G., 2 vols., Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Abhandlungen, phil.-hist. Klasse n.s. 88 (Munich, 1981) 11, 251 and 370Google Scholar. Christopher Hohler points out to me that there is no surviving Latin vita of St Miles, although accounts in Syriac and Greek exist, and that St Miles is commemorated in the Greek Synaxarion; Theodore, therefore, was possibly the agent by which knowledge of this saint was transmitted to England.

²⁸ Bede reports (HE v.24) that he corrected as best he could a librum uitae et passionis sancti Anastasii male de Greco translatum, and Bede's revision has recently been conjecturally identified by Franklin, C. V. and Meyvaert, P., ‘Has Bede's Version of the Passio S. Anastasii come down to us in BHL 408?’, AB 100 (1982), 373–400Google Scholar. It has been suggested that Theodore was the agent for the transmission of this vita to England and that he himself was formerly monk of the Greek monastery of S. Anastasio (ad aquas Salvias) in Rome: see Berschin, W., Griechisch-lateinisches Mittelalter: von Hieronymus zu Nikolaus von Kues (Bern and Munich, 1980), p. 115 and above, n. 1.Google Scholar

²⁹ It was first noted by Bishop, Edmund (Liturgica Historica (Oxford, 1918), pp. 137–48)Google Scholar that, although the Greek version of the litany was copied in the tenth century, its presence in England as early as the second half of the eighth century is guaranteed by the fact that a Latin translation of it is found in BL Royal 2. A. XX (? Worcester, s. viii²), 26r–v. It is known (from the Liber pontificalis) that Pope Sergius (687–701) was the first to introduce the Agnus Dei (with its accompanying litanies) into the mass; since he was an exact contemporary of Theodore and was, like Theodore, a Greek-speaking native of Syria, there may be grounds for suspecting that it was Theodore who first brought this Greek litany to England. The Greek text is ptd Badcock, F. J., ‘A Portion of an early Anatolian Prayerbook’, JTS 33 (1931–1932), 167–80Google Scholar; see further Knopp, G., ‘Sanctorum nomina seriatim: die Anfänge der Allerheiligenlitanei und ihre Verbindung mit den Laudes regiae’, Römische Quartalschrift für christliche Altertumskunde und Kirchengeschichte 65 (1970), 185–231, at 193–207.Google Scholar

³⁰ HE v.3 (ed. Colgrave and Mynors, p. 460): ‘memini enim beatae memoriae Theodorum archiepiscopum dicere, quia periculosa sit satis illius temporis flebotomia, quando et lumen lunae et reuma oceani in cremento est’.

³¹ Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, p. 325: ‘leporem licet comedere et bonum est pro desinteria et fel eius miscendum est cum pipero pro dolore’.

³² See Beccaria, A., I codici di medicina del periodo presalernitano, Storia e letteratura 35 (Rome, 1956), 364–8 (no. 129)Google Scholar. The manuscript is composite; only pp. 185–368 are in question here.

³³ Sigerist, H. E., Studien und Texte zur frühmittelalterlichen Rezeptliteratur, Studien zur Geschichte der Medizin 13 (Leipzig, 1923), 78–9.Google Scholar

³⁴ Other texts in the St Gallen manuscript would need to be considered: on p. 279 is a brief treatise on weights and measures (weights and measures are a principal concern in the glossaries associated with Theodore's school at Canterbury: see below, p. 61), and on pp. 297–8 is a treatise on the optimum times for blood-letting (inc. ‘Qualis tempus est utilis ad sanguinem minuendum’), which recalls Theodore's opinions on that subject cited above, n. 30. Treatises such as these, however, are commonplace in medical manuscripts.

³⁵ The attribution of medical recipes is not straightforward. Sigerist (Studien und Texte, p. 17, n. 1) refers to several recipes attributed to Adrianus and it is usually assumed that their author is the Roman emperor Hadrian, though on inconclusive grounds. Similarly, medical writings by the fourth-century Roman physician Theodorus Priscianus circulated widely in the middle ages; his Euporista contain many recipes, and he could well be the author of the recipe in question (see further Meyer, T., Theodorus Priscianus und die römische Medizin (Wieshaden, 1957))Google Scholar. Nevertheless the matter deserves investigation.

