The earliest texts with English and French
Identifieur interne : 000B06 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000B05; suivant : 000B07The earliest texts with English and French
Auteurs : David W. PorterSource :
- Anglo-Saxon England [ 0263-6751 ] ; 1999-12.
Abstract
Modern scholars can sometimes reconstruct the methods of medieval glossary-makers by tracking individual glosses along the path from the textual source to the final destination in the glossarial list. Here I wish to pursue a trail of clues through two early-eleventh-century manuscripts of the Excerptiones de Prisciano (‘Excerpts of Priscian’), a Latin grammatical treatise which has been identified as the source for Ælfric's bilingual Grammar. Viewed singly, the manuscripts of this work offer partial views of glossatorial activity; viewed together, these fragmentary glimpses snap into perspective, rendering a dynamic picture of glossary-making as a corporate enterprise undertaken by a group of Anglo-Saxon schoolmen working in several manuscripts simultaneously.
Url:
DOI: 10.1017/S0263675100002271
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:5BE421B811333B1E4175DCD6CE1C736292680709Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>The earliest texts with English and French</title><author><name sortKey="Porter, David W" sort="Porter, David W" uniqKey="Porter D" first="David W." last="Porter">David W. Porter</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:5BE421B811333B1E4175DCD6CE1C736292680709</idno><date when="1999" year="1999">1999</date><idno type="doi">10.1017/S0263675100002271</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K/fulltext.pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000B06</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000B06</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">The earliest texts with English and French</title><author><name sortKey="Porter, David W" sort="Porter, David W" uniqKey="Porter D" first="David W." last="Porter">David W. Porter</name></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Anglo-Saxon England</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Anglo-Saxon England</title><idno type="ISSN">0263-6751</idno><idno type="eISSN">1474-0532</idno><imprint><publisher>Cambridge University Press</publisher><pubPlace>Cambridge, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1999-12">1999-12</date><biblScope unit="volume">28</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="87">87</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="110">110</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0263-6751</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0263-6751</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">Modern scholars can sometimes reconstruct the methods of medieval glossary-makers by tracking individual glosses along the path from the textual source to the final destination in the glossarial list. Here I wish to pursue a trail of clues through two early-eleventh-century manuscripts of the Excerptiones de Prisciano (‘Excerpts of Priscian’), a Latin grammatical treatise which has been identified as the source for Ælfric's bilingual Grammar. Viewed singly, the manuscripts of this work offer partial views of glossatorial activity; viewed together, these fragmentary glimpses snap into perspective, rendering a dynamic picture of glossary-making as a corporate enterprise undertaken by a group of Anglo-Saxon schoolmen working in several manuscripts simultaneously.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>cambridge</corpusName><author><json:item><name>David W. Porter</name></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>00227</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Modern scholars can sometimes reconstruct the methods of medieval glossary-makers by tracking individual glosses along the path from the textual source to the final destination in the glossarial list. Here I wish to pursue a trail of clues through two early-eleventh-century manuscripts of the Excerptiones de Prisciano (‘Excerpts of Priscian’), a Latin grammatical treatise which has been identified as the source for Ælfric's bilingual Grammar. Viewed singly, the manuscripts of this work offer partial views of glossatorial activity; viewed together, these fragmentary glimpses snap into perspective, rendering a dynamic picture of glossary-making as a corporate enterprise undertaken by a group of Anglo-Saxon schoolmen working in several manuscripts simultaneously.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.296</score><pdfWordCount>10575</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>60339</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>24</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>451.44 x 697.68 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>108</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>770</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>0</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>The earliest texts with English and French</title><pii><json:string>S0263675100002271</json:string></pii><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>Anglo-Saxon England</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><issn><json:string>0263-6751</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1474-0532</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>ASE</json:string></publisherId><volume>28</volume><pages><first>87</first><last>110</last><total>24</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K</json:string></ark><categories><inist><json:string>1 - sciences humaines et sociales</json:string></inist></categories><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1999</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1017/S0263675100002271</json:string></doi><id>5BE421B811333B1E4175DCD6CE1C736292680709</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K/fulltext.pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K/bundle.zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K/fulltext.tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">The earliest texts with English and French</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher scheme="https://scientific-publisher.data.istex.fr">Cambridge University Press</publisher><pubPlace>Cambridge, UK</pubPlace><availability><licence><p>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999</p></licence><p scheme="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-G3RCRD03-V">cambridge</p></availability><date>1999</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="research-article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</note><note type="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">The earliest texts with English and French</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">David W.