¹ Morris, R., The Blickling Homilies (EETS 58 [London 1874], 63 [1876], 73 [1880]).Google Scholar

² M. Förster, Die Vercelli-Homilien (Bibliothek der angelsächischen Prosa, 12; Hamburg 1932). Homilies 1–9 (lines 1–10) are published. Google Scholar

³ Cf. Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen 91 (1893) 184; 103 (1899) 149; 11 (1906) 301–14; 122 (1909) 246–62, and 129 (1912); Festschrift für Lorenz Morsbach (Halle 1913); Englische Studien 54 (1920) 46–68; Festschrift für Johannes Hoops (Heidelberg 1925) 105–30; Anglia 66 (1942) 42–51, and 73 (1955) 6–36.Google Scholar

⁴ Cf. Anglia 56 (1932) 265–315 and Wulfstanstudien (Bern 1950).Google Scholar

⁵ Cf. Beiträge zur englischen Philologie 30 (1935); Publications of the Modern Language Association 50 (1935) 957–83; Review of English Studies 12 (1936) 1–17; Philologica: Malone Anniversary Studies (Baltimore 1949) 65–78; Speculum 12 (1937) 147–66, and 24 (1949) 76–87.Google Scholar

⁶ ‘Ubi sunt passages in Old English,’ Vetenskaps-Societetens i Lund Aarsbok (Lund 1956) 25–44; ‘On The Wanderer lines 80–84,’ ibid. (Lund 1958–59) 77–110; and Journal of English and Germanic Philology 56 (1957) 434–39. Neophilologus 45 (1961) 63–75 and 46 (1962) 66–70.Google Scholar

⁷ Smithers, G. V. ‘The Meaning of The Seafarer and The Wanderer,’ Medium aevum 26 (1957) 137–53. and 28 (1959) 1–22, 99–104; Cross, J. E. as in n. 6 supra, and Medium aevum 28 (1959) 1–22, 99–104. Gordon, I. L., The Seafarer (London 1960), Introduction.Google Scholar

⁸ Wis, T.én (ed.), Homiliu-bók (Lund 1872) 61.1–64.16.Google Scholar

⁹ Twelfth Century Homilies (EETS OS 137 [London 1909]).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Arkiv för nordisk Filologi 32 (1961) 31–49; 33 (1917) 146–47.Google Scholar

¹¹ Anglia 66 (1942) 47–8. I cannot trace the article by Willard, R. to which Förster refers here.Google Scholar

¹² Anglia 56 (1932) 306, n. 2.Google Scholar

¹³ Cf. Trygve Knudsen, ‘Homiliebøker’ in Kulturhistorisk Leksikon for nordisk middelalder 6 (Copenhagen 1961) 657–66, and references there given. A facsimile Is publihed in Corpus Codicum Islandicorum Medii Aevi 8 (Copenhagen 1935), with an introduction by Fredrik Paasche. Google Scholar

¹⁴ I adopt the sigla used by Förster in his variant apparatus, Die Vercelli-Homilien 53–71; I have accepted his readings of S. O. T. H. Google Scholar

¹⁵ The numeration of items in manuscript collections that have not been printed as a whole is that given by Ker, N. R., Catalogue of Manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford 1957), as is also the dating of the script.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Thorpe, B., The Sermones Catholici or Homilies of Aelfric I, II (London 1844–46).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Cf. Napier, A. S., History of the Holy Rood-Tree (EETS OS 103 [London 1894[), ix; and Ker, Catalogue no. 310 (cf. n. 15 supra). Some additional ascriptions can now be made (cf. n. 18 infra).Google Scholar

¹⁸ Cf. Clemoes, P., ‘The chronology of Aelfric's works’ in The Anglo-Saxons: Studies presented to Bruce Dickins (London 1959) 212–47.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Assmann, B., Angelsächsische Homilien u. Heiligenleben (Bibliothek der angelsächs. Prosa 3; Cassel 1889).Google Scholar

²⁰ Printed by Stephens, G., Tvende Oldengelske Digte (Copenhagen 1853) 81ff. from another manuscript, since Corpus 162 has no more than the heading.Google Scholar

