LUP_Kendal_Bede_01_Intro
INTRODUCTION
The Venerable Bede (672/3–735), a monk in the Anglo-Saxon monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow in Northumbria, was the most remarkable scholar and intellect of his age in Western Europe. He is best remembered today for his crowning achievement, The Ecclesiastical History of the English People, a work of great literary power to which we owe nearly everything we know about the Anglo-Saxon invasion and settlement of England, the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity, and the intertwined development of political, religious, and educational institutions in the country up to his own day. But the range of his writings was enormous, extending from learned commentaries on many of the books of the Old and New Testaments to sermons and hymns and lives of the saints to textbooks on a variety of subjects for use in the classroom.1
Date and Purpose of On the Nature of Things (ONT) and On Times (OT) On the Nature of Things2 and On Times,3 two short and seemingly unpretentious works, are of great significance not only because they were probably
Bede's first literary productions, but because they set up certain landmarks for his future development as a thinker and writer. On the Nature of Things is an inventory of the material universe based on a venerable classical model;
On Times, by contrast, represents the new Christian genre of the computus manual – a genre which Bede himself played a very significant role in developing. Both types of writing have important moral dimensions. Ancient cosmology and natural history from the Pre-Socratics through to Lucretius
(whose great poem furnished the title for Isidore of Seville's treatise, and 1 For an illuminating summation, see Brown, A Companion to Bede, esp. ch. 1: 'Bede's
Life and Times', pp. 1–16.
2 De natura rerum (DNR), ed. Jones, CCSL 123A, 173–234.
3 De temporibus (DT), ed. Jones, BOT, pp. 293–303; CCSL 123C, 579–611.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
thence for Bede's4) had an ethical purpose: to refute superstition by setting forth rational explanations of the nature of the universe in general, and its more awe-inspiring spectacles in particular (eclipses, earthquakes, thunder and lightning). A second related purpose was to foster pious admiration for the beauty and order of the world. For the ancients, the world itself was divine and eternal. For Isidore of Seville, whose De natura rerum was the first sustained Christian non-exegetical treatment of cosmology in Latin, the focus of piety was the Creator, not creation. Nonetheless, he shared Lucretius's aim of demystifying natural phenomena through reason. Isidore wrote
De natura rerum in the aftermath of the striking lunar and solar eclipses of 611–612, and there is abundant evidence that the work was intended to respond not only to 'popular superstition', but to Christian apocalyptic speculation.5 Bede composed On the Nature of Things, his revised version of Isidore's cosmology, at approximately the same time as he was working on his own commentary on the Apocalypse; moreover, the companion treatise
On Times, as well as being a pious reflection on the divinely instituted order of time, promoted a radically revised chronology of world-history apparently targeted against apocalyptic speculation.
On the Nature of Things is also a work that could have easily been adapted for teaching. The same is the case for On Times, where the definitions and formulas can readily be turned into questions, such as 'What is a day?'
(ch. 2), 'What is the difference between a lunar month and a solar month?'
(ch. 5), 'How do you find the solar concurrent for the present year?' (ch.
14). Bede would certainly have been familiar with didactic question-andanswer dialogues for teaching computus, as they were found in both Irish and continental milieux. By taking a straightforward expository approach, however, Bede allowed On Times to be used in other contexts, for example as 'talking points' in discussions arising from the Insular Easter controversy.
Ceolfrith's letter to Necthan, king of the Picts, explaining the Alexandrian computus (EH 5.21) may have been accompanied by On Times.
Bede 'published' On the Nature of Things and On Times at about the time that he was ordained as a priest at the age of thirty. The exact year of the composition of On the Nature of Things is unknown, but it is intimately connected with On Times, which appeared in AD 703, and there is every reason to believe that the two works were written in conjunction with each other.6 It
4 On Bede's scanty knowledge of Lucretius, see Appendix 4.
5 Fontaine, Traité, Introduction, pp. 3–6.
6 For an argument against the inference that On the Nature of Things was significantly earlier than On Times, see Appendix 3.
