"First is writen a clause of the bigynnynge therof": The table oflections in manuscripts of the Wycliffite Bible

              Bo/e(il1 Milla!'es Cario
2005-2006. 24-25: 343-37K
ISSN: 0211-2140
"First is writen a clause ofthe bigynnynge
therof": The table oflections in manuscripts of
the Wycliffite Bible
Matti PEIKOLi\*
SUMMARY
This artiele diseusses the Middlc English tablcs of leetions (tabulae leetionum. eapitularia. lists
of perieopes) - liturgieal reterential tools found in almost one hundred later-fourteenth/early­fitieenth-
eentury manuseripts of the WyelifTite Bible. The major part of the artiele surveys
variation inthe form and content ofthe tables. serving the needs of genre description and paving
the way for further textual seholarship (a preliminary Iist of the Wyeliffite tables is presented in
Appendix A). The eoneluding diseussion addresses the use ofthe tables from the point ofview
ofreaders ofthe Wyclitlite Biblc. It is argued thatthe structural and textual development ofthe
tablcs testifíes to a gradual loss of Wyclitlíte ideologieal control over the use and design of the
English tablcs 01' lections. A previously unpublished Wyclitllte text related to this question is
included in Appendix B.
Key words: Middle English: liturgiealtexts; Wyeliffíte Bible; Lollardy; later medieval English
manuseripts.
RESUMEN
Este articulo examina las tabulae lectionum (eapitularia. listas de pericopes) --herramientas de
referencia Iitúrgiea- en casi cien manuscritos de los siglos catorce/quince que contienen la
Hiblia de WyelitT. La mayor parte del trabajo estudia la variación formal y de contenido de las
tablas, desde la perspectiva del género. para facilitar futuras investigaciones de crítica textual
(se incluye en un apéndice una lista preliminar de las tablas de lolardos). La discusión final trata
del uso de las tablas desde el punto de vista de los lectores de esta Biblia. Se argumenta que el
desarrollo estructural y textual de las tablas manifiesta una pérdida gradual del control ideoló­gico
sobre el uso y el diseíio de las tabulae Icctionum inglesas. Se incluye un texto inédito de
lolardo relacionado con este tema en el Apéndice B.
Palabras clave: inglés medio. textos litúrgicos. Hiblia de Wyclitl: Lolardos, manuscritos ingle­ses
medievales.
,. Th~ r~s~arch r~por(~d ill (his ~trticlc has b~~ll flllld~d by lh~ i\cad~11lY of Filllalld. decisioll ll1l11l­ber
203s04. I \Vall( (o lhallk (h~ orgalliscrs alld th~ parlicipallls ill the Se11lillar "Orgallization in M~dieval
Fllglish Tcxts: Stru~(lIre and Sigllalillg I)evi~es"' a( th~ 7(b eOllference of lhe European Society ror the
Stlldy 01' Fllglish (Zaragoza. S~ptc11lbcr 2(04) I()r their valllablc COl1l11lCllls Oll all carli~r versioll of lhis
cssay',
343
Malli Peiko/a "Finl is wrilen a e/alise ullhe hig)'nn)'nge Iheml": 7he lab!e ol/eelions in manllscripls...
1. INTRODUCTION
The biblical translation project undertaken by John Wyclif's followers is
among the landmarks of the vernacularisation process that characterises the
end of the fourteenth century in several fields of later medieval English learn­ing
and literature l . For obvious reasons, research on texts associated with the
Wycliffite project has largely focused on the translations themselves. Very lit­tle
attention, on the other hand, has been paid to the various referential and
mnemonic aids -calendars, lists, tables and so on- that accompany the
translations in many of their approximately 250 extant manuscripts2 . In such
items, earlier medieval liturgical and calendrical traditions fuse with more
recently adopted scholastic forms and techniques of presentation (cf. Parkes
1976, Rouse & Rouse 1979, Canuthers 1990).
Within English studies, the early vernacular development of technical gen­res/
text-types such as these has only recently started to attract scholarly interest3.
Research in this area may involve several dimensions. First, in many cases thc
basic characteristics of the form and content of such genres still await descrip­tion.
Second, since the emergence of a genre in Middle English (ME) often
ret1ccts the diffusion of Latin (or sometimes Anglo-Nonnan) professional con­ventions
to new vernacular audiences, the comparison of a genre with its models
in the source language and culture may provide important c1ues regarding the
social context of such diffusion and the textual and ideological issues involved
therein (see e.g. Peikola 2003, Canoll 2004). Third, the manuscript context is
important for an understanding ofthe adoption ofa genre in ME; referential texts
such as tables and calendars rarely circulated on their own, but were usually
bound together with the texts with which they had been designed to be used.
Beyond the question of genre development, the research potential ofthese
items lies in what they may reveal about the intended use and early readership
of the Wycliffite translations. No less importantly, their c10se scrutiny may
also help us in reconstructing patterns of production and dissemination for the
manuscripts themselves and for different versions of the translation. No over­all
agreement has been reached within Wycliffíte studies on either issue (see
e.g. Somerset 2004: 199).
With this general background in mind, this article sets out to explore one
frequent manuscript companion to the Wycliffíte translations: the table of lec-t
For the Wyclit1ite projeet, see e.g. Ilargreaves (1969), Hudson (19R8: 238-247), Lindberg ( 1989),
von Nolcken (1997), Lawton (1999: 4S4-482), de Hamel (2001: 166-IR9), Daniell (2003: 66-9S), Peikola
(200S). For recent discussions 01' (he vernaeularisation process, sce e.g. Watson (1999), Pahta &
Taavitsainen (2004).
2 For lists ofthc manuscripts, see Forshall & Madden (18S0, 1, xxxix-Ixi v), Lindberg (1970), Lewis,
Blake & Edwards (19RS: 41-43). No up-to-date catalogue 01' the manuscripts exists.
3 Recent volumcs mapping the tield 01' early English genrc/text-type studies include Dillcr & Gorlach
(2001), Hiltunen & Skaflilri (2003), Gorlach (2004), and Taavitsainen & Pahta (2004).
Bo/e/ín Mil/ares CarIo
200S-200Ó, 24-2S: 343-378
344
Motti Peiko!o "Firsl is H'rilen o e/ollse "flhe higvnl1l'nge Iherol"': The loh/e "l/ee/ions in !I1o/1/lseripls...
tions - a liturgical tool found in almost 40 percent of surviving manuscripts.
In addition to thc brief ovcrview by Forshall & Madden (1850, 1, xxxi, IV,
683n), which accompanies thcir edition ofthe tables, the Wycliffitc tables have
becn discussed by Deancsly (1920: 176), Hudson (1988: 198-199; 1989: 131­132),
von Nolcken (1997: 177), and de Hamel (2001: 180-182). There is,
howcvcr, no comprehensive treatment of thcm available, comparable for in­stance
to Lenker's (1999) survey of Anglo-Saxon gospel-Iectionaries.
Serving the nceds of genre description and paving the way for further textual
scholarship on the Wycliffite tablcs of lections, the major part of this article
(Section 3) surveys variation in the form and content of the tables as they appear
in thc translation manuscripts. The concluding discussion (Section 4) addresses
the use of the tables from thc point of view of the readcrs of the Wycliffite
translations, and considers some implications ofthe prescnt re-scarch in broader
tcnns. To provide nccessary background infonnation, Section 2 deals brietly
with the liturgical function of the tablc of Icctions, and summarises the main
points of its historical developmcnt in the Westem Church.
2. THE TABLE OF LECTIONS AS A LITURGICAL TOOL
2.1. BIBLICAL READINGS IN THE MEDIEVAL LITURGY OF THE MASS
Since the times of the Early Church, readings (Iections, pericopcs) trom
Scripture havc formed an important element in the liturgy of the mass. In the
West, the number oflcctions to be read at each Mass had stabiliscd by the sixth
century or so at two: the epistle and the gospel. As a vestige of earlier con­ventions,
some liturgical days continucd to have one or more extra rcadings
from the Old Testamcnt in addition to the two basic types (see The Catholic
Eneyclopedia s.v. "Gospcl in the liturgy", "Lessons in thc liturgy"; Hughes
1982: 85).
As a general tcrm for a type of liturgical reading, the gospel is semanti­cally
transparent: aH gospel pericopes are taken from the four gospcls. The
readings for the epistle, however, may also bc dcrived from the Acts, from the
Apocalypse or from various books of the Old Tcstament, in addition to the
Pauline and Catholic epistles directly implied by thc tcrm (Harper 1991: 116­118;
see Frerc 1935: 103-115 for a detailed brcakdown). Due to this referen­tial
ambiguity, the term lesson is sometimes uscd for epistles and other peri­copes
derivcd from the Old Testamcnt (see The Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v.
"Lcssons in the liturgy", Oxfórd English Dictionmy, s.v. "Iesson", Frere
1935: 103). This thrcefold division is also fol1owed in the Wycliffite tables,
where thc standard nomenclature ofthe pericopes is "Iessouns", "pistlis", and
"gospels".
345 Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
Ma/li Pei/w!a "Fint is ,,'riten o e/al/se olthe higl"1I1l'nge t{¡eroj"" The toh/e ol/ectiol1s iI1I1101ll1scripts",
2.2. THE TABLE OF LECTIONS
Tables of lections (tabulae lectionum, capitularia, Iists of pericopes) con­stitute
one of the reference systems that were developed to help those reciting
the mass pericopes to easily locate the passages designated for each Iiturgical
occasion (for such systems, see Klauser 1935: xi-xxii, Vogel 1986: 314-3 I9,
Martimort 1992: 21-43, Lenker 1999). Unlike lectionaries, which provide the
full text of the pericopes, tables of lections consist of their incipits, cither aIone
or together with their explicits. Since they are not self-containcd liturgical
texts, they are normalIy found as components of Bible manuscripts. The ear­liest
examples occur in Italian codices dateablc to as early as the sixth century
(Klauser 1935: xxx-xxxi, Martimort 1992: 26). Klauser's survey ofmore than
600 medieval Latin manuscripts that contain a list of pericopes reveaIs two
chronological peaks in their production: the ninth to eleventh century for Iists
of gospel lections, and the thirteenth century for combined lists of epistles and
gospels (Klauser 1935: xxxvi-Ixxxi; sec also Vogel 1986: 317-318, Martimort
1992: 28, 31, Palazzo 1998: 92-93). In the formcr period, almost all of the
manuscripts incIlIded in KIauscr's survey are copies of the four gospels, typi­cally
of French or German Carolingian origin; in the latter period, they are
aImost exclusively complete Bibles with a wider geographical distribution of
origins, including scveral copies made in England.
The figures presented by Klauser also suggest that the popularity ofthe tabIe of
lections wancd during the fourteenth and fifteenth century - a trend prcsumably
connected to the corresponding rise in the production of specific liturgical books
that gave the text of the pericopes in full, i.e. lectionaries and plenary missals
(Klauser 1935: Ixxi-cxx; see also Vogel 1986: 314-315, Lenkcr 1999). While there
is no rcason to doubt the general direction of this devclopment, it is possible that
some finc-tuning of the picture is called for on the basis of more detailed codicolo­gicaI
investigation ofthose thirteenth-century Bibles that contain atable ofiections.
In severaI such books describcd in Medieval A1anuscripts in British Libraries, for
example, the table does not appear to have been an original constituent but a later
addition4. This observation also applies to certain similar manuscripts in the British
Library that 1havc had the opportllnity to examine myself5.
4 See British and Foreign Bible Soeiety Lat.1 (Ker 19(,9: 2-3); Lambcth Palaee 1364 (ibid. %-97); Sto
Peter upon C:ornhill L.33 (ibid. 2(,2-2(,3); a Bible in Appleby Magna Parish Chureh (Ker 1977: 45); Baptist
C:ollege Bristol Z.d.39 (ibid. 193).
5 See British Library Add 4000(, (ff 51'- I31'). Royal I.A.xi (Ir 344v-345r). Royal I.B.x (Ir 34r-39v).
Royal 1.C.i (ff. 22Xr-230r). The seeond and third 01' these manuscripts were also included in Klauser's sur­vcy.
but in neither case is mention made about the status of the table as a later addition (see Klauser 1935,
scction V, MSS 81 and X2; the briefaecounts ofthese manuscrípts in ibid. Ixxv-Ixxvi indieate that in both
cases Klauscr derived his information from earlier catalogue descriptions). In addition lo thesc tour I3ritish
Library manuscripls my samplc of Latin tables of Icctions includes those in British Library Arundel 387 (Ir
('9r-7Ir) and Egerton 2867 (ff. 534r-535r). See Appendix A2 for Latin tables of lections found in manu­scripts
ofthc Wyclit11tc l3iblc.
Boletín Mi/lares Car/o
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37R
346
ivfatti Peiko/a "Fint is writel7 a e/ause o(the higYl1111'11ge Iheroj"': The tah/e o(lec/iol1s il1 I1U1I1I1scripIS ...
3. WYCLlFFITE TABLES OF LECTlONS: FORM AND CONTENT
3.1. THE VARIATIONIST APPROACH
The form and content of the Wyc1iftite tables of 1cctions vary in several
aspccts across the manuscripts. The range and distribution of this variation is
unsatisfactorily represented in the sole critical edition of the tables by Forshall
and Maddcn (1850, IV, 683-98), based on eight manuscripts only out of the
total ofmore than ninety that contain a table in ME (see Appendix A). In addi­tion
to the small number of manuscripts used, the problem with Forshall and
Madden's edition is that their text is essentially a patchwork of two major
redactions ofthc table. Given the extent ofvariation between these redactions,
it would havc been a more logical solution to edit thcm separately.
While thc comprehensive dcscription and possiblc new editions of the
various types of thc table of lections found in the complete body of manu­scripts
obviously have to await further studies, sorne initial observations
concerning thc variation, both textual and non-textual, found in the tables are
presented in seetion 3.3 below. These observations are based on a close in­spection
of approximately 50 percent and a more cursory assessment of
approximatcly 30 percent of the tables, from originals or reproduetions; the
data have been supplemented by descriptions ofWycliffitc tables of lections
in library catalogues and other secondary sources (see Appendix A).
3.2. MANUSCRIPT CONTEXT OF THE TABLES
3.2.1. BIBLlCAL SCOPE OF PARENT MANUSCRIPT
On the basis of palcographic and stylistic (artistic) evidence, a large ma­jority
ofthe extant manuscripts ofthe Wycliffite translations would seem to be
dateable to thc tirst three decades or so of thc fifteenth century6. Sinee New
Testaments form the single most frequent type of surviving manuscript (circa
40 percent of all mss), it is not unexpccted to find that they are also the com­monest
type ofmanuscript containing atable oflections. It is more noteworthy
that within the group ofthose manuscripts furnished with atable, the propor-
(, This assessment is largely based on thc aeeounl o1'the manuscripts by Forshall & Maddcn (1 X50. l.
xxxix-Ixi v) and on subscqucnl descriptions in library catalogucs. The use 01' formal and possibly archaising
textura bookhands in lhe majority 01' thc manuseripts makes their paleographic dating partieularly chal­icnging.
As to lhe artistie cvidence. the detaiicd analysis of the border elements 01' an carly dated copy of
the Wyelirtlte l3iblc by Scott (2002: 40-41) eSlablishes some usetÍJI chronologieal eriteria thal are more gen­erally
applicablc lo illuminalcd Illanuscripls of lhe lranslalions.
347 Bo/etín Mil/ares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37X
Mal/i Peiko/a "Fin'l is wrilen a C!allse o/Ihe higynnvnge Ihem(',' n,e lah/e o/'leclion.\' in manllscripls",
tion of New Testaments is over 70 percent. The group also contains complete
Bibles, second volumes oftwo-volume Bibles, gospel-books, and manuscripts
with various other combinations of New Testament material, but in compari­son
to complete New Testaments all these types are a c1ear minority. As can be
predicted on the basis of Klauser, psalters or other manuscripts that contain
solely Old Testamcnt material do not feature in the group.
3.2.2. OTHER COMPANION ITEMS AND THEIR ORDER IN THE MANUSCRIPT
In addition to tables oflections, a few other types of referential aid are found
in the Wyc1iffite translation manuscripts. Items that occur with sorne frequency
comprise a full-text Icctionary of Old Testament pericopes (ca 30 mss), a calen­dar
of saints (ca 20 mss), a short list ofthe names ofbiblical books and the num­ber
of chapters they contain (ca 10 mss), and atable of the "matters" containcd
in the books and chapters ofthe New Testament or the four gospels (ca 5 mssF.