³⁶ Becker, G., Catalogi Bibliothecarum Antiqui (Bonn, 1885), pp. 85–6Google Scholar: ‘liber de abusivis. interrogationes sancti Augustini de questionibus fidei. exemplar fidei sancti Hieronymi presbyteri et symbolum quod composuit Theodorus archiepiscopus Britanniae insulae et liber Gregorii Nazianzeni. in uno codice’.

³⁷ See Kelly, J. N. D., Early Christian Creeds, 3rd ed. (London, 1972), pp. 102–4Google Scholar. I leave out of question here the so-called ‘Athanasian Creed’, which was certainly known in early Anglo-Saxon England, for a copy is found in Leningrad Q. v. I. 15, a manuscript associated with, and possibly copied by, Boniface.

³⁸ Recall that the litanies in these two manuscripts – Galba A. xviii and Royal 2. A. XX – have earlier been linked with Theodore on different grounds; see above, n. 29.

³⁹ Kelly, , Early Christian Creeds, p. 410.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Bede, HE iv.17 (ed. Colgrave and Mynors, p. 386).

⁴¹ Kelly, , Early Christian Creeds, pp. 362–3Google Scholar. Bright, W. (Chapters of Early English Church History, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1897), p. 361)Google Scholar attributes the occurrence of this phrase to the influence of Hadrian.

⁴² Bischoff, B., Lorsch im Spiegel seiner Handschriften (Munich, 1974), p. 69.Google Scholar

⁴³ Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, p. 317; cf. p. 204.

⁴⁴ Siegmund, A., Die Uberlieferung der griechischen christlichen Literatur (Munich and Pasing, 1949), pp. 84–5.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ This Latin version of the Nicene Creed is ptd Hahn, A., Bibliothek der Symbole und Glaubensregeln der alten Kirche, 3rd ed. (Breslau, 1897), pp. 258–60.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Cf. Dekkers, E., Clavis Patrum Latinorum, 2nd ed. (Steenbrugge, 1961), no. 1761Google Scholar, a commentary on a creed preserved in Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana M. 79 sup., an eleventhcentury Italian manuscript which has other links with England and Theodore (see below, pp. 59–62).

⁴⁷ Bischoff, B., Mittelalterlichen Studien, 3 vols. (Stuttgart, 1966–1981) 1, 41–9.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Noll, G., ‘The Origin of the so-called Plan of St. Gall’, JMH 8 (1982), 191–240.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ HE iv. 2 (ed. Colgrave and Mynors, pp. 332–4): ‘ita ut etiam metricae artis, astronomiae et arithmeticae ecclesiasticae disciplinam inter sacrorum apicum uolumina suis auditoribus contraderent’.

⁵⁰ Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ehwald, pp. 476–7; Aldhelm: the Prose Works, trans. Lapidge and Herren, pp. 152–3.

⁵¹ Aldhelm's knowledge of earlier metrical writings, as evidenced in his De metris and De pedum regulis, has been carefully assessed by Law, V., ‘The Study of Latin Grammar in Eighth-Century Southumbria’, ASE 12 (1983), 43–71, at 46–57.Google Scholar

⁵² Aldhelm's knowledge of astronomy was not profound, and was apparently based largely on Isidore's Etymologiae; cf. my remarks in Aldhelm: the Poetic Works, trans. Lapidge, M. and Rosier, J. L. (Cambridge, 1985), p. 262.Google Scholar