</forename><surname>Porter</surname></persName></author><idno type="istex">5BE421B811333B1E4175DCD6CE1C736292680709</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1017/S0263675100002271</idno><idno type="PII">S0263675100002271</idno><idno type="article-id">00227</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Anglo-Saxon England</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Anglo-Saxon England</title><idno type="pISSN">0263-6751</idno><idno type="eISSN">1474-0532</idno><idno type="publisher-id">ASE</idno><imprint><publisher>Cambridge University Press</publisher><pubPlace>Cambridge, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1999-12"></date><biblScope unit="volume">28</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="87">87</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="110">110</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1999</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract style="text-abstract"><p>Modern scholars can sometimes reconstruct the methods of medieval glossary-makers by tracking individual glosses along the path from the textual source to the final destination in the glossarial list. Here I wish to pursue a trail of clues through two early-eleventh-century manuscripts of the Excerptiones de Prisciano (‘Excerpts of Priscian’), a Latin grammatical treatise which has been identified as the source for Ælfric's bilingual Grammar. Viewed singly, the manuscripts of this work offer partial views of glossatorial activity; viewed together, these fragmentary glimpses snap into perspective, rendering a dynamic picture of glossary-making as a corporate enterprise undertaken by a group of Anglo-Saxon schoolmen working in several manuscripts simultaneously.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1999-12">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K/fulltext.txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus cambridge not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.2 20060430//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article dtd-version="2.2" article-type="research-article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ASE</journal-id><journal-title>Anglo-Saxon England</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title>Anglo-Saxon England</abbrev-journal-title><issn pub-type="ppub">0263-6751</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1474-0532</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Cambridge University Press</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Cambridge, UK</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S0263675100002271</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pii">S0263675100002271</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">00227</article-id><title-group><article-title>The earliest texts with English and French</article-title><alt-title alt-title-type="left-running">David W. Porter</alt-title><alt-title alt-title-type="right-running">The earliest texts with English and French</alt-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib><name><surname>Porter</surname><given-names>David W.</given-names></name></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>12</month><year>1999</year></pub-date><volume>28</volume><fpage seq="8">87</fpage><lpage>110</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999</copyright-statement><copyright-year>1999</copyright-year><copyright-holder>Cambridge University Press</copyright-holder></permissions><abstract abstract-type="text-abstract"><p>Modern scholars can sometimes reconstruct the methods of medieval glossary-makers by tracking individual glosses along the path from the textual source to the final destination in the glossarial list. Here I wish to pursue a trail of clues through two early-eleventh-century manuscripts of the <italic>Excerptiones de Prisciano</italic> (‘Excerpts of Priscian’), a Latin grammatical treatise which has been identified as the source for Ælfric's bilingual <italic>Grammar</italic>. Viewed singly, the manuscripts of this work offer partial views of glossatorial activity; viewed together, these fragmentary glimpses snap into perspective, rendering a dynamic picture of glossary-making as a corporate enterprise undertaken by a group of Anglo-Saxon schoolmen working in several manuscripts simultaneously.</p></abstract><counts><page-count count="24"></page-count></counts><custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta><meta-name>pdf</meta-name><meta-value>S0263675100002271a.pdf</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-wrap></article-meta></front><back><fn-group><fn id="fn01" symbol="1"><label><sup>1</sup></label><p>As <citation id="ref001" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Lendinara</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name> has observed: ‘<article-title>The Abbo Glossary in London, British Library, Cotton Domitian i</article-title>’, <source>ASE</source> <volume>19</volume> (<year>1990</year>), <fpage>133</fpage>–47, at <fpage>133</fpage>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn02" symbol="2"><label><sup>2</sup></label><p>The only general study of the <italic>Excerptiones</italic> is by <citation id="ref002" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Law</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title>Anglo-Saxon England: Ælfric's “Excerptiones de Arte Grammatica Anglice”</article-title>’, <source>Histoire Épistémologie Langage</source> <volume>9</volume> (<year>1987</year>), <fpage>47</fpage>–<lpage>71</lpage>.</citation> The same author's <citation id="ref003" citation-type="book"><source>Insular Latin Grammarians</source> (<publisher-loc>Woodbridge</publisher-loc>, <year>1982</year>)</citation> is the standard point of reference for Anglo-Saxon grammatical studies. For a description of Ælfric's use of the <italic>Excerptiones</italic>, see <citation id="ref004" citation-type="thesis"><name><surname>Bender-Davis</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name>, ‘Ælfric's Techniques of Translation and Adaptation as Seen in the Composition of his Old English Latin Grammar’ (unpubl. PhD dissertation, <publisher-name>Pennsylvania State Univ.</publisher-name>, <year>1985</year>).</citation> The <italic>Grammar</italic> is edited in <citation id="ref005" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Zupitza</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name>, <source>Ælfrics Grammatik und Glossar</source> (<publisher-loc>Berlin</publisher-loc>, <year>1880</year>) [henceforth cited as <italic>Grammatik</italic>].