INTRODUCTION
is certain that On Times was completed in 703 because in the last dated entry of the world-chronicle with which On Times ends Bede states: 'At this time
Tiberius is in the fifth year [of his rule] in the first indiction'. Tiberius was
Tiberius III Apsimar, who ruled the Eastern Roman Empire from 698—705.
We may surmise that Bede had been collecting and organizing his materials during the previous decade as he sought for the most effective ways to teach his students the elements of God's plan as revealed in the natural world and how they could be used to calculate the proper time to celebrate Easter.7
Structure and Content of ONT and OT It would be natural for Bede to conceive of paired works on cosmology and chronology, because the beginning of time was part of the story of creation as narrated in the first and second chapters of Genesis (1:1-2:3). Not surprisingly, Bede grounded his cosmology in the Genesis account. In later years, he wrote a 'hexaemeron', an encyclopaedic exegesis on the six days of God's creation of the world, which was eventually incorporated into book 1 of his commentary On Genesis.8 This hexaemeron makes explicit the theological underpinning of On the Nature of Things and On Times. The three works are thus asymmetrical but complementary. The theological account in On Genesis is evidently more significant from Bede's perspective, but he deals in it with physical issues as well. The difference between them is one of genre (which determines organization, tone, and selection of material) and intention. In On the Nature of Things, starting with creation and the universe as a whole, Bede reads the cosmos downwards from the heavens, through the atmosphere, to the oceans and rivers of earth. He takes up the four basic elements – earth, air, fire, and water, the heavenly bodies and their orbits, meteorological phenomena like thunder and lightning, rainbows, hail and snow, apparent disruptions of the natural order like eclipses, earthquakes and volcanoes, and plagues, and the fact that the earth is a globe, and its zones and climates (see Figure 1, p. 134).
Fascinated as he was by the underlying order and regularity of physical phenomena, Bede's deepest interest was undoubtedly in the temporal order of nature, because natural time plays an essential role in the correct
7 For possible connections between Bede's ordination as deacon at the age of nineteen and priest at the age of thirty and his career as teacher and writer, see Kendall, 'Bede and Education', p. 105.
8 On Genesis 1.1:1–1.2:3a/b, trans. Kendall, pp. 68–105.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
celebration of Easter. For this reason, he may have thought of On the Nature of Things as an extended prolegomenon to On Times. On Times, like its 'second, revised and enlarged edition', The Reckoning of Time (De temporum ratione),9 works upwards from the smallest units of time, through the day and night, the week, month and year, to the world-ages. Crucially,
Bede takes advantage of these units, the definitions of which were a staple of the encyclopaedic compendia of Late Antiquity, to introduce step-by-step the data, including mathematical formulas, that a student would need to understand the construction of an Easter-table. In so doing he transformed his sources.
Unity of Conception of ONT and OT Conceived though they were, so far as we can judge, as companion volumes,
On the Nature of Things and On Times almost immediately drifted apart in the manuscript transmission. The drift began in the Carolingian period, particularly on the continent, when On Times was replaced by The Reckoning of Time, and On the Nature of Things began an independent career with the cosmographical tradition. Of the 42 ninth-century manuscripts on our list which contain either On the Nature of Things or On Times or both (excluding extracts and copies containing only the chronicle from On Times) 22 contain
On the Nature of Things together with On Times, 15 contain On the Nature of Things without On Times (in eight cases, On the Nature of Things is paired with The Reckoning of Time), and five contain On Times without On the Nature of Things. In other words, by the Carolingian period almost half of the manuscripts containing either text contained only one of the pair. In the modern era, Charles W. Jones edited On Times but not On the Nature of Things in his magisterial volume Bedae Opera de Temporibus.10 He later published the two independently in separate volumes of the Corpus Christianorum (123A and 123C).
9 De temporum ratione (DTR), ed. Jones, BOT, pp. 173–291; CCSL 123B, 263–544; trans.
Wallis, The Reckoning of Time, pp. 3–249.
10 Of the decision to omit On the Nature of Things, he remarked, 'to my mind, that survey of natural science should be published together with Bede's commentary on Genesis' (BOT, p. viii). BOT contains Jones's definitive edition of The Reckoning of Time as well as On Times.
