The benedictional of archbishop Robert

발행: 1903년

분량: 259페이지

출처: archive.org

분류: 미분류

11쪽

LIST OF ORI S CITE OR REFERRE TO.

12쪽

ex Bibliothecis Italicis Vol S. to PariS, IJ24. Vetera Analecta Cum adnotationibus it aliquot disquisitionibus.

Malmesbury William os : De Gestis Pontificum Anglorum vo Rolis

13쪽

PREI ACH.

THE manuscript known as Benedictionarius Roberti Archiepiscopi, formeri in themathedra Librar of Rouen, an no in the Public Librar of the fame ity, has been frequently described

with more or lesis ulnes of delati, and som paris of iis Contenis have been more than onc printed. The learne French Oratorian Jean ori made Considerable extracis fro it in his reat works. De Disciplina in Administratione Sacramenti Foenitentiae λand De Sacris Ecciniae ordinationibus. He was incline to attach t it eviden ce an importanc greater tha that hichil a properi Claim, Since, in Common illi Ome therscholars of his own Jay, he assigne to the book a date muchearlier tha that at hicli the earlies portio oscit Contenis

o the date os the book practicali agrees illi that o Morin, made much se of the lex for his ori , De Antiquis Ecclesiae Riribus' abillo also publislied in his Vetera Analecta Omeo the later paris of the Content of the Volume he, OO, SeemSto have been omewhat a fauit in deciding the date of the portions hichise printed. In 1746 the Abbe Saas, in his account of the manuscript Osthe Librar of Roue Cathedral, devote Some age t thebook, an in 747 certain uestion as O it histor wererathe warmi debate between him an his critic, o Tassin. The Volume was also the subjec o notices by the Abbe Gour-

din in 181 2, and by the Englisti bibliophile T. F. Dibdin in

'annorum Oo, aut circiter. V

The extracts are in the second volume of the collection, Published in I676. Se Saas Notice des anuscriti de a Bibliotheque de PE De Metropositaine de

Notices de in Manuscriti de a Bibliotheque de Ronen, in the repor of the Academia des Sciences de Kouen.

14쪽

X PREFACE.

Ι 821. In 1832 Mr. Jolin age appende a carem account osth book an iis content to his editio of the Benedictionalo S. Ethelwold. More recenti it has been describe by M. Silvestre in his Falso raphie Uniet refrige, by M. Potiter in Frere' Mannes et Bibliographo Normand and by the late

it a b found in the lis of Englisti Pontifical prefixed by the Dean o Carli sterio his edition of the Pontificat o Cardinal Bainbridge, in the more etaile lis include by r. . H. Frere in the hir volume of the Duinita Collections an in M. Henri mont' Catalogue of the SS. of the ouen

Libra . The volume, hich now bears the press-mark o, is in amodern indin os ello leather, an Contains I9 numberedlCRVCS, ORSuring approXimatet 122 by in ches. Soriar asciis Origina Content are Concerne d the manu Script is a fine specimen o English writin and illumination the miniatures hi Chrem ain re ni three in number; ut in acti Case the page fac in the miniatur is decorat ed illi a borde in old and colour an similar order appea in two Other places herethere is no no miniature. In ne of these places between

sol. 8 an fol. 9 there is an apparent reali in the texi and here at an rate itiseem likely that a lea has been removed in the ther case belween fol. 27 and fol. 28 it oes notappea that an par of the texi has been lost. The book is commoni calle Benedictional, V ut it

Contain no oni a Benedictiona in the narrower sense of the wOrd-a Collection o Episcopa benedictions for se in the Service of the Mass, Such as e findos a Separate Volume in

the Benedictional of S. Ethel vold, o as a parti mos of the Englisli Pontificals but also a collection o Pontifical offices. I might in faci, b describe with qua O greater accuracy

