Abstract
This study provides a new edition of, and commentary to, the Latin-Old English glossary preserved in London, British Library, Harley 107. This glossary, which comprises three introductory entries, a chapter on bird names, and a chapter on fish names, belongs to a group of Latin-Old English glossaries organized by subject (class glossaries), rather than alphabetically. According to scholarship, the chapter-format of Old English class glossaries echoes the form of the Greek-Latin textbooks known as Hermeneumata Pseudodositheana. In this study, I first assess the question of the tradition of the Hermeneumata in England, followed by an overview of the sources behind the compilation of the glossary in Harley 107. I conclude with an edition of the glossary, with notes on each entry. These notes provide parallels with possible sources and related glossaries. In particular, I focus on the parallels between the glossary in Harley 107, on the one hand, and the Épinal-Erfurt Glossary and the Corpus Glossary, on the other.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Bayless (1993: 73) suggests that the grammatical tract ultimately derives from Priscian’s Institutio de nomine.
Meritt reprinted the interpretamenta and the lemmata of Har107, in alphabetical order, in his “Old English index to glossary fragments” (Meritt 1945: 134–135). Its brevity, its late date, as well as its resemblance to larger compilations (on which see below) all may explain why Har107 has remained neglected for so long. Franzen (2012: liv) only briefly mentions Har107 in her overview of late Old English glossaries. I have edited a number of glosses from Har107 in Cataldi (2023: 60–72).
Several versions of the Hermeneumata have been preserved to date. They vary a great deal in content and length and were classified by Goetz (1892) into six main redactions. These were given a more detailed eight-part classification by Dionisotti (1982): Leidensia, Amploniana, Bruxellensia, Stephani, Montepessulana, Monacensia, Einsidlensia, Celtis. Dionisotti (1988: 26–31) has then further classified the Hermeneumata into nine versions by adding the Vaticana redaction; Korhonen (1996) has also proposed a nine-part classification. For an overview, see Dickey (2012: 17). Further studies on the Hermeneumata are by Debut (1984); Dickey (2015); Dickey (2016).
See Lindsay (1921b: 9): ‘The first step in adapting Hermeneumata to ordinary glossary purposes would be to put the Latin explanation into the lemma’s place and to discard the Greek lemmas. But if these lemmas were written in Latin characters they would not always be recognized as Greek, especially if the Greek word had gained some footing in Latin speech’.
Quoted from the manuscript; cf. Dionisotti (1984–85: 312). See also Cataldi (2023: 9).
For an overview of these glossaries, see Franzen (2012: xlviii–liv).
According to Rusche (1996: 17), CleoII ‘represents the most complete version we have of the Hermeneumata Glossary that was brought to England in the seventh century’.
For a new edition and commentary of the Bodley Glossaries, see Cataldi (2023).
Wright and Wülcker (1884) include this chapter in their edition of Bruss, unlike Rusche (1996).
On Brussels, KB 1828–30, see Bremmer and Dekker (2006: 26–29).
Most of the copies of the Hermeneumata feature an order of capitula that differs from Har107: the chapter on fish names most often precedes that on bird names. Hermeneumata Vaticana and Hermeneumata Celtis are the only versions in which the chapter on bird names is immediately followed by that on fish names. In LdGl xlvii, a batch of entries on bird names (51–70) is followed by one on fish names (71–75).
See especially Lazzari (2003).
Both rubrics show signs of textual corruption: they should read nomina volucrum and nomina piscium, respectively.
On the Laudes regiae, see Kantorowicz (1958).
Folk-taxonomy of Old English bird names has been discussed by Lacey (2016: 75–98), who notes that they can be broadly arranged into four groups: by behaviour, appearance, habitat, and sound. The Har107 bird names overall reflect this classification.
The overlap between Hermeneumata and Etymologiae is by no means confined to the realm of lexicography. In his discussion on the lexical sources of the Lorica of Laidcenn, Herren (1987: 40) notes that ‘The interesting point is that the Hermeneumata, taken collectively, account for virtually all the words in Isidore plus at least eight of the non-Hisperic words not in Isidore’.
It is worth providing some essential information on Hermeneumata Stephani. The text published by Goetz as Hermeneumata Stephani is actually a transcription of at least two glossaries, whose manuscript copies are unfortunately lost today. These glossaries were first printed in the seventeenth century by Henri Estienne. Other alleged members of the Stephani family are edited by Goetz (1892: 94–103, 438–487) as Fragmentum parisinum, Glossae Stephani, and Glossae Loiselii. Cf. Dionisotti (1982: 87); Dickey (2012: 18–19). Hermeneumata Stephani have the Greek-Latin order reversed: the Latin element constitute the lemma and the Greek one is its interpretamentum. If this version ever circulated in England, this aspect might have eased the process of dropping the Greek element by replacing it with an Old English gloss.
All quotations from the Etymologiae refer to Lindsay (1911).