More incidental companion tcxts inc1ude for example a list of the doctors who
have expounded the Bible and an explanation ofArabic numeralsx
AIthough a few manuscripts contain only one kind ofreferential aid, there
is a clear tendency for them to co-occur. This clustering may reflect the way
tables of lections and other referential items kept company in exemplars.
Examples are the substantially identical tables of Icctions ancl thc list of New
Testament books/chapters that accompanies them in Emmanuel Collegc
Cambridge 34 and Gonville & Caius College Cambridge 343/539. In both of
these Ncw Testament manuscripts, the pericopes are somcwhat unusually pre­sented
under two separate tables (see furthcr 3.3.4); the list of biblical books
is placed bctwecn them as an apparentIy unique solution as far as the
Wyc1iffite material is concemed. The presence of independent errors in these
sections in both manuscripts suggests that neither is a direct copy of the other;
rather, they seem to derive independentIy from a common ancestor - onc
which in all likelihood was arranged in a similar way as table + list + table
(see Rand Schmidt 2001: 73). The case ofEmmanuel34 and Gonville & Caius
343/539 may also provide evidence indicating that exemplars of such referen­tial
sections were available in separate fascic1es. This is suggested by the dif­ferent
location ofthe section in thc two manuscripts. In Emmanuel it is found
at the very beginning ofthe codex, which is the dcfauIt location ofthe table of
lections in the Wycliffite manuscripts, while in Gonvillc it occurs very unu-
7 For the "table 01' matters", see Forshall & Madden (1850, 1, xxxii),
x For the list 01' doetors, see British Library Lansdowne 407 (f 9r). An exposition 01' Arabic nu­merals
oeeurs in John Rylands Library Manehester Eng XO (1'1' 22v-23r); the preliminary matters 01' this
manuscript also contain atable 01' movable feasts and atable to fmd Easter (sec Lester 19X5).
Boletín Mi!!ares Carlo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37X
348
A4atli Peiko/" "Finl is lITilel1 a e/"I/se orlhe higYlll1\'11ge lhem(': 7111' tah/e oOeeliolls ill mal1l/seripls...
sually between the gospels and the Pauline epistles (see James 1904: 35, Rand
Schmidt 2001: 72-73).
3.2.3. EARLY ANO LATER VERSION MANUSCRIPTS
The Wyc1iffite translations are usually divided on textual grounds into
two distinct redactions - the Early Version (EV) and the Later Version (LV)­albeit
the variation evidenced within the former group has led some scholars
to propose a third 'lntermediate Version' (e.g. Talbert 1940, Hargreaves 1956;
cf. Lindberg 1994: 24). The precise relationships between these versions as to
their dates, processes of redaction and locations/avenues of publication
remain to be fully explored. On a general note, the small proportion (ca 15
percent) of the EV manuscripts (inc1uding those of the 'lntermediate
Version') out of all extant copies and their on average earlier dates of pro­duction
suggest that once LV texts became available, probably in the course
of the 1390s, they fairly rapidly ousted the EV from circulation (Hudson
1988: 239, Peikola forthcoming).
Both EV and LV manuscripts contain tables of lections. Moreover, tables
also often accompany the ME translation of Clement of Llanthony's gospel
harmony Unw/1 ex quattllor (the 00/1 oj'Foure) whose transmission (and per­haps
origin as well) is connected with the Wycliffite translations9. The way the
text co-occurs with other Wyc1iffite New Testament material in several manu­scripts
suggests that it was sometimes used as a substitute for the gospel trans­lations
proper - particularly those ofthe EV]o.
3.3. ELEMENTS OF FORM AND CONTENT
3.3.1. MISE-EN-I'AGE
The manuscript layout of most Wycliffite tablcs of lcctions readily
explains why the word tah/e is appropriate in describing them: the entries are
presented in a column fonnat that has been placed on a finely ruled grid, with
'! Sec lllldson (19SS: 267-26S). for a disclIssion ofthe 0011 ofFol/re. For a list ofthe ll1anllscripts. sce
Morey (2000: 333).
lO 0011 ofFol/re (OF) is fOllnd in the eOll1pany of othcr Wycliftitc biblieal tcxts at Ieast in the follow­ing
ll1anllscripts: Bodleian Libnll'y Bodley 771 (OF + extraets froll1 the Old and New Testall1ent in EV).
Bodlcy ns (OF T Catholie Epistles. Aets al1(l Apoealypse in EV); British Library Arllndel 254 (OF -j
Catholic epistles in EV). Ilarley 6333 (OF +- Pallline epistles- Apoealypse in LV): Glasgow University
Library Cien 223 (OF -j Catholie epistles in EV); 1I11ntington Library San Marino 11M 50] (OF +- extraets
froll1 the Old Testall1cnt etc. in LV).
349 Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
Malli Peiko/a "FiI:vf is wrifen a C!allse o/fhe hig)'nnvnge fhem{": The fah/e ol!ecfions in manllscripfs ...
each lection appearing in its own compartment (see Figure 1) 11. In most cases
the columns themselves have aItemating red and black colours, so that
columns ofthe same colour are never placed side by side. As usual, red ink is
also used for thc rubrics and occasionalIy for the flourishing of initials. A
majority of the tables surveyed for thc present study are written in textura
bookhands of professional appearance. On the whole, the tablcs of lections
found in the manuscripts of the Wycliffite translations have an air of
sophistication and careful planning. In their sophisticated layout thc Wycliffite
tables resemble the astronomical and mathematical tables found in contempo­raneous
scientific manuscripts (for such tables, see e.g. Voigts 1989)12.
The usual mise-en-page of the Wycliffite tables consists of the folIowing
six columns, from left to right:
(1) liturgical occasion (e.g. "Passioun Soneday"), red, (see 3.3.4);
(2) source of lection, by biblical book and chapter (e.g. "Joon viijo"),
black;
(3) referentialletter (e.g. "h"), red, (see 3.3.2);
(4) lection incipit (e.g. "Who of3ou"), black;
(5) the word "ende", red, (see 3.3.2);
(6) lection explicit (e.g. "ofpe temple"), black, often followed by a red or
black double virgule (//).
1 have not been able to ¡ocate other examples of precisely this layout among
Latin biblical codices ofEnglish origin or early provenance in the British Library.
Even if identical Latin tables of lcctions are not found, there can hardly be any
doubt that the mise-en-page has been modelIed upon the Latin tables used in later
medieval England. For example, a Latin table of Sarum lections, added in the
later fourtcenth or early fifteenth century to a thirteenth-century Bible in British
Library Royal 1.B.x (ff. 34r-39v), bears a considerable resemblance to the
Wycliffite tables in its compartmentalised column layout, which contains items
(1 )-(4) and (6) in the same order that they usualIy appear in the WycIiffite mate­rial.
The absence of (5) can be explained by the same information appearing in
the running hcad "Fines", placed aboye the column which contains the lection
explicits; the column containing the incipits is similarly headed "Principis".
The samc convention of omitting (5) and using running heads is found in
at least three WycIiffite tables whosc column layout differs from the standard
11 For uses 01" the table format in ditlerent kinds 01' later medieval English manuseripts, see e.g.
Gillespie (19R9), Voigts (19R9), Briggs (1993). See Carruthers (1990: 129) for the mnemonie aspects oftab­ular
layout.
12 I would like to thank Professor Irma Taavitsainen for pointing out the similarity 01' layout between
the Wyelitlite material at hand and ME manuseripts ol"Guy de Chauliae's Chirllrgia Magna.
Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006,24-25: 343-378
350
/'vlolli Pei/w/o "Firsl is ,,,rilen o C!ollse of/he higl'l1nl'l1ge /heroj"': lile /oh/e o(iee/ion.\' in /l1ol1l1seripls ...
pattern in othcr ways as wcll. Two of the manuscripts - British Library
Arundcl 104 and Emmanucl College Cambridgc 21 - are early copies of the
complete Bible in LV; thc third is Trinity College Dublin 67, a relatively early
copy of Proverbs-Apocalypse in LV that originally may have formed thc
second part of a Bible in two volumes. According to Forshall & Madden
(1850, 1, Ivi), Arundel and Emmanucl "agree very remarkably" in thcir text
and orthography, suggesting a close production relationship bctween them.
Their tables contain tívc columns instead of the regular six, and the order is
unusual: from len to right (1), (4), (6), (2), (3); Trinity College 67 follows the
same order, but items (2) and (3) are placed in a single column. The running
heads for the incipit and explicit columns in all three manuscripts ­"
Biginnings" and "Ecndings" respectivcly (quoted from Emmanuel21) - ccho
thc Latin usagc represented by the table in Royal I.B.x. Similar running heads
are also uscd in the table 01' lections in Bcrkeley, University of California
Bancroft Library UCB 128 (Ncw Testament in LV), but in this case thc mise­en-
page is otherwise thc standard one oI' six columns in the usual order.
Another cxample of a non-standard mise-en-page occurs in New York
Public Library MA 67 (Ncw Testament in EV). The table has been exccuted in
a larger writtcn area and in a different hand I'rom that found in the main part
of thc manuscript, and its parchment leaves arc oI' a diffcrent quality. These
fcaturcs may mean that it was not preparcd togethcr with the rest of the codcx
(see further Pcikola 2005). The layout of the tablc follows no clcar column
structurc, but the pericopes for each occasion are given in longlines in the
following order: liturgical occasion (e.g. "Andrec Apostoli"), type offirst lec­tion
("cpistola"), incipit ("Bi hertc me byleuep"), biblical refcrencc ("Rom x"),
type of sccond lcction ("euangelium"), incipit nhc walkende bisidc see"),
biblical reference ("Mt iiii") (MA 67, f. xiV). Neither refcrentialletters nor lec­tion
cxplicits are used, and both thc names of the occasion and the abbrevia­tions
for typc of lection appear in Latin. Although this type 01' mixcd­language
table is possibly unique in Wycliffíte biblical manuscripts, a simi­larly
formatted tablc using Latin only is found appended at the end of British
Library Harlcy 4027 (New Testamcnt in LV). Moreovcr, whilc not writtcn in
longlines, the Latin tablcs in Oxford Ncw Collegc 67 (NT in EV) and Trinity
Collcge Dublin 74 (NT in EV) likcwise lack the lettcrs and cxplicits. Thc
mixcd-Ianguagc tablc in British Library Egerton 618 (2nd volumc oI'
Proverbs-Apocalypse in EV) also rcsembles MA 67 in its lack of the lettcrs
and thc explicits; unlike MA 67, howcver, in Egerton both Latin and English
are uscd in thc lection incipits (for this manuscript, see further 3.3.5). It is
worth noting that among the Wycliffitc material the Latin (or mixed-Ianguage)
tables scem to have a tcndency to appear in EV manuseripts.
In non-Wycliffite biblical manuscripts, this type of table (or more appro­priately
a list) can be found for examplc in Egerton 2867, Royal I.Cj, and
351 Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37X
Malli Peiko/a "Firsl is H'rilen (f e/alISe olfhe higvnnvnge Iherol": The lah/e o//ecliol7S in lI1anllscripls...
Royal I.A.xi. AII three manuscripts are complete Bibles of thirteenth-century
English origino In Egerton, the hand in which the table has been written also
seems to occur elsewhere in the manuscript; thus the table apparently belongs
to the original design of the codex (Dover/Canterbury, probably before 1247;
see the electronic British Library Manuscripts Catalogue). In Royal I.Cj, the
main hand of the table also appears to be roughly contemporaneous with that
in which the rest of the manuscript has been written, whereas the imperfect
table of Royal 1.A.xi is a later fourteenth/early fifteenth-century addition, writ­ten
on the original endleaves of the manuscript.
The very limited amount of non-Wycliffite Latin data used does not
allow far-reaching conclusions about the development of mise-en-page in
tables of lections used in medieval England 01' the place of the Wycliffite
tables in this dcvelopment. However, a hypothesis about the relative earli­ness
of the untabulated list-like design, lacking the referential letters and
Icction explicits, scems warranted even on the basis of the present material.
The characteristic occurrence of the more sophisticated compartmentalised
misc-en-page in the tables found in fifteenth century LV manuscripts is
consistent with this hypothesis.
3.3.2. THE REFERENTIAL J\PPARJ\TUS
In most Wycliffite tablcs of lections, the precision of rcferencc from table
to biblical text is ensured by means of a specific referential letter attached to
each lection (see also Hudson 1989: 131). The reader of the manuscript, intent
on finding the lection for a particular liturgical occasion, would first consuIt
the table to learn the book, chapter, referential letter, and incipit given for the
lection. Upon turning to the book and chapter specified in the table, the reader
would look for the same letter in the manuscript margin to see where the lec­tion
begins. The incipit givcn in the table guides him 01' her to the exact opcn­ing
words. As a further visual cue, the first words of the lection have been
washed with red 01' yellow in many manuscripts. The approximatc location of
the end of each lection is usually marked in the manuscript margin with a
double virgule; the explicit given in the table infonns the reader as to the
precise closing words of a lection.
In a majority ofthe Wycliffite tables inspected, the letters employed in the
referential function consist of the beginning of the alphabet from A to L. In the
biblical text, however, there are gaps in the alphabetical sequence of Ictters
writtcn in the manuscript margino The two lections read from Mt. vii, for
example, have been marked with e and D; Mt. viii has A and D; Mt. ix is fur­nished
with A, e, D, E and G. Had the alphabetical system been dcvised with
this particular referential purpose in mind, one would expect to find A and B
Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-3n
352
Hull! I'cikll/u "Fin"! is HTilen (/ c/lll(Se of/he higl'17nynge t!u:,roj"': T/u! toh/e uj'/ce/ion.'! in IJlw111.\CnjJ/s ..
uscd 1'01' the two Icctions in Mí. vii and viii respcctively, and A, B, e, o and E
for thc fivc lections takcn from Mí. ix. Instead, thc distribution and placement
of the letters suggests that they derive from a separate system in which each
chapter of the Bible has becn subdivided into shorter sections of approxi­mately
even length marked by the letters of the alphabet, invariably beginning
fmm A. In the margins ofany given chapter ofthe Wyc1iffite translations, only
those subdividing lettcrs of this systcm remain that correspond to the begin­nings
of lcctions; the rest of the letters (such as B and r in Mt. ix) are not
shown, becausc they are rcdundant for thc purpose of marking the lections.
A widcspread alphabctical system that vcry much rescmbles that of the
WyclitTitc manuscripts was dcvelopcd by the Parisian Dominicans in the thir­tccnth
century for purposcs of Bible concordancing (sce dc Hamel 2001: 181).
In this system, the letters A-e; werc uscd for thc subdivision of biblical chap­ters
into seven parts of roughly equal length (Rouse and Rouse 1979: 34,
Carruthers 1990: 100). That the schemc was malleable is demonstrated by
Briggs' (1993) discussion of a six-Ietter (AF) systcm used in an alphabctical
subjeet index (fahula) produced 1'01' the De regimine principum of Giles 01'
Rome in the 1390s, probably for the university market at Oxford. The eleven­letter
scheme (A-L) found in most Wyc1iffite tables is probably likewise a fur­ther
modification 01' the Dominican system 13.
The evidcncc prcsented by the Wycliffite and other contemporaneous
Sarum tablcs of lcctions suggests that at least in this liturgical context the
elcven-Iettcr scheme may have been something of a novelty around the turn of
thc fourteenth century. In the Wyc1iffite material, there are two smal1 sub­groups
01' tables which use the traditional A-e; scheme instead of the A-L onc.
Both subgroups are textual1y and (on average) codicologically earlier than the
tablcs that conform to the ¡\-L schcmc.
