¹ For the Beowulf Manuscript see, e.g., Taylor, Paul B. and Peter Salus, H., ‘The Compilation of Cotton Vitellius A XV' Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 69 (1968) 199–204; for the Vercelli Book see, e.g., Krapp, George P., ed., The Vercelli Book (The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records 2; New York 1932) v; for the Exeter Christ see, e.g., Burlin, Robert B., The Old English Advent (New Haven 1968) viii.Google Scholar

² The codex, also called the Junius or Cædmon Manuscript, is held by the Bodleian Library, Oxford. I should like to thank the librarian for permission to examine this volume and the other Bodleian manuscript mentioned below, Laud Misc. 509. A complete facsimile of Junius 11 has been edited by Gollancz, Gollancz, The Cædmon Manuscript of Anglo-Saxon Biblical Poetry (Oxford 1927).Google Scholar

³ On this point see also Francis Blackburn, A., ed., Exodus and Daniel (Boston 1907) xxii; Kennedy, Charles W., The Cædmon Poems (London 1916) xi; and Wrenn, C. L., A Study of Old English Literature (London 1967) 104.Google Scholar

⁴ Only four of the twelve sections are actually numbered. Similarly, over forty per cent of the sections in the Old Testament part of the manuscript lack numbers. Google Scholar

⁵ Junius, Francis, ed., Cædmonis Monachi paraphrasis poetica … (Amsterdam 1655) 91. Junius' statement is quoted and accepted by Thorpe, Benjamin, ed., Cædmon's Metrical Paraphrase of Parts of the Holy Scriptures (London 1832) 263; Bouterwek, Karl W., ed., Cædmon's des Angelsachsen biblische Dichtungen (Elberfeld 1849) 164; Clubb, Merrel D., ed., Christ and Satan (New Haven 1925) 137; and Gollancz xlix. Following the manuscript, Junius, Thorpe, and Bouterwek print the Old Testament poems as one work and the New Testament poem as another. Likewise, the codex is described as having only two ‘articles,’ by Ker, N. R., Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford 1957) 406-7, 543.Google Scholar

⁶ See Shepherd, Shepherd, ‘Scriptural Poetry,' in Continuations and Beginnings, ed. Stanley, E. G. (London 1966) 33.Google Scholar

⁷ This writing is in red and thus distinct from the brown of the text. Except for a few capitals of proper names, red ink is otherwise used only for the incipit to the treatise. Google Scholar

⁸ ‘Studies in the Versification of the Old English MS. Junius 11: An Investigation into the Use and Function of the Accents and A Consideration of the Poetical Rhythms and their Relation to Sense and Style’(diss. University of London 1950) especially 191-3, 213, 216(a), 381-3, 400-1, 405. Apparently accents were made by both the original scribes and by correctors; there is no evidence that the various accent-writers had different purposes.Google Scholar

⁹ The Junius Manuscript (ASPR 1; New York 1931) xxii. All textual citation of the Junius poems is from this edition.Google Scholar

¹⁰ My calculations. Except for a few debatable instances, the standard used for proper pointing is the division of half-verses in Krapp's edition. An omitted or a misplaced point is counted as an error. These figures may not exactly represent the percentages of correct pointing when the volume was first copied. Like several accents (see Thornley 183-4), some of the points may have faded away entirely; as it is, some points in Liber II, where they are usually lighter than in Liber I, can barely be seen. In cases in which there is uncertainty if a particular mark is a point, I have usually assumed that the mark was intended as such. From my examination of the text under natural and ultra-violet light, at least ninety percent of the points appear to have been inserted by the original scribes; but no certainty is possible. Google Scholar

¹¹ For statements contrasting the consistent and accurate pointing of Junius 11 and the sporadic pointing in the three other major OE codices, see Blackburn xv; Gollancz xxi; and Krapp, George P. and Dobbie, E. V. K., ed., The Exeter Book (ASPR 3; New York 1936) xxi. As for individual poems, so far as I know only the Menologium and Maxims II, in MS Brit. Mus. Cot. Tib. B. i fols. 112-115 ^v, are comparable to the poems in Junius 11 in the excellence of their metrical punctuation. I wish to thank the librarian for permission to examine this volume.Google Scholar

¹² Not all scholars agree, however, that Christ and Satan was originally intended as part of the volume. See the Appendix below. Google Scholar

¹³ Old English Verse (London 1972) 137, 207-8, and cf. 143. For support, Shippey refers to Larès' study, cited below. But because Larès is concerned with Holy Week, not just Holy Saturday, Shippey's exclusive reference to the Easter Vigil constitutes a different proposal.Google Scholar