⁵³ A lunar table preserved in some continental manuscripts under the rubric Ciclus Aldelmi de cursu lunae per signa.xii. secundum grecos is possibly the work of Aldhelm, as was suggested by Jones, C. W., Bedae Pseudepigrapha (Ithaca, NY, 1939), pp. 69–70Google Scholar; cf. however the caveat of Cróinín, D. O, Peritia 1 (1982), 406–7.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ The conjecture is made (independently) by Cook, A. S., ‘Aldhelm's Legal Studies’, JEGP 23 (1924), 105–13Google Scholar, and James, M. R., Two Ancient English Scholars: St Aldhelm and William of Malmesbury (Glasgow, 1931), pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Corpus Iuris Civilis, ed. Mommsen, T., Krüger, P., Schöll, R. and Kroll, G., 3 vols. (Berlin, 1908–1912)Google Scholar; vol. 11 contains the Codex lustinianus, vol. 111 the Novellae.

⁵⁶ Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, p. 205.

⁵⁷ In this respect in particular it is unfortunate that the accompanying volume of commentary to Finsterwalder's edition was never completed. The work remains to be done.

⁵⁸ On the manuscript see de Meyier, K. A., Codices Vossiani Latini II: Codices in Quarto (Leiden, 1975), pp. 157–64Google Scholar; Bischoff, , Mittelalterliche Studien 11, 26 and 111, 289Google Scholar; and below, p. 69.

⁵⁹ Hessels, J. H., A Late Eighth-Century Latin–Anglo-Saxon Glossary preserved in the Library of the Leiden University (Cambridge, 1906)Google Scholar; there is also an edition (but lacking the full commentary which Hessels provided) by Glogger, P. A., Das Leidener Glossar (Augsburg, 1907).Google Scholar

⁶⁰ See below, p. 70. Bernhard Bischoff has kindly advised me as follows concerning this manuscript: ‘Ein schwieriger Fall, die beiden Teile: fols. 1–46 und 47–70 [which is in question here] sind wohl aufeinander in Format abgestimmt, beide wohl saec. IX³/³, in der Schrift (Teil I von mehreren Händen) aber recht verschieden. Für norddeutsch halte ich sie nicht, trotz des altsächsisches Anteils, aber für holländisch? oder belgisch?’

⁶¹ The Old English glosses in BN lat. 2685 are ptd Kluge, F., Angelsächsisches Lesebuch, 3rd ed. (Halle, 1902), p. 12Google Scholar, and Meritt, H. D., Old English Glosses (A Collection) (New York and London, 1945), nos. 33–5, 40–2, 45, 48 and 53.Google Scholar

⁶² On the manuscripts of the ‘Leiden family’, see in general Baesecke, G., Der Vocabularius Sti Galli in der angelsächsischen Mission (Halle, 1933), esp. pp. 92–7Google Scholar, and Stüben, W., ‘Nachträge zu den althochdeutschen Glossen’, BGDSL 63 (1939), 451–7Google Scholar. On the subsequent ‘Germanization’ of these (originally English) glossaries, see W. Schröder, ‘Kritisches zu neuen Verfasserschaften Walahfrid Strabos und zur “althochdeutschen Schriftsprache”’, ZDA 87 (1956–1957), 163–213, esp. 169–71 and 196–207.

⁶³ For detailed discussion of the large number of German manuscripts preserving biblical glosses which are in some way descended from the original English collection, see Steinmeyer, E. and Sievers, E., Die althochdeutschen Glossen, 5 vols. (Berlin, 1879–1922) v, 108–407Google Scholar; see also the brief but helpful sketch by H. Thoma, in Reallexicon der Literaturgeschichte 1 (Berlin, 1958), 579–89Google Scholar, s.v. ‘Glossen, althochdeutsche’, and Goetz, G., Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum, 7 vols, (Leipzig, 1888–1923) 1, 217–27.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ See Lindsay, W. M., The Corpus, Epinal, Erfurt and Leyden Glossaries (Oxford, 1921), esp. pp. 1–37Google Scholar; and Pheifer, J. D., Old English Glosses in the Epinal-Erfurt Glossary (Oxford, 1974), pp. xxviii–li.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ As may been seen by comparing the list given above (pp. 54–5) with the list of Aldhelm's sources given in Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ehwald, pp. 544–6. Of the texts represented in the ‘Leiden Glossary’, Aldhelm does not appear to have known (or, at least, does not quote from) the following: Cassiodorus, Expositio psalmorum; Jerome, De uiribus inlustribus; Eucherius, Instructions; and Augustine, Sermones. None of these texts is a rarity, and further work on Aldhelm's sources may well reveal that he knew them all.