But from both of these works he omitted the world chronicles with which they conclude with the observation that he could not improve upon Theodor Mommsen's 'sound editions' in the Monumenta Germaniae Historica (BOT, p. viii). The exigencies of book production in the midst of the Second World War no doubt influenced that unfortunate decision, which he rectified in his republications of The Reckoning of Time and On Times in the Corpus Christianorum.
INTRODUCTION
Bede, however, always spoke of On the Nature of Things and On Times together. In the Preface to The Reckoning of Time, he says, 'Some time ago
I wrote two short books in a summary style which were, I judged, necessary for my students; these concerned the nature of things, and the reckoning of times'.11 In the bibliography he appended to his Ecclesiastical History, he expresses himself similarly: 'Two books, one on the nature of things and the other on chronology; also a longer book on chronology'.12 And indeed the verse epigraph that he prefixed to On the Nature of Things unmistakably applies to both books. Bede's order is overwhelmingly the order followed by scribes in later centuries when the two works were copied in the same manuscript. On Times follows On the Nature of Things sequentially, without a break, in 56 of the surviving manuscripts. In several manuscripts from the ninth century onwards (e.g., St Gall 248, our DNR, no. 100/DT, no. 77) the two works are treated as a single treatise in two books, with On Times designated as 'book 2'. The reverse order, with On Times preceding On the Nature of Things is found only three times.13
Of course, the two works are distinct. They represent a deliberate splitting of Isidore's DNR, and Bede gave them separate titles and lists of chapters.
As with his grammatical textbooks The Art of Poetry (De arte metrica) and The Figures of Rhetoric (De schematibus et tropis), which he likewise spoke of in the same breath, he observed a hierarchy of domains according to which related but logically independent subjects were dealt with separately, but kept in close association. This probably mirrors Bede's pragmatic and vocational approach to teaching. The curriculum was dictated, not by the abstract schema of the 'seven liberal arts', but by the need of his pupils for instruction in the particular topics for which Bede prepared his manuals.
The present volume brings the two companion texts on nature and time together again in accordance with what we conceive to have been Bede's original intention.14
11 The Reckoning of Time, Preface, trans. Wallis, p. 3.
12 EH 5.24: Colgrave and Mynors, p. 571.
13 In Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale U74, a twelfth-century manuscript from Jumièges
(our DT, no. 76/DNR, no. 99), Valenciennes, Bibliothèque municipale 343, a tenth-century manuscript from St Amand (our DT, no. 91/DNR, no. 116), and possibly in Zürich, Zentralbibliothek Car C 176, a manuscript of the tenth or eleventh century (our DT, no. 111/DNR, no.
142). Bern, Burgerbibliothek 610, and Cambridge University Library Gg II 21, are not counted here because DT is either incomplete or excerpted.
14 In addition to the MSS that designate them as books 1 and 2 of a single work, there are some Carolingian MSS that actually fuse the two works into a single text, e.g. Bern 610 (our
DNR, no. 12/DT, no. 9) and Paris, B.N. lat. 13013 (our DNR, no. 90/DT, no. 67).
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
The Place of ONT and OT in Bede's Thought To understand how On the Nature of Things and On Times fit into the larger trajectory of Bede's development as a thinker and writer, we need to know what kind of books these are, and what were the expectations aroused by this genre. On the Nature of Things and On Times are conventionally categorized by modern scholars as 'schoolbooks', 'didactic manuals' or didascalica, with the implication that they are simplified introductions for the instruction of presumably young and unlearned students. There is much evidence that Bede's students did indeed use these works – he says in the introduction of The Reckoning of Time that they clamoured for an expanded edition of both – but we need not conclude that On the Nature of Things and On Times were derivative or uncontroversial. In fact, both were quite innovative, and On Times in particular provoked a storm of criticism. To be sure, they are early works from Bede's pen, but so was his Commentary on the Apocalypse – a bold choice for a maiden voyage in Biblical exegesis. Bede was a scholar and a monk, but also seems to have been confident and self-assured about what he was doing as a writer; he was respectful of ancient authority, but also of his own powers to interpret and re-shape traditional learning.15
The fact that he was working on his Apocalypse commentary at about the same time as he was composing On the Nature of Things and On Times is certainly not without significance. The classical de natura rerum genre, even when Christianized by Isidore of Seville, always had as its implicit aim the deflating of superstitious fear of natural phenomena through rational explanation. And in the chronicle which concludes On Times, Bede offers a vigorous challenge to a chronology of world history that encouraged belief in the imminence of the Last Judgement, or at least confidence that its date could be predicted. His Commentary on the Apocalypse likewise takes the position that the vision of John is an allegory of the perennial conflict of good and evil, not a straightforward timetable for the Last Days.16
Another point to bear in mind is the primacy of Biblical study and Christian doctrina for Bede. The astronomy and cosmology of On the Nature of Things is not knowledge acquired and enjoyed for its own sake, but practical knowledge. In the medieval scheme of things, 'practical' rarely means utili15 Roger Ray, 'Who did Bede think he was?', pp. 11–35.