The first subgroup consists of the tables of lections tailored to thc Oon of
Foure (see 3.2.3 above). The second subgroup contains tables that werc desig­ned
to accompany manuscripts of the Wycliffite Biblc, but where the lection
incipits and explicits represcnt an carlier stage of translation than in other
tables; most tables in this group arc found in thc manuscripts of EVI4. Atable
with the shorter alphabetical sequence also accompanies Bodleian Library
Fairfax 2 - a large-sizc complete Bible with the biblical books in LV but most
of the prologues in EV According to its colophon, thc manuscript was made
in 1408 (f. 3851'; see Hargreavcs 1969: 394, Scott 2002: 40). This otherwise
11 The sequenee ;\-1. eonlainsjust eleven Ietters. as J \Vas not dístínguished ti'OIll 1.
1-1 See Bodleían Library (;ough Ecel. Top. 5. Ilatton 111; Brítish Líbrary Additíonal 155XO; Corpus
C'hrísti C'ollege Oxi(mj 4; Herzog·August l3íbliothek Wolfcnbüttcl Guclf Aug. A2; Trinily College Dublin
75. 76. The Wycliltile tables using this syslelll ean easily be dístinguished frolll lhe standard ;\.1. ones ti'olll
lhe lelter attaehed to the tirst epistle lection al the very beginning of the table (the lirst Sunday ín Advent).
In the ;\ (; tables. this letter is 1; in lhe ;\-1. lables. it ís !J.
353 Bo/etín lvlillares Cario
2005·2006.24·25: 343·37X
Malli Peiko/a "Firsl is wrilefl a c/allse ollhe higYflflmge Ihero!",: l/le lah/e ol/eclion.\' in maflllscripls ...
somewhat idiosyncratically formatted table spells out neithcr lection incipits
nor explicits, which may mean that at the time ofits making no table using LV
readings suitable to accompany the text of the manuscript was yet available
for copying.
My data from contemporaneous Latin tables of Sarum Icctions that use the
alphabetical system of reference are limited to two manuscripts only, but in
both cases the tables conform to the conventional A-G scheme. One of the
tables has been prefixed to a copy of The English Wyc!ij¡ite Sermons, dating
from the end ofthe fourteenth century (see Hudson 1983: 79)15. In the margins
of another manuscript of the Wycliffite sennon-cycle there are rubricated
biblical references that use the same alphabetical scheme (ibid. 138)16.
The marginalletters ofthe alphabet that mark the lection openings and the
double virgules that flag their endings are regularIy prescnt also in those LV
(New Testament etc.) manuscripts that do not contain atable of lections (see
also Hudson 1988: 198, de Hamel 2001: 181). Scribes probably copied them
routinely from exemplars together with the biblical text, rcgardless of
whether or not a copy of the table was available at the time of the copying.
Since the Ictters are virtually meaningless without atable keyed to them, their
wide attestation among LV manuscripts probably means that atable of
lections containing the letters was part of the dissemination of LV from earIy
on - a conclusion also suggested by the case of Fairfax 2 discussed aboye.
This condition does not seem to apply to EV, however, where marginal letters
are only rarcly found in manuscripts that do not contain atable.
A few EV manuscripts employ an altemative system in marking the lec­tions
17. In this system, self-contained rubricated notes that spell out the litur­gical
occasion (e.g. "the gospel vpon cristcmasse euen") are inserted in the
scriptural text or in the margin at the head of each pericope (quoted from
Columbia University Library Plimpton Add 3, f. 3r; see also de Hamel 200 1:
181). As in the alphabetical system, hcre too the word "ende" usually marks
the cnd of the pericope (cf. Martimort 1992: 22). As a Iiturgical device, this
system predates the list/table oflections; it secms to have become more or less
obsolete by the end of the Middle Ages (Klauser 1935: xiv, xxxv; sce also
Vogel 1986: 390, n. 123). As Klauser (ibid. xiv) and Lenkcr (1999: 152) ob­serve,
making effective use ofthe notes on their own would have required con-
1j Pembroke College Cambridge 237: the tablc is found in a quire that precedes the sermons. The other
Latin table using the alphabet in the prcsent data is found in British Library Royal l. B.x.
16 Trinity College Cambridge B.2.17.
17 Bodleian Library llolkham mise 40 (Matthew-John): British Library Additional 155XO
(Proverbs-Apocalypse). Egcrton 617-1 X (Proverbs-Apocalypse); Columbia University Library Plimpton
Add 3 (New Testament in EV/LV; rubrics only occur in EV text); John Rylands Library Manchester Eng 84
(Acts in EV/LV; rubrics only oeeur in the EV seetion); Tokyo. Takamiya 28 (Matthew and Acts; rubries in
Aets only); Trinity Collegc Dublin 76 (Matthew-John).
Boletín Mil/ares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
354
Malli Peiko/a "Firsl is wrilell a e/alise o/Ihe higYlIlIl'l1ge Iherol": The laMe ol/eclirms in mallllscripls...
siderablc liturgical and scriptural expertise, which cxplains the development of
the table of lections as a more user-friendly device.
In two of the EV manuscripts surveyed for the present study atable of lec­tions
co-occurs with rubricated liturgical notes, in both cases apparently as part
of the original dcsign of the book. Thc evidence presented by these manu­scripts
- British Library Additional 15580 and Egerton 618 - is by no means
unambiguous, but it may render support to thc conc1usion that in the trans­mission
of EV the liturgical notes represent an earlier stage than the marginal
letters.
The table found in Egerton 618 (before 1397) is not fumished with the
usual rcferentiallettcrs, but spells out the beginnings ofthe lections (see further
3.3.5). It is therefore ideally suited to accompany the lection notes in the bibli­cal
text, and it considerably improves the usability ofthe notes by providing as
it were an index to thcm. One possible explanation for this combination of
systems in Egerton is that neither exemplars fumished with the marginal refer­ential
1etters nor tab1es of lections keyed to them were available to the makers
of the manuscript; thus the tabular reference had to be organised around the
older notational system.
In Additional 15580 (s. xiv ex.), the table employs thc referential letters
according to the oldcr scheme A--G. Since the margins ofthe biblical text in this
manuscript do not reproduce these letters, the table is not fully compatible with
thc text. As the table also contains the incipits of thc lections, however, it is
in practicc rcadily useable with the liturgical notes of the manuscript. Thc
refercntial incompatibility between table and text may mean that in Additional,
unlike in Egcrton, the table was copied from a separate cxemplar from that
lIsed for the main part of the manuscript. This conclusion is supported by the
signatllrc of thc qllire that contains the table, which is not part of the same
scries as thc quire signaturcs in the rcst of the codex.
3.3.3. TVPLS 01' LLCTION
A great majority of thc Wyc1iffitc tables survcyed for this study contain
information on threc types of lection: the Old Tcstamcnt lessons, the epistles,
and the gospcls. In Klauser 's terminology they therefore represent the
Capitulare lectionum et evangeliorum, whosc rise seems to be closely asso­ciated
with the thirteenth-century surge in the production of complete Bibles
(sce Klauser 1935: xvi, Ixxi, Light 1987: 280). This relationship is a logical
one; a 'full' table of lections obviously works best with a complete Bible. By
the same token, it seems not impossible that the full ME tables of lections
found in the Wycliffite translations were likcwise originally intended to be
used with completc Bibles. At 1east it can readily be observed that several of
355 Buletín Millares Carlu
2005-2006.24-25: 343-3n
Malli Peiko/a "Firsl is l\úlen a e/alise oflhe hig\'l1l1\'11ge Ihem!",: The lah/e ol/eelions in IllUllllseripls ..
the numerically few complete Bibles (or their surviving second volumes)
which contain a table are relatively earIy l8. The opening rubrics of the full
Wycliffite tables also almost invariably use the word "bible" to describe the
text to which their references pertain.
Strictly speaking, the lesson and epistle references to the üld Testament
are redundant in tables accompanying New Testament manuscripts, because
the reader would not be able to access their text within one and the same vol­ume.
The reason why scparate üld Testament lectionaries were appended to
many New Testaments must have been to remedy this problem by making the
volume Iiturgically self-contained (see Forshall & Madden 1850, 1, xix).
Another way to achieve the same resuIt, aIthough a much rarer one in the light
of the surviving manuscripts, was the insertion of the full text of the üld
Testament lections at the appropriate locations of the table itself (for this prac­tice,
see Hudson 1988: 198-199, von Nolcken 1997 n. 4). That there also exist­ed
a need for separate full-text lectionaries of both üld and New Testamcnt
pericopes using the Wycliffite translations is demonstrated by the survival of
at Ieast two manuscripts of this kind: British Library Harley 1029 and HarIey
1710 (see Forshall & Madden 1850: 1, xix; Hanna 1984: 14, Lindenbaum
forthcoming 2006). The two volumes have an identical plan and contain the
pericopes for the whole eccIcsiasticaI year.
There are a few cascs in which atable that is appended to a New
Testament manuscript contains only refcrences to those epistle and gospcl
lections which occur in the New Testamcnt l9 . Thc opcning rubrics of such
tables usualIy rccognise this by rcferring to "pistils & gospeIs" as the types
of lection contained in them; thc rubrics also specify the textual scope of the
references as "pe newe testamenf' or "pe new law" instead of the standard
"bible" (see Figure 1). In general, the rubrics and structuring principIes of
these tables suggest that they are not textually independent products, but
derivatives of the more widcspread tables containing references to the whole
set of lessons, epistles and gospels. Concrete evidence for the process of
modification can be found for example in the opening rubric of the table in
New York Public Library MA 66 (f. 2r), where the scribe first copied the
IX For cxamplc. British Library Additional 15580 ("before lhc c10se of the xiv. ecnt". Forshall &
Madden 1850. Lxiv), Arundel 104 (carly 15th eentury. Prof Luey Freeman Sandler. privalc eommunica­tion).
Egerton 618 (before 1397; sce 3.3.5): Bodleian Library Fairfax 2 (1408: sec Hargreaves 1969: 394,
Seoll 2002: 40); Emmanue1 College Cambridge 21 ("Cen!. xiv late", James 1904: 17); IIercford Cathedral
O.VIl.1 CS. xv in .... Mynors & Thomson 1993: 46); Herzog-August Bibliothek Wolfenblillel GuclfAug. A
2 ("zu Anfang der 15. JH", von Ileinemann 1965. IV, 10).
19 See Bodleian Library Bodley 183 (but note that the Sanetorale seetion includes the refcrenees to the
Old Testament leetions), Douee 265. Gough Eecl. Top 5. Hallon 111; British Libral)' Royal 1.A.x;
Chctham's Library Manehcster 6723; John Rylands Library Manehcster Eng 77: National Library of
Seotland Edinburgh Adv. 18.6.7 (see Forshall & Maddcn 1850, 1, lix. who report that lhe tablc is in a laler
hand Ihan lhe main parl oflhe manuseript): Ncw York Publie Library MA 66; Trinily College [)ublin 76.
Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
356
iVlotti !'ei/;% "h,,,t is \t'ritel1 a e/alise of'the higvlIl1vnge thero(": The toh/e ol!eetio!1S il1 lI1ol1l1scripts ..
word "bible" from his exemplar, but subsequently cancelled it and replaced
it with "new law".
A similar derivative status seems to apply to those tables that make refer­ence
to even more sclected types of lection. The largest group consists 01'
tables that contain only references to the gospel pericopes - in one instance to
Sunday gospels only20. In thcsc cases the parent manuscripts are gospel-books,
which explains the limited scope 01' the references. The opening rubrics now
refer to "gospels", and dcscribe the textual scope 01' the references as "(pe
tourc) euangclistis", although "bible" remains as a residual element 01' the
standard formulation in at least one manuscript2l . In like fashion, the tables in
two manuscripts that contain the books from thc Pauline epistles to the
Apocalypse list only the beginnings and endings 01' the epistle pericopes fmm
the Ncw Testament22 .
3.3.4. LITlJRGICAL OCCASIONS AND TIlEIR ORDER
Another dimension along which the contents 01' the Wycliffite tables 01'
lections vary concems the type 01' liturgical occasion included and the order in
which these are presentcd. A large majority 01' the tables surveyed contain thc
following three sections, separated from each other by rubrics:
(1) thc lections for Sundays and ferias - in the rubrics "sonedaies &
ferials" or "dominicals & ferial s" (henceforth section D);
(2) the lections for the votive masscs or commemorations-
"pe eommemoraciouns" (V);
(3) the lcctions for the Sanctoralc - "pe sanctorum" (S).
The most frequent order for the sections to appear is DVS; atable 01' lec­tions
with the three sections arranged in this order is tound in at least thirty­five
manuscripts (sec Appendix A). With a single exception, they are all
manuscripts 01' LV23. Another relatively common order is DSV, present in at
lcast fourteen manuscripts, 01' which almost all are again in LV (see Appendix
211 See Bodlcian Libnu'y Selden supra 49; Cambridge Universily Library Additional 66X4; Corpus
Christi College Cambridge 440 (Sunday gospcls only); Lambeth Palaee 1366. Moreover, Hudson (198X:
19X n. 130) menlions lwo lablcs whieh include lhe full lexl of lhe cpistle lections. The tables aeeompany­ing
lhe (JOI1 o{Follre eonlain gospel references only (wilh lhe exceplion of British Library lIarley 6333, see
furlher 3.3.5).
21 Lambeth Palaee 1366, f. 21'.
2' Bodleian Library Fairfax 21; SI. John's College Cambridge E. 13.
21 The exeeplion is Ilrilish Library Royal l.B.vi (New Teslamenl in EV); lhe lable is possibly a laler
produel lhan lhe main parl 01" lhe manuseript.
357 Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006,24-25: 343-37R
Malli Pei/{o!a "Fin'l is ",rilen u C!utlse ollhe higl'nllmge Ihemf': The luh!e o/'Ieerions in mantlsaipls ..
A). In sorne EV manuscripts, however, the Don ofFoure is accompanied by a
DSV-type table that has been tailored to its parts and chapter divisions24.
While a similar table is also found in a few ofthose copies ofthe Don ofFoure
that do not contain other Wycliffite Bible material - such as British Library
Royal 17.D.viii, Christ Church College Oxford AlIestree LA.I, and Columbia
University Library Plimpton 268 - it is not an invariable component of the
gospel harmony in all of its ME manuscripts (e,g. Peterborough Cathedral 8;
see Edden 2000: 51-53)25. The origins ofthe Don ofFoure table and its pre­cise
relationship with other Wycliffite tables of lections remain to be explored
(cf. Deanesly 1920: 176),
By way offurther variation, in a few manuscripts thc three sections D, V,
and S are presented under two separate tables - a conventionally formatted
DV-table that has been arranged according to the ecclesiastical year (i.c.
beginning from Advent) and an S-table that follows the order of the secular
year from January to December26. The self-standing S-table may be viewed
as a calendar of saints into which the lection incipits and explicits have been
incorporated, In the closely related Emmanuel 34 and Gonville & Caius
343/539 (see 3.2,2), for example, S contains the golden numbers and domin­ical
letters; these features belong to the stock repertoire of saints' calcndars,
but are not usually found in tables of lections (see Hughes 1982: 277-278).
As it appears in Emmanuel and Gonville & Caius, the section also includes
several feasts that never appear in Wycliffite tables of lections proper, such
as The Translation of St Wilfrid (24 April) - a non-Sarum feast that was cele­bratcd
in the Use ofYork (see Henderson 1881), For many such 'additional'
fcasts, no information on thc incipits and explicits of the pericopes is pro­vided,
which furthcr cmphasises the primarily calcndrical function of this
type of table.
Some Wycliffite tables contain four sections instead of the usual threc.
Both sections O and V remain intact, but instead of S there are two separate
sections: the Common of Saints (C) and the Proper of Saints (P). The usual
sequcnce is DPCV; in the present data, only two tables follow a DVPC order
(see Appendix A), Although atable with a separate C and P can be found in a
few LV manuscripts, it enjoys a closer relationship with manuscripts of EV,
and thc incipits and explicits of the tables tend to represent an earlier textual
24 Bodlcian Library Bodley 771; British Library Arundel 254; Glasgow University Library Gen 223,
The Oon o/FolI!'c tables notwithstanding. the only instance of a DSV table found in an EV manuscript lhal
1 have been ablc lo verily is Chrisl Church College Oxford 145,
25 For Allestree LA, l. see Ker ( 1983: 595-596); for Plimpton 268, see lhe Digira! Sc!'iplo!'illm dala­base.
available online at hltp://sunsite,berkeley.edu/scriplorium/seareh/manuseript.html
26 See Bodleian Library Sclden supra 51: Emmanucl College Cambridge 34; Gonville & Caius
College Cambridge 343/539; Herclord Cathedral MS Q,VILl; Trinity College Cambridge B, 10.20. The S­seclions
01' British Library Arundel 104 and Emmanuel College Cambridge 21 also begin from January.
although they have not been presen(ed under a separate table,
Bo/etín Mi//ares Cario
2005-2006,24-25: 343-378
358
¡vlol/i Peiliolo "Finl is "'I'ilell (f cfouse o(lhe hig\'lllll'lIge Ihemj": The loh/e ol/ee/io/1S ill !I1om/seripls ...
state than those of the more widespread DSV and DVS types. Moreover, all
the tables surveyed using thc apparently earlier alphabetic refcrential scheme
(1\-(,) havc scparatc C and P sections. lt is thcrefore probable that the presen­tation
of the Icctions in four sections is a characteristic of the early transmis­-
sion ofthe Wycliffitc tables.
