“The Mysterious Paiśācī”

1943 ◽  
Vol 75 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 217-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred Master
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Indian Form

The only Pai. quotation connected directly with the Bṛh. is given by Mārkaṇḍeya (seventeenth century): Bṛhatkathāyām kupaci pisāḷam (Grierson, EPG., 134). Keith, HSL., p. 269, observes, “We really cannot be sure that we have a single relic of the Bṝhatkathā, still less that so late a grammarian as Mārkaṇḍeya actually had the text before him.” Pisālaṃ, moreover, is a neo-Indian form, which normally would not occur before the twelfth century, for the words in AMg pisalla (PG 595) and in Pkt. pisalla (Hem., i, 193) are normal Mid-Indian as contrasted with Mar. pisāḷeṇ “madness”.

Frithegod of Canterbury's Maundy Thursday hymn

2005 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. 219-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosalind C. Love
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Trinity College ◽  
Tenth Century ◽  
Mary Magdalen ◽  
English Manuscript ◽  
Cult Of Mary

In his Catalogus of British writers, John Bale's account of the tenth-century scholar, Frithegod, includes incipits for two hymns, of which the first, on Mary Magdalen (‘Dum pietas multimoda’), was long thought lost. In fact it is not lost, but has simply become uncoupled from its author's name, and is transmitted anonymously in three manuscripts of French origin, and in some Spanish liturgical books, whence it was first printed in 1897. Frithegod's authorship is suggested by Patrick Young's seventeenth-century catalogue of Salisbury Cathedral manuscripts. Young noticed two ‘carmina Frethogodi’ at the end of what is now Dublin, Trinity College 174 (a late eleventh- or early twelfth-century Salisbury legendary), giving the incipit of the first as 'Dum pietas multimoda’. After Young had catalogued TCD 174, the page with the hymns must have become detached, and cannot now be traced. Frithegod may have composed the hymn while still at Canterbury, and then perhaps took a copy back to his native Auvergne, given that it ended up in an English manuscript but also circulated in France. Although the circumstances of composition are beyond recovery, I suggest that the hymn was originally intended not for the cult of Mary Magdalen (it was used thus in France), but rather to accompany the penitential rituals of Maundy Thursday. The article includes a text and translation of the hymn.

The ‘Entheticus’ of John of Salisbury: A Critical Text

Traditio ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 127-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald E. Pepin
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Fourteenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
British Museum ◽  
John Of Salisbury ◽  
University Library ◽  
Critical Text ◽  
Standard Edition ◽  
The University ◽  
Editio Princeps

The Entheticus de dogmate philosophorum of John of Salisbury has come down to us in three manuscripts: a twelfth-century codex in the British Museum (Royal 13. D. IV); a fourteenth-century manuscript in the University Library at Cambridge (Ii. II. 31); a seventeenth-century codex now located in the Staatsbibliothek, Berlin (Hamburg Cod. Phil. 350). The editio princeps was published by Christian Petersen (Hamburg 1843), and it has remained the standard edition. However, important deficiencies in that work have made a complete re-examination of the text necessary.

VI.—St. Manchan's Shrine

Archaeologia ◽  
1937 ◽  
Vol 86 ◽  
pp. 105-118 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. D. Kendrick ◽  
Elizabeth Senior
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
British Museum ◽  
Seventh Century ◽  
The Church

Very little is known about St. Manchan. He died of the plague in 664, composed a poem of which two lines survive, and may have been the author of a commentary, parts of which are quoted in an early twelfth-century manuscript (British Museum, Harley 1802). But though various attempts were made to establish his genealogy, there were other saints of the same name, so that the references to him are sadly confused, and all that is certain is that he lived in the first half of the seventh century, and gave his name to the place now called after him Lemanaghan, i.e., Manchan's grey land (Manchan's church). This was a small monastery in co. Offaly that has little recorded history and can never have been a house of much importance. In 1531 it was under the charge of the prior of the neighbouring monastery of Gallen, and by the beginning of the seventeenth century it was almost unknown, being described at that time as situated in the middle of an impassable bog. Its chief treasure, the shrine, attracted no notice from the outside world; but it was still preserved there, and there is a record of its existence in the church at Lemanaghan about 1630.