16 The Expositio Apocalypseos has recently been edited by Roger Gryson. Faith Wallis is preparing a translation for the Translated Texts for Historian series. Gerald Bonner's 'Saint
Bede in the Tradition of Western Apocalyptic Commentary' remains a useful introduction. See also Peter Darby, 'Bede's Eschatological Thought'.
INTRODUCTION
tarian. It is always linked to the ancient notion of 'practical philosophy', that is, of ethics. To envisage astronomy as practical meant, then, two things for Bede: 'the uses of the regular motions of the heavens to reckon the passing of times and seasons, and the attempts to incorporate those celestial virtues of stability and order into human lives and societies'. These processes are independent of 'any formal articulation of mathematical astronomy or philosophical cosmology'.17 Bede was following in the footsteps of the fathers even here, notably of Jerome and Augustine, for whom studying the heavens was a lesson in the constancy of the divine covenant and a form of worship.18
On the other hand, unlike either Isidore or the Carolingians, Bede does not hold up the order of the heavens as a natural symbol of either the Christian order of divine law, or the political order of a Christian king as God's representative on earth. His perspective is Biblical: the heavens declare the glory of the Lord, and reveal his providence, wisdom and goodness to pious minds. Nor is Bede's piety that of late antique quadrivial astronomy, which presented the order of the universe as a model for the cultivation of human character.19
As we shall attempt to demonstrate, particularly in our commentaries on the two works translated here, Bede's motivation and goals were driven by his own strong religious imagination, and what set his imagination ablaze was pondering God's created world as space, time and number. This scientific dimension of his imagination interlocked with other imaginative circuits in his thinking, notably the mysteries of salvation-history, and the place of his own people in that history. His comprehension of the physical world was of a piece with his understanding of what it meant to be a Christian, a monk and an Englishman.
Bede's Template:
Isidore of Seville's De natura rerum A century before Bede, the great Spanish scholar, Archbishop Isidore of Seville (560?–636), had composed a treatise, De natura rerum [DNR], 'On the Nature of Things', that provided a convenient synopsis of basic information about the natural world.20 Isidore was in vogue in early Anglo-Saxon
England, and Bede quickly grasped the opportunity to revise and refashion 17 McCluskey, Astronomies and Cultures, p. 4.
18 McCluskey, Astronomies and Cultures, pp. 31–32.
19 McCluskey, Astronomies and Cultures, pp. 124–36.
20 Ed. and trans. into French, Fontaine, Traité, pp. 163–327.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
Isidore's manual and to supplement it with technical material from ancient and Irish sources in order to make it a useful instrument for his students.
Isidore wrote DNR certainly between 612 and 615, and probably in the spring of 613, at the request of the Visigothic King Sisebut.21 Its immediate occasion may have been a total eclipse of the sun on 2 August 612, which followed on an eclipse of the moon in the previous year, and which seems to have provoked superstitious practices and apocalyptic fears that the king and Isidore wished to combat. Their purpose was to show that unusual phenomena in the earth or sky, like earthquakes or volcanoes or eclipses of the sun or the moon, were neither the work of demons nor signs of the end of the world, but rather part of the natural order of things ordained by God.
Isidore's DNR can thus be seen as a Christian variation on the perennial theme of ancient cosmological treatises of this genre, notably Lucretius's
De natura rerum.