A comparison ofthe contcnts ofC and P in tables offour sections with sec­tion
S ofthe thrcc-scction tablcs suggests thc process whercby the two sections
scem to have cvolved into a single one. In four-section tables, C contains the
pericopcs for thc usual categories of thc Common of Saints, such as "Many
Martyrs", "Confessor and Bishop", "Virgin and Martyr" and so on (sce
Forshall & Madden 1850,1,696-697; cfGradon 1988: cl-cli; for the liturgical
uses of CO1/11/1on and proper, see Hughcs 1982: 45-47). No individually named
saints appear in this scction. In equally convcntional fashion, P lists thc festi­vals,
vigils and octavcs for individually namcd saints, and provides informa­tion
on the pericopcs to be rcad on these days. Thcre are approximately fifty
differcnt occasions listcd undcr section P in the Wycliffite tables.
Dcspitc the usual description in the DSV/DVS table rubrics of scction S as
containing both the Common and thc Propcr ofSaints "togidere ofal pe 3eer",
thc liturgical occasions named in S do not in fact contain any of thc general
Common of Saints catcgories of section C. Instcad, there is a long list (about
170 items) of occasions celebrating individually namcd saints. Section S thus
has the appcarancc of a considerably extended P. For example, wherc P lists
onc feast in thc month of January - the Convcrsion of Paul on the 25th - S
includes no fewer than twclve other saints: Felix (ofNola), Maurus, Marcellus,
Sulpicius, Prisca, Wulfstan, Fabian and Scbastian, Agncs, Vincent, Julian,
Agnes ("pe secunde"), and Bathildis.
A closcr look at the pcricopes assigned to thcse and other similar additional
fcasts in scction S shows that they draw on a rclatively small textual pool, in
contrast to the wider biblical rangc of pericopes used tor the fcasts that occur in
both S and P. Morcover, thc additional fcasts of individually named saints in
section S sharc thcir readings according to the conventionalised typc/epithet of
the saints (martyr, virgin, confcssor etc). The textual pool uscd for these read­ings
is thc same as that of scction C. The separately standing sections C and P
scem to havc becn rcworked into a single extensive section S by attaching thc
Common of Saints readings to a large number of individual saints' feasts in the
Sarum calendar, as ir they were actually rcadings proper to thcm.
Thc apparently unique table in British Library Egerton 618 takes us
directly into thc midst of what seems to have been thc process of uniting the
scctions - pcrhaps in thc early/mid 1390s, as the date ofthe manuscript would
suggest (see 3.3.5). Likc sevcral othcr early Wycliffite tables, Egerton contains
tour scparate sections; the order in which thcy appear is DPCV. Exceptionally,
however, section C does not contain the general catcgories prescnted under it
359 Bolelín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
Matti Peiko/a "Fi"l,t is writen a e/alise oj'the hig.l'lInl'nge theroj"': The tah/e oj'/ections in man/lscripts..
in other Wycliffite manuscripts. Instead, there is a long list ofindividual saints,
all fumished with readings derived from the conventional categories of the
Common of Saints. Viewed togethcr, the contents of sections C and P in
Egerton are substantially identical to the 170 or so occasions normally listed
under scction S in tables of the DVS/DSV type. The setting clearIy anticipates
the integration of the two sections into a single one.
In addition to variation in the arder and number ofthe sections listing diffe­rent
types of liturgical occasion, the tables also vary to some extent in the reper­toire
of occasions listed within one and the same section. Under section O, for
example, some tables list the pericopes for both thc 25th Sunday and the
Wednesday after Trinity, whereas others just contain the Sunday pericopes27.
Under section S, there is similarly some variation in thc repertoire of saints
included. As noted aboye, the calendar-like tables ofEmmanuel 34 and Gonville
& Caius 343/539 are exceptionally rich with regard to this feature, but the more
standard types show variation along similar lines, even if more restricted28.
3.3.5. RUBRICS
Almost all the Wycliffite tables oflections surveyed contain both an open­ing
rubric and short medial rubrics scparating the different sections from each
other. The c10sing rubric is a less frequent element, and seems to aIlow for
more scribal variation than the opcning/medial rubrics. The few tabIes without
any opening rubric whatsoever (excluding the defective tables that have lost
their beginning) are either ones tailored to the Oon ofFoure or representatives
of the four-section tabIes presumably designed to accompany EV manu­scripts29.
A similar lack of rubrics also characterises the small sample of thir­teenth-
and fourteenth-century Latin tabIes investigated. This finding may
indicate that the use of opening rubrics in Sarum tables of lections bclongs to
a later phase in their development. In my data, the only Latin table with rubrics
n Thc Wednesday pcrieopes ¡lre not indicatcd for example in the following DVS tables: Bodleian
Library Bodlcy 665. Douce 240; Christ Church C'oilcge Oxford 146; New York Public Library MA 65, AII
these have a similar opening rubric that includes an additional phrase "at (pe) massc", Another group of
DVS tablcs without these lections that also have a mutuaily identical opening rubric compriscs Bodlcian
Library Fairfax 11. Douce 265, Rawlinson C259; British Library Egerton 1165, Lansdownc 455, In a sixth
manuseript with the same opcning rubric - British Library Egerton 1171 - the Wednesday pericopes have
been added in the margin as a scribal eorreetion,
2X Variation in the Sanctorale may yield important intormation on the early localltics where the man­useripts
were used. This question dcserves fuller treatment than is possible here; I hopc to rcturn to it clse­where
togethcr with an inspection 01' the calendars 01' saints found in Wycliffite manuscripts,
29 Oon 01 FOllre tables without an opening rubrie include British Library Arundcl 254 and Royal
17,D,viii; lor tables without opening rubries in manuscripts ofthe EV. see Bodlcian Library Hatton 111;
British Library Additional 15580; New York Public Library MA 67; lIerzog-August Bibliothek
Wolfenbüttcl GuclfAug, A2; Trinity C'oilege Dublin 75. 76, For acephalous tables. scc Appendix A,
Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
360
Afalli l'eiÁn/a "Fi"vt is I"rilen a clame nllhe higl'nl1\'nge th{'/'n(": nI(' lah/e n(!eetinns in manllseriptS",
is that of British Library Royal I.B.x - a late table, whosc other featurcs like­wise
closely rcsemble the Wyeliffite products (see 3.3.1).
Although the discussion of rubrics in this seetion primarily focuses on their
functions for the user, it should not be forgotten that there is also a considerable
degree of textual variation betwecn the rubrics of the various structural types of
table (OVS, OSV etc.). When shared between tables, such variation may help to
identify subgroups under the broader types. The rubrics also show evidence of
idiosyncratic scribal behaviour, ranging from the usual copying errors to what
seems to be intentional modification of the rubrics, usually by way of shortening
them. Some such idiosyncrasies may reflect scribes' creative responses to the
lack of opening 01' closing rubrics in thcir exemplars.
The medial rubries serve a straightforward signposting function by naming
the previous and/or next section: for example, "Here eenden dominicals & ferials:
& bigynnen pe eomcmoraeions in pis ordir" (Bodleian Library Fairfax 11, f. 131').
The opening rubries also frequently eomment on the strueture of the table by
naming its scetions and mentioning their order: "first ben sett sonedaies & fcrials
togidcr. & aftir pe sanetorum comoun & propre togider ofal pe 3eer" (ibid. f. 7r).
[n addition to the signposting funetion, particularly the longcr opening rubries
01' the OVS and OSV types also provide table users with infonnation about the
way their refercntial apparatus works. Thc infonnation inc1udes a deseription of
how, in the biblical text, the lections are "markid wip lettris of pe abe. at pe
bigynnynge of \)e ehapitris twoward pe myddil or pe ecnde: aftir pe ordre as pe
lettris stondcn in \)c abc" (Jesus College Cambridge Q.0.6, f. 221'); 01' how the
leetion "endil) at twei strikis in pe margyn" (ibid.). The longer rubries also explain
what the eolumns of the incipits and explieits stand tal': "First is writen a c1ause of
pe bigynnynge perof: and a clause ofpe eendynge perofalso" (ibid.). Explanations
sueh as these possibly anticipate an audienee unfamiliar with the alphabetical
system of referenec 01' the tabular format in general (see further Section 4).
Regardless of their length, the opening rubrics almost invariably bcgin by
naming the text that fallows them. The genre label used in most rubries is
"rule", eharaeteristically found in an opening sentence whieh also states the
gencral purpose 01' the text. For example, "Here bigynnep a rule pat tellip in
whiehe ehapitris ofpe bible 3e mai fynde pe lessouns pistlis & gospcls pat ben
red in pc ehirehc. aftir pe vss of salisburi" (Magdalenc College Cambridge
Pepys 2073, f. 3381'). Less frequently used genre labels include "table wip a
rulc"30, "kalender wip a reule"31, "general kalender"32, 01' simply "kalender"33.
1(\ I~ritish Library Arundcl 104; Einmanucl Collegc Cambridge 21; Trinity Collcge Dublin 67.
11 Cambridge University Library LI.I.13; Emmanucl College Cambridge 34; Gonville & Caius
Collegc Cambridge 343/5.19.
l' National Library ofScotland Adv. 18.6.7.
11 Bodleian Library Fairhlx 2; British Library Egcrlon 618; Cambridge University Library Additional
66i{3: .101m Rylands Library Manchcster f'ng 77; St .101m 's College Cambridge E. 13. The same label "kalen-
361 Boletín Míflares Car/o
2ÜÜ5-20Ü6. 24-25: 343-378
Malli Peiko/a "Finl is I\úlen a e/alise o{the hig)'I1I1\'11ge lJ¡emj": 7he lah/e o//eeliolls illllwlIlIse!'ipls ...
According to the Midd/e English Dictionary (MED), all three head nouns
- ca/ender, reu/e, and table- were first used in this technical sense to de­note
a tabular form or technical guide/principle at the c10se of the fourteenth
century, so their application in the Wycliffite rubrics was still somewhat of a
novelty (s.v. ca/ender 2, reu/e 7, tab/e 5). Judging from the MED quotations,
the contexts of the earliest uses of these senses seem to have been typically
scientific, such as Trevisa's translation of the Po/ychronicon, Chaucer's
Treatise on the Astro/abe, and the Equatorie ofthe P/anetis.
An example of how the compilers of the Wycliffite tables themselves had
to wrestle with the Englishing oftechnical vocabulary is provided by the word
cotacioun. This word (in the plural form "cotaciouns") is used in the closing
rubrics of the early four-section tables as a reference to entries Iisted in the
table. A corresponding Latin usage in a similar context occurs for example in
the rubrics of the table of the Sarum lections in British Library Royal I.B.x,
where the plural form "cotaciones" refers collectively to the entries listed
under the various sections ofthe table (e.g. "Hic expliciunt cotaciones de tem­porali
per totum annum", f. 37v)34. It would appear that the Wycliffite table
compilers' attempt to introduce this word into English failed to gain wider
currency. According to the MED quotations, the word also occurs in an early
fifteenth-century concordance to the Wycliffite Bible in British Library Royal
17.B.i (c.g. on f. 31'; for this text, see Mclntosh 1965, Kuhn 1968). The MED,
however, does not list the word under a separate entry, and the Oxford Eng/ish
DictionGlY (OED) provides only one ME citation for it fram thc 1450s (s.v.
quotation). It is evident that "the quotaciouns of the Rubricis" mentioned in
the OED citation are c10se to the usage witnessed in the Wycliffite tables.
In addition to providing metatextual information about the structural
organisation, referential apparatus and general purpose ofthe tablc, thc rubrics
occasionally alcrt the reader to the presence oftextual 01' ideological problems.
In the explication oftextual problcms, the table of British Library Harley 6333
is in a class of its own - so much so that it would mcrit a separate discussion.
Suffice it to say here that the problems in Harley stem from the status of thc
table as an apparently unique redaction, where the usual DSV type has been
modified by replacing the references to the gospel pericopes with correspond­ing
entrics referring to the Oon of Foure. The compilator of the table was
worried about the possible inadequacy of the text of the gospel harmony as a
source of the Sarum lections. His concern is revealed through comments such
der" is also used in lhe 0011 o/Follre lables of I:lodleian Library Bodley 771; Chrisl Church College Oxl'ord
Allestrce LA ¡; Columbia University Library Plimpton 26g; Glasgow University Library Gen. 223. In lhe
closing rubrics 01' the Wyeliffite tables. the word "kalender" is the standard labe!.
.14 See also the opening rubric ofthe Latin tablc found in Oxford New College 67 (l\jew Testament in
EV). f l72v.
Bo/ctín Mi//ares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-3n
362
!l4utti Pei/m/u "Fint is lt'I"ilel1l/ e/l/lIse o(lhe higmi1.mge Iherof': [he luhle oj'lecliol1s il1 I11UI1I1S(TipIS ..
as "pou3 in pis gospel afier pis stori [the Oon 01 Foure] ben rehersid manye
mo wordis pan ben red in pe chirche. 3itt me seemep pe sentence is accordyng
with pe usse of salisburi" (f. 8v).
Another kind of textual concern shown by the compilators/scribes applies
to discrepancies betwecn thc text of some of the Old Testament lessons and
thc corresponding biblical text proper. This question also has an ideological
dimensiono As the following quote from the closing rubric of the table of
Hereford Cathcdral O.VII.I (f. 9v) suggests, the scribe's conception of the
problem may retlect the more general Wycliffite fear of the 'contamination'
of the biblical text through the meddling of the Church (see e.g. Peikola
2000a: 283ft)
lt is to vndirstonde pat not ech lessone of pe oolde lawe is writen in pe
bible word bi word as it is red in chirche but sum is taken a resoun of o cha­pitre
and pe remenaunt of anoper and summe ben taken of mo chapitris and
pat in diverse placis and 3it not accordinge fulli to pe text of pe bible ... and
al so in many lessouns pe chirche hap set to bope bigynyngis and endyngis pat
bcn not in pe bible (Mynors & Thomson 1993: 46).
The scribe ofthc table in Bodleian Library Ashmole 1517 shared the same
concern as his colleague working on the Hereford manuscript. In this case,
howcver, the closing rubric more directly issues a word ofwarning to the rea­der
about textual problems to be encountered in the table. The Ashmole scribe
puts the blame on thc "ordynaunce ofpe chirche" in a way that echoes the crit­icism
found in some Wycliffite polcmical tracts35 . In the spirit of close textual
attention that often characterises Wycliffite biblical scholarship, the scribe also
points out that the non-scriptural words of the lcction incipits and explicits
havc been underlincd in red:
pe lokeris in pis kalender be ri3t wel war: for he shal not fynde alle pe
bigynnyngis ol' pe lessouns of pe olde lawe acorde wip pe kalender / for bi
ordynaunce of pe chirche: per is seU to pe bigynnyngis of many lessouns
more & operwyse pan it is in pe byble / & pat is drawen vndir wip a stryk
ol' reed ynkc: & it is not in pe kalender: for it is not so in pe text / & also
it is in pe same maner 01' manye of pe endingis of pe lessuns (Ashmolc
1517. f. 5v)
" \'or the Wycliflite writers. lhe "oroinaunee" ofChrisl or (joO. grounoeo on the Hible. gencral\y rep­resenls
the aeceptable rulc. whereas thal introouced by the Chureh ano its various representatives tenos to
be seen in a ncgative light. See. for example the eomment maoe by the author 01' the General Prologue lo
lhe Wycliffile Hible: "these pore l11en [i.e. the Wycliflites] oesiren oonly the (reulhe ano ti'eool11 ofthe hooly
gospcl. ano 01' hooly scripture. ano aeeepten manis lawis ano oroynauneis. oonly in as l11yehe as thei ben
grounoio in holy seriplure. eithir gooo resoun. ano eomyn prophit 01' eristen puplc" (forshal\ & Maooen.