</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn03" symbol="3"><label><sup>3</sup></label><p>See <citation id="ref006" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Ker</surname><given-names>N. R.</given-names></name>, <source>Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon</source> (<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>, <year>1957</year>), pp. <fpage>1</fpage>–<lpage>3</lpage> (no. 2) and <fpage>442</fpage>–3</citation> (no. 371). <citation id="ref007" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Ladd</surname><given-names>C. A.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title>The “Rubens” Manuscript and <italic>Archbishop Ælfric's Vocabulary</italic></article-title>’, <source>RES</source> <volume>44</volume> (<year>1960</year>), <fpage>353</fpage>–64, discusses the modern history and dismemberment of the Antwerp–London manuscript.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn04" symbol="4"><label><sup>4</sup></label><p><citation id="ref008" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, no. 2</citation>, inventories the contents and the order in which they were written. The additions, beside the glossarial material described below, include Remigius's commentary on Donatus's <italic>Ars minor</italic>, Ælfric's <italic>Colloquy</italic>, several Latin poems, and a letter in Latin prose. <citation id="ref009" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Förster</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title>Die altenglische Glossenhandschrift Plantinus 32 (Antwerpen) und Additional 32246 (London)</article-title>’, <source>Anglia</source> <volume>41</volume> (<year>1917</year>), <fpage>94</fpage>–<lpage>161</lpage></citation>, describes the manuscript and establishes the original arrangement of the leaves (pp. 97–8). He also edits the additions of the Antwerp segment, with the exception of the Remigius commentary and the poem by the Frenchman Herbert, which is discussed below.</p></fn><fn id="fn05" symbol="5"><label><sup>5</sup></label><p><citation id="ref010" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, no. 2</citation>, describes the four lists containing English (one on flyleaves, three in margins). The three marginal lists (two alphabetical and one bilingual class list) are in <citation id="ref011" citation-type="thesis"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name>, ‘The Latin-Old English Glossaries in Plantin-Moretus MS 32 and British Museum Add. 32, 246’ (unpubl. PhD dissertation, <publisher-name>Stanford Univ.</publisher-name>, <year>1955</year>)</citation> [henceforth cited as Kindschi]. All citations below are by page and line from this edition. The glossarial material from the Antwerp segment only is printed in <citation id="ref012" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Förster</surname></name>, ‘Die altenglische Glossenhandschrift’, pp. <fpage>101</fpage>–46.</citation> The glossaries are best known from <citation id="ref013" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Wright</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name> and <name><surname>Wülcker</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name>, <source>Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies</source>, <edition>2nd ed.</edition> (<publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>, <year>1884</year>), cols. 104–91</citation>, edited from the Junius transcript (Oxford, Bodleian Library, Junius 71). The relationship of this transcription to the original is elucidated by <citation id="ref014" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ladd</surname></name>, ‘The “Rubens” Manuscript’.</citation> I discuss the five lists (a Latin-Latin list of architectural terms on Antwerp 43v, in addition to those mentioned by <citation id="ref015" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, in ‘<article-title>On the Antwerp-London Glossaries</article-title>’, <source>JEGP</source> <volume>98</volume> (<year>1999</year>), <fpage>170</fpage>–92</citation>). Other studies touching on this glossarial material include that of <citation id="ref016" citation-type="thesis"><name><surname>Gillingham</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name>, ‘An Edition of Abbot Ælfric's Old English—Latin Glossary with Commentary’ (unpubl. PhD dissertation, <publisher-name>Ohio State Univ.</publisher-name>, <year>1981</year>)</citation>, which analyses the relationship of the class list to Ælfric's <italic>Glossary</italic>, and that of <citation id="ref017" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Lazzari</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title>II canto liturgico nel glossario in latino-inglese antico del ms Antwerpen, Plantin Morenas M. 16.2 (47) + London, BL, Add. 32246</article-title>’, <source>Linguistica e filologia</source> <volume>2</volume> (<year>1996</year>), <fpage>193</fpage>–<lpage>221</lpage></citation>, which examines a discrete batch of the class list. Tania Styles of the University of Nottingham is preparing a thesis on the vocabulary of family relationships in the class list.</p></fn><fn id="fn06" symbol="6"><label><sup>6</sup></label><p>Ker, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, no. 2, art. b. It is in the first glossing hand, the same elegant hand that wrote text glosses and marginal scholia but none of the main text aside from two supply sheets. The list is mostly Latin; there are only a half dozen vernacular interpretamenta among the 1000 items.</p></fn><fn id="fn07" symbol="7"><label><sup>7</sup></label><p>BNF, nouv. acq. lat. 586 is thus to be added to T. A. M. Bishop's list of nine Anglo-Saxon manuscripts that use this abbreviation (<citation id="ref018" citation-type="journal">‘<article-title>Lincoln Cathedral MS 182</article-title>’, <source>Lincolnshire Hist. and Arch.</source> <volume>32</volume> (<year>1967</year>), <fpage>73</fpage>–6, + 2 plates, at p. <fpage>73</fpage>, n. 3</citation>): Lincoln 182 (Bede); Antwerp/London (Priscian); Antwerp, Plantin-Moretus Museum 16.8 (Boethius); Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, 1650 (Aldhelm); Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale, 1828–30 (glossary); Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, 1595 (sermons); London, BL, Cotton Cleopatra D.i (Vitruvius); London, BL, Egerton 267, fol. 37 (Boethius); and Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. lat. 123, fol. 114 (misc.). Bishop puts the Lincoln Bede, the Brussels Aldhelm and both the Antwerp and the London Boethius at Abingdon along with the Antwerp—London manuscript. For other evidence linking the Paris manuscript to the same scriptorium, see below.