Isidore's DNR is organized in three parts: (1) a 'hemerology', or science of the divisions of time, beginning with the day and the hour and extending to seasons, the year, etc. (chs. 1–8); (2) a cosmology or astronomy (chs.
9–28); and (3) a meteorology or science of terrestrial phenomena (chs.
29–48).22 The cosmological and meteorological sections (chs. 9–48) follow an ancient tradition.23 The 'hemerological' section (chs. 1–8) is alien to this tradition and comes from different sources. Its inclusion owes much to the new Christian concern with the liturgical hours and the fixed and moveable feasts of the ecclesiastical calendar.24 Into the weft of this classical, pagan material, Isidore wove an allegorical commentary based on Ambrose,
Gregory, Augustine, Jerome, and other doctors of the Church. The allegory begins with the vicissitudes of times and ends with a vision of hell in the fires of Mt. Etna.25
Seven diagrams, six of them wheels (rotae), appear in the manuscript tradition of DNR. There are wheels of the months (ch. 4), of the year (ch.
7), of the circles of the world (ch. 10), of the planets (ch. 23), and of the winds (ch. 37), as well as a wheel of the world, the year, and man (ch. 11). In addition, there is an oddly shaped, 'geometric' figure of the elements (also
21 Fontaine, Traité, pp. 1–3.
22 Fontaine, Traité, p. 7.
23 These correspond to chapters or sections in, among others, Aristotle's Meteorologica, books 5 and 6 of Lucretius's De rerum natura, and book 2 of Pliny's Natural History. Cf.
Fontaine, Traité, pp. 8–9.
24 Fontaine, Traité, p. 7.
25 Fontaine, Traité, p. 12.
INTRODUCTION
ch. 11). Isidore refers to these diagrams in his text, so he is responsible for their inclusion, but they are not original with him – they have a long though somewhat obscure history.26 They are the reason that Isidore's DNR was often given the title of liber or libri rotarum in the medieval period.27
Isidore's DNR circulated in three recensions – a first or 'short' recension, a second or 'intermediate' recension, and a third or 'long' recension.28 The first recension comprised 46 chapters, and appended an astronomical poem on the subject of eclipses by King Sisebut, which the king sent to Isidore.29
The second recension added a 47th chapter, 'De partibus terrae' (now ch.
48), and kept the poem of Sisebut's. The third recension of 48 chapters incorporated a 'mystical addition' to chapter 1,30 and added a new chapter
44, 'De nominibus maris et fluminum', but omitted the poem.31
Isidore's DNR reached southern England shortly after 670, in the form of the first or the second recension. Two separate batches of lemmata from DNR appear in the 'Leiden Glossary', a work compiled at Canterbury between the years 670 and 690 from the teaching of Archbishop Theodore and Abbot Hadrian.32 In the year 685 Aldhelm, the abbot of Malmesbury33 and future bishop of Sherborne, addressed a treatise on poetry to King Aldfrith of Northumbria in which he quoted a verse that he said was
Isidore's. It occurs in Aldhelm's enumeration of the varieties of elision (or synaloepha) that are found in quantitative Latin poetry. 'Isidore', he says,
26 For the origin of Isidore's rotae, see Fontaine, Traité, pp. 15–18.
27 Not realizing this, Plummer (BOH 1, clxii, n. 8) proposed altering the phrase de libris rotarum Isidori, which he found printed in editions of Cuthbert's De obitu Bedae (On the Death of Bede) to de libris notarum Isidori.
28 Fontaine, Traité, pp. 38–45. Fontaine's overly complex account of authorial revisions to DNR has been questioned and his stemma accounting for the three recensions simplified by José Carlos Martín, in Codoñer, Martín, and Andrés, 'Isidorus Hispalensis Ep.', pp. 353–62.
Wesley Stevens, 'Sidereal Time in Anglo-Saxon England,' pp. 136–37, has identified a fourth
'more elaborate version' of Isidore's DNR that also circulated in parts of England. Manuscripts of the fourth version include Exeter Cathedral, MS 3507 (ca. 960—986), London, B.L., Cotton
Vitellius A XII (eleventh c.), and London, B.L., Cotton Domitian I.