¹⁴ The Leofric Missal , ed. Warren, F. E. (Oxford 1883; rpt. Farnborough, Hants. 1968) 97-8. The Missal was not produced in England but imported from France sometime during the tenth century. In England, the standard set of Holy Saturday readings in the late tenth and early eleventh centuries was the Gregorian (two of its four readings correspond to material in Liber I); see my article ‘Some Liturgical Notes on Ælfric's Letter to the Monks at Eynsham,’ Downside Review (forthcoming).Google Scholar

¹⁵ ‘Échos d'un rite hiérosolymitain dans un manuscrit du haut Moyen Age anglais,’ Revue de l'histoire des religions 165 (1964) 13–47. For a complete list of the Old Jerusalem Holy Week readings, see Wilkinson, John, ed. and trans., Egeria's Travels (London 1971) 266-70, 276.Google Scholar

¹⁶ ‘The Story of the Fall of Man and of the Angels in MS. Junius 11 and the Relationship of the Manuscript Illustrations to the Text’(M.A. thesis University of London 1953) 16–9, 196-7. For the subjects of the Liber Responsalis for the Sundays of Sexagesima, see PL 78.748-64.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Shepherd 24; Wrenn 103-4. Google Scholar

¹⁸ The lectionary tradition followed in England during the late tenth and early eleventh centuries was that of Ordo librorum XIIIA (ed. Andrieu, Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani du haut moyen age [Louvain 1948] 2.481-8), of which two English copies are extant. The first, preserved in MS Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, 190 fols. 212-3 (still unpublished), prescribes, according to the standard tradition, the reading of the Heptateuch, Jeremiah, and Lamentations for Septuagesima; the second, preserved as part of Ælfric's Letter to the Monks at Eynsham in MS CCCC 265 fols. 265-7 (ed. Bateson, Bateson, Appendix 7, Compotus Rolls of the Obedientiaries of St. Swithun's Priory, Winchester, ed. Kitchin, G. W. [London 1892] 194-6) provides for the reading of apparently all of Genesis, Exodus, and Jeremiah, and selections from Lamentations, Augustine's commentary on the Psalms, 1 Corinthians, and Hebrews. See my paper on Ælfric's Letter, n. 14 supra. Google Scholar

¹⁹ ‘The Origin of the Old Testament Plays,’ Modern Philology 10 (1912-13) 482. Craig goes on to discuss the formation of cycle drama in a liturgical context, but he clearly recognizes that salvation history itself is not necessarily liturgical.Google Scholar

²⁰ The Guest-Hall of Eden (New Haven 1972) 16.Google Scholar

²¹ So Thorpe and Bouterwek in their editions (n. 5 supra). The attribution of the poems to Cædmon did not go undisputed. For a detailed summary of the authorship question from the time of Junius to the late nineteenth century, see Wülker, Richard P., Grundriss zur Geschichte der angelsächsichen Literatur (Leipzig 1885) 111–43. The passage from Bede is quoted below.Google Scholar

²² See, e.g., xiii; Krapp, Kennedy, The Junius Manuscript ix; and Irving, Edward B., Jr., ed., The Old English Exodus (New Haven 1953) 27.Google Scholar

²³ Historia ecclesiastica 4.24; the edition used is Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, ed. Colgrave, Bertram and trans. Mynors, R. A. B. (Oxford 1969) 418.Google Scholar

²⁴ ‘The Cædmon Poems,’ Anglia 49 (1925) 281. Under ‘Confession of Faith’ Crawford includes Cædmon's Hymn and Genesis A (which he ascribes to Cædmon), but the inclusion of these works does not materially affect the main point that Bede's list itself belongs to the tradition of the Classification of Topics. See also Lee 17.Google Scholar

²⁵ Bede's list of Cædmon's subjects mainly differs from the contents of Junius 11 in three ways: in Cædmon's paraphrase of the whole of Genesis (cf. Genesis A), in his treatment of several episodes from the Exodus to the time of Christ (cf. Daniel), and in his treatment of the teaching of the Apostles (which lacks a parallel in Junius 11). Google Scholar

²⁶ Unlike Cædmon, Augustine concludes his consideration of the material in Genesis, as does Genesis A, with Abraham; moreover, Augustine's treatment of the period from the Exodus to the coming of Christ is more limited than Cædmon's, specifically including only the period of prosperity in the Promised Land (with emphasis on David's rule) and the Babylonian Captivity, each paralleled by material in Junius 11. Google Scholar