²¹ Anglia 56 (1932) 306; some stylistic peculiarities of Assmann xi and xii are illustrated in Wulfstandstudien 178–82 (cf. n. 4 supra).Google Scholar

²² Cf. Willard, R., Speculum 24 (1949) 76 on the use of this homily in Old English translations. The incipits of three more unpublished homilies could be added: Vercelli 14; C.C.C.C. 303 no. 45, and Hatton 114 no. 55.Google Scholar

²³ Cf. Rochais, H. M., ‘Contributions à l'histoire des florilèges ascétiques du haut moyenâge,’ Revue bénédictine 63 (1953) 246–91) Leclercq, J. L'amour des lettres et le désir de Dieu (Paris 1957) 175–78, and Southern, R. W., The Making of the Middle Ages (London 1953) ch. 4, ii a.Google Scholar

²⁴ On these ‘essentially hortatory treatises’, cf. Laistner, M. L. W., Thought and Letters in Western Europe (2nd ed. London 1957) 315–21.Google Scholar

²⁵ An excerpt from this work was identified in an Old English homily by Jost (Wulfstandstudien 246–47); but the passage was probably taken from a florilegium used by Paulinus. Google Scholar

²⁶ On Alcuin's VV and its sources, cf. Wallach, L. in Harvard Theological Review 48 (1955) 175–95; and his Alcuin and Charlemagne (Ithaca 1959) 231–54.Google Scholar

²⁷ On the use of VV in Norway and Iceland, cf. Widding, O., Sage Book of the Viking Society 14 (1956–7) 291–5; on its use in England, cf. Jost, Anglia 56 (1932) 312–15. Wallach gives a general survey of vernacular translations in Traditio 9 (1953) 149–51; cf. also hls Alcuin and Charlemagne 250.Google Scholar

²⁸ Cf. J. Turville-Petre, Arkiv för nordisk Filologi 75 (1960) 175–6. The tract has been edited by Hellmann, S., TU 3, 4 (Leipzig 1909).Google Scholar

²⁹ Cf. Fournier, P. and Le, G. Bras, Histoire des collections canoniques en Occident I (Paris 1931) 62–4, who note the great activity of Anglo-Saxon scholars in collecting and disseminating moral sentences.Google Scholar

³⁰ Cf. the summary by Buchner, R., Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter: die Rechtsquellen (Weimar 1953) 61-71, and the references given there, especially Le, G. Bras, ‘Pénitentiels’, DThC 12.1160ff.Google Scholar

³¹ Cf. Hellmann, S., Sedulius Scottus (Quellen u. Untersuchungen 1; Munich 1906) 136–44.Google Scholar

³² Cf. Anspach, A. E., ‘Das Fortleben Isidors im VII. bis IX. Jahrhundert’, Miscellanea Isidoriana (Rome 1936) 328–9.Google Scholar

³³ Edited by Ure, J., The Benedictine Office (Edinburgh 1957).Google Scholar

³⁴ Contents discussed by Bateson, M., English Historical Review 10 (1895) 712–31; Bethurum, D., Publications of the Modern Language Association 57 (1942) 916–29. It should be noted that MS. C.C.C.C. 190 includes a text of the Liber scintillarum with a few English glosses, and that C.C.C.C. 265 has a number of excerpts from the Corpus canonum Hibernensium. Google Scholar

³⁵ The sources have been examined by Lawson, A. C., in an unpublished dissertation (1937) deposited in the Bodleian Library, Oxford; MS. Engl. theol. C 56.Google Scholar

³⁶ Cf. the edition and commentary by Turner, C. H., Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1921) 306–20.Google Scholar

³⁷ Förster, , Anglia 66 (1942) 47–8.Google Scholar

³⁸ Anglia 56 (1932) 307–12.Google Scholar

³⁹ Printed by Thorpe, Ancient Laws and Institutes II (London 1840) 394. The fragment of another bilingual, more literally translated, exists in Bodley 865 (early xi). The whole text of Capit. I is found in the miscellany C.C.C.C. 265. Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Napier, A., Wulfstan (Berlin 1883) 134–143.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Cf. Wallach, L., Alcuin and Charlemagne 240–41.Google Scholar

