Western Medieval Manuscripts : Homilies in Old English

Western Medieval Manuscripts

Cambridge, University Library, MS Ii.4.6 contains thirty-six homilies, most of which were written by Ælfric of Eynsham (c. 955–c. 1010), one of the most prolific authors of Late Old English. The majority of the homilies originate from Ælfric's two series of Catholic Homilies, the first complete versions of which were composed between c. 989 and 992. Only two homilies (written for Rogationtide) are anonymous, although they incorporate much Ælfrician material as well. The homilies are organised according to the so-called 'Temporale', a cycle of movable feasts in the liturgical calendar that are keyed to the date of Easter, meaning that they occur in the order of the church year.The manuscript was copied in the mid-eleventh century at the royal Benedictine abbey of New Minster, Winchester. Subsequently, it may have been owned by Tavistock Abbey in Devon, since a sixteenth-century inscription on fol. 1r claims that it was found at the latter monastery (dissolved in 1539) by Robert Farrar [Ferrers], agent to Francis Russell (1526/7–1585), 2nd Earl of Bedford, in 1566. The earl presented the manuscript to Archbishop Matthew Parker (1504–1575) in 1567, who, in turn, donated it to the University of Cambridge in 1574.Ælfric's Catholic Homilies are found in a large number of manuscripts originating from a period that spans from the end of the tenth century until c. 1200. According to John C. Pope, CUL Ii.4.6 is related to two other manuscripts, namely, <a target='_blank' class='externalLink' href='https://parker.stanford.edu/parker/catalog/cg531kv2466'>Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 302</a> (c. 1100–1110) and <a target='_blank' class='externalLink' href='http://searcharchives.bl.uk/permalink/f/ja42l1/IAMS040-001103858'>London, British Library, Cotton MS Faustina A IX</a> (c. 1100–1150). Pope argues that all three manuscripts ultimately derive from a common exemplar.The manuscript is missing several folios at the beginning and currently runs from the second Sunday after Epiphany until the first Sunday after Pentecost, ending with two extra homilies for Rogationtide. Considering that there are manuscripts that not only feature more complete collections of the Catholic Homilies but were also produced close to their original date of composition (such as <a target='_blank' class='externalLink' href='http://searcharchives.bl.uk/permalink/f/ja42l1/IAMS040-002106235'>London, British Library, Royal MS 7 C XII</a> from 990; and Cambridge, University Library, MS Gg.3.28 from c. 1000), one may wonder what the relevance is of manuscripts such as CUL Ii.4.6. However, their particular importance lies in the fact that medieval texts were not static entities, like published texts are today. Ælfric continually updated his homilies throughout his lifetime, and CUL Ii.4.6 represents a distinct stage in their development. The manuscript, for instance, features a version of the first series' homily for the second Sunday after Easter (Homily 17) that is much longer than other copies, and is thought to contain an authentic addition by Ælfric. Manuscripts such as CUL Ii.4.6 thus can be invaluable for studying how Ælfric developed his work over a long period of time and may feature authorial changes that scholars would miss if they only researched the most complete and earlier manuscripts.Moreover, the study of later Ælfrician manuscripts can tell us something about the reception of his homilies by later audiences. For instance, readers used symbols to highlight passages which they thought were important or added interlinear or marginal material. Indeed, CUL Ii.4.6 contains a number of contemporary glosses and additions, in particular on fols <a href='' onclick='store.loadPage(56);return false;'>23v–37r</a>, and also some marginal annotations from c. 1300 on fols <a href='' onclick='store.loadPage(273);return false;'>132r</a>, <a href='' onclick='store.loadPage(301);return false;'>146r</a>, and <a href='' onclick='store.loadPage(302);return false;'>146v</a>. Most notably, the later annotations, according to N. R. Ker, 'refer to the [Old English] text and show understanding of it'.Another type of response is not so easily discernible, namely, the replacement of linguistic features and lexical items during the process of copying the text. In some twelfth-century manuscripts containing the Catholic Homilies, scribes have changed case endings and replaced words, most likely because they considered these to be obsolete. These alterations are incredibly valuable for our knowledge of the development of the English language during the twelfth century, which is traditionally seen as the transitional period between Old and Middle English. Manuscripts such as CUL Ii.4.6 can therefore shed light on the development of Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, give insight into the homilies’ reception by later audiences, and enable us to learn more about that fascinating period in the history of English when Old English gave way to Middle English.Amos van Baalen Leiden University Centre for Linguistics