⁶⁶ Of the six lemmata from the Vita S. Eugeniae (PL 73, 605–20) in the ‘Leiden Glossary’ (no. xlii.21 and 23–7), Aldhelm uses one (basterna: ‘a sedan chair’) in his account of Eugenia (prose De virginitate, ch. 44; Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ehwald, p. 297, line 1).

⁶⁷ Lindsay, W. M., The Corpus Glossary (Cambridge, 1921)Google Scholar; on the manuscript, see Lowe, E. A., Codices Latini Antiquiores, 11 vols. and supp. (Oxford, 1934–1971) 11, no. 122Google Scholar; Ker, N. R., Catalogue of Manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957), pp. 49–50 (no. 36)Google Scholar; and Pheifer, , Old English Glosses, pp. xxviii–xxxi.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ See Brown, T. J., ‘The Irish Element in the Insular System of Scripts to circa A.D. 850’, Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. Löwe, H., 2 vols, (Stuttgart, 1982) 1, 101–19, at 109, n. 12.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Leiden xii.40: ‘Cyneris nablis. idest citharis longiores quam psalterium. nam psalterium triangulum fit. Theodorus dixit’ (A Late Eighth-Century Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary, ed. Hessels, p. 13).

⁷⁰ See below, pp. 60 and 70.

⁷¹ 63r (the biblical lemma is compulit illos oppido): ‘.i. oppidum intrare. Non est grecum ut multi dicunt oppido quasi ualde. Quod negat Theodoras esse aduerbium grece.’

⁷² See below, pp. 68–9.

⁷³ Steinmeyer and Sievers, Die althochdeutschen Glossen v, 276: ‘ualuas muros templi in circuitu Adrianus dicit’.

⁷⁴ See below, p. 71.

⁷⁵ Steinmeyer and Sievers, Die althochdeutschen Glossen iv, 460: ‘larum. hragra. Adrianus dicit meum esse’.

⁷⁶ See below, p. 70.

⁷⁷ Bischoff, B., ‘Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter’, Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), 189–279, at 191–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar, repr. in his Mittelalterliche Studien 1, 205–73, at 207–9.

⁷⁸ See the remarks of M. Ferrari apud Polara, G., Virgilio Marone Grammatico: Epitomi ed Epistole (Naples, 1979), p. xli.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ These chapters are ptd from the Milan manuscript in Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum, ed. Goetz, v, 425–31; the chapters in question correspond to nos. xxvi, xxvii, xxviii, xxxiv and xxxv of the ‘Leiden Glossary’.

⁸⁰ Bischoff, , Mittelalterliche Studien 1, 207Google Scholar. Professor Bischoff very kindly placed at my disposal an unpublished article on the biblical glosses in the Milan manuscript. My following remarks concerning the classification of the glosses are drawn entirely from his unpublished article, as well as from his more cursory printed account cited above.

⁸¹ There is in addition a sequence of glosses to Genesis, Exodus and the gospels interpolated as a unit between Gen I and Gen II; these additional glosses are referred to by Bischoff as Gen Ia, Ex Ia and Ev Ia.

⁸² See below, pp. 68–9.

⁸³ The glosses are ptd Robinson, F. C., ‘Old English Lexicographical Notes’, Philologica Pragensia 8 (1965), 303–7, at 306–7.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Mittelalterliche Studien 1, 208–9.

