the second chapter. And in this, his portion of St Mark, he does not give us an independent version, as he has done in St Matthew, but a verbal copy of the Lindisfarne, with its grammatical inflections southernized. Clearly, then, the Lindisfarne gloss came to the knowledge of Farman when he had reached the end of St Matthew, and he began using it for his Mark, till tired of mere transcription, he stopped in the middle of a verse, and left Owun to go on with it. This view is completely confirmed by Owun's colophon to St John, already referred to, which is de min bruche gibidde fore owun de das boc gloesde. færmen Sæm preoste æt harawuda. hæfe nu boc awritne,' &c. 'Who makes use of me, pray for Owun who glossed this book. For Farman the priest at Harwood (I) have now written the book'.' This, by the way, is erroneously translated in the Surtees edition....By the express statement of Owun then, as well as by the internal evidence of the gloss, his work was contemporary with that of Farman; and it is interesting to find the latter again taking up the pen at John xviii. 1-3, and giving us three verses of independent translation of the same quality as his rendering of Matthew, which have a striking effect in the midst of Owun's copy of the northern gloss. The Monastery of Harwood, in the West Riding of Yorkshire, was near enough the Mercian border to include inmates of Midland as well as Northern extraction. Farman, the presbyter,' was evidently one of the former: that Owun was one of the latter is apparent from the fact that his copy of the Lindisfarne [MS.] is evidently more decidedly and consistently northern than the original, and is thus of some value in investigating the progress of the northern tongue, of which the remains are so scanty....The northern glosses testify in a remarkable manner to the different degrees of rapidity with which even adjacent dialects may change, for some of the forms which they preserve are wondrously archaic, e. g., the first person singular of the verb in o, ic cuedo, ic sello, &c., which, with its later form, u, was already disappearing in the Wessex dialect of King Alfred's time, leaving only e in the 'classical' period of Anglo-Saxon, and still more the forms in m, as ic dom, ic biom, the old Aryan person-ending of Sanscrit and Greek (τioŋμi, þvμi). The reflexive possessive sin also preserves a Teutonic pronoun utterly lost 2 in West Saxon and later English; other archaic pronominal forms being mec, dec, and usser for ure. The umlaut of o, moreover, constantly remains as oe, as in doema, boec, whereas in the West Saxon it had already, in the days of Alfred, become simple e. But along with these archaisms, there is an equally wonderful anticipation of centuries later in the breaking down of grammatical inflections, especially in the loss of final n, and general 'levelling' of the signs of case and number in the different genders and declensions; so that, to sum up the whole in two words, while the Northern dialect of the tenth 1 Dr Murray now further corrects this by help of the punctuation of the MS. as given in my edition, and takes harfe to be in the imperative mood. See p. xi. 2 Sin="its" occurs once in The Blickling Homilies, ed. Morris, p. 125, 1. 21.-Note by Mr E. Brock. It does not occur in Beowulf. century is on one side centuries older than Alfred, on another it is more modern than Chaucer. Its phonetic development was then, as now, behind that of the Southern tongue; in retaining the pre-Conquest a, which Southern English has made o in bone, more, the u, which in the South has become ow, in now, cow, the guttural ch, the kn, wr, wh, and other vigorous consonantal combinations, Northern-English and Lowland-Scotch are still, phonetically, old English dialects." I again express my thanks to the Syndics of the Pitt Press, for undertaking the publication of this fourth volume of the series of the Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Gospels. It is with great satisfaction that I can now say that Mr Kemble's original plan of representing all the texts has been at last carried out, after a lapse of more than forty years since the time of its commencement 1. Of the AngloSaxon versions, both the best and the latest texts are printed in full, side by side, the Various Readings of the other four MSS. affording such slight variations that the full texts, as contained in them also, can be safely inferred. Of the Northumbrian versions, the Lindisfarne MS. is presented in full, together with the Latin text and all the extraneous matter, such as the Prefaces of St Jerome, the imperfect lists of lessons, the Argumenta, and Capitula Lectionum. Except in the small portion of St Matthew (xxv. 7 to the end) edited by Mr Hardwick, the Ammonian sections are also marked in the margin, as in the MS. The gloss of the Rushworth MS. is also given in full, whilst the Appendices to St Mark, St Luke, and St John exhibit all the variations in the Latin text of those Gospels. Considerable pains have been taken to represent the MSS. faithfully; and the recent publications of the Palæographical Society afford