</p></fn><fn id="fn08" symbol="8"><label><sup>8</sup></label><p>A stain covers several pages in the first original quire, a probable indication of the mishap that occasioned the twelfth-century repairs. Trimming at the outer top margins of the first four original leaves, fols. 16–20, was probably to remove areas disfigured by the same stain. Small spots of the stain are scattered throughout the manuscript, without impairing legibility.</p></fn><fn id="fn09" symbol="9"><label><sup>9</sup></label><p>Beneath the back pastedown, which has separated from the board, is written ‘Demigieu 1754, 12<sup>ct</sup>’. The reference is to the Marquis de Migieu, who acquired the manuscript in 1752 (<citation id="ref019" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, p. <fpage>443</fpage></citation>). Probably it was during this rebinding that the manuscript was trimmed to its present size.</p></fn><fn id="fn10" symbol="10"><label><sup>10</sup></label><p>The lower left margin of 113v does, however, hold the sketch of a well-dressed man clasping his hands in front of him. Executed in dry-point and only faintly visible, the drawing has no connection with the text.</p></fn><fn id="fn11" symbol="11"><label><sup>11</sup></label><p>This ancestor was related to a manuscript used in the composition of Ælfric's <italic>Grammar</italic>. Both Paris and Antwerp—London originally had <italic>deneger</italic> for <italic>degener</italic> (corrected on Paris 34r, uncorrected on Antwerp 6v), a mistake shared with four copies of the <italic>Grammar</italic>, including the oldest, Oxford, St John's College 154 (<citation id="ref020" citation-type="other"><italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. <fpage>45</fpage></citation>). And Ælfric's copy of the <italic>Excerptiones</italic> shared the same tradition of scholia with the extant copies, judging from the items of the paratext absorbed by the <italic>Grammar</italic>, e.g., ‘quaternio, cine oððe feower manna ealdor’ (<citation id="ref021" citation-type="other"><italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. <fpage>35</fpage></citation>); ‘hie quaternio, qui preest iiii militibus uel quattuor dyplomata’ (Paris 31r); ‘glabrio, calu oððe hnot’ (<citation id="ref022" citation-type="other"><italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. <fpage>35</fpage></citation>); ‘glabrio, clauus uel sine pilis’ (Paris 31r). ‘hie lar, ðis fyr/ hi lares, ðas hus. lardum, spic, forðan ðe hit on husum hangað lange’ (<citation id="ref023" citation-type="other"><italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. <fpage>42</fpage></citation>); ‘Lar numero tantum singulari ignem significat. In plurali domus significat. Unde lardum nomen accepit, quod in laribus pendet diu’ (Paris 33r).</p></fn><fn id="fn12" symbol="12"><label><sup>12</sup></label><p>E.g., the omission of <italic>homuncio</italic> from a list of diminutives on London 9r (cf. Paris 16v and <italic>Grammatik</italic> 17.6); the omission on London 9r of several lines of text (beginning ‘ut tignum…’ and ending ‘…ante um’ on Paris 17v); <italic>qui</italic> for <italic>quia</italic> and <italic>sonor</italic> for <italic>soror</italic> on the same page (cf. Paris 18r); and there are many other examples.</p></fn><fn id="fn13" symbol="13"><label><sup>13</sup></label><p>The Paris scribe first misinterpreted an apostrophe as the almost identical abbreviation of <italic>-us</italic>. The <italic>-us</italic> ending has been pointed for deletion but no apostrophe has been inserted. This is the context: ‘Apostrophus dexter pars est circuli, sed ad summam litteram apponitur. Qua nota deesse ostendimus parti orationis ultimam vocalem, ut Tanton' (<italic>Paris</italic>, Tantonus) pro Tantóne, et similia’ (Paris 129rv, Antwerp 46v).</p></fn><fn id="fn14" symbol="14"><label><sup>14</sup></label><p><citation id="ref024" citation-type="other"><italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. <fpage>168</fpage>.10.</citation> It must be said that there is no evidence in either of the manuscripts for textual contamination from the <italic>Grammar</italic>, copies of which were numerous. Any such editing would become immediately evident, since anomalous words would appear among the lists of illustrations. The <italic>diripio</italic> paradigm, however, is the only example where Antwerp—London and the <italic>Grammar</italic> share material omitted by the Paris manuscript. Some vernacular glosses may have originated with Ælfric's <italic>Grammar</italic>, or perhaps even with Ælfric's own copy of the <italic>Excerptiones</italic> (see <citation id="ref025" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, p. <fpage>442</fpage></citation>), but there is no reason to suspect that the monolingual Latin text of the <italic>Excerptiones</italic> differs much from its author's autograph copy.</p></fn><fn id="fn15" symbol="15"><label><sup>15</sup></label><p><citation id="ref026" citation-type="other"><italic>Catalogue</italic>, p. <fpage>1</fpage>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn16" symbol="16"><label><sup>16</sup></label><p><citation id="ref027" citation-type="other"><italic>Vocabularies</italic> II, <fpage>130</fpage>.</citation> These glossaries have recently been re-edited by <citation id="ref028" citation-type="thesis"><name><surname>Rusche</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name>, ‘The Cleopatra Glossaries: an Edition with Commentary on the Glosses and their Sources’ (unpubl. PhD dissertation, <publisher-name>Yale Univ.</publisher-name>, <year>1996</year>).</citation> The Antwerp—London class list has three lemmas beginning with k: <italic>Karchesia</italic>, melas; <italic>Kalende</italic>. i. uocationes, gehealddagas uel halige dagas; <italic>Kalo</italic> g[rece], uoco Latine (<citation id="ref029" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>82</fpage>.14 and <fpage>223</fpage>.8–9</citation>). The compiler of the a-order list could have found four <bold>k</bold> words in the <italic>Excerptiones. karibdis</italic> on London 13r, <italic>kalipso</italic> on Antwerp 5v, <italic>kalends</italic> on Antwerp 15r and <italic>Kartago</italic> on Antwerp 33r.</p></fn><fn id="fn17" symbol="17"><label><sup>17</sup></label><p>The block, beginning ‘ut si falsum…’, ending ‘…proderam. proderas. proderat’, is on Paris 121v–123v.</p></fn><fn id="fn18" symbol="18"><label><sup>18</sup></label><p>The loss of the first folio of quire nine produced an anomalous quire of seven leaves. It is impossible to say whether this loss occurred during medieval times or during the modern dismemberment of the manuscript. All the <bold>r</bold> words from Wright and Wülcker's edition of the Junius transcript can still be found in the manuscript, but Junius copied only items with English, of which the <bold>r</bold> batch probably had none, because the a-order glossary is overwhelmingly Latin—Latin.