Surtee Societ PublicationS, Ol. I. It forme press-mar Wa Y 37 r. age gives it the number 27. In thenumerationi M. Omont' Cataloguerit ismo. 369. M. Omont ives the fige in millimetres a 322κ232; r. IV. H. Frere, S323κ226. Both these measurement differ lighil frona that supplied to me bybir. L. G. Wic am Leg 324κ2333. He remarks that the book is o tighilybound acto malle it a dissiculi alter accuratet to distinguisti the gathering at thebeginning an en of the volume. To his conditio ma perhapsae ascribe thestigii variation in the different measuremenis, and the fac that r. ichliam Legg's letalis a to the athering do no exacti agre With r. Frere's. r. rere'SStatemen Seem to tali no account of the loSs of a leas belwee sol. 8 an fol. 9.

15쪽

in Ponti cal There is a distinctio belween the wo paris, s sar a the decoration is Concernem the ornamentat ordersan full-page miniatures are confine to the Benedictionalproper an at the en of this part an a the beginning of the Pontifica portion, Some leaves seem to have been est blanli, asthough it might have been intende to in the wo portions separalely. The like divisio by lank leaves, however, Seemst have been made et Neen the wo sections of the Benedictiona portion anxit is to e note that a particula form, whicli occurs in the secon portio of the book, an is there written at fui tengili is indicate only b iis first word wheniis se is contemplate in the rs portion. I the Benedictiona propera ad been intende tot made a Separate Volume,

it is most likely that it,ould have containe this fori in fuit.'

Prosessor estwood' judgement that the S. was rittendiaring the alter par of the tentii centur in the Newm insteros inchester. It handwritin an illumination seem to approach Ore early to those of the Benedictional of S.

AEthelisol than to the ather later ork of themissa of Roberto Jumleges and the place of writin may be determine with

susticient certaint frona the character of the writin and ornamentation, and ais fro the appearance in the ex of the Benedictiona properi form for the festival of S. Judo and S. Grim bald, ho ere speciali venerate at the Newm inster, and the presence of the names of the fame ainis in the litantes containe in the Pontifical portionis the Volume. The theorn

There is ome inconvenience in employing, to describe the whol book a termwhicli has to e 1 te employed in a somewhat different sense, to denote a partis it content and the se of the wor Benedictional V seem to suggest a book of like character illi the Benedictionali S. Ethelwold Thus askell, distinguishingbetween the Benedictionale an Ponti cale, mentions as examples of the forme the Benedictionals of S. AEthelwol and Abp. Robert, adding that the Benedictionale is somelimes include in the Pontilais Mon. Eit Eccl. An L, Ι 882, Vol. i. P. XlVi. 3. But the wider se of the term Benedictionales cis ancient. It was applied to denote books containing offices for the lessing of person and things, even though such book di no contain a Benedictionale in the more specia senSe of the term Thus a Canterbur inventor of I3Il include benedictionale pro pueris confirmandis et vestimentis benedicendis' and benedictionale pro consecratione altaris et cimiterii V I ventorias of C risu urch, ante ury, ed by I. Wickliam Leg and . H. St. J IIope, Vo, egiminster, I9 2, p. 75 . In the particular case of the Benedictionales' of Archbisho Robert, the employment of the term is established by longuSe, an it seem bestrio retaincit. The form is ne for the Benedictioni Ashes, hici appears by iis ue in the Benedictiona for usei Ash eonesday, and in fuit in the Ponti caldor use at the Dedication o a Church. is se for this purpos might OSSibi be more frequentilia the annual usei Ash ednesday. Both ames appea in the longe of the two litantes a the Dedication o a Church ohat of S. Judo appears also in the horter.