⁸⁵ Professor Bischoff's edition of these glosses (first announced some thirty years ago) is now being brought to completion: B. Bischoff and M. Lapidge, The Milan Biblical Glosses from the School of Canterbury, to appear in the series Cambridge Stud. in Anglo-Saxon England. The edition includes Pent I, Gen-Ex-Ev Ia and Ev II, as well as a number of shorter texts directly related to the Milan glosses.

⁸⁶ 64V: ‘in uno autem argenteo xviii. pendingas. Alii autem.xx. argenteos dicunt esse.xx. cesaringas’.

⁸⁷ 63v: ‘ Quadringentis argenti siclis:.i..cccc. solidos. Unus siclus habet tres solidos cesaringes. Alii quadringentos argenti.cccc. dicunt esse cesaringas’.

⁸⁸ For the remarks which follow I am much indebted to the advice, generously given, of three numismatical colleagues: Mark Blackburn, Philip Grierson and Stewart Lyon.

⁸⁹ See Lyon, S., ‘Historical Problems of Anglo-Saxon Coinage: III. Denominations and Weights’, BNJ 38 (1969), 204–22, at 209–12.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ See, for example, the Carmen de ponderibus often attributed to Priscian (Poetae Latini Minores, ed. Baehrens, E., 5 vols. (Leipzig, 1879–1983) v, 71–82Google Scholar), lines 10–18, and discussion by Callu, J. P., ‘Les origines du miliarensis’, Revue numismatique 6th ser. 22 (1980), 123–30.Google Scholar

⁹¹ This last equivalence is confirmed by an Old English gloss in the ‘Lindisfarne Gospels’, where the drachma of Luke xv.8 is glossed cesaring (The Four Gospels in Anglo-Saxon, Northumbrian and Old Mercian Versions, ed. Skeat, W. W., 4 vols. (Cambridge, 1871–1887) 111, 155)Google Scholar.

⁹² On this problem Stewart Lyon has written to me as follows: ‘The reference to pendingas is puzzling. If it goes back to the seventh century, perhaps it means that a pending was once a weight of gold comparable to the siliqua, viz. of the order of 1/144 oz. But we already have a gold scylling divided into 20 sceattas, one of which seems to have weighed a grain of gold (see Lyon, ‘Historical Problems’, pp. 211–12), so is there really room for a gold pending equivalent to about three sceattas?’

⁹³ See Dickins, B., ‘The “Epa” Coins’, Leeds Stud. in English 1 (1932), 20–1Google Scholar, where it is suggested that the word pending derives ultimately from the name of the Mercian king Penda (c. 626–54).

⁹⁴ The Early History, p. 95.

⁹⁵ Benedicti Regula, ed. Hanslik, R., Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum 75 (Vienna, 1960).Google Scholar

⁹⁶ In general see Traube, L., ‘Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedictỉ’, Abhandlungen der königlich bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse 21 (1898), 601–731Google Scholar; Plenkers, H., Untersuchungen zur Uberlieferungsgeschichte der ältesten Mönchsregeln, Quellen und Untersuchungen zur lateinischen Philologie des Mittelalters 1.3 (Munich, 1906), esp. 29–52Google Scholar; and Meyvaert, P., ‘Towards a History of the Textual Transmission of the Regula S. Benedictỉ’, Scriptorium 17 (1963), 83–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹⁷ The Carolingian manuscript is now St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek 914 (St Gallen, s. ix¹); it was the great merit of Traube (‘Textgeschichte’) to demonstrate that this manuscript was a close copy of the lost ‘Aachener Normalexemplar’, a manuscript acquired by Charlemagne from Monte Cassino; on St Gallen 914 see Regula Benedicti de codice 914 in bibliotheca S. Galli asservato … quam simillime expressa addita descriptione … necnon praefatione palaeographica Bernhard Bischoff auctore, ed. Probst, B. (St Ottilien, 1983).Google Scholar

⁹⁸ There is a facsimile edition by Farmer, D. H., The Rule of St Benedict, EEMF 15 (Copenhagen, 1968)Google Scholar; see also Lowe, E. A., English Uncial (Oxford, 1960), p. 20 and plGoogle Scholar. xx, and CLA 11, no. 240.