</p></fn><fn id="fn19" symbol="19"><label><sup>19</sup></label><p>‘Xisma. tis. i. nouaculum’, omitted by Kindschi.</p></fn><fn id="fn20" symbol="20"><label><sup>20</sup></label><p>Each alphabetical batch begins with a capital in the middle of the top margin. Some of these are in red, though now, because of fading, the colour is distinguished only with difficulty. Capitals <bold>l</bold>, <bold>m</bold>, <bold>n</bold> and <bold>o</bold> (Antwerp 20r, 24r, 28r and 32r) are certainly red.</p></fn><fn id="fn21" symbol="21"><label><sup>21</sup></label><p>See the discussion and examples in Porter, ‘Glossaries’.</p></fn><fn id="fn22" symbol="22"><label><sup>22</sup></label><p><citation id="ref030" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Gneuss</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title><italic>Anglicae linguae interpretatio</italic>: Language Contact, Lexical Borrowing and Glossing in Anglo-Saxon England</article-title>’, <source>PBA</source> <volume>82</volume> (<year>1992</year>), <fpage>107</fpage>–48, at <fpage>134</fpage>–7.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn23" symbol="23"><label><sup>23</sup></label><p>E.g., <citation id="ref031" citation-type="book"><source>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</source> (<publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>, <year>1992</year>), <italic>s.v. mentir</italic>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn24" symbol="24"><label><sup>24</sup></label><p><citation id="ref032" citation-type="book"><source>Oxford Latin Dictionary</source>, ed. <name><surname>Glare</surname><given-names>P. G. W.</given-names></name> (<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>, <year>1982</year>), <italic>s.v. detestor</italic>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn25" symbol="25"><label><sup>25</sup></label><p>London 7r: ‘Alia que primitiuorum similem possunt habere significationem’; London 10v: ‘Denominatiuum apcllatur a uoce primitiui sui non ab aliqua speciali significatione’; London 24v: ‘Species uerborum duae sunt, primitiua et diriuatiua, quae inueniuntur fere in omnibus partibus orationis. Est igitur primitiua quae primam positionem ab ipsa natura accepit’; Antwerp 20r: ‘Et seruant significationes primitiuorum, quamuis uideantur quedam ex his in alium sensum transire … Sed si quis attentius inspiciat, non penitus absistunt haec a primitiuorum significatione’; Antwerp 45v: ‘Et sciendum quod poete sepe diriuatiuis utuntur pro primitiuis.’</p></fn><fn id="fn26" symbol="26"><label><sup>26</sup></label><p><italic>Antestor</italic>, ‘to call as a witness’, probably derives from a contraction of *<italic>ante-testor (Oxford Latin Dictionary</italic>, s.v. <italic>antestor</italic>). The a-order list makes a logical but wrong connection with <italic>antistes</italic>, derived from the prefix <italic>ante-</italic> and the verb <italic>sto</italic>, ‘to stand’.</p></fn><fn id="fn27" symbol="27"><label><sup>27</sup></label><p>Of the more than 1000 items in the <bold>a</bold>-order list, about 150 contain repeated material. The verb <italic>asciscere</italic>, for instance, appears twice as a headword on London 2r (<citation id="ref033" citation-type="other"><italic>asscisco</italic>, <name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, p. <fpage>42</fpage>.17;</citation> <italic>adscisco</italic>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref033">ibid.</xref> p. 43.3). <italic>Aqualiculus</italic> appears on Antwerp 2r and again on 2v (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref033">ibid.</xref> pp. 39.2 and 41.18), as does <italic>aplustra</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref033">ibid.</xref> pp. 40.13 and 42.4), etc.</p></fn><fn id="fn28" symbol="28"><label><sup>28</sup></label><p>Examples include contiguous glosses on <italic>mutuo</italic> and <italic>mentio</italic>, first on Antwerp 24r and again on 24v (<citation id="ref034" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>256</fpage>.7–8 and <fpage>257</fpage>.15–16</citation>), on <italic>oria</italic> and <italic>obsonor</italic>, twice on Antwerp 32r (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref034">ibid.</xref> pp. 259.14–15 and 260.11–12), and on <italic>nebulo</italic> and <italic>nequito</italic>, twice on Antwerp 28r (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref034">ibid.</xref> pp. 258.8–9 and 258.13–14).</p></fn><fn id="fn29" symbol="29"><label><sup>29</sup></label><p>Cf., for example, <citation id="ref035" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>255</fpage>.16–256.15 and <fpage>257</fpage>.1–257.20, or <fpage>259</fpage>.7–259.15 and <fpage>260</fpage>.1–260.12.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn30" symbol="30"><label><sup>30</sup></label><p>The variations show that the scribe was not copying slavishly but was editing and interpreting as he transferred glosses from the working copy to the margins, as in the following example (<citation id="ref036" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>258</fpage>.8–9 and <fpage>258</fpage>.13–14</citation>):</p><p>nebulo. i. mendax</p><p>nequito et nequitor. i. nequiter ago, uel inutilem rem ago</p><p>nebulo. i. mendax qui mendaciis quibusdam ueritatem obscurare nititur, uel qui suos</p><p>fallit auditores</p><p>nequito, as. i. nequiter ago. Necatus ferro dicimus. Nectus uero. Alia re peremptus dicitur.</p><p>In this instance the compiler expands the original definitions, but in other instances he abbreviates, sometimes severely (e.g., the two glosses on <citation id="ref037" citation-type="other"><italic>incubo</italic>, <name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>115</fpage>.13 and <fpage>202</fpage>.7</citation>). At a later date I plan to examine the details of the working methods.</p></fn><fn id="fn31" symbol="31"><label><sup>31</sup></label><p><citation id="ref038" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, p. <fpage>116</fpage>.4–5:</citation> ‘Cedes. i. interemptio. Strages uero est ubi multi occiduntur’; ‘Glades. i. morbus’. <citation id="ref039" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, p. <fpage>254</fpage>.1–2: ‘Lues. i. illuuies. sordiditas’; ‘Labes. i. interims’.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn32" symbol="32"><label><sup>32</sup></label><p>See above, pp. 90–4.</p></fn><fn id="fn33" symbol="33"><label><sup>33</sup></label><p>Another distinctive scribal habit is forming the bowl of the <bold>g</bold> as a circle.