⁴² Cf. Eccl. off. 2.17. ‘Bene ergo in cilicio et cinere poenitens deplorat peccata, quia in cilicio asperitas est.’ Google Scholar

⁴³ Cf. n. 34 supra. Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Cf. Werminghoff, A., Neues Archiv 27 (1902) 607–51.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Cf. the edition of Kn, A. öpfler (Veröffentlichungen aus dem Kirchenhistorischen Seminar 5; München 1901). Mr. Lawson, C. H., who has prepared a new edition of De ecclesiasticis officiis, informs me that the version of Hrabanus is closer to Isidore's text than to that of Arévalo (PL 83.757–826).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ The text and sources of De vigiliis have been fully discussed by Turner, C. H.; cf. n. 36 supra.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ The nearest analogues I can find to the description of the Devil's vigils in B 6 (Belfour, 54.17–24) are as follows: Basil, Admonitio 12: ‘Devita inutiles vigilias. Haec sunt inutiles per quas laeditur et deperit anima, si quis vigilaverit circa cogitationes turpissimas …’ Niceta, De vigiliis 8: ‘Inde diabolus, divinarum semper rerum callidus aemulator, sicut jejuni et virginitatem vanam et baptismata inania suis cultoribus dedit, ita et hoc sanctum aemulatus officium nocturna sacra et vigilias suis commiseronibus addidit …’ Ibid 9: ‘Sunt enim et ex maligne vigiliae, sicut in Proverbiis legitur, quia ablatus est somnus ab oculis eorum: non enim dormiunt, inquit, nisi male fecerint. Sed absint … ab hoc conventu tales vigiliae.’ Ibid 7. ‘Sobrii estote et vigilate, quia adversarius vester diabolus tamquam leo rugiens cireuit quaerens quem devoret’ (1 Pet. 5.8). Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Cf. Leclercq, J., op. cit. 101.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Only the shortened A-version of CCH is in print; but I have compared MS Hatton 42 of the B-version, which does not differ materially in these chapters. It should however be noted that an eighth century manuscript of the B-version has these three books differently constituted (see Wasserschleben's note ad. loc.). Google Scholar

⁵⁰ The otherwise unrecorded p. part./adj. (ge) elfremod (cf. Forster's edition n. 64) replace the p. part. of afremdian, found as a finite verb in V 10 (afremedon, more correctly afremdedon in C.C.C.C. 421); the alternative formation afremðan is found in the Vespasian Psalter gloss (afremðae sint), where also is the verb-abstract afremðung. Cf. on these words Gneuss, H., Lehnbildungen und Lehnbedeut ungen im Altenglischen (Berlin 1955) 104.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Vespasian Psalter gloss (mid ix) 30.19. ‘muta efficiantur labia dolosa: dumbe sien gefremed weolere fæcne.’ Alfredian translation of Bede (Schipper 16.213) ‘ut Christianus efficeretur: ϸæt he cristen wære gefremed.’ Google Scholar

⁵² Jost has shown (Anglia 56 [1932 [312–15) that excerpts included in a miscellany of the mid-eleventh century are from the same translation as Vsp., although they reproduce an inferior text. Vsp. has been printed by R. D-N. Warner, EETS OS 152 (London 1917). Google Scholar

⁵³ Cf. M. Ångström, Studies in Old English MSS (Uppsala 1937) 105–09. Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile 10 (Copenhagen 1960).Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Sisam, K., Studies in the History of Old English Literature (Oxford 1953) 150-56; cf. also Clemoes, P. in The Anglo-Saxons (1959) 220ff.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ The correspondence in order has been noticed by Willard, R., op. cit. 38.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ The relationship of Aelfric's CH to the homiliary of Paul the Deacon has been demonstrated by Smetana, C. L., Traditio 15 (1959) 163–204, who has also drawn attention to Aelfric's use of Haymo's homilies (ibid. 17 [1961] 457–69).CrossRefGoogle Scholar