⁹⁹ See Bischoff, Mittelalterliche Studien 111, 81–2.

¹⁰⁰ See CLA iv, no. 505; Millenium Scriptorii Veronensis (Verona, 1967), pl. XIII, and Bischoff, , Mittelalterliche Studien 111, 19.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ See Bischoff, B. and Hofmann, J., Libri Sancti Kyliani. Die Würzburger Schreibschule und die Dombibliothek im VIII. und IX. Jahrhundert (Würzburg, 1952), pp. 54 and 110.Google Scholar

¹⁰² At RSB Lxvii.4 (excessus), O has excessum, VSWM have excessus; at xxxviii. 1 (fortuitu) O has fortuito, VSWM have fortuitu. The Leiden-family glossaries have excessus and fortuitu (Leiden, no. ii, lines 60 and 76). I should stress that these observations are based on Hanslik's apparatus criticus, not on fresh collation of the manuscripts; and as Meyvaert has demonstrated at length, Hanslik's apparatus is very far from being a reliable one (‘Towards a History’, pp. 88–103).

¹⁰³ At RSB 1.5, S has examine against all other manuscripts of RSB, which have ex acie; cf. the ‘Leiden Glossary’ no. ii, line 62 (examine).

¹⁰⁴ See Ker, N. R., ‘The Provenance of the Oldest Manuscript of the Rule of St Benedict’, Bodleian Lib. Rec. 2 (1941), 28–9Google Scholar, who demonstrated the Worcester provenance; see also Sims-Williams, P., ‘An Unpublished Seventh- or Eighth-Century Anglo-Latin Letter in Boulogne-sur-mer MS 74 (82)’, MÆ 48 (1979), 1–22, at 9–10Google Scholar, where the suggestion of a possible Bath origin for Hatton 48 is mooted. The matter is not as simple as I imply here, for the scribe of Hatton 48 subsequently corrected his text by using another (lost) manuscript, referred to as O⁰ by Meyvaert (‘Towards a History’, pp. 97–8) and O² by Hanslik; as Meyvaert shows, this lost manuscript had textual affinities with W. These corrections too need to be collated against the Leiden-family lemmata.

¹⁰⁵ Meyvaert wrote: ‘We know next to nothing about the introduction of RB to Canterbury’ (‘Towards a History’, p. 95). The Leiden-family glossaries will ultimately alter this picture.

¹⁰⁶ Bede, HE iv. 5; Haddan, A. W. and Stubbs, W., Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1869–1871) 111, 118–22.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Haddan and Stubbs, Councils 111, 119: ‘quibus statim protuli eundem librum canonum, et ex eodem libro decem capitula …’.

¹⁰⁸ The best discussion of the sources of the canons of the Council of Hertford is still that of Bright, , Chapters of Early English Church History, pp. 274–84Google Scholar. Bright (who had himself edited the Greek texts of early church canons) identified the following as having been drawn on by Theodore: the ‘Apostolic Canons’, Nicaea, Antioch, Laodicea, Constantinople, Chalcedon, Sardica and Africa (Carthage).

¹⁰⁹ HE iv. 17; Haddan, and Stubbs, , Councils 111, 141–4.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, pp. 204–5.

¹¹¹ See Maassen, F., Geschichte der Quellen und der Literatur des canonischen Rechts im Abendlande bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters (Graz, 1870)Google Scholar; also useful are van Hove, A., Prolegomena ad Codicem Iuris Canonici, 2nd ed. (Mechelen and Rome, 1945)Google Scholar, and Fransen, G., Les collections canoniques (Turnhout, 1973)Google Scholar.

¹¹² Various Latin texts of the various councils are available in the monumental (but incomplete) edition of Turner, C. H., Ecclesiae Occidentalis Monumenta Iuris Antiquissima, 2 vols. in 7 pts (Oxford, 1899–1939)Google Scholar. Turner's edition includes the Canones apostolorum, and canons of the councils of Nicaea, Ancyra, Neocaesarea, Gangra, Antioch and Sardica. For the Latin texts of other councils, we are often thrown back on a seventeenth-century edition (see below, n. 117).