</p></fn><fn id="fn34" symbol="34"><label><sup>34</sup></label><p>There are, for example, mistakes in Paris that are not repeated in Antwerp—London: incorrect <italic>ma</italic> for <italic>ama</italic> (Paris 80r, Antwerp 23r), incorrect <italic>frigero</italic> for <italic>frigeo</italic> (Paris 87v, Antwerp 27r; cf. <italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. 156.6), and incorrect <italic>indutabilem</italic> for <italic>indubitabilem</italic> (Paris 104v, Antwerp 35r), as well as the omission of the <italic>diripio</italic> paradigm (Paris 90v, Antwerp 28v). Other evidence against direct copying is the relatively large number of text glosses, Latin-Latin or Latin-English, unique to one or other of the manuscripts (especially evident in the section on adverb inflexion, Paris 99v-106r, Antwerp 32v-35v), and the very different pattern of word accents on, for example, Paris 83v and Antwerp 25r. It also seems implausible that an eyeskip error on Antwerp 41r (the omission of the phrase ‘…aduerbia poni debent. Sunt autem pleraque huiuscemodi aduerbia…’) could have arisen from the Paris manuscript, where the two instances of the word <italic>aduerbia</italic> appear on different pages, 116r and 116v.</p></fn><fn id="fn35" symbol="35"><label><sup>35</sup></label><p>Both lemma and interpretamentum mean ‘to surpass’ or ‘to excel’. The French verb in the form <italic>surmunter</italic> is first attested <italic>c.</italic> 1119, in the form <italic>surmonter c.</italic> 1155 (<italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>, s.v.).</p></fn><fn id="fn36" symbol="36"><label><sup>36</sup></label><p><italic>Coniueo</italic> means ‘to wink’ or ‘to leave uncensured’, <italic>ergo</italic> ‘to connive at’. Old French <italic>ceners</italic> means ‘to give a sign’. Latin <italic>nuo</italic> (‘to nod’) is a back formation from <italic>adnuo. Ceners</italic> is the ancestor of modern <italic>signer</italic> (‘to sign’, ‘to make a sign’). For the environment of all these words in the glossary, see p. 104. The earliest attestation of <italic>ceners</italic> is again the <italic>Chanson de Roland</italic>, with the meaning ‘to make the sign of the cross’, according to the <italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>. The same source gives the gloss meaning as common from the twelfth and into the seventeenth century.</p></fn><fn id="fn37" symbol="37"><label><sup>37</sup></label><p><italic>Sufulcirs</italic> is a hapax legomenon, cited in neither Godefroy's <citation id="ref040" citation-type="book"><source>Dictionnaire de l'ancien française</source>, 10 vols. (<publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>, <year>1880</year>–<year>1902</year>)</citation> nor in <citation id="ref041" citation-type="book"><source>Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch</source>, ed. <name><surname>Tobler</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name> and <name><surname>Lommatzsch</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name> (<publisher-loc>Berlin and Wiesbaden</publisher-loc>, <year>1925</year>–; in progress).</citation> The word is apparently a loan formation from Latin <italic>suffulcio</italic>, ‘to prop from below’, ‘to keep from falling’. The form of the word in the Paris manuscript is certain: the final <italic>s</italic> is tall and quite clear. Old French <italic>foucir</italic> is the well-attested reflex of the Latin Lemma., <italic>fulcio</italic> (<citation id="ref042" citation-type="other"><italic>Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch</italic>, p. <fpage>2178</fpage></citation>).</p></fn><fn id="fn38" symbol="38"><label><sup>38</sup></label><p>Because it is attested only very late (fourteenth century), it is problematic to link <italic>perfumers</italic> with the eleventh-century scribe. Nevertheless, the lemma <italic>suffio</italic> occurs twice in the <bold>a</bold>-order list (below, p. 104). Ancestor of modern <italic>parfumer</italic> ‘to perfume’, <italic>porfumers</italic> is of undetermined Romance origin (<italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>, s.v.).</p></fn><fn id="fn39" symbol="39"><label><sup>39</sup></label><p><italic>Merchier</italic>, ancestor of modem <italic>marquer</italic> ‘to mark’, is attested in this form from <italic>c.</italic> 1120 (<italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>, s.v.). The OE cognate <italic>mearcian</italic> is found in the works of Alfred and Ælfric (<italic>Oxford English Dictionary</italic>, s.v. <italic>mark</italic>). It is interesting that Latin <italic>insignire</italic> is interpreted in Ælfric's <italic>Grammar</italic> by OE <italic>mœrsian</italic> (<citation id="ref043" citation-type="other"><italic>Grammatik</italic>, p. <fpage>192</fpage></citation>), which is phonetically similar to the French interpretation here.</p></fn><fn id="fn40" symbol="40"><label><sup>40</sup></label><p><italic>Catolliers</italic>, ancestor of modern <italic>chatouiller</italic> ‘to tickle’ or ‘to titillate’, is attested <italic>c.</italic> 1220. The primitive spelling <italic>ca-</italic> indicates that the word was in currency at an early date (<italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>, s.v.).</p></fn><fn id="fn41" symbol="41"><label><sup>41</sup></label><p>The gloss, damaged by trimming, is illegible at beginning and end. The meaning may be ‘[?to remain] all day is to sojourn’. Whatever the Latin verb, this is evidendy a learned definition arrived at by translating the lemma by a vernacular phrase to which it is linked etymologically. <italic>Soiorners</italic>, ancestor of modern French <italic>séjourner</italic>, has been attested as a late-eleventh-, early-twelfth-century word (<italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>, s.v.); the shift of vowels (/o/ to /e/) is owing to the medieval school-pronunciation of Latin words (<citation id="ref044" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Ewert</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name>, <source>The French Language</source> (<publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>, <year>1933</year>), p. <fpage>55</fpage>).</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn42" symbol="42"><label><sup>42</sup></label><p>Past participle of <italic>suffulcio</italic> ‘to prop below’.</p></fn><fn id="fn43" symbol="43"><label><sup>43</sup></label><p>In <citation id="ref045" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>105</fpage>.10, <fpage>105</fpage>.12 and <fpage>272</fpage>.13.</citation> The first two instances are in the Latin-English class list, the third in the mosdy Latin <bold>a</bold>-order list.