Numbers refer to Pheifer (1974).
For parallels between the bird and fish names in CleoII, ÉE, Corpus and LdGl, see Rusche (1996: 411–417).
α might also be taken as the copy that contributed entries to the alphabetical First Cleopatra Glossary, but this suggestion remains speculative.
XR hidden in the MS.
X hidden in the MS.
In a different ink.
GR hidden in the MS.
E partially hidden in the MS.
MS siracarices with expunction mark under e and i written above.
MS crus corrected to grus in a different ink.
In a different ink.
I would like to thank Patrizia Lendinara (University of Palermo) for commenting on earlier drafts of this paper. Thanks are also due to the anonymous reviewers for suggesting improvements.
References
Andrews, A. C. (1955). Greek and Latin terms for salmon and trout. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 86, 308–318.
Baesecke, G. (1933). Der Vocabularius Sti. Galli in der angelsächsischen Mission. M. Niemeyer.
Bayless, M. (1993). Beatus quid est and the study of grammar in late Anglo-Saxon England. In V. Law (Ed.), History of linguistic thought in the early Middle Ages (pp. 67–110). Benjamins.
Bischoff, B., and M. Lapidge. (1994). Biblical commentaries from the Canterbury school of Theodore and Hadrian. Cambridge Studies in Anglo-Saxon England, 10. Cambridge University Press.
Bremmer Jr, R. H. and K. Dekker. (2006). Manuscripts in the Low Countries. Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts in Microfiche Facsimile 13. Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 321. Arizona Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies.
Bremmer Jr, R. H. (2010). Leiden, Vossianus Lat. Q. 69 (Part 2): schoolbook or proto-encyclopaedic miscellany? In: RHB Jr, K. Dekker (eds), Practice in learning: The transfer of encyclopaedic knowledge in the early Middle Ages (pp. 19–53). Peeters.
BT = An Anglo-Saxon dictionary based on the manuscript collections of Joseph Bosworth. Oxford University Press, 1898 1921. Online version available at <http://bosworthtoller.com/>.
Cataldi, C. (Ed.). (2023). The Bodley glossaries. The glossaries in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 730. Publications of the Dictionary of Old English 11. PIMS.
Debut, J. (1984). Les Hermeneumata pseudodositheana. Une méthode d’apprentissage des langues pour grands débutants. Koinonia, 8, 61–85.
Dickey, E. (Ed.). (2012). The colloquia of the Hermeneumata pseudodositheana. Vol. 1: Colloquia monacensia-einsidlensia, leidense-stephani, and stephani. Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries 49. Cambridge University Press.
Dickey, E. (Ed.). (2015). The colloquia of the Hermeneumata pseudodositheana. Vol. 2: Colloquium harleianum, colloquium montepessulanum, colloquium celtis, and fragments. Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries 53. Cambridge University Press.
Dickey, E. (2016). Who used the Hermeneumata pseudo-dositheana? Evidence for Greek speakers in the medieval West. Studi Medievali e Umanistici, 14, 47–71.
Dionisotti, A. C. (1982). From Ausonius’ schooldays? A schoolbook and its relatives. The Journal of Roman Studies, 72, 83–125.
Dionisotti, A. C. (1988). Greek grammars and dictionaries in Carolingian Europe. In M. Herren (Ed.), in collaboration with S. A. Brown, The sacred nectar of the Greeks (pp. 1–56). King's College London Medieval Studies.
DMLBS = Dictionary of medieval Latin from British sources, online version, available from ΛΟΓΕΙΟΝ. <https://logeion.uchicago.edu/>.
Doane, A. N. (2007). Grammars: Handlist of manuscripts. Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts in Microfiche Facsimile 15. Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 331. Arizona Centre for Medieval and Renaissance Studies.
DOE = Dictionary of Old English: A to I. Toronto: University of Toronto. Online version available at <www.doe.utoronto.ca/pages/index. html>.
Flammini, G. (2004). Hermeneumata pseudodositheana leidensia. K. G. Saur.
Franzen, C. (2012). Introduction. In C. Franzen (ed.), Ashgate critical essays on early English lexicographers. I: Old English (pp. xv–lxxxvi). Ashgate.
Garrison, M. (2013). An insular copy of Pliny’s Naturalis historia (Leiden, VLF 4 fols 4–33). In E. Kwakkel (Ed.), Writing in context: Insular manuscript culture 500–1200 (pp. 66–125). Leiden University Press.
Gatti, P. (2006). Nomi di pesci negli Hermeneumata celtis. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi (= Bulletin du Cange) 64, 105–121.
Gneuss, H., & Lapidge, M. (2014). Anglo-Saxon manuscripts: A bibliographical handlist of manuscripts and manuscript fragments written or owned in England up to 1100. University of Toronto Press.
Goetz, G. (Ed.). (1892). Hermeneumata pseudodositheana. Corpus glossariorum latinorum 3. Teubner.