²⁷ For the importance of the treatise to monastic education, see Christopher's introduction to The First Catechetical Instruction (Ancient Christian Writers 2; Westminister, Md. 1946) 8–9. The edition of the treatise used below is CCL 46.121-78 (also edited in PL 40.309-48); for a translation, see Christopher. Augustine's work is divided into two parts. The first (ch. 1-15) is a manual for the catechist; the second (ch. 16-27) contains two addresses, the latter an abridgement of the first, which are to serve as alternate models in the actual teaching of a would-be Christian. It is the long address (ch. 16-25) which receives attention in this study. Hereafter in the notes the treatise is referred to as DCR. Google Scholar

²⁸ Crawford, 281-3, speculates that a treatise known as De Catholica fide, formerly attributed to Boethius, is at the basis of Cædmon's subjects. In fact, the poet's subjects are in some ways closer to Augustine's outline, and De Catholica fide itself belongs to the tradition of sacred history in DCR. Google Scholar

²⁹ This is the conclusion of Bethurum, Dorothy, ed., The Homilies of Wulfstan (Oxford 1957) 294. All citation of Sermo 6 is from this edition.Google Scholar

³⁰ Bethurum 293 says that Wulfstan's major immediate sources, other than the Bible, are Ælfric's ‘De initio creaturae’ and a tract by St. Pirmin. She adds, however, that the type of homily of which Sermo 6 is an example dates back at least to Augustine's De Gen. ad. litt. In fact, Sermo 6 is much closer in intent and content to DCR. Google Scholar

³¹ For the distinction between historia and theoria in DCR, see Musurillo, Musurillo, ‘Symbolism and Kerygmatic Theology,' Thought 36 (1961) 60.Google Scholar

³² Both Augustine and Wulfstan acknowledge that a treatment of salvation history of their type necessitates omitting consideration of much biblical material. See DCR 3.5.2; and Sermo 6.22-4. Google Scholar

³³ Because of the loss of probably three leaves between pp. 8-9. Genesis A now contains a full account of only the first two and a half days of Creation. The narrative begins again with the creation of Eve. For a discussion of the loss, see Wells, David M., ‘A Critical Edition of the Old English Genesis A with a Translation,’ (diss. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 1969) l-li.Google Scholar

³⁴ That the Fall of Lucifer is twice told may have seemed no more surprising to a medieval reader than that the Book of Genesis contains two accounts of Creation. In a different context, Bernhard ten Brink notes that ‘in other mediaeval renderings of Genesis, the revolt of the angels is twice related.’ See Early English Literature, trans. Kennedy, Horace M. (New York 1883) 41 n. 2.Google Scholar

³⁵ Augustine refers to the Creation in six days not here but in an earlier part of his address, 17.28.6-9. Google Scholar

³⁶ On the poet's use of the two genealogies to suggest the City of God and the City of Man, see Huppé, Bernard F., Doctrine and Poetry (New York 1959) 158–68.Google Scholar

³⁷ According to ancient traditions (originating in Jewish commentary), Ham was regarded as the first idolater and the Tower was constructed as a place where idols could be set up and adored. See Ginzberg, Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews , trans. Szold, Henrietta (Philadelphia 1909-28; rpt. Philadelphia 1955) 1 .179-80 and 5.200-1; Rappoport, Angelo S., Myth and Legend in Ancient Israel (London 1928) 1. 236-7; and Emerson, Oliver F., ‘Legends of Cain,’ Publications of the Modern Language Association 21 (1906) 929. Though Augustine does not directly mention the Tower of Babel in DCR, he includes it in the briefer outline of salvation history in De Gen. con. Manich. 1.23.36 (PL 34.190-1).Google Scholar

³⁸ The Guest-Hall of Eden 41.Google Scholar

³⁹ This point of agreement among Augustine, Wulfstan, and the poet is a principal difference between their treatment of sacred history and that of Bede's list, the lectionary of the Anglo-Saxon Church, and the Liber Responsalis. Google Scholar

⁴⁰ In relating Abraham to Shem, an involved genealogy is used in Gen. 11.10-26. Wulfstan and the poet simplify this line of descent so that Abraham's relationship to Shem is more pronounced. Google Scholar

⁴¹ As Farrell, Robert T. says, ‘This final speech includes yet another mention of the promised land, with reference to the fulfilment of the covenant made to Abraham which has been stressed so often in the poem.’ See ‘A Reading of OE. Exodus ,’ Review of English Studies n.s. 20 (1969) 415.Google Scholar

