Despite scholarly attention on its later medieval popularity, the feast of Anne, the mother of the Virgin Mary, first appeared in the West in twelfth-century England. The earliest surviving liturgical texts for the feast were composed in the 1130s by Osbert of Clare, prior of Westminster, for Worcester Cathedral. They attest to the novelty of the celebration and the process by which a saintly identity was constructed for Anne, an apocryphal figure. To understand why Anne began to be celebrated at this time and how her liturgy was crafted, this article explores Osbert's texts in their devotional context. A lively monastic cult of the Virgin Mary in England provides an important backdrop to the emergence of the celebration of Anne. Debates about the Anglo-Saxon feast of Mary's Conception were especially influential, and a comparison between the liturgical texts for the feast of the Conception and the feast of Anne yields striking parallels. This suggests that the liturgy for Anne both drew on and supported the contentious feast of the Conception. At the same time, Anne was presented as a monastic role model, a virtuous and chaste woman with special appeal for nuns. The history and identity of Anne were therefore deeply embedded in trends of monastic devotion to Mary as Anne was shaped into a deserving mother of her illustrious offspring but also as a worthy saint in her own right.

This article investigates a specific twelfth-century hand that occurs in a group of manuscripts connected to the Norman abbey of Mont-Saint-Michel and identifies it as the hand of Robert of Torigni, the famous Anglo-Norman historian who became abbot of that monastery in 1154. The manuscripts used as evidence all contain corrections and interlinear glosses in what I contend constitutes Robert's own hand, and have neither been studied comparatively nor had their relationships scrutinized. Indeed, scholarship to date has actually argued for different examples of handwriting altogether as belonging to Robert and has not inquired as to whether the glosses and annotations contained within the codices discussed here could be indicative of Robert's scribal activity in the scriptorium of Mont-Saint-Michel during the period of his abbacy (1154–86). This article, therefore, seeks to challenge the prevailing notions concerning Robert's characteristic handwriting, both in terms of its supposed shape and character, and with regard to the manuscripts in which it is thought to survive. This fundamental reassessment of previous scholarship will be achieved by combining, for the first time, a comprehensive paleographical analysis of the manuscripts with a discussion of their broader historical and institutional contexts. Furthermore, and perhaps more significantly, in identifying Robert's hand and the contexts in which it survives, this article aims to enhance our knowledge concerning the person behind the script. It will present new and important insights into Robert's activities as head of his monastic community, as well as into his methods as a monastic historian who, as will be shown, was intimately involved in the processes of manuscript production at Mont-Saint-Michel during the second half of the twelfth century. Ultimately, this article argues that Robert, despite being the author and intellectual architect of complex and influential historical works, had in fact very little training as a book scribe, which is evidenced by his handwriting.

The non-Wycliffite Middle English commentaries on the Synoptic Gospels in MSS London, British Library Egerton 842 (Matt.), Cambridge, University Library Ii.2.12 (Matt.), and Cambridge, Corpus Christi College Parker 32 (Mark and Luke) are important witnesses to the widespread appeal of scholastic exegesis in later fourteenth-century England. They appear to have been produced by two different commentators (or teams of commentators) who worked without knowledge of one another's undertakings but responded similarly to the demand for vernacular biblical material. The commentary on Matthew represents a more extensive effort at compilation than the Mark and Luke texts, and, in his elaborate prologue, the Matthew commentator translates the priorities of scholastic Latin criticism even as he tailors his writing to meet the perceived needs of his English readers. Especially when considered alongside the Wycliffite Glossed Gospels, these texts illustrate further the variety and richness of vernacular biblical commentary composed in the decades following the important precedent of Richard Rolle's English Psalter.

The human face has the capacity to generate expressions associated with a wide range of affective states. Despite the fact that there are few words to describe human facial behaviors, the facial muscles allow for more than a thousand different facial appearances. Some examples of feelings that can be expressed are anger, concentration, contempt, excitement, nervousness, and surprise. Regardless of culture or language, the same expressions are associated with the same emotions and vary only in intensity. Using modern psychological analyses as a point of departure, this essay examines descriptions of human facial expressions as well as such bodily “symptoms” as flushing, turning pale, and weeping in Old Norse-Icelandic literature. The aim is to analyze the manner in which facial signs are used as a means of non-verbal communication to convey the impression of an individual's internal state to observers. More specifically, this essay seeks to determine when and why characters in these works are described as expressing particular facial emotions and, especially, the range of emotions expressed. The Sagas and þættir of Icelanders are in the forefront of the analysis and yield well over one hundred references to human facial expression and color. The examples show that through gaze, smiling, weeping, brows that are raised or knitted, and coloration, the Sagas and þættir of Icelanders tell of happiness or amusement, pleasant and unpleasant surprise, fear, anger, rage, sadness, interest, concern, and even mixed emotions for which language has no words. The Sagas and þættir of Icelanders may be reticent in talking about emotions and poor in emotional vocabulary, but this poverty is compensated for by making facial expressions signifiers of emotion. This essay makes clear that the works are less emotionally barren than often supposed. It also shows that our understanding of Old Norse-Icelandic “somatic semiotics” may well depend on the universality of facial expressions and that culture-specific “display rules” or “elicitors” are virtually nonexistent.

This article revisits a set of sixteen hexameters by Guarino on the accession of Leonello d'Este in 1442. The poem was first published by Ian Thomson, whose text can be improved in several minor points as well as one major one. Thomson had already realized that Guarino's lines are not transmitted in their original order and had proposed to move lines 4–6 to follow line 11. The displacement is in fact even more extensive than he realized but has a simple mechanical explanation and a simple solution. Once the lines are properly distributed, the piece emerges as a dialogue between an unnamed speaker and the city of Ferrara, perhaps intended to accompany a visual representation of some sort. Thomson's theory that Guarino ghost-wrote the poem for an unnamed presbyter to present to Leonello is shown to be problematic.

The Latin translation of al-Ghazali's Maqās˙id al-falāsifa was one of the works through which scholastic authors became familiar with the Arabic tradition of Aristotelian philosophy after its translation in the middle of the twelfth century. However, while historians have examined in great detail the impact of Avicenna and Averroes on the Latin intellectual tradition, the place of this translation of al-Ghazali, known commonly as the Summa theoricae philosophiae, remains unclear. This study enumerates and describes the Latin audience of al-Ghazali by building on Manuel Alonso's research with a new bibliography of the known readers of the Summa theoricae philosophiae. It also treats Latin scholars' perception of the figure of al-Ghazali, or Algazel in Latin, since their understanding in no way resembles the Ash'arite jurist, Sufi mystic, and circumspect philosopher known in the Muslim world. Latin scholars most commonly viewed him only as an uncritical follower of Avicenna and Aristotle, but they also described him in other ways during the Middle Ages. In addition to tracing the rise, decline, and recovery of Algazel and the Summa theoricae philosophiae in Latin Christendom over a period of four centuries, this study examines the development of Algazel's identity as he shifts from a useful Arab to a dangerous heretic in the minds of Latin scholars.