Adam Easton’s Manuscripts

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Zutshi
Keyword(s):  
Bodleian Library ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Corpus Christi ◽  
University Library

After a brief introduction, this article provides descriptions of the eight extant Latin manuscripts which are known to have been in the possession of Adam Easton, as well as one manuscript where his ownership is questionable. The manuscripts passed to Norwich Cathedral Priory and are now divided between Cambridge University Library; Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; Balliol College, Oxford; the Bodleian Library; and the Bibliothèque Municipale, Avignon.

scholarly journals Scribal Intrusion in the Texts of Gamelyn

2010 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-20
Author(s):  
Nila VáZquez
Keyword(s):  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
British Library ◽  
Bodleian Library ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Corpus Christi ◽  
University Library ◽  
Christ Church ◽  
Physical Elements

Scribal Intrusion in the Texts of Gamelyn One of most important steps in the process of editing a manuscript is the identification and correction of the mistakes made by the scribe or scribes involved in its copying process in order to obtain the best text. In some cases, the changes introduced by the scribe, or by the editor who was supervising his work, can easily be noticed because we find out "physical" elements throughout the folio, such as dots under a word as a sign of expunction or carets indicating that a missing word is being added. However, there are many instances of scribal intrusion where only a detailed analysis of the text itself, or even the comparison of different manuscripts, can lead us to the identification of a modified reading. For instance, orthographical changes due to the dialectal provenance of the copyist, or altered lines with a regular aspect. The purpose of this article is to analyse the scribal amendments that appear in some of the earliest copies of The tale of Gamelyn: Corpus Christi College Oxford MS 198 (Cp), Christ Church Oxford MS 152 (Ch), Fitzwilliam Museum McClean 181 (Fi), British Library MS Harley 7334 (Ha4), Bodleian Library MS Hatton Donat. 1 (Ht), British Library MS Lansdowne 851 (La), Lichfield Cathedral MS 29 (Lc), Cambridge University Library Mm. 2.5 (Mm), Petworth House MS 7 (Pw) and British Library MS Royal 18 C.II (Ry2).

LIX. The Address of the Soul to the Body

PMLA ◽  
1935 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 957-983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudolph Willard
Keyword(s):  
Old English ◽  
The Body ◽  
Bodleian Library ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
English Poem ◽  
Conspicuous Feature ◽  
University Library ◽  
Intermediate Time ◽  
The Moment

There exist in Old English a number of compilations in which an address of the soul to its body is a conspicuous feature. The best known is the poem in the Vercelli and the Exeter Books, in which the soul returns to its body once a week and communes with it, the sinful soul reproaching it vituperatively, the righteous comforting it lovingly and joyously. The fourth Vercelli homily has a remarkable scene, an elaborated account of the judgement of the soul at Doomsday, in which the souls address their bodies as they stand in the presence of the Judge. The Last Judgement is again the scene of an address, and that in one of the homilies presented by Assmann. There is, finally, the Old English vision, printed by Thorpe and Napier, of the bringing forth of the soul, wherein the newly-released soul of a sinner vituperates the body it has just left. To this literature, I wish to add passages from two unpublished Old English homilies, in which the address is made, not at the moment of death, as in Thorpe and Napier, nor at the Last Judgement, as in Vercelli Homily iv and in Assmann, but at some intermediate time, when the soul returns intermittently to its body for that purpose, as in the Old English poem. These two texts are Homilies ii and iv of MS. Junius 85 of the Bodleian Library, and Homily xl of MS. Ii. 1.33 of the Cambridge University Library.