a fair test of the general character of the work. Plate no. 90 of this series represents, in exact facsimile, a page of the Rushworth MS., or "The Gospels of Mac Regol," containing St Luke xvi. 25xvii. 6; and thus presents to us, practically, the original of a passage taken at random. On comparing my print of this passage with the facsimile, I have discovered one slight error, viz., that cwed in v. 31 should have been printed as cwas in this instance, though sometimes written cwed in other passages. The dif ficulty of attaining to perfect accuracy in such a matter is best shewn by consulting the transcript printed by the Palæographical Society, under the more favourable circumstance of having the facsimile at the side of the printed text. In this transcript there are three variations from the MS., viz., daforlicra for darof-licra, xvii. 2; donne for donne, xvii. 2; and "rihten" for "drihten," xvii. 6; all manifest errors of the press merely, and of a character which it is very difficult wholly to avoid. In the Surtees Society's edition, pp. 134-136, the reading cwed occurs in v. 31, which I suppose I must have followed. In xvii. 2, cern is printed curn, but 1 The original "prospectus" is printed at p. 162 of the Bibliothèque Anglo-Saxonne, par F. Michel; Paris and London, 1837. it the MS. is here smudged, and the second letter of the word is rather doubtful ; looks like e or o rather than u. In xvii. 4, the word sidum is omitted on its first occurrence, and, on its second occurrence, is printed siðun; whilst the symbol 1 (before forgef) is omitted. In xvii. 6, the verse is made to begin with " cwæd"; but it is best to print cwa only. The real reading of the MS. is d cwad (sic); but the letter d, thus standing alone, means nothing, and is to be explained away. The Latin word below this gloss is dixit, and it is clear that the scribe (as in other places in the MS.) began to write the Latin word which he had in his mind, but immediately desisted, and wrote cwad. These are but slight slips, and shew that Mr Waring's edition is very fairly correct; the chief shortcomings in it being rather in the text of the Lindisfarne than of the Rushworth MS. I here subjoin, for the reader's convenience, a brief list of the most useful books in connection with the present subject. I. TEXTS OF THE GOSPELS. (See these described in Preface to St Mark, p. xiv.) 1. The Gospels of the fower Euangelistes, translated in the olde Saxons tyme out of Latin into the vulgare toung of the Saxons, &c. (Edited by John Foxe). Printed by John Daye; London, 1571. 2. Quatuor D. N. Jesu Christi Euangeliorum Versiones perantiquæ duæ, Gothica scilicet et Anglo-Saxonica ; &c. Edited by Junius and Marshall. Dordrecht, 1665; reprinted at Amsterdam, 1684. 3. Đa halgan godspel on Englisc. Edited by B. Thorpe. London, 1842. 4. The Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels, in parallel columns with the Versions of Wicliffe and Tyndale. Edited by Dr Bosworth and G. Waring. London, 1865. 5. Die Vier Evangelien in Alt-Northumbrischer Sprache...herausgegeben von K. W. Bouterwek. Gütersloh, 1857. Contains also the lives of St Matthew and St John, the arguments to St Matthew, and the Preface of St Jerome; from the Lindisfarne MS. Also a Glossary. 6. Screadunga (Fragments). Edited by K. W. Bouterwek. Elberfeld, 1858. Contains the lives of St Mark and St Luke, and the arguments to St Mark's, St Luke's, and St John's Gospels, from the Lindisfarne MS. Also St Mark's Gospel (with the Latin text) from the Rushworth MS. 7. The Gospel of St Matthew, Northumbrian Versions; from the Lindisfarne and Rushworth MSS. Ed. Rev. J. Stevenson. (Surtees Society, no. 28). 1854. 8. The Gospel of St Mark, Northumbrian Versions; from the same MSS. Ed. G. Waring. (Surtees Society, no. 39). 1860. 9. The Gospel of St Luke, Northumbrian Versions; from the same MSS. Ed. G. Waring. (Surtees Society, no. 43). 1863. 10. The Gospel of St John, Northumbrian Versions; from the same MSS. Ed. G. Waring. (Surtees Society, no. 48). 1865. The Preface and Prolegomena are of considerable value; on which account I here subjoin an epitome of their contents. Argument to the Preface to the Surtees Society's edition, pp. vii-xxxv. Conversion of the Teutonic races. The church of Northumbria established under king Edwin of Deira (A.D. 627). Edwin defeated and slain by Penda, king of Mercia; and consequent sufferings of the church. Re-establishment of Christianity under Oswald, A.D. 634. Aidan, first bishop of Lindisfarne. Death of Oswald, A.D. 642. Colman, bishop of Lindisfarne, vacates the see, and retires to Iona. Eata, abbot of Lindisfarne, and St Cuthbert, prior, A.D. 664; the seat of the bishopric being removed to York till A.D. 678. St Cuthbert's excellent work. He is consecrated bishop of Lindisfarne, A.D. 685. His death, Mar. 20, 687. His last instructions. Succeeded by Eadbert, died A.D. 698, Succeeded by Eadfrith, to whom (probably before his appointment to the bishopric) the Latin text of the Lindisfarne MS. is due. Memoirs and legends of St Cuthbert. Great invasion of the Danes, A.D. 875. The bones of St