¹ The later terminus for its composition is determined by the date of its earliest manuscripts, which are assigned to the late ninth century as noted in Sisam, Celia, ‘An early fragment of the Old English Martyrology,’ Review of English Studies 4 n.s. 15(1953) 210. Its earlier terminus is indicated by the dating of the feast of All Saints on November 1st, a day introduced about the turn of the century (Sisam 213 with references), and also by its inclusion among the entries for saints Sithiu, Bertinus, Audomar, and Winnocus, whose vitae are assigned to ‘ix saec. ineunte’ by Krusch, B. in MGH: SS. rer. Merov. V 734 etc., and to ‘about 800’ in Levison, W., England and the Continent in the Eighth Century (Oxford 1946, 1966) 6 note 4. Its English provenance is established particularly by comments within the text referring to places in Northumbria as ‘by the northern boundary’ (see Sisam, 214), and by minor adaptations of sources — as, e.g., in the Vita S. Winnoci (above) where in the Latin it is noted that the saint was one of ‘quattuor religiosi viri ex longe remota Brittonum terra’ (Krusch 770), whereas the martyrology describes him as ‘mynstres hlaford be suÐan sae se is nemned Wurmholt,’ (lord of the monastery, to the south of the sea, which is called Wurmholt).Google Scholar

² An Old English Martyrology ed. Herzfeld, G. (EETS os 116; London 1900) 122–124. Herzfeld's text is inaccurate in details, so my citations below are from a typescript text now available as a doctoral dissertation by Günter Kotzor of Munich.Google Scholar

³ Cockayne, T. O., The Shrine (London 1864–70) 106; Herzfeld xxxix.Google Scholar

⁴ Ed. Socii Bollandiani, I (Brussels 1898–1899) 264–266.Google Scholar

⁵ AS July, V 524–528.Google Scholar

⁶ Mombritius, B., Sanctuarium seu Vitae Sanctorum (1st ed. c. 1480; 2nd ed. Paris 1910) I 360–363.Google Scholar

⁷ PL 147.1269–1282.Google Scholar

⁸ See PL 147.1213 seq. This Passio is also an insufficient source for the detail of OEM.Google Scholar

⁹ Pennazi, S. A., Vita e martirio ammirabile delta gloriosa S. Cristina vergine et martire (Montefiascone 1725) 259–276, 352–358, 364–373, 416–421 respectively. I am indebted to Baudouin de Gaiffier who generously photographed the relevant pages of Pennazi's book from the copy held in the Bollandists’ library. It was not available in its entirety in England or America.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Boglino, L., Palermo e Santa Cristina (Palermo 1881) 164–170.Google Scholar

¹¹ A comparison of Boglino's text with that of Pennazi 259 seq., to which it has close verbal similarities, indicates considerable omission.Google Scholar

¹² AS Jul. V 507 where a short extract on the baptism is cited. This includes the baptismal formula spoken by Christ and the leading ashore of Christina by the Archangel Michael (see discussion below).Google Scholar

¹³ Bischoff, Bernhard, Die südostdeutschen Schreibschulen und Bibliotheken in der Karolingerzeit 1 (Wiesbaden 1960) 207.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Bischoff 177 and 177 note 2.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Herzfeld xxxiii.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Herzfeld 228, 232 notes two uses of the poem. The section on John the Evangelist (Dec. 27th), Herzfeld 8, includes an insertion on abritzum (obryzum) from Aldhelm's prose account. I hope to write more fully on the contacts with Aldhelm's pieces at a later time.Google Scholar

¹⁷ The day in OEM, July 19th, differs from that in the eighth-century manuscripts of the Hieronymian Martyrology (July 24th), AS Nov., II 393, and also of martyrologies discussed by Quentin, H., Les martyrologes historiques du moyen ǎge (2nd.; Paris 1908) viz. Bede, Family II (July 24th) 53, the Martyrologe Lyonnais (July 24th) 151; Vetus Romanum (July 24th) 434, and Ado (July 24th) 580. As Tuplin, C. J. indicates below (commentary to B cap. 1 heading) this date, July 24th (i.e. ix kal. Aug.) is also the most common in the manuscripts of the Passio S. Cristinae which he had consulted. He notes, however, that MS B reads: ‘xiiii k. Aug.’ (July 19th), in what appears to me to be an insertion in the left-hand margin of fol. 41^r, seemingly in another hand from that of the narrative text. He regards this, rightly I think, as deriving from a scribal corruption, and I may add that such a corruption is suggested in AS July, V 528, which reads: ‘xiiii kal. Augusti,’ for which the editors note: ‘lege vim.’ The corruption is attested in another English text of the ninth century, the calendar in MS Bodley, Digby 63, which also assigns Christina's obit to July 19th (see F. Wormald, English Kalendars before A.D. 1100 (London 1934) I 8.Google Scholar

¹⁸ The OE word seo, which can be used as a relative pronoun, could refer to gemynd (memoria), a feminine noun.Google Scholar