</p></fn><fn id="fn44" symbol="44"><label><sup>44</sup></label><p><citation id="ref046" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Förster</surname></name>, ‘Glossenhandschrift’, p. <fpage>121</fpage>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn45" symbol="45"><label><sup>45</sup></label><p>A. Campbell represents the most extreme view in minimizing the French influence: ‘No loanwords which can certainly be regarded as French occur in manuscripts older than 1066, except <italic>prūd, prīct</italic> proud, whence are derived <italic>pryte, pryt</italic> pride. There are … a few words like <italic>capun, castel</italic>, which might be derived from Latin or French’ (<citation id="ref047" citation-type="book"><source>Old English Grammar</source> (<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>, <year>1959</year>), p. <fpage>221</fpage>).</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn46" symbol="46"><label><sup>46</sup></label><p><citation id="ref048" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, p. <fpage>3</fpage>.</citation> The poem (edited by <citation id="ref049" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Förster</surname></name>, ‘Glossenhandschrift’, p. <fpage>154</fpage></citation>) and its Abingdon associations are discussed by <citation id="ref050" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Lapidge</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>, ‘Æthelwold and the <italic>Vita S. Eustachii</italic>’, in his <source>Anglo-Latin Literature 900–1066</source> (<publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>, <year>1993</year>), pp. <fpage>213</fpage>–23, at <fpage>218</fpage>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn47" symbol="47"><label><sup>47</sup></label><p><citation id="ref051" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Porter</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title>Æthelwold's Bowl and the <italic>Chronicle of Abingdon</italic></article-title>’, <source>NM</source> <volume>97</volume> (<year>1996</year>), <fpage>163</fpage>–7.</citation> I omit from discussion here the elegy on the death of Ælfric, archbishop of Canterbury (<citation id="ref052" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, p. <fpage>3</fpage></citation>), as that reflects as much a Canterbury as an Abingdon connection.</p></fn><fn id="fn48" symbol="48"><label><sup>48</sup></label><p><citation id="ref053" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Ker</surname></name>, <italic>Catalogue</italic>, p. <fpage>382</fpage>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn49" symbol="49"><label><sup>49</sup></label><p>The folio is an originally blank flyleaf. The poem is ed. <citation id="ref054" citation-type="journal"><name><surname>Dümmler</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name>, ‘<article-title>Lateinische Gedichte des neunten bis elften Jahrhunderts</article-title>’, <source>Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde</source> <volume>10</volume> (<year>1885</year>), <fpage>333</fpage>–57, at <fpage>351</fpage>–3.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn50" symbol="50"><label><sup>50</sup></label><p>Michael Lapidge draws my attention to the tenth-century Horace manuscript of Fleury provenance, Paris, BNF, lat. 7971. On 3r a metrical ex-libris in elegiacs names Herbertus as the donor: ‘Hic liber est, Benedicte, tuus, uenerande, per [euum]; / Obtulit Herbertus seruus et ipse tuus’. Another ex-libris on 1v names Constantius, who had close ties with the Ramsey monk Oswald when Oswald was studying at Fleury. See <citation id="ref055" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Vidier</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name>, <source>L'historiographie à Saint-Benoît-sur-Loire et les miracles de Saint Benoît</source> (<publisher-loc>Paris</publisher-loc>, <year>1965</year>), p. <fpage>53</fpage></citation>, and <citation id="ref056" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Mostert</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>, <source>The Library of Fleury</source> (<publisher-loc>Hilversum</publisher-loc>, <year>1989</year>), no. BF1140 (p. <fpage>222</fpage>).</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn51" symbol="51"><label><sup>51</sup></label><p>Relations between Canterbury and Fleury were particularly strong, for example. V. Ortenberg documents communications over several decades of the late tenth and early eleventh centuries: <citation id="ref057" citation-type="book"><source>The English Church and the Continent in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries</source> (<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>, <year>1992</year>), p. <fpage>10</fpage></citation>, n. 28. There was likewise considerable communication between Canterbury and Abingdon. Ælfric, archbishop of Canterbury from 995 to 1005, had been an Abingdon monk, and Siward, abbot of Abingdon from 1030 to 1044, travelled to Canterbury in 1044 to become executive assistant to the enfeebled archbishop. He returned to Abingdon in 1048, dying there on 23 October. There must have been many others who travelled between Canterbury and Abingdon, either alone or in the train of great men like Ælfric and Siward. See <citation id="ref058" citation-type="book"><name><surname>Graham</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name>, ‘CCCC 57 and its Anglo-Saxon Users’, <source>Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts and their Heritage</source>, ed. <name><surname>Pulsiano</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name> and <name><surname>Traherne</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name> (<publisher-loc>Aldershot</publisher-loc>, <year>1998</year>), pp. <fpage>21</fpage>–<lpage>69</lpage></citation>, for an analysis of the historical and codicological links between Canterbury and Abingdon. As for the presence of a Frenchman at Abingdon, it may be relevant that an anonymous redactor of the Abingdon version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle exhibited both interest and expertise in French: see <citation id="ref059" citation-type="book"><source>The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, MS B</source>, ed. <name><surname>Taylor</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name>, The AS Chronicle: a Collaborative Edition, ed. D. Dumville and S. Keynes <volume>4</volume> (<publisher-loc>Cambridge</publisher-loc>, <year>1983</year>), p. <fpage>lxi</fpage>.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn52" symbol="52"><label><sup>52</sup></label><p>For an example, see <citation id="ref060" citation-type="book"><source>Byrhtferth's Enchiridion</source>, ed. <name><surname>Baker</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name> and <name><surname>Lapidge</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name>, EETS ss <volume>15</volume> (<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>, <year>1995</year>)</citation> for an assessment of the career and influence of Abbo of Fleury, one of the luminaries of monastic culture near the turn of the millennium.