⁴² See Earl, James W., ‘Christian Traditions in the Old English Exodus,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 71 (1970) 563. Shippey 137 cites this passage from Augustine as a partial justification for the poet's ‘sudden and undramatic leaps in time.’Google Scholar

⁴³ ‘ “Exodus” and the Battle in the Sea,’ Traditio 28 (1972) 119–40.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ First, however, Augustine devotes a few sentences to the Paschal Lamb (20.34.4), a subject not found in Exodus; but other aspects of the episode of the tenth plague are treated by the poet, lines 33-53. Google Scholar

⁴⁵ As Irving points out in his edition 98, the unlocking of Scripture here must refer to ‘allegorical or symbolical’ interpretation. Google Scholar

⁴⁶ See Earl 544-59. Earl points out that the crossing of the Red Sea in the poem is, in one sense, to be taken as entry into the Promised Land itself. He also connects the first seven lines of the poem, on the laws of Moses and man's spiritual journey, to the present passage (516-48). See also Isaacs, Neil D., Structural Principles in Old English Poetry (Knoxville 1968) 154–5.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ This figural dimension of the passage was first pointed out by Earl 564-5; see also my paper ‘The Building of the Temple in Exodus: Design for Typology,’ Neophilologus (forthcoming). Google Scholar

⁴⁸ The Junius editor had nothing to do, of course, with the poet's introduction of Solomon and the temple. But just such a treatment would eliminate any necessity the editor may otherwise have felt for including a separate poem on the time of David. One reason that Exodus was an excellent choice for the manuscript is precisely because the work provides considerations of other periods of sacred history, including the treatment of the temple as well as the sacrifice of Isaac. Cf. n. 49 infra, on the editor's choice of Daniel. Google Scholar

⁴⁹ This passage connects so well with the conclusion of Exodus that certain scholars have speculated that the Daniel poet or a scribe wrote the passage for that very purpose. See Conybeare, John J., Illustrations of Anglo-Saxon Poetry, ed. Conybeare, William D. (London 1826; rpt. New York 1964) 189; Blackburn 107; Kennedy lxi; and cf. ten Brink 46 n. 1. The idea is rejected, rightly I think, by Gollancz lxxxv; and by Brennan, Francis C., ‘The Old English Daniel, Edited with Introduction, Notes, and Glossary' (diss. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 1966) 70-1. The close connection does suggest that the editor chose his poems with extreme care.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ In the outline of salvation history in De Gen. con. Manich. 1.23.38-9 (PL 34.191-2), however, Augustine gives a literal interpretation of the fall of Israel which much resembles Wulfstan's and the Daniel poet's. Google Scholar

⁵¹ From here Augustine goes on to speak of David, a subject considered above in connection with Solomon in Exodus. The period of prosperity described at the beginning of Daniel historically includes the time of David's and Solomon's reigns. In De Gen. con. Manich. 1.23.38 (PL 34.191), in fact, Augustine's characterization of David's reign is comparable to the Daniel poet's description of Israel's prosperity. Google Scholar

⁵² The Guest-Hall of Eden 53-4.Google Scholar

⁵³ See Gollancz lxxxv; Krapp, Junius Manuscript xxxi; and Brennan xxxvi. Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See the note to line 12 in the CSL edition 161; Christopher 134 n. 235; and Krüger, Gustav, ed., De catechizandis rudibus (3rd ed.; Tübingen 1934) 43 n. to line 8.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ ‘The Old English Daniel' xxxiv-xxxv. Google Scholar