1XSO. \.30)
363 Boletín Mil/ares Cario
2005-2006. 24-25: 343-37K
Malli fTikola "Firsl is wrilen a clallse "rlhe higvnnynge Iherof': [he lah/e oj'/eclions in l1ulIIlIscripls ..
Neither Hereford nor Ashmole provides evidence about their early owners
or the primary audiences to whom the table scribes addressed their caveats. A
third table of lections, with somewhat different ideological concems, is found
in British Library Egerton 618, which together with its companion vol lime
Egerton 617 is one of the relatively few Wycliffite Bible manuseripts whose
early ownership is known. This large and sumptuous codex belonged to
Thomas ofWoodstock, Duke ofGloucester, and is mentioned in a posthumous
inventory ofhis chattels at Pleshy Castle, Essex, made in 1397 (see e.g. Doyle
1983; for the inventory, see Dillon & Hope 1897). As observed in Section
3.3.2, the apparently unique table in Egerton probably represents a stage of
transmission that immediately preceded the integration of the separate Proper
of Saints and Common of Saints sections into a single extended Sanctorale.
The compiler/scribe of the Egerton table evidently felt strongly about the
issue of extending the Sanctorale. His attitude is revealed by a long comment
ingeniously interpolated into the section on the "comoun sanctorum", which in
this table unusually contains an extended ¡ist ofindividually named saints (see
3.3.2; for the text in full, see Appendix B)36. The section opens normally with
the epistle ("lessoun") for St Nicholas' day (f. 173r). rt first speIls out (in a
rubric) the Latin incipit ofthe epistle, and then provides the equivalent English
translation in text ink, preceded by "pat is to saye". This practice is in accord­ance
with the eonventions foIlowed throughout the tableo The English trans­lation,
howcver, is directly foIlowed by a polemical discussion that employs
the voice of "some men" against the application of biblical lections "of most
holy fadris ofpe holde lawe" to "men and wommen now clepicl seyntis"37. The
stance adopted by the scribe is markeclly Wycliffite in its conclemnation of
recent saints introcluced by the Church ancl its emphasis on the necessity ofthe
biblical approval of sainthoocl (cf. Huclson 1988: 302-3(3).
Wherfore ennauntre we erre in !)e si3t ofgod in redinge !)es lessouns aftcr
use ofpe chirche nowe a dayes, it is no perel 3ifwe seeke hoh writt to knowe
ofwhome pes preisingis ben sayd, appliynge hem to pe same seyntis whomc
holy writ appreuep. men reden of mani seyntis nowe a dayes of whome lityll
euidcnce of holynesse is knowen to pe reders or heercrs (Egcrton 618, f.
173r).
Around the midpoint of the interpolated passage thcre are two rllbricated
lection incipits in Latin, both followecl by their English translation, introdllced
3(, In their descriplion ofthe manuseript. Forshall & Maddcn (1 g50. J. xliii) made anote aboul thc inter­polaled
passage ("somc remarks direeted againsl the application 01' thc lessons to the sainls 01' the Romish
church"). but thcir deseription 01' the location 01' the passage under "proper Sal1c!"rllln" is misleading.
)7 For Wycliftite uses of"some men" in areporting function. see Hudson (1 n Il. von Nolcken (1995).
Pcikola (2000b: 240-241).
Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37g
364
MUlli !'cilio/u 'Fin'! is \I'rileJl a ,,/ullse o(thc hig1'JlJI\'I7ge Iilcro/,,: rile lah/e o(icc/ioJl,I' in /11anll.l'cripls .. ,
with the usual "pat is to saye". The ineipits are apparently derived from a grad­ual
that would have been ehanted at mass on the feast of a confessor and bish­op
saint (such as St Nicholas), but thc Egerton scribe, instead ofmaking litur­gieal
use of them, uses them to strengthcn his arguments (see Appendix B).
The rubrication and pairing of the incipits around thc middle of thc interpo­latcd
passagc also suggcst that thc scribe was aware of the controversial
naturc of the subject at hand, and that by masking the passage as a regular
cntry he wanted to avoid its accidental discovcry. Had thc text flow 01' thc
intcrpolatcd passagc not been interrupted by the two rubrics, a browser 01' the
manuscript might have been alerted by what would have been an unusually
long streteh 01' text without lcction rubrics. As it stands in the manuseript, the
discovery 01' thc passage now rcquires closer attention to the text. 11' the Dukc
of Glouecster was the sponsor 01' thc manuscript, onc wonders whethcr the
interpolation might havc been intended for his eyes. Outside this context,
Thomas of Woodstock is known as thc addressce of a Wycliffite polcmical
dialogue (Hudson 1988: 12, 112); thus he clearly scems to have sympathised
with the Lollard causc at some point in his Cal·cer.
4. CONCLUSION: WYCLlFFITE TABLES OF LECTlONS AND HEIR
USERS/PRODUCERS
There is no clear scholarly consensus as to the primary context in which
the Wyclitlítc tables of lections and their accompanying manuscripts were
uscd. Deanesly (1920: 176) sees "private study" as a more probable alterna­tivc
than their use by the congregation at mass to follow the Latin pericopes
from the English text 01' the translations. Shc altogether rules out the pos­sibility
that the WyclitTitc translations themselvcs could have been used for
reading aloud at mass. Hudson (1988: 1(9) disagrees with Deanesly and holds
public "church reading" (in English) to be the primary context for which the
manuscripts were intcnded. She suggcsts that thc production of the manu­scripts
with thc liturgical apparatus in the vernacular may originally have becn
part 01' a conscious Wycliffitc programme "to supplant the use 01' Latin for the
gospel and epistlc readings within the established liturgy" (ibid.; see also
Hudson 1989: 131-132)'~. This strategy eould be viewed as a parallel to the
Wyeliffites' endeavour to disseminate their own vcrsions of some basic cate­chetical
texts in English, sllch as the Pater Noster and the Ave Maria (see e.g.
Pcikola 2000a: 2(0). De Hamel (2001: 182) takes a different position and
;x Iludson ( 1972) discusscs a dislinclivc form 01' mass. cclchrated in lhe 13g0s hy the selt~proclaimed
Lollard priesl William Ramsbury in lhe Salisbury diocese. In Ramshury"s casco ho,,"evcr. there is no cvi­denee
01' lhe llSe 01' English in lhe ritual (see 'liso Iludson ll)g~: 1:;5),
365 Boletín Millures Curio
.2005-.2006. .24-.25: 343-37X
Malli Peikola "Firsl is H'rilen a c!ause o/Ihe higynnynge Iherot': The lab/e oj1eclions in manllscripls...
regards Wycliffite Bible manuscripts as "completely orthodox and con ven­tional
in their liturgical aspect". He emphasises their primary function as tools
of private devotion, and argues that the English biblical text might have been
used in the fifteenth century by laymen as "a sustained gloss or mirror to the
original, to help focus devotion by increasing understanding of the sacred
Latin text" (ibid. 184).
Despite their differences in emphasis, the positions of Hudson and de
Hamel need not be historically irreconcilable. As Hudson (1989: 131-132)
observes, the original Wycliffite intention of using the manuscripts in public
church reading may have differed from their eventual use in more prívate con­texts,
whether orthodox or heterodox39. The present study supports a scenario
whereby the English tables of lections originated in Wycliffite circles, but ide­ological
control over them was lost during later transmission. The limited
number of saints included in the Proper of Saints section of the earlier tables
is a case in point. Its contents generally accord with Wycliffite views of saint­hood;
a similar shorter repertory of saints is found for example in the overtly
polemical English Wycliffite Sermons (see Hudson 1988: 197). The distressed
comments of the compilator of the table of lections in Egerton 618 present the
voice of a Wycliffite struggling to regain ideological control over the table in
one specific instance.
De HameI's (2001: 182) argument about the readings at mass, as beingper
se at variancc with Wycliffite anticeremonial attitudes, does not receive support
from Wycliffite texts. It is true that there are texts criticising the Use of
Salisbury and particularly sorne of its ncw ceremonies as hindrances to the
priest's duty to preach and teach thc gospel, but on no occasion is such criticism
targeted at readings from the Bible or at the use of lectionarics40. Of thc spe­cific
Iiturgical manuscripts, it is rathcr songbooks, such as graduals and
antiphonals, that Wycliffitc writers find suspect (see e.g. Matthew 1902: 194;
for these books in general, see e.g. Gneuss 1985, Krochalis & Matter 200 1).
According to Hudson (1988: 196), "[t]he two elements ofthe traditional church
servicc to which Lollards attached importancc were the readings from the bible
and the sermon". From this perspective, the liturgical organisation plan of the
Wycliffite sermon-cycle (see Hudson 1983: 1-50) is readily comparable to the
Iiturgical apparatus found in manuscripts ofthe Bible translation.
De Hamel 's idea of the subservient, gloss-like status of the English biblical
text, in contrast to the official Latin text, also seems somewhat problematic in
the Iight of the tables of lections cxamined in this study. Had the Latin words
.19 l1udson (1989: 132) specifically mentions "Lollard schools" as one ofthe settings where the use of
¡he Bible manuscripts eould have taken place. For such clandestine conventicles and their modes 01' opera­tion,
sce Hudson (1988: 180-2(0). McSheffrey (1995: 49-66).
40 For instances of such criticism in Wycliffite texts, see Forshall (1851: 154), i\rnold (1871: 202,
482). Matthcw (1902: 170. 192-194), Gradon (1988: 362).
Bo/etín Mi//ares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
366
Malli Peiho/a 'Fir.\'1 is ".,-ilel/ a C!allse o(/he hig\'I/I1\'I1ge /herot"': The /ah/e o(lec/iol/.\' il/ l'/1al/llscripls...
of the lections been simply intended as pegs for readers on which to hang the
English gloss, one would expect to find more examples of genuinely bilingual
tables, with the incipits given in both Latin and English. The only table of this
kind in the prcsent data is British Library Egerton 618, which can in no way be
regarded as a mainstream producto Another simi1ar1y unique instance is British
Library Royal 1.A.x (New Testament in LV), where the biblica1 chapters con­sist
of altemating Latin and English passages; the Latin text always precedes its
English trans1ation and has been under1ined in red ink, as if to suggest to the
reader that the English text is indeed just a gloss. Even here, however, the
layout may bespeak a need to conccal the rcal idcntity ofthe proscribed English
tcxt of the Wyc1iffite translations from accidental browsers, rather than the
compilator's/scribe's determination to genuinely transform it into a gloss.
As the detailed examination of the Wyc1iffite tables in Section 3 shows, cer­tain
features of their layout, referential apparatus and tenninology are indebted
to Latinate scholastic practices. By the tum of the fourteenth century, many
original1y scholastic novelties, inc1uding running titles, chapter rubrics, and
the tlagging of paragraphs with the paraph sign, had made their way into the
standard referential apparatus ofvemacular texts (see e.g. Parkes 1976). The dif­fusion
into the vemacular of more technical referential devices such as com­partmentalised
tables appears, however, to have been slower and generical1y
more limited. While there is no concrete evidence that the Wyc1iffite tab1cs of
1cctions directly adoptcd innovations from the contemporaneous academic
world, the sophisticated features they exhibit do not exc1ude the possibility that
their compilation could have been initiated by the Oxford-schooled translators
themselves. The prolific copying orthe tables in the ¡írst decades ofthe fifteenth
century as pre-designed components of Wyc1iffite New Testaments implies that
by this stage there already existed a substantial demand cven for a vemacular
technical genre like this among English lay audiences. As the instructive rubrics
ofthe tablcs suggest, this audience may not as yet have been very familiar with
all the reterential conventions, but it was expected to be readily capable ofgrasp­ing
thcm. In the hierarchical religious atmosphere cngcndered in England by thc
notorious anti-Wycliffitc Constitutions of 1409, this appreciative picture of
vernacular readers and tablc users may point towards what Watson (1999: 345)
has cal1ed "the circ1e ofprivilege comprising aristocracy, gentry, and urban mer­chant
c1asses" as the projected audience. The tone adopted in the rubrics of the
tables is also in alignment with the Wyc1iffite writers' usual conception of their
audiences as "at once tcxtually untrained and textual1y hyperconsciolls"
(Copeland 2001: 137).
As observed in Section 3, the numeroLIS DSV or DVS tables with a long
opening rubric characteristieal1y accompany Ncw Testaments in LV. The
tables contain an extended Sanctorale section inclllding many non-biblical
saints, and are as a rule devoid of the ideological concerns occasionally fOllnd
367 Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37X
Motli Peik,,!o "Firs/ is H'l'ift'1l a C!Olfse f!lthe higl'lmYllge theroj"": The {ah/e (!lleclioJls in JJl(fllllseripls ..
in the tables accompanying manuscripts 01' EV or complete Bibles in LV.
Future study 01' manuscript data may help to establish whether the evident loss
01' Wycliffite control over the use and design 01' the table 01' lections in English
is associated with the envisaged professional and standardised production 01'
English New Testaments in London during the first decade or two foIlowing
the Constitutions 01' 140941 .
Figure l. Chethal1l's Lihrary MS 6723 (1' 2r). RcproJuccJ with the perl1lission
01' Chethal1l 's L ihrary.
~I For further Jiscussion 01' this moJe of proJuction. scc Doylc (19R3), Iludson (19i\9), de Ilal1lcl
(2001: 1]X). Jurkowski (2005), Pcikola (t(lrthcol1ling).
Boletín Millares Car/o
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37i\
368
Mulli Peikolu "Firs! i.\' \\Ti/c}} (/ e/U/lse uF/he h(t!,.I'llnYllge fhcn?!''': [he !oh/e (!(lec/iol7s in lllllllllscnjJf.\' ...
Appendix A
Tables 01' lections in manuscripts 01' the Wycliffite Bible
The entries below are arranged alphabetieally according to repository. In
addition to the shelfmark 01' the manuscript, each entry contains the location 01'
the tablc in the manuscript (by folio numbers); the number 01' thc manuscript
in Lindberg 's catalogue (Lindberg 1970), in brackets; the order 01' the liturgi­cal
sections in the table; and the types 01' Iection included in the table. The
abbreviations t<Jr the liturgical sections are as follows: D = Dominical and
ferial lcctions, V = Votive masses, e = Common 01' Saints as a separate sec­tion.
P - Proper 01' Saints as a separate section. S = a 'combined' Sanctorale
with readings from C and P (see 3.3.4). The abbreviations for the types 01' lcc­tion
are as follows: Ci ~.' gospel lcctions, E = epistle lections from the New
Testament, L~ epistlc and other lections from the Old Testament. The follow­ing
abbreviations are used in indicating the repository: BL = The British
Library. London; BOn = The Bodlcian Library, Oxford; Ca = Cambridge; ColI
= College; JRL = John Rylands Library, Manchester; NY = Ncw York; Ox =
Oxford; TCD =- Trinity College, Dublin; UL = University Library. Where
information regarding a tablc is not based on my own inspection 01' the manu­script
from the original or ti-om microfilm. the secondary source is mentioncd
in a note. For manuscripts that I have not pcrsonally inspectcd, the foliation oí'
the tablc. the order 01' the sections. and the lcction types havc not been indi­catcd
iftheir unambiguous verification from catalogue descriptions etc. has not
bcen possible. The list is not cxhaustive. Manuscripts 01' the Wycliffite Biblc
with Latin tablcs 01' lcctions have been listed separately under scction A2.
Al Middle English (and mixed-language) tables
fkrkelcy. University 01' California, The Bancroft Library UCB 128 (226),
Ir-12v. DVS. GEL'!.?
BLAdditional 15580 (41). Ir-8r, DPCV, GEL
BL Arundel 104 (29). 11'-1 Ovo DVS, GEL
BL Arundel 254 (30), 14r-18r. DSV, G4:1.
BL Egerton 618 (32), 160r-l77r, DPCV, GEL
BL Egcrton IIú5 (33), Ir-12v, DVS, GEL
BL Egerton 1171 (34).81'-21 r, DVS. GEL
BL Harlcy 1212 (14), Ir-14r, DSV, GEL
4' rhe inlúrlllation is based on the description amI illlagcs ortbe lllanuseript in tbe Oigilul Sc!"iplo!"illil1.
al'ailabk online al http://sunsite.berkeky.edu/seriptoriulll/seareh/ lllanuscript.htllll. I al11 grateful to :viI".