29 Epistula Sisebuti (Fontaine, Traité, pp. 329–35).
30 DNR 1.3.17-52 (Fontaine, Traité, pp. 175–77).
31 Fontaine, Traité, p. 38.
32 See Lapidge, 'The School of Theodore and Hadrian', pp. 54–55, and idem, The AngloSaxon Library, p. 176.
33 Aldhelm has until recently been thought to have been appointed abbot of Malmesbury in 675, but Michael Lapidge, 'The Career of Aldhelm', pp. 48–52, demonstrates that 'the beginning of Aldhelm's abbacy cannot be reliably dated before 680, and possibly not before 685' (at p. 51).
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
'certainly elided vowels in the following way: argutosque34 inter latices et musica flabra' [among the melodious waters and musical breezes].35 The verse is actually line 2 of King Sisebut's poem, but in manuscripts of DNR before the ninth century the poem was not ascribed to the king. Hence,
Aldhelm assumed that it was composed by Isidore.36
It is virtually certain that it was the second recension of Isidore's DNR to which Bede had access. He gives no evidence of knowing the 'mystical' addition to chapter 1, or chapter 44 (or, for that matter, Sisebut's poem).
He quotes with minor changes a passage from Isidore's chapter 48, though this is not in itself decisive because Isidore's sentence (which is also found in Etym. 14.2.2) is verbally identical to Augustine, The City of God 16.17, and Bede could have taken it from either source.37 However, the fact that both Isidore and Bede conclude with a chapter on the division of the earth
– Isidore's chapter 48 and Bede's chapter 51 – would seem to confirm that Bede's copy of Isidore included what is now chapter 48. Clinching the evidence for Bede's access to the second recension is a phrase found only in one manuscript of that recension and in a small group of manuscripts of the third recension directly influenced by it. The phrase occurs in Isidore's chapter 37, 'On the Names of the Months'. In it he states that the North
Wind is also called 'Aparctias' [hic est Aparctias], an observation which Bede echoes in his chapter 27, 'The Order of the Winds' [qui et Apartias].
Now, the manuscript of the second recension that contains this phrase is Fontaine's 'H' [= Hispanus].38 H is a Spanish manuscript of the seventh century (636 X 686) – the oldest surviving exemplar of Isidore's DNR. It lacks the 'mystical' addition to chapter 1, and it lacks chapter 44, but it includes the poem of Sisebut and chapter 48 (hence, it is the second recension).39
However, chapter 48 is added on fol. 24v in a 'slightly later' hand40 (end seventh/beginning eighth c.?), after the poem of Sisebut. Thus, H must be very close to the archetype of the second recension. Also at the bottom of fol. 24v are inscribed two 'T-O' maps that happen to correspond closely to Bede's verbal description of the division of the earth (see Commentary on 34 Argutusque, Ehwald.