⁵⁶ It may seem strange that Augustine, who gives more consideration to Moses and his time than to David and his, omits the former from his outline of the ages but includes the latter. The reason is that Augustine wishes both to limit the number of ages to six, in accord with the six days of Creation (see 17.28.7-8), and also to follow the Gospel account (Matt. 1.17) for the three of them immediately before the coming of Christ (see 22.39.2). But other medieval writers not concerned with limiting the ages to six amend Augustine's system to include Moses: e.g., the author or an editor of Historia Brittonum (Harleian recension), the author of the Saltaire na Rann, and Honorious Augustodunensis. See Zimmer, H., Nennius Vindicatus (Berlin 1893) 15; Förster, Förster, ‘Die Weltzeitalter bei den Angelsachsen,' Neusprachliche Studien: Festgabe Karl Luick, Die neuren Sprachen 6 (Marburg 1925) 190, 201; and Schmidt, Schmidt, ‘Aetates mundi: Die Weltalter als Gliederungsprinzip des Geschichte,' Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 67 (1955-56) 310-11, 316. It is also noteworthy that in a related version of the ages of the world — found in the chronicle of Gervasius Ricobaldus, and implicit in the Vatican recension of the Historia Brittonum and the Book of Ballymote — Solomon (the building of the temple) is substituted for David, thus yielding an outline of history approximating the material in Junius 11: Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Solomon, the Captivity, Christ. See Zimmer 15; Förster 201-2; and Schmidt 311.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ In De Gen. con. Manich. 1.23.39 (PL 34.191-2), Augustine characterizes the period from the Babylonian Exile to the coming of Christ as man's decline into moral degeneracy. Because the return to Israel had, apparently, no spiritually uplifting effect on the chosen people, Augustine does not even mention the event. Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Probably because of the special audience for which his catechetical address is intended, Augustine is concerned here exclusively with the moral aspect of the redemption. Elsewhere he presents a more complex view. For a review of his teachings, see, e.g. Rivière, Rivière, The Doctrine of the Atonement , trans. Cappadelta, Luigi (St. Louis 1909) 1.288-303.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ This consequence of the Fall of Man is emphasized in Genesis B (397b-408, 425b-32a. 486-89a, 529b-31a, 717b-40a, 750b-58a, 791-99a). Google Scholar

⁶⁰ For the second part of this point, see Young, Jean I., ‘Two Notes on the Later Genesis,’ The Anglo-Saxons, ed. Clemoes, Clemoes (London 1959) 205–6.Google Scholar

⁶¹ See lines 109b-13, 261b-71 in the poem; and for a consideration of them, Isaacs 134-5, 138. Google Scholar

⁶² The Lament serves an important role in the manuscript, but as an ‘event’ the material lacks a parallel in the two homilists' commentary on this portion of sacred history. In treating of the coming of Christ neither Augustine nor Wulfstan refers to Lucifer's crime and punishment. The themes of the Lament, however, have close parallels in the final admonitions of the homilists. This question is dealt with below. Google Scholar

⁶³ That the Temptation has this meaning in the poem has been demonstrated by Finnegan, Robert E., Jr., ‘MS Junius XI Christ and Satan and the Latin and Vernacular Prose Homiletic Traditions' (diss. University of Notre Dame 1969) 141–57. See also Huppé 230-1; and Greenfield, Stanley B., A Critical History of Old English Literarture (New York 1965) 142-3.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ On the importance for salvation history of Christ's conquest over the third temptation, see Shepherd 35. The three temptations were understood by medieval commentators to encompass all sins; in this sense, Christ's conquest over the temptations was the moral highpoint in His life. Milton so used the episode in Paradise Regained. See Howard, Donald R., The Three Temptations (Princeton 1966) 3, 43-75. (The second temptation is not found in Christ and Satan, however, owing to faulty transmission).Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Augustine and the poet differ in where they place emphasis, however. In accord with his catechetical intentions, Augustine stresses Pentecost and the conversions which followed; in line with his Christocentric theme, the poet emphasizes the Resurrection and Ascension, and alludes to Pentecost and its conversions (568b-78). For a consideration of Pentecost in the poem, see Bright, James W., ‘Jottings on the Cædmonian Christ and Satan,’ Modern Language Notes 18 (1903) 130–1.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ See Markus, R. A., Saeculum: History and Society in the Theology of St. Augustine (Cambridge 1970) 63. Markus contrasts the Church history in DCR with the lack of it in De civ. Dei. Google Scholar

⁶⁷ See Bouman, Bouman, ‘He Descended into Hell,' Worship 33 (1958-59) 194. For a comparison between the second section of the poem and the Creed, see Kennedy, Charles W., Early English Christian Poetry (New York 1952) 23. Augustine, of course, subscribed to the doctrine of the Descent into Hell; for a review of his ideas, see MacCulloch, John A., The Harrowing of Hell (Edinburgh 1930) 122-4.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ This point is convincingly made by Finnegan; for summary statements, see iii, 68, 150. Google Scholar

⁶⁹ An excellent analogue to the poet's arrangement is found in an Easter sermon (formerly ascribed to Athanasius) by Basil of Seleucia (PG 28.1081-92). Like the Old English poet, Basil treats of the Second Coming, Harrowing, and Resurrection, and closes his homily with an account of the Temptation. Google Scholar

⁷⁰ For a study of the Lament in its relation to vernacular and Latin homiletic traditions, see Finnegan's first two chapters. Google Scholar