!\nthony Hliss. Curator at Ihe l~anlTolí Library. l(Jr conlinning the idenlity of the l11anuscript as Lindbcrg
( !970 I Illl. .?26.
j 1 The tabk rekrs to the 0011 o/FolI!"c.
369 Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2()06. 24-25: :14:1-:1n
MalliPeiko/a "Firsl is wrilel1 a e/ause o/the higl'I1I1.1'l1ge Iherol": The lah/e o/1eeliol1s il1 mal1useripls...
BL Harley 4890 (21), I r-8r, OVS, GEL
BL Harley 6333 (25), Ir-17v, OSV, GEL44
BL Lansdowne 407 (26), Ir-8r, OPCV, GEL
BL Lansdownc 455 (28), 50r-57v, OVS, GEL
BL Royal I.A.iv (1), 3r-15r, OSV, GEL
BL Royal 1.A.x (2), I r-9r, OVS, GE
BL Royal l.B.vi (4), 4r-13v, OVS, GEL
BaO Ashmole 1517 (89), Ir-5v, OV, GEL45
Bao Bodley 183 (59), vir-xvv, OVS, GE46
Bao Bodley 531 (62), Ir-37v, OVS, GEL47
Bao Bodley 665 (63), I r-12v, OVS, GEL
Bao Bodlcy 771 (64), Ir-3v, OSV, G4X
Bao Ooucc 240 (S5), 182r-193r, OVS, GEL
Bao Oouec 265 (86), 4r-13r, OVS, GE
Bao Fairfax 2 (71), 188r-193v, OV/S, GEL49
Bao Fairfax II (72), 7r-ISv, OVS, GEL
Bao Fairfax 21 (73), IrAv, OS, E
Bao Gough Eeel. Top 5 (83), 235v-243r, OPCV, GE
Bao Hatton III (74), 13v-34r, OPCV, GE50
Bao lunius 29 (75), Ir-12r, OVS, GEL51
Bao Laud mise. 388 (-), viir-xixv, OSV, GEL
BaO Lyell 26 (189), 6r-14v, OVS, GEL52
BüO Rawlinson C.259 (80), 241 r-25 Ir, OVS, GEL
Bao Selden Supra 49 (68), 9r-15r, OVS, G
BaO Selden Supra 51 (69), 13v-25r & 25v-32v, S & OV53
Ca British & Foreign Bible Soeiety 156 (186), IOSr-12Iv, OSV, GEL
Ca Corpus Christi ColI 147 (116), ISv-23v, OVS, GEL54
Ca Corpus Christi ColI 440 (117), I r-2r, O, G55
Ca EmmanucI ColI 21 (1 I S), 2r-7v, OVS, GEL
-1-1 The gospcl leclions reter to the (JOI1 o/Foure.
-Ij The lable is acephalous.
-16 The Old Testament pericopes only oecur in section S.
-17 The Old Testament pericopes have been written out in fui!.
-IX The table refcrs 10 the (JOI1 o/Follre.
-19 The layout of the lable is idiosyncratic. i\ calendar wilh refcrences to the S perieopes is placed at
the l11iddle of each page, while the top and bottol11 arcas of each page contain the DV pericopes.
50 Section D conlains 1110re ferial perieopes lhan lhe Wycliftlte tables nonnally.
51 In the manuseripl, the lea ves fonning lhe table have been arranged in the wrong order. The correct
order is tr 5, 6, 1,2,3,4,7-12.
52 There is a lacuna of probably 2 lea ves between the present tI'. 7 and X.
5.1Refcrences lo the Sanctorale pericopes have been inserled into a calendar 01' saints.
j-lThe table is atclous.
5j The table only eontains lhe Sunday gospels.
Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006,24-25: 343-37X
370
Malti Pciko/a 'Fil'sl is \l'l'ilCII a e/al/se ollhe higYllnmge Ihem(': n/c la/¡fc o(lecl/rms ill l11anll.\'cnj!Is..,
Ca Emmanuel Coll 34 (119), lr-6v & 7r-12v, DV & S, GELs6
Ca Emmanucl Coll 108 (120), 2r-15v, DSV, GEL
Ca Gonville & Caius Coll 343/539 (114), 79r-85r & 86r-91 v, DV & S,
GELs7
Ca Jesus Coll Q.D.6 (121), 22r-34v, DVS, GEL
Ca Magdalene Coll Pepys 15 (124), 179r-194v, DVS, GEL
Ca Magdalene Coll Pepys 2073 (125), ff. 338r-351 v, DSV, GEL
Ca Sidney Sussex Coll99 (127), GELsX
Ca St John 's Coll E.13 (128), 1r-4r, DPCV, E
Ca Trinity Coll B.IO.20 (135), 227r-232v & 233r-239v, S & DV, GELs9
Ca UL Additional 6683 (176), 1r-12v, DVS, GEL
Ca UL Additional 6684 (229), 1r-9r, DVS, G
Ca UL Dd.1.27 (106), 420r-426r, DSV, GEL
Ca UL Kk.1.8 (110),31 r-37r, DPCV, GEL
Ca UL Ll.1.13 (111), 57r-64v, DV, GEL
Covington, VA, H. A. Walton Jr (228)60
Dallas, Southem Methodist University, Bridwell Library (-), DVPC, GEL61
Dunedin, Public Library Reed Fragment 20 (_)62
Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland Adv. 18.6.7 (145), GE63
Glasgow UL Gen 223 (195), 1r-6v, DSV, G64
Hereford Cathedral O.VII.\ (137), Ir-5v & 6r-9v, S & DV, GEL6S
JRL Eng 76 (205), Ir-9v, DSV, GEL66
JRL Eng 77 (158), 4r-12r, DVS, GE
JRL Eng 78 (160), 1r-8v, DVS, GEL67
JRL Eng 80 (157), 9r-22v, DSV, GEL
JRL Eng 91 (209), 1r-9r, DVS, GEL
Lambeth Palace 532 (48), Ir-15v, DSV, GEL
Lambeth Palace 1150 (51), 2r-14r, DVS, GEL
Lambeth Palace 1366 (185), 2r-1 Or, DVS, G
Manchcster, Chetham's Library 6723 (143), 2r-l1 v, DVS, GE
1(, Scclion S is a combined calendar 01' sainls and table 01' lections.
57 Section S is a combined calcndar 01' saints and lable 01' lections.
IS 'The table is acephalous (see Forshall & Madden l XSO. l. Ivii)
\'1 Section S is a eombined calendar 01' sainls and table 01' Ieetions.
(,() cor a deseription ofthe manuseript. see Faye & Bond (1962: SI X). lts present loeation is unknown lo me.
(,[ See the W)'cliflílC Mall/lScl'ipl CD-ROM,
(,! A Ieaffrom a gospclleetionary with the epistle pcricopes written out in full (f1udson 19XR: 19X: lan
Stewarl, Reed Rare Hooks Librarian. private communieation).
(,\ For a description 01' lhe manuscript. scc (Forshall & Madden l XSO. l. lix).
(A Thc table refers to lhe ()on 01 FOl/l'c.
(., Section S is a combined calendar 01' saints and table 01' lections: accphalous with medial lacunae.
(,1, The table is accphalous (sce Lester 19X5: 4).
(,7 Thc table is accphalolls \Vith a mcdial laeuna (scc Lestcr 19X5: 7).
371 Boletín Mi/lares CarIo
200S-2006. 24-2S: 343-3n
MalliPeiko/a "Finl is 1\'I"ilell a e/alise ollhe hig.l'IIII\'I7ge Ihe",l"': The lah/e ol/ecliolls illll1allll,l'cripls,.
Marquess of Bath, Longleat 5 (179), GEL6R
NY Pierpont Morgan Library MAOO (-), 145r-155r69
NY Public Library MA 64 (201), Ir-12v, DVS, GEL
NY Public Library MA 65 (171), Ir-12v, DVS, GEL
NY Public Library MA 66 (202), 2r-l0v, DVS, GE
NY Public Library MA 67 (162), ixr-xi v , DS in a single section, GEUo
Orlando, FL, The Van Kampen Col!ection VK 638, 1-4, G71
Orlando, FL, The Van Kampcn Col!cction VK 641, GEU2
Ox Brasenose Col! 10 (90), 3r-12v, DPCV, GEL
Ox Christ Church Col! 145 (91), lr-9r, DSV, GEL73
Ox Christ Church Col! 146 (92), 1r-l 01', DVS, GEL
Ox Corpus Christi Col! 4 (94), 1r-6r, DPCV, GEU4
Ox Oricl Coll 80 (100), 1r-12r, DPCV, GEL
Ox Quecn's Col] 388 (10 1), ] r-, DVS, GEU5
Philadclphia, University of Pennsylvania Codex 201 (203), 228r-236r76
Princeton University Schcidc 13 (169)77
San Marino, CA, Huntington Library HM 134 (198), lrn
TCD 67 (149), 236r-243v, DVS, GEU9
TCD 75 (151), 4r-11 1', DPCV, GEL
TCD 76 (-), 1r-5v, DPCV, GERO
Tokyo, Takamiya fi-agment (-), GELRI
Tokyo, Takamiya 3] (219),9] r-96v, DVPC, GE
Westminster Abbey 8 (45)iQ
(,s Thc Old Tcslalllent perieopes have been written oul in full (see lJargreaves 1961: 294, von Nolekcn
1997 n. 4).
(/) The infónnalion is based on an in-house deseriplion ofthe lllanuscript. kindly provided by Ms Inge
Duponl, llead of Reader Services al I'ierponl Morgan Library.
7() i\ cOlllbined calendar of sainls ami lable of leclions.
71 See von NoIckcn (1997 n. 3)
72 The cntire lllanuseripl is a lable fraglllcnl of section D: sce von Noleken ( 1997 n. 3).
71 One leal' is missing belween ff. 7 and R.
74 Fol' lhe table and ils l'eadings, see Forshall & Madden (1 R50, 1. 6R3-69R).
7, For lhe lable, see Ogilvie-Tholllson (1991: R4).
7(, See FRANKUN: Pellll Li/¡rarr Cala/og, available online al http://www.fí"anklin.library.upenn.cdu
n Fol' a descl'iplion orlhe lllanuscripl. see Fol'shall & Madden (IR50. 1, Ixiv. no. 1(9).
7.s The lable is acephalous. wilh only lhe lasl six enlries ofseclion S relllaining: see Dulschke (19R9: 17R).
79 In lhe lllanuscripl, lhe Icaves fonning lhe table ha ve becn al'l'anged in the wrong ol'der. The correct
order is Ir. 236, 237, 239. 23R, 241,240,242.243.
Sil In the lllanuscripL lhe Icaves fonning lhe lable have been arrunged in lhe wrong order. The correel
order is ff. 1,3.2,5.4. ¡\ leaf has been lost bctwcen tI 3 and 2. and ff. 5 and 4
slThe tÍ'agment comprises a single Icaf fÍ'OIll the Sanclorale section or atable (jf lections. extending
frolll the Candlemas Day epislle lo the gospel of lhe feast of Mark lhe Evangelist. In lhe lable lhe Old
Teslalllent perieopes ha ve bcen written out in fui!. 1am grateful lo ProlCssol' Takallliya fol' kindly providing
mc Wilh an image (JI' lhe fí"agment.
S2 For the lllanuscript. see Forshall & Madden (1 R50. 1. xlv, no. 45), Robinson & .lames (1909: (9).
Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006,24-25: 343-37R
372
¡\lta//i P"ik,,!a "Fir",r is HTil('}} (J e/ulIse uF/he higY!1JZ\'flge tlwro("· 7he tah/e (!(lect;nl7s il1l11olluscript.\, ..
Winchester Coll 42 (139), 1r-ISr, GELX3
Windsor Castle, St Georgc's Chapel 4 (177), 1r-4v, OPCVX4
Wolfenbüttel, Herzog-August Bibliothck Guelf Aug. A.2 (IS3), Ir-Sv,
OPCV, GEL
York Minster XVI.N.7 (141), Ir-3vX5
York Minster XVI.O.I (142), lr-13r, OVS, GEL
A2 Latin tables
BL Harley 4027 (20), I82r-183r & 184v-186r, O & SX6
London, DI' Williams' Library Anc 7 (187), lr-3v, OX7
Ox New Coll 67 (98), I 72r-1 74v, DSxX
TCO 74 (), l r-2r & 3r-6v, S & OX9
Appendix B
Wycliffite intcrpolation in thc tablc 01' lcctions of British Library Egcrton
618, tT. 173r-v.
In the transcription 01' the passage, the original punctuation has been
modernised and all abbreviations have been silcntly expanded. Curly brackets
indicate additions/corrections, possibly made in another contemporaneous
hand. Cancellation has been indicated as overstrike. Underlining stands 1'or
rubrication. For a discussion 01' the text, see section 3.3.S. I wish to thank the
British Library 1'or pennission to publish the text.
Some men wondren and ben astoynede in her inwittis whan pei reden pes
lessouns 01' most holy fadris of pe holde lawe & secn hall her prcysynge
wipouten reuelacioun or open euidence of deser : u: ynge is 30uen bope to men
and wommen (now clepid seyntis:, alle be it pat alle tyme ofher Iytís WilJ oute
opyn renounsinge 01' her worldly glorie pei regnyden lordis and ladies bolJe in
name am] in hauynge undir colour of bischopis, abbatis, prioris, and abbcssis,
and prioressis. Wher1'ore ennauntre we erre in pe si3t 01' god in redingc pes
lessouns after use 01' 11e chirche nowe a dayes, it is no percI 3i1' we seekc holi
writt to knowe of whome pes preisingis ben sayd, appliynge hem to pe same
seyntis whome holy writ appreuep. Men reden 01' mani seyntis nowe a dayes
s, See Ker & Piper (1992: (30).
S-\ Leaves are ll1issing froll1 the table: see Ker & Piper (1992: (AS).
s' fhe table is acephalulls: al! that rell1ains is Ihe end uf section S: I'ur details. see Ker & Piper
(19')2: 7511.
Si, Sectiun S is a cOll1bined calendar ul' saints ami table of lections.
Sectiun D lIoes nul cover Ihe whole ecelcsiastical year (see Kcr 1969: 4,0).
" The table is atclow'.
,,, There are twu separate tables: S(Ir. !r-2r) ami D (Ir. Jr-6v): f. 2v is blank.
373 BO/!'Iín Mi//ar!'s Cario
2005-2006.24-25: J4J-37X
Malfi Peik% "Firsl is \\Tilen o e/ollse oj'rhe hiKynnl'n¡;e Ihero{': The lohle oj'/eelions in manllscripls...
of whome lityll euidenee of holynesse is knowen to pe reders or hecrers. Non
est inuentus similis illi qui eonseruaret legem exeelsi90 . Pat is to sayc, per is
not founden lije to him whiehe holy to gidre kepid pe loue of pe hi3est. Also
pe ehirehe redip Eeee saeerdos magnus qui in uita sua eurauit gentem suam &
liberauit illam a perdieione. Pat is to saye, loo a greete preest whiehc in his lijf
heelide his fole of kynde and deliuerde it fro perdieyoun. Wolde god pat men
wolden asken her prestis pat setten pe glorie of presthode in pe fulfilling of pe
ordcna{unejes of her bisehop{s}~ of whome pese prcysingis and alle
oper pat ben rad in lessouns of pe e0l110un sanetorum ben sayde. And 3if pci
kunnc not telle hcm pc grounde pei sehewe hemselfto be diseeyuours, seruinge
more for worldis goodis pan for helpe of soule, whose namis wip outen doute
3if pci sehamc not hcr folyc amendynge hem ben [f. 173v] writen in crpe
whiehe sehuln soone be wasehe a wcy. And perfore it is most sikir eounseyl to
men of good wille desiringe pat pe willc of god be fulfillid in erpe as it is in
heuene pat pei scke pcs pingis and lessouns in pe bible knowingc of whome
pei ben radde, 3euinge prineipali pe preysinge ofhem to holy fadris ofpe lawe
whom god in oure bileue apreuep sayntis worpi allc preisinge.
REFERENCES
ARNOlD, T. (ed.). 1871. Select English Works of John Wyclif. Vol. 3. Oxford:
Clarcndon Press.