¹⁹ The passage agrees almost verbatim with the opening sentences of Pennazi 259 and Boglino 164.Google Scholar

²⁰ Aldhelmi opera ed. Ehwald, R., MGH: Auct. Antiq. XV (Berlin 1919) 301.Google Scholar

²¹ Although Urbanus is not ‘valde iratus’ at this point in B he is angry during the events leading up to the casting of Christina into the sea. A summarizer need not have picked up Urbanus's anger from exactly this instance of it.Google Scholar

²² OE ondyrsnlic (variant: ondrysenlic) appears to have a basic meaning of ‘creating awe, fear,’ and seems to be used in favourable and unfavourable senses arising from the basic meaning. See Bosworth-Toller, , Dictionary and Supplement s.v. ondrysnlic, andrysenlic and related words. Herzfeld's choice ‘venerable’ (125) is accepted here as a choice from the general context.Google Scholar

²³ OE brun-basu (-baso) as a compound sometimes glosses purpureus. See Bosworth-Toller, Supplement s.v. brun-basu. Google Scholar

²⁴ One wonders whether the martyrologist saw gloriosiam instead of pretiosissimam as a transfer from gloria. Google Scholar

²⁵ See Tuplin's commentary to B cap. 11.13 seq. and to B caps. 12 and 13 on the relationships of words in other texts to the phrases of the OEM. It is clear from this that e.g. Christ's words to Christina: ‘I am Christ whom you love’ came from a Latin text to OEM.Google Scholar

²⁶ Gerefærn, which appears to be a unique compound in Old English, seems to be a close equivalentof praetorium ‘the official residence of a governor in a province’, s.v. praetorium I 2 in A Latin Dictionary by Lewis, C. T. and Short, C. (Oxford 1879, 1955 impression).Google Scholar

²⁷ Tuplin's commentary, of course, indicates that it did appear in Bokenham.Google Scholar

²⁸ The only comparably old Latin texts (apart from T, Z below) are MS Vat. lat. 5771b (items 80, 98) and MS Farfensis 29 (on which cf. below n. 31), all saec. ix/x.Google Scholar

²⁹ See below pp. 169–70 and n. 31.Google Scholar

³⁰ Also, if Arundel 169 is an example of Passio 1i (see below p. 171) it is an incomplete one.Google Scholar

³¹ At a late stage in the preparation of the present publication I was able to examine microfilms of MS Farfensis 29 and MS Bolland. 14 which are reported in the catalogues as containing Passio 1b. The versions in these MSS, however, are not the same as that of T, Z, nor are they the same as each other (in the sections corresponding to 1b 1–9, Farf. and Boll. regularly agree against 1b but thereafter they diverge frequently, with Boll, tending to be closer to 1b). In these circumstances there is clearly a real question as to whether the ‘1b’ published here is the same as the one in BHL's ‘paradigm’ text.Google Scholar

³² T and Z diverge also on the date of the martyrdom, a.d. VI kal. Aug. in T, a.d. XIIII kal. Aug. in Z. True, before correction the heading in Z had a.d. VI kal. Aug., but it is clear from the position of the Passio S. Christinae in Z that the compiler of that MS at least thought that the proper date was a.d. XIIII kal. Aug. In any event there is such wide disagreement in general on the matter of date that it is not necessary to regard a divergence of T and Z in this respect as telling against their both being examples of 1b.Google Scholar

³³ Cf. n. 9.Google Scholar

³⁴ This passage does not appear in 1b (12.19–20), but possibly should have done so, given that Christina is there said to have looked to heaven, as in 1a, H, but then delivers a speech to Dion.Google Scholar

³⁵ A third possible solution, splitting ad hanc … commotus, so that ad hanc vocem goes at the end of the text and iudex indignatione commotus at 16.1, is not in essence all that different from solution (a) and may be left out of account.Google Scholar

³⁶ Alternatively, the section corresponding to 16.1–21.15 got displaced and was then internally displaced, so that 17.10–21.15 preceded 16.1–17.10; the calculations below will apply to this scenario equally well, mutatis mutandis. Google Scholar

³⁷ For simplicity's sake I proceed on the assumption that the displacement occurred in the exemplar and not earlier.Google Scholar

³⁸ In making this and other word-counts I exclude any words that I have added to the text — i.e., I count the words actually present in B.Google Scholar

³⁹ Here, and elsewhere, of course, ‘fol. 1’ means simply ‘the first folio in the MS on which the Passio appeared.’Google Scholar