Archangel in the Margins: St. Michael in the Homilies of Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 41

Traditio ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 63-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard F. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Ninth Century ◽  
Devotional Literature ◽  
Anglo Saxon ◽  
The South ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Corpus Christi ◽  
University Library ◽  
The North ◽  
Devotional Practices

In the preface to his edition of the ninth-century Book of Cerne (Cambridge, University Library, MS L1. 1.10), A. B. Kuypers notes “two great currents of influence, two distinct spirits, Irish and Roman” at work in the composition of the prayers in this private devotional book. Moreover, Kuypers asserts that “these influences are traceable through the whole range of the strictly devotional literature of the period.” Since it is generally acknowledged that the two great forces shaping the early Anglo-Saxon church were the Roman missionaries in the south and Irish monks in the north, it is reasonable to suspect that the Anglo-Saxon devotional practices to St. Michael the Archangel were also influenced by both traditions.

scholarly journals Copying strategies of late Middle English scribes: Hand(s) and language(s) of two 15th-century manuscripts

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-172
Author(s):  
María José Carrillo-Linares
Keyword(s):  
Middle English ◽  
Bodleian Library ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Linguistic Data ◽  
University Library ◽  
15Th Century ◽  
Linguistic Behaviour

The purpose of this paper is to compare two 15th-century manuscripts, Cambridge, University Library Kk.1.3 and Oxford, Bodleian Library Hatton 50, focusing on both paleographical and linguistic aspects. Samples from different sections of both manuscripts have been transcribed from either the original manuscripts or digital photographic reproductions. Each word and morpheme have been lexico-grammatically tagged to evaluate the scribe’s linguistic behaviour with respect to spelling, phonology, and morphology. Paleographical and linguistic data to support the two main conclusions of the study are offered. With this analysis, I conclude that both manuscripts are, almost certainly, copied by the same person. Comparison of the different copying strategies generated by this single scribe allows us to achieve a better understanding of the written material in which Middle English has been preserved.

Ælfric's Preface to Genesis: genre, rhetoric and the origins of the ars dictaminis

2000 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 215-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Griffith
Keyword(s):  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Old English ◽  
British Library ◽  
Bodleian Library ◽  
English Version ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Corpus Christi ◽  
Illustrated Text ◽  
Complete Form ◽  
Partial Translation

The preface by Ælfric occurs in complete form in two manuscripts and in part in a third. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Laud Miscellany 509 (s. xi2) contains the preface (fols. 1–3, headed with the words Incipit prefatio genesis anglice), together with the Old English Hexateuch (fols. 3–107) and Ælfric's selections from Judges (fols. 108–15). Cambridge, University Library, Ii. 1. 33 (s. xii2) has the preface, without tide, followed by Ælfric's partial translation of Genesis (fols. 2–24). London, British Library, Cotton Claudius B. iv (St Augustine's, Canterbury, s. xi1), having lost its first leaf, now preserves only the second half of the preface followed by an illustrated text of the Old English Hexateuch, but a sixteenth-century transcript by Robert Talbot, Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 379, preserves some of its missing text, along with the same tide as Laud 509. Both Laud 509 and Claudius B. iv give slightly different compilations of the translations by Ælfric with the more extensive work of the anonymous scriptural translator (or translators). The differing rubrics and contents of the manuscripts affect the way we read the preface that they share: the Cambridge manuscript presents it as a preface to half of Genesis only, Laud 509 and the transcript label it a preface at least to the whole of Genesis. If, however, the incipit is scribal, it could be taken as a prologue to the Hexateuch. Was the preface, then, intended by Ælfric to introduce just the first half of Genesis, or a larger work? Sisam is of the first view: ‘no preface to the Pentateuch (or Hexateuch) survives, and evidendy the compiler of the extant Old English version did not know of one, since he used Ælfric's inappropriate English preface to the first part of Genesis.’

Middle English Gospel Glosses and the Translation of Exegetical Authority

Traditio ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 87-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. B. Kraebel
Keyword(s):  
Middle English ◽  
Fourteenth Century ◽  
Synoptic Gospels ◽  
British Library ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Perceived Needs ◽  
Corpus Christi ◽  
University Library ◽  
Biblical Commentary ◽  
Extensive Effort

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 WycliffiteGlossed Gospels, these texts illustrate further the variety and richness of vernacular biblical commentary composed in the decades following the important precedent of Richard Rolle'sEnglish Psalter.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document