Cuthbert, together with the Lindisfarne MS., are removed from the island for greater safety. Legend of the loss of the MS. in the sea, and of its miraculous recovery. Establishment of a new see at Chester-le-Street, six miles from Durham, with a shrine of St Cuthbert; here also the MS. was preserved. After 113 years, the shrine of St Cuthbert is temporarily transferred to Ripon, but is finally established at Durham. The priory church of Lindisfarne is rebuilt, A.D. 1093, and the MS. restored to its first abode, where it remained till the time of the dissolution of the monasteries under Henry VIII. It comes into the hands of Sir Robert Cotton, and is at last deposited in the British Museum. Argument to the Prolegomena, pp. xxxvi-cxxv. Description of the Lindisfarne MS., copied from Prof. Westwood's Palæographia Sacra Pictoria. Observations upon the ornamentation of the same MS., by J. B. Waring, Esq. Translations of, and remarks upon, the entries made by Aldred the glossator'. Description of the Rushworth MS., copied from Prof. Westwood's Paleographia Sacra Pictoria. Copies of, and remarks upon, the entries made in the MS. by Owun and Farman, who wrote the glosses. The MS. is given by John Rushworth, barrister of Lincoln's Inn, and deputy-clerk to the House of Commons during the Long Parliament, to the Bodleian library. Remarks on the Latin versions of the Bible, especially on the Italic version and the version of St Jerome. The latter is corrected by Sixtus V. and Clement VIII., and the Vulgate edition of A.D. 1592 is finally and fully authorized. Specimens of errors in the Latin text of the Lindisfarne MS., and of still greater errors in that of the Rushworth MS. Similarity of the latter to MS. Corp. Chr. Coll. Cam. no. 197. Collation of the Latin texts of St Matthew's Gospel, in which "a double comparison has been instituted; first, between our two texts (Lind. and Rushw.) and the printed Vulgate; secondly, between the discrepancies so ascertained and the four forms of the Italic version edited by Blanchini (Evangeliarium Quadruplex, 1749)." To which is added a comparison of the Rushworth MS. with MS. 122 in the library of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. The collations of St Matthew occupy pp. lxiii-xeix. Remarks on the Northumbrian glosses. Supposition that the Rushworth gloss is the older of the two. The date (viz. 1100-1150), assigned to these glosses by Bouterwek, is rejected. Comparison of the glosses. The writers of the Rushworth gloss, named Farman and Owun, were certainly contemporaries. Comparison of these glosses with the Durham Ritual and the Cotton Psalter (MS. Cott. Vesp. A. 1)3. Instances of the extraordinary igno 1 See above, pp. viii-x. 'This I have proved to be not the case; St Mark's Gospel, pref. pp. xii, xiii. 3 The inference that both glosses are derived from an older common source, is quite untenable. I have pointed out the real state of the case; see the last note. 4 Of this there can be no doubt. 5 See remark on the latter on p. xix. Peculiarities of Orthography in these glosses, as com- rance displayed by the writers of the glosses'. pared with the usual spelling in West-Saxon MSS. 11. The Gospel according to St Matthew; Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions. Ed. J. M. Kemble and C. Hardwick. Cambridge, 1858. 12. The Gospel according to St Mark; Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions. Ed. W. W. Skeat. Cambridge, 1871. 13. The Gospel according to St Luke; Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions. Ed. W. W. Skeat. Cambridge, 1874. 14. The Gospel according to St John; Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian Versions. Ed. W. W. Skeat. Cambridge, 1878. To which may be added: 15. The Wycliffite Versions of the Holy Bible. shall and Sir F. Madden. With a Glossary. 4 vols. Edited by the Rev. J. For- The Preface contains much valuable information; see a quotation from it in my Pref. to St Mark, pp. ii, iii. OTHER WORKS RELATING TO THE MSS. Palæographia Sacra Pictoria; by J. O. Westwood, M.A. See the quotations, describing the Lindisfarne and Rushworth MSS., in Waring's Prolegomena to St John, pp. xxxvi-xl, and pp. xlvii-l. Facsimiles of the Miniatures and Ornaments of Anglo-Saxon and Irish Manuscripts; by J. O. Westwood, M.A. London, 1868. This work gives specimens of ornamentation from the Lindisfarne and Rushworth MSS.; with descriptions of the MSS. See also Astle's Origin of Writing; Humphrey's Illuminated Books of the Middle Ages; Shaw's Illuminated Ornaments; Strutt's Horda Angel-cynnan; &c. Publications of the Palæographical Society. Plates 3-6 and 22 give specimen-pages of the Lindisfarne MS.; and Plates 90 and 91, of the Rushworth MS. Original Letters of Eminent Literary Men. Ed. Sir H. Ellis, K.H., F.R.S. Camden Society, 1843. See p. 267 for Sir F. Madden's remarks on the MSS. The identity of the handwriting in the Durham Ritual with that in the Lindisfarne MS. is by no means so certain as is here implied. 1 For a few examples, see St Mark, pref. p. xxviii. 2 See St Mark, pref. p. xxix. See St Mark, pref. p. xxx. |