16쪽

those of the Blesse Virgin ary, S. Michael, S. Peter, S. Bartholomew, and S. Denis. illi regar to the firs three of these ames, the facti theiraeing thus distinguished is hardlyremarhable: ut the selectio of the ames of S. Bartholomeruandra Denis, in a litan where the number of saint mentioned by nam in ach grou is o mali as in his particular RSe, is itfel rather singular, an Seems, hen it is emphasiged by the distinctio given to the names by the se of old, to demandSOme attention. I can hardly ho inever, suggeSt an decidedin rence a to the place sor hicli the book was originalty intende to serve, o modis the opinion hicli is forme onother round a to the place here it was ritten. ithregard O the nam o S. Denis, it seem mos likely that theimportance give to it is the resultis a temporar increaSe in the cultus of the aint in Englando the time to hicli thebook belongs. Such in crease veneration o S. Denis may OtunreaSOnablyae Connected with what we earn a to the specialdevotion illi hicli the aint a regarde by S. Edith of Wilton, and with the account of the vision o S. DunStan, after the death of S. Edith, in hicli S. Denis appeare a her

The absence of an benedictio sor the festiva o S. Withun a perhap potnt in the Same direction. r. age mentions that o that a the montis of the NewMinster attende the services in the old inster, hile hos of the old instercam to the Newminster o the festival of S. Grimbal and S. Judoc. In the Benedictiona proper it ma be noted the first e lines of the form sorS Bartholomew' Day, and the Amen after ach of it clauses, are ritte in old. But his unusual reaimen is perhapsiue to the fac that the benedictio hegins onthe fame age hic contain the lalter par of the form for the festiva of the Assumption, hicli is ritie ininold throughout Soriar a concern the Amen, theus of gol extend to ome ther benedictions hic follo. Se p. O).

17쪽

Some special distinction hould e give by the scribe to thenam os . Denis. The nam o S. Bartholome seem to have been writtentate tha those illi hicli it is associate in the litan and

this may suggest that the introductio of the nam os the APOSile, o the prominence iVen to it ma be due t Some Specia Circumstances Connected illi a place here the bookwa in se at a date omewhat later than that of the original Scribe. It is inclee probabi that be re the allege translationo the aint' remain Do Benevento to Rome report Ofmiracles rought y his intercession ad ecome more notableor Ore idely Spreassi even f the translation didio actuallytali place before the en of the tentii century, the Same auSOS Whicli induce one or more of the Emperor to See to bringit about may have had som effect even in Englandispoia thecultus of the Apostle. The benedictiori formis festiva in thebook unde Consideration, an also in the Pontifical of S.

DunStan malle expres mentio of the number of his miracles,

whereas in the Benedictionali S. Ethelwol an in Ponti aD LanaletenSP the forin provide is es specialty significant. The

Patron aints of Croylan seem to date Dona the time of the restoratio of the abbey, and is probabinio e connected with the reli of the Apostle sal to have been bequeathe to Croyland by Turi elut the firs abbot of the restore monaStery, havin been acquired by him a a gis fro Henry the Foruler, Vto hom it ad been ive by a Duke o Benevento. Is we accepi the Statomenis o the subject containe in the Chronicie of Inguis, it ould appea that efore the iddie of the tentii Centur a notabie relic of the aint ad Mund iis a toEngland . The dedication-titie of the paristi hurch at Hyde Seem at rs sight to suggest the possibilit os an early Veneratio of the Apostle in a place speciali Connected illith Newm inster; ut the date of the dedication is uncertain and the lose relation of the erum inster illi the place toWhicli it was afterreard remove is probabi os a date later

The question of the date, and even of the faci, of the translation is omeWhat doubisul Accordin to the tale hic attributes the translation to the Emperor Otto II., it oui apparenti have alien place in 983. I the etter-Supported Statement, hicli attributes it to Otto III., e true, the event muS have occurret betwee 983 an I 2. The authorit os Inguis' is no generali a secure Mundation; ut in Such matter a this, in hicli the writer ould e likelyrio solio in the tradition handecti OW at Croyland it a be orth something Turketui' forme position in theliingdomi perhaps no exacti describe by Inguis; V ut seo ordericus Vitalisit Ouid appea that he was a person notis at unlikelyrio have been brought into PerSOna intercourse illi Henr during the negotiations for the marriage of Otto.