</p></fn><fn id="fn53" symbol="53"><label><sup>53</sup></label><p>‘Perlege tarnen et, que peto, perfice clemens et mihimet misero miseriis miserere misello…’ (<citation id="ref061" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Förster</surname></name>, ‘Glossenhandschrift’, p. <fpage>153</fpage></citation>). Cf. <citation id="ref062" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Dümmler</surname></name>, ‘Lateinische’, p. <fpage>351</fpage>.8: ‘Perlege tu pastor perfice quodque precor’; and 353.89: ‘Tu mihimet misero miserans miserere misello’.</citation></p></fn><fn id="fn54" symbol="54"><label><sup>54</sup></label><p>An entry from the class glossary, for example, holds the solution to the Latin riddle (my <citation id="ref063" citation-type="journal">‘<article-title>A Double Solution to the Latin Riddle in MS Antwerp, Plantin-Moretus Museum 16.2</article-title>’, <source>ANQ</source> <volume>9</volume>.2 (<year>1996</year>), <fpage>3</fpage>–<lpage>9</lpage>, at <fpage>3</fpage></citation>). Some lexical rarities from Herbert's elegy, <italic>amphibalis, birrus, cauma</italic>, also appear in the class list (<citation id="ref064" citation-type="other"><name><surname>Kindschi</surname></name>, pp. <fpage>88</fpage>.3, <fpage>155</fpage>.13 and <fpage>234</fpage>.10</citation>). And it is worth noting the elegy's adjectival forms <italic>lupinus</italic> and <italic>ferinus</italic>, which recall the discussion in the <italic>Excerptions</italic> of adjectives derived from animal names (London 7v): ‘Omnia quae a nominibus mutorum animalium cuiuscumque sint declinationis diriuantur in formam possessiuum i penultimam longam seruant, ut aper aprinus, caper caprinus, ceruus ceruinus, porcinus, taurinus, ferus uel fera ferinus, caninus, leporinus, lupinus.…’</p></fn><fn id="fn55" symbol="55"><label><sup>55</sup></label><p>Kindschi's comment on this topic is misleading: <citation id="ref065" citation-type="other">‘The Latin—Old English class glossary … is crowded into such marginal space as remained [after the alphabetical list was written]’ (p. <fpage>2</fpage>).</citation> Antwerp—London in fact holds much empty marginal space which the scribe of the class glossary chose to ignore. Instead he squeezed his text onto a few leaves, between earlier strata in the forward-sloping hand.</p></fn><fn id="fn56" symbol="56"><label><sup>56</sup></label><p>This seems a strong possibility, and if it is so, one with relevance for the word <italic>porfumers</italic>, which as we noted above is unattested before the fourteenth century. The earliest attestation of <italic>mouton</italic> is some 150 years after the date of the glossary, and even then it is considered a dialectal form (<italic>Dictionnaire historique de la langue française</italic>, s.v.). <italic>Mutinus</italic> must be related to <italic>mutina</italic>, which in the Paris Priscian (20v) is glossed ‘…bestia sine cornibus’, an animal without horns, i.e. a sheep.</p></fn><fn id="fn57" symbol="57"><label><sup>57</sup></label><p>One may speculate whether the hapax <italic>sufulcirs</italic> was a loan formation in imitation of Anglo-Saxon scholastic practice.</p></fn><fn id="fn58" symbol="58"><label><sup>58</sup></label><p>In the course of this work I incurred many debts. I thank the institutions that allowed me to examine manuscripts in their keeping: the British Library, the Bibliothèque Nationale de France and the Planrin-Moretus Museum. Thanks also to the National Endowment for the Humanities, which supported this work with a research fellowship, and to the English Department of Louisiana State University, which welcomed me as a visiting scholar in 1997.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>The earliest texts with English and French</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>The earliest texts with English and French</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">David W.</namePart><namePart type="family">Porter</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Cambridge University Press</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Cambridge, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1999-12</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1999</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><abstract type="text-abstract">Modern scholars can sometimes reconstruct the methods of medieval glossary-makers by tracking individual glosses along the path from the textual source to the final destination in the glossarial list. Here I wish to pursue a trail of clues through two early-eleventh-century manuscripts of the Excerptiones de Prisciano (‘Excerpts of Priscian’), a Latin grammatical treatise which has been identified as the source for Ælfric's bilingual Grammar. Viewed singly, the manuscripts of this work offer partial views of glossatorial activity; viewed together, these fragmentary glimpses snap into perspective, rendering a dynamic picture of glossary-making as a corporate enterprise undertaken by a group of Anglo-Saxon schoolmen working in several manuscripts simultaneously.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Anglo-Saxon England</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Anglo-Saxon England</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0263-6751</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1474-0532</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">ASE</identifier><part><date>1999</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>28</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>87</start><end>110</end><total>24</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">5BE421B811333B1E4175DCD6CE1C736292680709</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1017/S0263675100002271</identifier><identifier type="PII">S0263675100002271</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">00227</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-G3RCRD03-V">cambridge</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/6GQ-HRZLLCK2-K/record.json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/ChansonRoland/explor/ChansonRolandV7/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000B06 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000B06 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= ChansonRoland
|area= ChansonRolandV7
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:5BE421B811333B1E4175DCD6CE1C736292680709
|texte= The earliest texts with English and French
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.39. |  |