¹¹³ See Peitz, W. M., Dionysius Exiguus-Studien, ed. Foerster, H. (Berlin, 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and the concise discussion by Berschin, , Griechisch–lateinisches Mittelalter, pp. 87–96.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ See the edition by Strewe, A., Die Canonessammlung des Dionysius Exiguus in der ersten Redaktion (Berlin, 1931)Google Scholar. The two manuscripts of this First Recension are Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Pal. lat. 577, a manuscript in Anglo-Saxon minuscule, probably written on the Continent, c. 800 (see CLA 1, no. 97, and Bischoff, , Mittelalterliche Studien 111, 28 and 83–5Google Scholar), and Kassel, Hessische Landesbibliothek, Theol. qu. 1, of similar date and origin (Bischoff, ibid. p. 28).

¹¹⁵ Hessels, A Late Eighth-century Latin-Anglo-Saxon Glossary, p. xliv; by the same token it was suggested by Bright (Chapters of Early English Church History, p. 277) that Theodore drew on the Dionysius Exiguus collection for the canons of the Council of Hertford.

¹¹⁶ See Wurm, H., Studien und Texte zur Decretalensammlung des Dionysius Exiguus (Rome, 1939)Google Scholar. The decretals certainly glossed by the Leiden-family glossators are: Innocent viii, xxv, li, lii and lv, Leo xii and Gelasius 11.

¹¹⁷ Dionysius's Codex canonum (in the Second Recension) and Codex decretalium are found together in two manuscripts (Paris, BN lat. 3837 (Angers, s. ixⁱⁿ) and Vatican lat. 5845 (Beneventan script, s. x)). They were ptd together by Voell, G. and Iustell, H., Bibliotheca juris canonici veteris, 2 vols. (Paris, 1661) 1, 101–74Google Scholar (Codex canonum), and 183–248 (Codex decretalium), whence they are repr. PL 67, 139–230 and 231–316 respectively.

¹¹⁸ See Maassen, , Geschichte, pp. 504–12 (nos. 626–32)Google Scholar; for the decretals in the Sanblasiana, see also Wurm, Studien, pp. 88–9 and 261–4.

¹¹⁹ Hofmann, J., ‘Altenglische und althochdeutsche Glossen aus Würzburg und dem weiteren angelsächsischen Missionsgebiet’, BGDSL 85 (1963), 27–131, at 42–4Google Scholar. Hofmann would see the manuscript as originating in the circle of Willibrord, perhaps at Echternach.

¹²⁰ See CLA viii, no. 1163; Alexander, J. J. G., Insular Manuscripts 6th to the 9th Century (London, 1978), pp. 44–5 (no. 13)Google Scholar; and McKitterick, R., ‘Knowledge of Canon Law in the Frankish Kingdoms before 789: the Manuscript Evidence’, JTS n.s. 36 (1985), 97–117, at 111–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹²¹ The contents of Cologne 213 may be worked out from the apparatus in Turner, Monumenta, passim. A detailed study of the contents of this manuscript is a great desideratum for the study of canon law in early England.

¹²² Die Canones Theodori, ed. Finsterwalder, p. 311: ‘De hoc in canone dicitur: qui auguria auspicia siue somnia uel diuinationes quaslibet secundum mores gentilium obseruant aut in domos suas huiusmodi homines introducunt in exquaerendas aliquam artem maleficiorum penitentes isti si de clero sunt abiciantur’ (italics mine). The canon in question is from the Council of Ancyra, in the Isidori uulgata version; the text as ptd Turner (Monumenta 11, 112) has the readings more and aliquibus arte maleficia on the basis of all surviving manuscripts with the exception of Cologne 213, which has the very wording of Theodore's iudicia as quoted above.