THE IRISH PEERAGE AND THE ACT OF UNION, 1800–1971

2000 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 289-327
Author(s):  
A.P.W. Malcomson
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
House Of Lords

AbstractTHERE was always an important, though varying, distinction between the Irish peerage and the Irish House of Lords. The former dated from the late twelfth century, and the latter, or at least something discernible as its forerunner, from the late thirteenth. From then until the early seventeenth century, because men who were neither temporal nor spiritual peers attended the House of Lords (though in decreasingly significant numbers) by virtue of a writ of summons only, the House of Lords was a larger body than the Irish peerage. Thereafter, due to the number of non-Irishmen and/or non-residents who were created Irish peers, the House of Lords became the smaller body, because such people seldom or never attended.

Aelred of Rievaulx and the Nun of Watton: an Episode in the Early History of the Gilbertine order

1978 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 205-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giles Constable
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Religious Life ◽  
Early History ◽  
History Of

Although the story of the nun of Watton by Aelred of Rievaulx was published by Twysden in the seventeenth century and reprinted by Migne, it has never been studied in detail for the light it throws on religious life and attitudes in the twelfth century and on the history of the order founded by St Gilbert of Sempringham. This neglect has been the result less of ignorance than of the nature of episode, which was described as ‘disgraceful and fanatical’ by Dixon, ‘distressing’ by Eckenstein and by Graham, ‘painful’ by Powicke, ‘strange’ by Knowles, ‘of almost casual brutality’ by Nicholl, and as ‘curious’ and ‘unsavoury’ by Aelred Squire.

The Printing of Twelfth-Century English Historiography, and the Integration of Law with History

2020 ◽  
pp. 360-386
Author(s):  
George Garnett
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Medieval History ◽  
Historical Writing ◽  
Domesday Book ◽  
Medieval Law ◽  
Henry Of Huntingdon ◽  
William Of Malmesbury

Chapter 10 opens with the first printing in the 1590s of several of the great works of twelfth-century English historical writing: Lord William Howard’s edition of John of Worcester (1592); and Henry Savile’s of William of Malmesbury, Henry of Huntingdon, Roger of Howden, and (purporting to be twelfth-century) Pseudo-Ingulf’s Historia Croylandensis (1596). It then proceeds to the editing and publication of works of Norman historiography which encompassed the Conquest: William of Jumièges, William of Poitiers, and Orderic Vitalis. It pays a great deal of attention to William Camden and Robert Cotton. The chapter culminates with a discussion of John Selden’s edition of Eadmer’s Historia novorum. This is shown to combine the two strands of antiquarian interest examined in preceding chapters: medieval historical writing, and medieval law. In terms both of choice of text and focus of editorial attention, it reveals that by the reign of James VI and I, the Conquest had again become the key issue in English medieval history. The chapter also discusses chorographical history as espoused by William Lambarde and William Camden, and the beginnings of scholarly investigation of Domesday Book. It ends by looking forward to the central role which controversy about the Conquest would play in political arguments of the seventeenth century.

CURRENCY AND CREDIT IN MEDIEVAL JAPAN

2008 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eiji Sakurai
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Medieval Period ◽  
Early Modern Japan ◽  
Medieval Japan ◽  
Modern Japan

AbstractIn contrast to the currency issued for use in ancient and early modern Japan, a feature of the currency of that country's medieval period was that the Japanese state did not mint its own coinage but rather imported the entirety of its supply of copper coins from China. An economy based on Chinese coins therefore lasted for 650 years, from the middle of the twelfth century, through the upheavals of the sixteenth century, down to the seventeenth century when the Tokugawa Bakufu once again minted coins. This article outlines the situation of currency and its specific features during this period, paying particular attention to the trend towards the use of credit, in such forms as bills of exchange and promissory notes. In addition, it points out that the medieval Japanese state had absolutely no motivation, either financially or geopolitically, to issue its own currency.