BRIGGS, C. F. 1993. Late Medieval Texts and Tabulae: The Case ofGiles ofRome, De
regimine principum. Manuscripta 37: 253-275.
CARROlL, R. 2004. Middle English Recipes: Vernacularisation oI' a Text-Type. In
Taavitsainen & Pahta (eds): 174-191.
CARRUTHERS, M. 1990. The Book oI' Memory: A Study oI' Memory in Medieval
Culture. (Cambridge Studies in Medieval Literature, 10). Cambridge etc.:
Cambridge University Press.
CATIIOLlC ENCYCLOP¡:DIA. Available online at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen (as
accessed 2006)
COPElAND, R. 2001. Pedagogy, Intellectuals, and Dissent in the Later Middle Ages:
Lollardy and Ideas of Learning. (Cambridge Studies in Medieval Literature, 44).
Cambridge etc: Cambridge University Press.
DANIEll, D. 2003. The Bible in English: Its History and Influence. New Haven, CT
and London: Yale University Press.
DEANESlY, M. 1920. The Lollard Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
DE HAMEL, C. 200 l. The Book: A History oI' the Bible. London and New York: Phaidon.
DILlER, H-J. & M. GORLACH (eds). 2001. Towards a History of English as a History
of Genres. Heidelberg: C. Winter.
9() Cf. VlIlgatc. EcclcsiasticlIs 44:20.
Boletín Millares CarIo
2005-2006.24-25: 343-371'
374
Alulli i'L'i/(o/u "FiJ;l1 is \\'l"ilL'17 l/ c/l/u.\(' off/u! hig\"l1I7\"11gL' Ihemj"'.. Tile luhiL' ojiL'clio/1S il7 I/I(I/Iuscripls ...
DILLON, V. & W. H. STIOIIN HOPI. 1897. Inventory of the Goods and Chattels
Belonging to Thomas, Duke ofGloucester, and Seized in His Castle at Pleshy, Co.
Essex, 21 Richard 11 (1397); with Their Values, as Shown in the Escheator's
Accounts. Arehaeological Journal 54: 275-308.
DOYLE, A. 1. 1983. English Books in and out ofCourt from Edward 111 to Henry VII.
In Scattergood, V. 1. & 1. W. Sherborne (eds). English Court Culture in the Later
MiddleAges. NewYork: St. Martin's Press: 163-181.
DUTSCIlKE, C. W. 1989. Guide to Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the
Huntington Library. Vol. l. San Marino, CA: Huntington Library.
EUDEN, V. 2000. The Index of Middle English Prose. Handlist XV: Manuscripts in
Midland Libraries. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
F/\YE, U. C. & W. H. BOND. 1962. Supplement to the Census of Medieval and
Renaissanee Manuseripts in the United States and Canada. New York: The
Bibliographieal Soeiety ofAmerica.
FORSII/\LL, .J. (ed.). 1851. Remonstrance against Romish Corruptions in the Church,
Addressed to the People and Parliament of England in 1395, 18 Rie. 11. London:
Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans.
FORSII/\LL,.I. & F. M/\DDFN (eds). 1850. The Holy Bible Containing the 01d and the
New Testaments with the Apocryphal Books, in the Earliest English Versions
Made from the Latin Vulgate by John Wyeliffe and his Followers. 4 vols. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
FRFRI, W. H. 1935. Studies in Early Roman Liturgy. Vol. 3: The Roman Epistlc­Lectionary.
(Aleuin Club Collections, 32). London: Oxfixd University Press.
GII.LFSPlli, V. 1989. Vernaclllar Books ofReligion. In Griffiths & Pearsall (eds): 317-344.
GNIUSS, H. 1985. Liturgical Books in Anglo-Saxon England and Their üld English
Tenninology. In Lapidge, M. & H. Gneuss (eds). Learning and Literature in
Anglo-Saxon England. Studies Presented to Peter Clemoes on the Oeeasion of his
Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 91-141.
(iORL\CII, M. 2004. Text Types and the lIistory 01' English. (Trends in Linguisties
Studies and Monographs, 139). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
GR/\UON, P. (ed.). 1988. English Wyclif1'ite Sermons. Vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
GRlrFITlls,1. & D. PL;\RS/\LL (eds). Book Prodlletion and Publishing in Britain 1375­1475.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
H/\NN!\, R., 111. 1984. The Index of Middle English Prose. I-1andlist 1: The Henry E.
Huntington Library. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
H/\RCiRF!WIS, H. 1956. An Intennediate Version of the Wyclitfíte 01d Testament.
Studia Neophilologica 28: 130-147.
1961. The Marginal Glosses to the Wyclitlite New Testament. Stlldia
Neophilologica 33: 285-300.
- -- 1969. The WyclilTite Versions. In Lampe, G. W. H. (ed). The Cambridge History
01' the Bible. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 387-415.
H/\RPFI<, 1. 1991. The Forms and Orders of Western Liturgy: From the Tenth to the
Eighteenth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
HFNDLRSON, W. G. 1881. Comparative Calendar of Sarum, York and Hcreford Uses
with Lists of Feasts Peculiar to Eaeh Use, and Generallndex. [Publisher and place
of publication not indicated.]
375 Bo/etín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-37X
Malli Peiko/a "First is \l'J'ilen a e/al/se olthc higl'lll~\'l1gethcn?!"': The tah/e (?l/eclions in manllscJ'ipls...
HILTUNEN, R. & J. SKAFFARI (eds). 2003. Discourse Perspectives on English: Medieval
to Modern. (Pragmaties & Beyond New Series, 119). Amsterdam and
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
HUDSON, A. 1972. A Lollard Mass. Journal ofTheologieal Studies 23: 407-419.
--- 1981.A Lollard SeetVoeabulary? In Benskin, M. & M. L. Samuels (eds). So Meny
People Longages and Tonges: Philologieal Essays in Seots and Mediaeval English
Presented toAngus Mclntosh. Edinburgh: M. Benskin and M. L. Samuels: 15-30.
---- (ed.). 1983. English Wyeliffite Sermons. Vol. l. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
-~-- 1988. The Premature Reformation: Wycliffite Texts and Lollard History.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
---- 1989. Lollard Book-Produetion. In Griffiths & Pearsall (eds): 125-/42.
HU(jIIES, A. 1982. Medieval Manuseripts for Mass and Oftiee: A Guide to Their
Organization and Terminology. Toronto cte.: University ofToronto Press.
JAMES, M. R. 1904. The Western Manuseripts in the Library of Emmanuel College: A
Descriptive Catalogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
JIJRKOWSKI, M. 2005. Lollard Book Producers in London in 1414. In Barr, H. & A. M.
Hutehison (eds). Text and Controversy tl'om Wyelifto Bale: Essays in Honour of
Anne Hudson. Turnhout: Brepols: 201-226.
KFR, N. R. 1969. Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries. Vol. 1: London. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
--- 1977. Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries. Vol. 2: Abbotsford-Keele.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
--- 1983. Medieval Manuseripts in British Libraries. Vol. 3: Lampeter-Oxford.
Oxford: Clarendon Press.
KER, N. R. & A. J. PIPER. 1992. Medieval Manuseripls in British Libraries. Vo!. 4:
Paisley- York. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
KLAlISER, T. 1935. Das RCimische Capitulare Evangeliorum. Vol. 1: Typen.
(Liturgiegesehiehtliehe Quellen und Forsehungen, 28). Verlag der
Asehendortrsehen Verlagsbuehhandlung: Münsler in Westt'.
KROCIIALlS, J. E. & E. A. MAlTER. 2001. Manuseripts of the Liturgy. In Hetfernan, T.
J. & E. A. Matter (eds). The Liturgy 01' the Medieval Chureh. Kalamazoo, MI:
Medieval Institule Publieations, Western Miehigan University: 433-472.
KUHN, S. M. 1968. The Pretaee lo a Fifteenth-Century Concordance. Speeulum 43:
258-273.
LAWTON, D. 1999. Englishing the Bible, 1066-1549. In Wallace, D. (ed). The
Cambridge Hislory of Medieval English Literature. Cambridge cte.: Cambridge
University Press: 454-482.
LENKFR, U. 1999. The West Saxon Gospels and the Gospel-Leetionary in Anglo-Saxon
England: Manuseript Evidenee and Liturgieal Praetiee. Anglo-Saxon England 28:
141-178.
LESTER, G. A. 1985. The Index ofMiddle English Prose. Handlist 11: The Jolm Rylands
University Library 01' Manehester and Chetham's Library, Manchester.
Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
LEWIS, R. E., N. F. BL\KF & A. S. G. EDW!\RDS. 1985. Index of Printed Middle English
Prose. (Garland Reference Library of the Humanities, 537). New York and
London: Garland .
Bo/etín Mi//ares Car/o
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
376
Mutli I'ciko¡u "Ff,..\'1 is \\.,.llc17 {/ C/Olf.\'(.! (?j't!7e /)J~~\'JlI1.\'l7g(' fhen!!''': T/¡e !ah/e oj"/ec!i017S il1 I11WW.\'(TljJ!S ...
LIGlIT, L. 1987. The New Thirteenth-Century Bible and the Challenge of Heresy.
Viator 18: 275-288.
L1NDBERG, C. 1970. The Manuscripts and Versions of the Wycliffíte Bible: A
Preliminary Survey. Studia Neophilologica 42: 333-347.
- -- 1989. Reconstructing the Lollard Versions of the Bible. Neuphilologisehe
Mitteilungen 90: 117-123.
--- (ed.). 1994. The Earlier Version of the Wyc1iffíte Bible. Vol. 7. (Stockholm
Stlldies in English. 81). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
LINDENBAUM. S. Forthcoming 2006. Literate Londoners and Litllrgical Change: Sarum
Books in City Parishes after 1414. In Essays for Caraline Barron.
MARTIMORT. A. G. ~ 992. Les lcetures liturgiques et leurs livres. (Typologie des sour­ees
du Moyen Age occidental. 64). Turnhout: Brepols.
MATTIIFW. F. D. (ed.). 1902. The English Works ofWyclifHitherto Unprinted. Revised
ed. (EETS O.S, 74). London: Kegan Paul. Trench. Trübner & Co.
MCINTOSII, A. 1965. Some Linguistic Retlections 01' a Wycliffite. In Bessinger, 1. B.
(ed.). Franeiplegius: Medieval and Linguislic Studies in Honor of Francis
Peabody Magoun, .Ir. New York: New York University Press: 290-293.
MCSlIFFFRLY, S. 1995. Gender & Heresy: Women and Men in Lollard Communities
1420-1530. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
MIDDlF ENGLlSII DICTIONARY. Available online at http://ets.umdl.umich.edu/m/med
(as accessed 2006)
MOREY, .l. H. 2000. Book and Verse: A Guide to Middle English Biblical Literature.
Urbana and Chicago: University of IlIinois Press.
MYNORS, R. A. B. & R. M. TIIOMSON. 1993. Catalogue o1'the Manuscripts of Hereford
Cathedral Library. Cambridge: D. S. Brcwer.
OGILVIF-TIIOMSON, S. J. 1991. The lndex of Middle English Prase. Handlist VIII:
Ox ford College Libraries. Cambridge: D. S. 13rewer.
OXFORD ENCLlSII DICTIONARY. Available online al http://diclionary.oed.com (as
aceessed 2006)
PAtlTA, P. & 1. TAAVITSAINEN. 2004. Vernacularisation of Seientific and Medica]
Writing in Its Soeiohistorieal Context. In Taavitsainen & Pahta (eds): ]-18.
PALAZ/O, E. ]998. A Hislory of the Liturgical Books from the Beginning to the
Thirteenth Century. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press. [Originally published in
French 1993. Translated by M. Beaumont.]
PARKES, M. B. 1976. The Intluence of the Concepts of ordinatio and compilatio on the
Developmcnt ofthe Book. In Alcxandcr, 1. 1. G. & M. T. Gibson (eds). Mcdieval
Learning and Literature. Essays Prcsented to Richard William Hunt. Oxford:
elarendon Press: 115-141.
PEIKOLA, M. 2000a. 'And after all, myn aue-marie almost to the ende': Pierce ¡he
P/oughman:v Crede and Lollard Expositions ofthe Ave Maria. English Studies 81:
273-292.
-- 2000b. Congregation of the Elect: Patterns of Sclf-Fashioning in English
Lollard Writings. (Anglicana Turkuensia, 21). Turku: University ofTurku.
--- 2003. The Catalogue: A Late Middle English Lollard Geme? In Hiltunen &
Skaffari (eds): 105-135.
377 Boletín Milfare.l' Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
Malli Pe'iko/a "Finl is "'I"ile'17 a e/alise' o/Ihe' hiKl'IIJ7l'l7ge' Ihe'm(": TI/<' laMe' o/keliollS il7 II1W/IIS,ÚpIS ..
PEIKOLA, M. 2005. The Bible in English. In Alexander, J. J. G, J. Marrow & L. F.
Sandler (eds). The Splendor ofthe Word: Medieval and Renaissance Illuminated
Manuscripts at the New York Public Library. London and Turnhout: Harvey
Miller: 77-85.
--- Forthcoming. Aspects ofMise-en-Page in Manuscripts ofthe Wycliffite Bible.
In Caie, G & D. Renevey (eds). Medieval Texts in Context. London: Routledge.
RAND SCHMIDT, K. A. 2001. The Index of Middle English Prose. Handlist XVII:
Manuscripts in the Library of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge.
Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.
ROHINSON, 1. A. & M. R. JAMES. 1909. The Manuscripts of Westminstcr Abbey.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ROUSE, R. H. & M. A. ROUSE. 1979. Preachers, Florilegia and Sermons: Studies on the
Manipulusj1orz¡n¡ ofThomas of Ircland. Toronto: Pontificallnstitute of Mediaeval
Studies.
Scan, K. L. 2002. Dated & Datable English Manuscript Bordcrs c. 1395-1499,
London: The Bibliographical Society and The British Library.
SOMERSET, F. 2004. Wycliffite Prose. In Edwards, A. S. G (ed.). A Companion to
Middle English Prose. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer: 195-214.
TAAVITSAINEN, 1. & P. PAlITA (eds). 2004. Medical and Scientific Writing in Late
Medieval English. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge Univcrsity Press.
TALBr'RT, E, W. 1940. A Note on the Wycliffite Bible Translation. The Univcrsity of
Texas Publication 4026: July 8, 1940: 29-38.
VOGEL, e. 1986, Medieval Liturgy: An Introduction to Sources. Washington, D.e.:
The Pastoral Press. [Originally published in French 1981. Revised and translated
by W. G Storey and N. K. Rasmussen.]
VOIGTS, L. E. 1989. Scientific and Medical Books. In Griffiths & Pcarsall (eds), 345­402.
VON Hr'INEMANN, O, 1965. Die I-1andschriften der herzoglichen Bibliothek zu
Wolfenbüttel. Vol. 2: Dic Augusteischen Handschriftcn, pt. l. Reprint. Frankfurt
am Main: Vittorío Klostermann. [Oríginally published 1890.]
VON NaLCKEN, e. 1995. A 'Certain Sameness' and Our Response to It in English
Wycliffite Texts. In Newhauser, R. G & 1. A. Alford (eds). Literature and Religion
in the Later Middle Ages. Philological Studies in Honor of Siegfried Wenzel.
(Medieval & Renaissance Texts & Studies, 118). Binghamton, NY: Ccntcr for
Medieval and Early Renaissancc Studies: 191-208.
VON NaLCKEN, C. 1997. Lay Literacy, the Democratization of God's Law, and the
Lollards. In Sharpc, J. L. & K. Van Kampen (eds). The Bible as Book: The
Manuscript Tradition. New Castle, DE: Oak Knoll Books: 177-195.
WATSON, N. 1999, The Politics of Middle English Writing. In Wogan-Browne, J., N.
Watson, A. Taylor & R. Evans (eds). The Idea ofthe Vernacular: An Anthology of
Middle English Literal)' Theory 1280-1520. Exeter: University of Excter Press:
331-352.
WYCUFFITE MANUSCRIPT The Ncw Testament Bridwell Library, England 1400-1450.
A facsimile edition on CD-ROM. Oakland, CA: Octavo.