Herren, M. W. (Ed.). (1987). The Hisperica famina II. Related poems. PIMS.
Hessels, J. H. (1906). A late eighth-century Latin-Anglo-Saxon glossary: Preserved in the library of the Leiden University. Cambridge University Press.
Kantorovicz, E. H. (1958). Laudes regiae. A study in liturgical acclamations and medieval ruler worship. With a study of the music of the Laudes and musical transcriptions by Manfred B. Bukofzer. University of California Press.
Ker, N. R. (1957). Catalogue of manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon. Clarendon Press.
Kitson, P. R. (1997). Old English bird-names. English Studies, 78, 481–505.
Kitson, P. R. (1998). Old English bird-names (II). English Studies, 79, 2–22.
Korhonen, K. (1996). On the composition of the Hermeneumata language manuals. Arctos: Acta Philologica Fennica 30, 101–120.
Lacey, E. (2016). Birds and words: Aurality, semantics, and species in Anglo-Saxon England. In S. Thomson & M. Bintley (Eds.). Sensory perception in the medieval West (pp. 75–98). Utrecht Studies in Medieval Literacy, 34. Brepols.
Lapidge, M. (2006). The Anglo-Saxon library. Oxford University Press.
Lapidge, M. (2009). Anglo-Saxon litanies of the saints. Henry Bradshaw Society.
Lazzari, L. (2003). Il Glossario latino-inglese antico nel manoscritto di Anversa e Londra ed il Glossario di Ælfric: Dipendenza diretta o derivazione comune?. Linguistica e Filologia 16, 159–190.
Lendinara, P. (1999). Anglo-Saxon glosses and glossaries. Variorum Collected Studies Series CS622. Ashgate.
Lendinara, P. (2009). Glossari anglosassoni per argomenti: Gebrauchstexte oder nicht? In L. Vezzosi (Ed.). La letteratura tecnico-scientifica nel Medioevo germanico. Fachliteratur e Gebrauchstexte (pp. 119–144). BGST, 25. Edizioni dell’Orso.
Lindsay, W. M. (Ed.). (1921a). The Corpus glossary. Cambridge University Press.
Lindsay, W. M. (1921b). The Corpus, Épinal, Erfurt and Leyden glossaries. Publications of the Philological Society, 8. Oxford University Press.
Lindsay, W. M. (Ed.). (1911). Isidori hispalensis episcopi Etymologiarum sive Originum libri XX, 2 vols. Clarendon Press.
LSJ = Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, online version, available from ΛΟΓΕΙΟΝ. https://logeion.uchicago.edu/.
Meritt, H. D. (1945). Old English glosses. A collection. Modern Language Association of America/Oxford University Press.
Meritt, H. D. (1968). Some of the hardest glosses in Old English. Stanford University Press.
Pheifer, J. D. (Ed.). (1974). Old English glosses in the Épinal-Erfurt Glossary. Oxford University Press.
Pheifer, J. D. (1987). Early Anglo-Saxon glossaries and the school of Canterbury. Anglo-Saxon England, 16, 17–44.
Porter, D. W. (2010). The Antwerp-London glossary and Ælfric’s glossary: A record of the earliest English scholarship. Notes and Queries, 57, 305–310.
Porter, D. W. (ed.). (2011). The Antwerp-London glossaries. The Latin and Latin-Old English vocabularies from Antwerp, Museum Plantin-Moretus 16.2 – London, British Library Add. 32246. Volume 1: texts and indexes, Publications of the Dictionary of Old English, 8. PIMS.
Pulsiano, P. (2001). Prayers, glosses and glossaries. In P. Pulsiano & E. Treharne (Eds.), A Companion to Anglo-Saxon Literature (pp. 209–230). Blackwell.
Rusche, P. G. (1996). The Cleopatra glossaries: An edition with commentary on the glosses and their sources. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Yale University.
Simmonds, P. (1984). Nautical terms in the Brussels glossary. In J. Scattergood (ed.). Literature and learning in medieval and renaissance England. Essays Presented to Fitzroy Pyle (pp. 41–58). Irish Academic Press.
Voss, M. (1996). Altenglische Glossen aus MS British Library, Cotton Otho E.i. AAA – Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik 21, 179–203.
Wright, T., R. P. Wülcker (eds). (1884). Anglo-Saxon and Old English vocabularies. Volume 1: Vocabularies, 2nd edition. Trübner & Co.
Zupitza, J. (Ed.). (1880). Ælfrics Grammatik und Glossar. Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.
Zupitza, J. (1889). Altenglische Glossen. Zeitschrift Für Deutsches Altertum Und Deutsche Literatur, 33, 237–242.
Funding
The author did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Cataldi, C. The Glossary in London, British Library, Harley 107, fol. 72v. Neophilologus 107, 659–677 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11061-023-09772-x
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11061-023-09772-x