⁴⁰ E.g. (a) assume 342 words = 1 folio of exemplar and lacuna = one side (ca. 171 words); pre-displacement disposition = 1.1–8. 16 = 1^r–6^r; lacuna = 6^v; 9.1–15.9 = 7^r–10^v; 15.9–41 11^r-v; 16.1–17.10 = 12^r-v; 17.10–21.15 = 13^r–16^v. (b) assume 342 words = 1 folio of exemplar, lacuna = 1 folio (ca. 342 words): 1.1–8.16 = 1^v–6^v; lacuna = 7^r-v; 9.1–15.9 = 8^r–11^v; 15.9–41 = 12^r-v; 16.1–17.10 = 13^r-v; 17.10–21.15 = 14^r–17^v. (c) assume 342 words = 1 double-column side of exemplar, lacuna = one column (ca. 171 words); 1.1–8.16 = 1^ra–3^va; lacuna = 3^vb; 9.1–15.9 = 4^ra–5^vb; 15.9–41 = 6^r; 16.1–17.10 = 6^v; 17.10–21.15 = 7^ra–8^vb. (d) assume 342 words = 1 two-column side, lacuna = 1 side (i.e. ca. 342 words): 1.1–8.16 = 1^v–4^rb; lacuna = 4^v; 9.1–15.9 = 5^ra–6^vb; 15.9–41 = 7^r; 16.1–17.10 = 7^v; 17.10–21.15 = 8^ra–9^vb. (e) assume 342 words = 2 two-column sides, lacuna = three columns (i.e. ca. 256 words): 1.1–8.16 = 1^vb–7^ra; lacuna = 7^rb-vb; 9.1–15.9 = 8^ra–11^vb; 15.9–41 = 12^ra–12^vb; 16.1–17.10 = 13^ra–13^vb; 17.10–21.15 = 14^ra–17^vb.Google Scholar

⁴¹ It is a curious coincidence that S also displays a textual dislocation of a sort similar to that in B. The order of contents in S is: (i) S 1.1–13.3 = B 1.1–16.24 (sum) = 1b 1.1–13.17 (fieri); (ii) S 13.3–14.17 (saietest) = B 20.11 – (after 21.15) = 1b 17.9 (et) − 18.24 (misit); (iii) S 14.17 (et que un.) − 15.24 = B 19.8 (aspides) − 20.11 (egreditur) = 1b 16.7 (et duo) − 17.9; (iv) S 15.24–18.15 = B 16.25–19.8 = 1b 13.17–16.7; (v) S 18.15–20 – 1b 18.24–8. Either the scribe of S or the original composer of the S version attempted to mask the dislocation by calling the judge Dion the whole way from S 11.1 to 16.26 and first introducing Iulianus at S 17.1, although properly the events of S 13.3–15.24 belong in the period of Iulianus. As Stimm (op. cit. 179) noted, (ii) and (iii) above occupy 33.5 and 34 printed lines respectively, while (iv) occupies 70.5 lines. (ii) and (iii) therefore filled one side or folio of an exemplar, while (iv) filled two sides/folios. One should note in addition that (i) occupies ca. 248 printed lines, which would be consistent with seven sides/folios.Google Scholar

⁴² In the comparationes locorum the references are by page and line (except for 1b, S, M where they are by chapter and line). In brackets I indicate (i) passages of B omitted, or very abbreviated, in the various versions; (ii) passages of those versions absent in B. (Unless otherwise indicated, the passages start at the beginning of a sentence in the first line named and end at the fullstop in the second line). I have only included the full length versions for which I have a complete text (not, therefore, A). I have not included 1g since it is so divergent (but have continued the entries for 1h after the point at which it becomes equivalent to 1g).Google Scholar

⁴³ D is thus no longer ‘the sole authority’ for this date (Magnusson op. cit. 156). — Another variant date is a.d. IV Kal. Aug. in MS Bolland. 14.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ A.d. VIII Kal. Aug. looks like mere corruption of a.d. VIIII Kal. Aug. The corrector in MS Vat. lat. 5771b restored the latter, and in C, Vat. 6075, Reg. Suec. 539, which have passages giving a.d. VIII Kal. Aug., there are also passages giving a.d. VIIII Kal. Aug.; I take it that MS Vat. lat. 6565, Passio Christinae Virginis quod est Nonis Aug., derives from something like 1k Non. Kal. Aug. i.e. a.d. VIIII Kal. Aug. Google Scholar

⁴⁵ 1k starts passa est eodem tempore …; but the context in Vincentius Bellovacensis (Speculum Hist. xii 86f.), who records martyrdoms in chronological order, shows that the tempus is that of Diocletian.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ In diebus illis was absent in the other two codices (Vienna 377, saec. xi, and Evreux 37, saec. xiii) from which, along with MS BL Addit. 11, 880, Robinson, J. A. edited the Passio sanctorum scillitanorum in The Passion of S. Perpetua, with an Appendix on the Scillitan Martyrdom (= Texts and Studies, I, no. 2), Cambridge 1891, 112f.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Not however 1n, propter Deum habens virginitatem eius integram custoditam; C, vovens se in Deo virginem permansuram. 1e, timorem Dei habens in virginitate custodienda is perhaps a corruption of the more common reference to spes. Google Scholar

⁴⁸ I mark elements absent in B with different type-face.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ I am most grateful to Professor Cross for the invitation to edit B, from which the present work grew, and to the Research Committee of the University of Liverpool for a grant making possible a visit to the Biblioteca Nazionale in Turin to examine the original of T.Google Scholar