Boletín Millares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 343-378
378
Bo/etíll Mí//ares Car/o
1005-1006,14-25: 379-394
ISSN: 0211-2140
Orthography, Codicology, and Textual Studies:
The Cambridge University Library, Gg.4.27
"Canterbury Tales" 1
Jacob TIIA1SEN
Adam MickiewicL University
SU:\lMARY
An analysis 01' thc distrihution 01' orthographic variants in the Cambridge University Library,
MS Gg.4.27 copy ofChauccr's CUlllahur\' Ta/es suggests that longer tranches ofthe source text
were together, and partially ordered, already when it reached the scribe. The cvidencc 01' this
manuscript's quiring, inks, miniatures, and ordinatio supports this finding. Studying linguistic
and (other) codicological aspects 01' manuscripts may thus he 01' use to textual scholars and
editors.
Key words: Chaucer - Call1erhur\' Ta/cs - manuscript studies - Middle English - scribes - illu­mination
-- dialectology - graphemic and orthographic variation - textual studies
RESUMEN
El análisis de la distribución de las variantes gralcmicas en la copia de los ClIclllos dc
Call1crhlllT de Chaucer en Cambridge University Lihrary, MS Gg.4.27 sugierc que fi'agmentos
largos del texto ya estahan juntos y parcialmente ordenados cuando éste llego al escriba. Esta
idea tamhién sc sustenta en evidencias paleográficas en el manuscrito, como las tintas, las
miniaturas, los cuadernos, y la disposición en la página. El estudio de los aspectos lingüisticos
y eodieológicos de los manusritos pueden serie úti les a editores y critieos textuales,
Palabras clavc: Chaucer, Cllclllos dc Call1erhllr\,, manuscritos, inglés medio, escrihas, illumi­nación,
dialectología, variación gralcmica y ortográfica, estudios textuales
INTRODUCTION
The dialecto10gist Angus McIntosh has noted that one type of exemp1ar
influenee has the interesting characteristic that "jt tends to assert itsc1f less and
1ess as the scribe proceeds with his work" (1975 [1989: 44 n. 10]). He distin-
I The aulhor was lhe rccipient 01' a doctoral bursary rrom De Vlonlforl University that cnabled the
research leadíng to the lindings hel"C presented. lle ís gratcful lo hís eolleagucs and supervísors at the
Canterbury Tales Project, Profcssors NOrlnan 13lake and Peler Robínson in particular, ror sharíng their mate­ríals
ami views wílh hím: ami lo Dr .Ioanna Nykiellór her íneisíve eommenls on eadier dralis orthe pres­ent
papel'. The maín jindíngs were presentcd lo the \Jth lnlcrnatíonal Confcrence on English Hislorical
Linguistícs, University 01' Vienna, August 2004, as well as lo lhe 7th Confcrenec 01' the Europcan Socicty
¡<Jr the Study 01' Englísh, Uníversity 01' Zaragoza, September 10()4.
379
Jaco/J Thaisen Orthography. Codicology. and Textual Studies: The Cambridge University...
guishes graphetic variants from those graphemic ones which imply no phono­logieal
difference ("written-Ianguage ones"), and the latter in tum from those
graphemic ones whieh do ("spoken-Ianguage ones"), though noting that clear
boundaries cannot be set along this eline. The type is that which makes itself
felt toward the former pole of the cline. Gradual change may be observed at
the opposite pole too, and has more often been so in the literature since we
tend to record the various spellings of whole words in our profiles and treat
them as the unit of variation. Drawing on the electronic transcripts made a­vailable
by the Canterbury Tales Projeet, two of its researchers, Norman Blake
and Jacob Thaisen (2004), traced variations at all three levels during the com­plete
text of two manuscripts of that Chaucer poem with early content,
London, British Library, MS Harlcy 7334 and Oxford, Christ Church MS 152.
We concluded that these variations in a scribe's orthographic practices can sig­nal
how many exemplars were used in the production of a manuscript and thus
can be of use in textual studies, and our conclusion was supported by the evi­dence
of these manuscripts' codicology. In what follows, 1 discuss another
scribal copy of the poem, that found in Cambridge University Library, MS
GgA.27, part 1, considering tirst its linguistic aspects and then its codicologi­calones
before discussing the evidence they provide.
Part I of the manuscript today consists of 43 vellum quires totalling 516
folios, and it contains al! Chaucer's longer poetical works and many ofhis short­el'
items in addition to Lydgate's Temple olGlas. The shorter items fill quire 1,
which constitutes an independent unít (Elanor Hammond 1908: 190; Malcolm
Parkes and Richard Beadle 1979-80, 3: 2; Daniel Mosser 1996), and the non­Chaucerian
text come last. Canterbwy Tales [Gg], which sits between Troilus
and Criseyde and Legend olGood rVomen. now begins imperfectly at A37 on the
verso of quire lI 's twelth folio and ends with the explicit to the Parson's Tale on
quire 37's first verso; the next folio, which presumably contained Chaucer's
Retraction, is no longer present. The poem is arranged in the same order as is
found in the San Marino, Califomia, Huntington Library, MS EI.26.C.9 copy of
it. [Ellesmere] and includes only material which is also present there except as
individual lines natural!y became slightly modified during their scribal trans­mission.
Textual scholars and editors have long agreed that Gg and the other
Chaucerian texts all are high in authority, and some have given the manuscript
special attention because it includes many unique readings. For example, Legend
olGood TVomen has a unique prologue which scholars generally accept as being
genuinely Chaucerian2, and the manuscript may be the earliest extant witness to
" What one eritie correctly described as "entcrlaining speculations" (Schl11idt 1975: 391) Icd F. W.
l3atcson (1975) to sllggest that lhe best extant witness to Chaucer's own spelling is the later version of lhe
prologue to Legena olGood Women which survives lIniquely in Gg. The logic of l3ateson 's arglll11ent is hard
10 follow. It appears to be that becallse Manly and E. Riekert held that lhe Gg scribe had "access to speeial
sources" (1940. 1: 179) c10se lo the CUl1lerhlllT Tules arehelype and beeause the poet intended his poel11 to
Bo/elín Mi//ares Car/o
2005-2006.24-25: 379-394
380
JlIcob T/llIi"en Orl!lOgrtll'h)'. Codico!og)'. am! Texlua! Sludie,,: The Cambridge Univer"il)'...
"Lenvoy de Chaucer a Scogan". A facsimile ofboth parts ofthe manuscript was
cdited by Parkes and Beadlc (1979-80). In their commentary, whieh is inc1uded
in the third volume, thcy eonfínn the customary production date of c. 1420 for
part 1, although they note that celiain features of the anglicana formata scribal
hand and of the illumination are slightly old-fashioned for that date3; they sug­gest
that the illumination is based on an early model (1979-80, 3: 6-7, 60; cf.
Hammond 1908: 189; Miehacl Seymour 1997: 51).
The scribe also wrote Oxford, Bodlcian Library, MS e Musaeo 116, part 1
(Treatise 011 the Astro/ahe. MOl1devi//e:\' Trove/s. and a treatise on arboricul­ture),
and Columbia, Univcrsity of Missouri, Fragmcnta Manuscripta 150 (one
folio of Chauccr's Boeee). Parkes and Beadle propose that he was commis­sioned
to produce CigA.27, part I in an East Anglian country house 01' vicarage
(1979-80,3: 56,63-64). Thc illumination supports a place ofproduction in this
part of the country, for Kathleen Scott considers it to be a precursor of what is
found in the later London, British Library, MS Harley 2778 and San Marino,
Huntington Library, MS 268, both of which are Lydgate manuscripts associ­ated
with Bury St Edmunds (1996, 2: 145; cf. Parkes and Beadle 1979-80,3:
60). Parkcs and Beadlc conc1ude from their study of threc longer dittographies,
two 01' which occur within Gg, that the scribe generally adapted the usage 01'
what was before him into his own dialcct as he transferred it to his copy (1979­80,
3: 56). Further support 1'01' the placing comes from this and other linguistic
cvidence, for the manuscript and e Musaeo 116, part 1 both contain far-eastern
features, and the former was localised to Cambridgeshire by A Lil1guL<;tic Atlas
oj'Lute Mediaeval El1glish [LALME] (McIntosh et al. 1986,1: 67). This rcvi­sed
an earlier, unpublishcd, localisation to the borders of Suffolk and
Cambridgeshire by Michacl Samue1s (Andrcw Ooyle and George Pace 1968,
25 n. 25), who additionally noted thc presence of London-Westminster features
also found in Aberystwyth, National Library of Walcs, MS Peniarth 3920
[Hengwrt] and Ellesmere and of a scatter of western spellings4 . He suggested
from this that a copy ofthe poem akin to those two manuscripts passcd through
at least one stage of copying before it reached thc Gg scribe (1983 [1988: 3 IJ).
The presence of eastern spellings is a characteristie of other copies of
Cal1terh/llY Tales with the same, 01' a related, order of tales (.Iohn Manly and
Edith Rickert 1940, 1: 555; Simon Horobin 2003: 64-70), including the
London-Westminster Cambridge University Library, MS OdA.24 and
Ellesmere itself5. That the Gg scribe may thus alternatively have had his work-be
read a10ud. the unusual spellings \()und in Gg are phonetie ones that go back lo Chaucer himse1f. For
anothcr dismissive criticism 01' this view. see Sal11uC!s (19X3 l \9XX: 36 n. 27) l.
) The hand indudes occasional secrelary !Catures such as singlc-compartmenl o.
.j In addilion to the westcrn spellings (e.g .. In'/h, heg/¡, hlll'e). some northcrn ones (e.g" agu\'I1.1'. 01'1")
are scattcrcd in Cig.
, For (he linguistic evidence for (his plaeing of the Cambridge Dd manuscript. see Thaisen and Da
Rold (in press).
381 BolelÍn Millares Cario
2005-2006. 24-25: 379-394
Jacob Tllaisen Ortllo/(raplly. CodicoloKJ!. and Textual Sludies: Tlle Cambridge University...
place in the metropolitan area is suggested by Blake (19SS: 76) from the known
availability of exemplars for the manuscript's various Chaucer texts there
earlier in the fifteenth century6.
The scribe did not work alone, for Gg.4.27, part l is the product of a
team. A supervisor marked corrections by supplying a cross or an omitted
word in the margin, and some of his directions for rubrics and catchwords
survive. A second scribe is responsible for fols. SOSr-S l Ov and SI 4 recto and
verso in the final quire, which contains the Lydgate item. Fols. SOS and SlS
are conjugate as are S09 and SI 4 but SI Ois a singleton, for its conjugate, fol.
SI 3, is no longer present. This means that the two scribes appear together on
one bifolium, indicating that they collaborated (Parkes and Beadle 1979-S0,
3: 44). This second scribe is ignored in the present discussion unless other­wisc
st~ted. Lastly, one or more artists contributed decorative initials with
leaf borders, miniatures of the Canterbwy Tales pilgrims, and sets of the
Vices and Virtues, the latter as illustrations to the Parson 's Tale. Most of
these decorations are lost through thc excision of folios. Part 2, of 3S folios,
contains passages copied from Thomas Speght's l S9S-edition of Chaucer 's
works to repair this extensive mutilation and was bound in with the mediae­val
text until the late nineteenth ccntury.
!> The language 01' Gg has reeeived far greater seholarly attention than what is here reeounted. Manly
and E. Riekert"s assistant Dean. who is responsiblc for the commentaries on dialeet alld spclling included in
their edition. deseribed the Gg dialeet as "East Midland. with suftieient traces 01' Northern to suggest Norfolk".
noting its resemblanee to that fi.llllld in the Paston letters (Manly and E. Rickert 1940. 1: 176-77). Samuels
(19X3 [19XX: 31]) applies the labe! "very pronounced East Anglian". In addition. the prescnce ofthc unusual
spellings along with the many eorreetions and lhe thrce longer repeated passages have !ed some past scholars
to suggest that tbe scribe was a foreigncr who pcrhaps had a limited undcrstanding of what he was copying.
For cxamplc. Skeat (1 X99-19(2) held that hc was influcnccd by Anglo-French usagc. whilc Dcan (Manly and
E. Rickcrt 1940. 1: I77-7X) suggested he possibly was Flcmish or Outch. Furnivall had previously assigned
the manuscript to thc borders 01' the Midlands and the North (1 X6X: 59). which might have meant a location
ncarcr the Ilul11ber in his days though mediaeval East /\nglian dialcct contained northcrn features. Caldwcll
(1944) f"und resemblanccs betwecn the spelling 01' ccrtain lemmata in Gg and thcir Duteh cognates and
argued. uncollvincingly, far a natively Dutch-speaking scribc on this basis. Thc manuscript contains examples
of.l"('h- in words likc ESCAPE. SCHOOL, and SIIAPE (see further p. 3X5 below). ofwhat might be described
as an epenthetic vowel in the unstressed final syllablc in. ¡"r examp!e. reso/1ahe!e and \'/1 stahe!e, of he fi.,r BY.
and 01' a plosivc rathcr than a t;-icative in spcllings ofTHITHER and WHETIIER (fJed\'/; H'hed)'l). Caldwell
based his argul11ent on thcse and certain other fcaturcs that Gg also contains bcing common in Middle Dutch.
although hc noted that "parallcls... can bc f"und in othcr Fnglish texts t;-om the first hall' ofthe fifteenth een­tury.
notably cCl1ain 01' the Paston !etters and various pieces frol11 the Fast Anglian area" (t 944: 34). More
recent scholarship has favoured this seribe being no f"reigner. For examplc. Seymour first proposed and later
rejeeted that Gg.4.27. part 1 (and e Musaeo 116) are the work ofan Englishman who had lived in Ilolland t"r
a long time (196X). now suggesting that a west Suf1"lk seribe wrote it in Cambridge. probably on the basis 01'
the findings 01' dialcctologists (1997. 5¡). Ral11scy (1994: 359-77) suggested this scribe was an Englishman
who was trained lo copy Latin and thereforc unfamiliar with secing the vernacular in writing. Parkcs and
13eadle (1979-XO. 3: 46. 54) conclude f;-om his handwriting that he was no f"reigncr and t;-om a comparativc
study ofthe spclling j"und in the three rcpeated passages within the manuscript that he "was a reasonably care­fÍJI
and conscicntious copyist [who] understood what he was copying [but was] prone to marked lapses ofcon­centration,
perhaps becausc 01' infinnity or old age" cr also Ilammond (190X: 191).
Bo/etín Mi//ares Cario
2005-2006.24-25: 379-394
382
Jacob Tllai"en Ortllograplly. Codicology. and Textual Sludie,,: Tlle Cambridge Univer"ity. ..
THE EVIDENCE OF GG'S LANGUAGE
The present research is based upon an electronic transcript of Gg prepared
by the Canterbury Tales Project. An index of this transcript was semi-auto­matically
compiled by me from the forms registered in the published Spelling
Database for all fifteenth-century witnesses to the Miller's Tale (Peter
Robinson 2004). A comprehensive spelling profile for Gg was extracted from
this index, answering to the questionnaire used for LALME. This profilc gives
the distribution of the variant spellings of each questionnaire item in separate
tales and the Wife of Bath's Prologue, but not other links because of their
brevity; the Cook's Tale is absent from the data set because the text of the tale
is lost due to the mutilation to the manuscript.
The methodology 1 have employed for the analysis ofthe linguistic aspect of
Gg is that described by Blake and Thaisen (2004). It focuses on the variations in
the rclative usage of functiona! equivalents at aH three levels defined aboye
during the course of the text. A scribal copy written throughout in a single hand
will contain some random variation at these lcvels. This is because the ortho­graphy
of a scribe is variable in itself in addition to being subject to many and
varied int1uences, prominent among whieh are the number of exemplars and the
order of copying. The criterion for c1aiming that a non-random pattern is present
in the movements in the rclative use of diverse femns of a single lemma during
the course of a given text must consequently be that other forms for other lem­mata
are found to show coincident movements. Alternative!y, the movements in
the use of a single form relative to the lcngth of each text unit must be paralleled
in other, unrelated fonns. Some individua! fonns and even lemmata will be too
rarely attested to produce a elcar pattern. It is a reasonable expeetation that the
variable feature in those fonns will be found to be similarly distributed in rclated
forms eontaining it, since the context is stable. If similar variation was found in
the representation ofthe initial consonant in the forms recorded for, say, the items
YOU, YOUR, and YOUNG in the Gg spelling profile, the distributions ofthose
spellings were therefore cont1ated so as to increase the reliability of the pattern.
This procedure amounted to positing the representation of