18쪽

tha that at hicli the nam was inserte in the hori Litany. But ii it were ni a question of the invocatio of the aint in preferen e to ther of the Apostoli Company the increaSeo his fame in connection illi the relic a Croylan might furnish one sussicient reason sor the choice, hile another might be Mund in the fac that the relics, an presum abi ais the intercession of the Apostle ere et to e of special emcacya a Protectio against lighining λ- belles ,hicli might very naturali have e to his bein speciali involae at the dedicationi a ne bullding. It is es eas to account for the later insertio of his name, par hos loca considerations of some specialaind. Such loca reasons, it ould seem, ere to e Mund at Canterbury, at a time Somewhat later tha that to hicli themat bod of the S. has been assigned. It was in the time of

19쪽

his criticism of Abbe Saas, maintaine that the wor erased ha been Motomagensis. V e Suggeste that the erasurelia been made by Saas himself, and that a Corresponclingalteration ha been made in the inscription O the cove of the book Saas, in his reply, allege that the erasure or eraSurOS

ha been ad long esore his in Jay, and that in supplying the wor Cantuariensis V he had followed the indication of stili olde inscription, hici he had found n the inside of

the cover Robertus Cantuaritarum Archiepiscopus anno

Christi IOSO.' Both disputants apparently agree in den

with a volume describe a Benedictionarius Roberti Archiepiscopi V in a lis of the athedra book drawn u in thetime of Archbisho Godos redus mΙ-ΙΙ28): and assin argueSwith much force that in Such a lis the designation Robertus Archiepiscopus' is much more likel to indicate Rober the Archbishop of Rouen than to referri an Archbishopi Canter-bury, whO though Orman by birili ha no specia connectionwith Roueri or illi themathedral Church, here the list aswritten. The evidence of the note on hich Abbe Saas based hi conjecture Seem hardi to utweigh the probabilit in favour of this interpretatior of the list. The forni Cantuari

The Benedictiona and the Missat lare no vnnaturali regarded by thoS Who Se them in the fame library, a companion volumes. ut the came to the Librarya Paris of different collections. The Missat V came rom Jumleges, the Benedictionat' hom the athedra Library, here it ad apparently been Since besore

20쪽

Robert' Consecration coincides illi that of the death os

AEthelgar and the hypothesis that Ethelgar' Pontifica may

have been obtaine by Emma on his deceaSe a a POSSCSSionsor her rother, is ather a tempting one On the ther and ,

it ma perhaps eigh against the identification o ' ArchbishopRobert V with Rober of Rouen that non of thos addition to the origina content of the book hicli ere evidenti madeafter iis transferen eoo Normand appears to e of a date

ground for Supposita that the book was stillis Canterbur ata time a least hirt years after the death of Ethelgar, henthe long pontificate of Rober of Rouen a more than alf

On the whole it a be sal that while the evidence of the Roue list, and the fac that the book was sor centuries the properi os the Cathedra Church of Rouen, seem to e in favour os o Tassin's vlew, the question of wnerShi Canhardi be decide with certainty. I the evidence Oe notwarrant a decision in favouri Robertis Normandy it certainlydoes no warrant a decision in favour of Rober of umieges; an it,ould Seem that ome of those ho have followed thelea of Abbe Saas have been influenced by the tenden C to associat the Benedictionat' illi the Sacramentar giVen to

Jum leges by the Englisti Archbishop and by the belles that it,

Since remaine there. The additions ad Do time to timeto the origina content of the Volume are concerned, O themOS pari, illi atters for hicli it a firs containe noPrOViSion. In Some Cases their Norma character is Clearlymarhed thus the ordo for a Provincia Counci is clearly Orthe province of Rouen the additiona sectio relatin to the ordination o Bishops provides for the profession o obedienceto the se of Rouen the order ad ducem Constituendum, though contain no mention of the particula duchy, WAS

SEARCH

MENU NAVIGATION