IV.—On some remarkable ecclesiastical figures in the cathedral church of Wells

Archaeologia ◽  
1894 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-86
Author(s):  
W.H. St. John Hope
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century

The cathedral church of Wells contains, both within and without, a number of ecclesiastical figures of unusual interest. Besides a series of seven effigies of early bishops, all carved at the same time about the end of the twelfth century, there are, in addition to the well-known incised slab of bishop William de Bitton II. 1267-1274, five effigies of pre-reformation bishops, viz.: William de Marchia, 1293-1302; John de Drokensford, 1309-1329; Ralph de Salopia, 1329-1363; John Harewell 1369-1386; Thomas de Bekinton, 1443-1465. The last-named has also a cadaver below. There are, besides, effigies of two seventeenth century bishops, John Still, 1593-1608, and Robert Creighton, 1670-1672.

scholarly journals Gulielmius and the Erfurtensis of Cicero: New Readings For Pro Sulla

1989 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 400-407
Author(s):  
D. H. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
The Other ◽  
Early Nineteenth Century ◽  
Medieval Manuscript ◽  
Sizeable Number

The Erfurtensis (E), now lat. 2°.252 in the Staatsbibliothek Preuβischer Kulturbesitz at Berlin (West), was assembled by Wibald of Corvey in the mid twelfth century, and is the most comprehensive medieval manuscript of Cicero, containing nearly half of what was eventually to survive. The manuscript as it exists today has lost one or more folios at several different points, but in some of these places readings were recorded by sixteenth and seventeenth-century scholars before the mutilations occurred. There is, however, only one lacuna where early collations survive and where, also, E is a manuscript of primary importance for the reconstruction of the text. The omission in question, caused by the removal of folios at some unknown date between the beginning of the seventeenth century and the early nineteenth century, comprises the end of pro Caecina (beginning after vincula, § 100) and virtually all pro Sulla (ending before- tundis Catilinae, §81). No readings are known to have been taken from the end of pro Caecina, but from the bulk of pro Sulla, before the manuscript as we have it resumes, a sizeable number of readings has fortunately been preserved. The tradition of pro Sulla takes the form of two branches, one consisting of Munich, Bayer. Staatsbibliothek, Clm 18787, olim Tegernseensis, (T) and all the deteriores (to), the other consisting of just two manuscripts, E and its twin, Vatican, Pal. lat. 1525 (which will be referred to as V). V comes to a halt at §43; the early collations of E are therefore of the highest importance for pro Sulla until §81, especially from §43 onwards where they comprise our only record for one of the tradition's two branches.

III. The Pipe Rolls and the Historians, 1600–1883

1952 ◽  
Vol 10 (03) ◽  
pp. 271-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lady Stenton
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Twelfth Century ◽  
Continuous Series ◽  
The Past

It is a remarkable fact that the only continuous series of records which has survived from the twelfth century, the Great Rolls of the Pipe, was not completely available in print with adequate indexes until the thirties of the twentieth century. The search for an explanation takes one back to the beginnings of English medieval scholarship in the early seventeenth century. The great antiquaries of that day had not conceived the idea of printing adequately indexed editions of the records they used, for the medieval past, when books were patiently transcribed by hand for circulation, was too near. When scholars met to discuss their work it was of making copies by hand and passing them from one to another that they talked. They were concerned that the notes sent to them should be on ‘paper of the same size for bignesse as the sender first did use’. To them in the seventeenth century, the past was a virgin field in which they had no forerunners; and they themselves aimed at writing history which should stand for ever.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document