35 Aldhelm, De metris, ed. Ehwald, MGH, AA 15, 80.1-2.
36 Fontaine, Traité, pp. 74–75.
37 Bede, DNR 51.9-11, ed. Jones, CCSL 123A, 234.
38 Escorial, Real Biblioteca R.II.18, ff. 9r–24v. See Fontaine, Traité, pp. 20–23, 163, and 295.
39 Since the second recension lacks ch. 44, ch. 48 is numbered as ch. 47 in H.
40 Fontaine, Traité, pp. 20–21.
INTRODUCTION
ONT 51). These do not seem to originate with Isidore; he makes no reference to them in his text, as he does with the 'wheels' mentioned above.41
Fontaine explores the possible routes by which DNR might have reached southern England toward the latter part of the seventh century – direct from Spain; through Ireland; from France via Irish missionaries to the Continent
– without reaching any definitive conclusion.42 He assumes that the work was subsequently diffused from southern England to Northumbria and in particular to Bede's monastery of Wearmouth-Jarrow. This may well be the case, but the possibility that Wearmouth-Jarrow had a more direct link with Spain is an attractive alternative. Perhaps a Spanish scholar had made his way to Wearmouth-Jarrow, or the monastery might have been in contact with Spanish scholarship in Ireland. All we can say of Aldhelm's copy of DNR is that it was not the third recension. But of Bede's copy, that is, the copy in the library of Wearmouth-Jarrow, we can say that it most resembles H, the oldest extant manuscript of DNR and one that never left Spain. And further, if Fontaine's conjecture that the third recension originated in Northumbria and spread from there to the Continent is valid, then the ancestor of the third recension might well have been the Wearmouth-Jarrow copy or one nearly identical with it. Fontaine thinks it almost certain that chapter 44 is a non-Isidorian interpolation of Northumbrian origin, and that the 'mystical' addition is more likely than not non-Isidorian – probably the work of a scholar thoroughly familiar with Isidore's style.43 Finally, the unique and anomalous presence of the two T-O maps in H strongly hints at a connection between Spain and Wearmouth-Jarrow. The diagram is of unknown provenance; neither Isidore nor Bede had any hand in its construction so far as we can tell. It may have had a long pre-history. Nevertheless, the coincidence seems remarkable that, at approximately the time an anonymous scribe was appending the oldest extant T-O map to Isidore's final chapter in Spain,44 Bede in Northumbria, borrowing from Pliny as well as Isidore, was composing a verbal description for his final chapter corresponding perhaps
41 Stevens, 'The Figure of the Earth,' pp. 272–73, assumes that it was Isidore himself who added this figure to his text in AD 613. Although Fontaine, Traité, carefully notes the rotae in each of the manuscripts he describes, he mentions the T-O map only in connection with H.
Stevens states categorically (p. 273) that 'no completed second or third version manuscript exists without it'. However, there is no T-O map in St Gall 238 (a third recension MS: Fontaine's 'S').
42 Fontaine, Traité, pp. 75–78. For more on the possibility that Isidore came to England via the Irish, see Hillgarth, 'Ireland and Spain in the Seventh Century'.
43 Fontaine, Traité, pp. 45, 79–80.
44 The left-hand T-O map on fol. 24v of H is probably, though not certainly, in the same hand as ch. 48. The right-hand map appears to be a later copy.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
more nearly to that map than any other ancient source. Could the diagram have been inspired by Bede's words? Or did the Wearmouth-Jarrow copy of DNR display the same diagram as H, inspiring Bede to construct his chapter
51 as he did? We are left in the frustrating realm of conjecture.
Bede's transformation of Isidore's DNR On the Nature of Things and On Times may be thought of as Bede's treatises on the spatial and temporal aspects of the physical universe respectively.
Although Bede was an adept practitioner of the allegorical interpretation of scripture in his commentaries on various books of the Bible, he apparently considered Isidore's allegorizations extraneous to the purposes of his textbooks, and jettisoned them. Isidore was an encyclopaedic scholar, but he was not a specialist in the science of Easter reckoning, nor was it his purpose to offer students practical tools for theoretical understanding and accurate calculation of the ecclesiastical calendar. This divergence in intent between Isidore and Bede may have something to do with the widespread belief among contemporary Bede scholars that Bede had a low opinion of Isidore. We take up this question below.
In effect, Bede divided the chapters of Isidore's DNR to create his two textbooks. The first 23 chapters of Bede's On the Nature of Things correspond to the 'cosmological' section, chapters 9–28, of Isidore's DNR, while the remaining 28 chapters of On the Nature of Things (chs. 24–51) correspond to the 'meteorology' section, Isidore's chapters 29–48. Much of what
Bede adds to Isidore is taken from Pliny, though he used other sources as well, notably the Irish pseudo-Isidore's De ordine creaturarum.45
As Fontaine points out, Bede isolated Isidore's 'hemerological' section (chs. 1–8) and reconstituted it separately as On Times.46 To this material on the units of time of the solar calendar – the day, the week, the month, the year, Bede added (1) several chapters of technical explication of the nineteen-year cycle for reconciling the solar and lunar calendars that was used to calculate the proper date of Easter (the foundation of the disci45 'Bede, in contrast to Isidore, found Pliny a congenial and useful source on astronomical matters. In the fifty-one chapters of his De natura rerum, Bede used Pliny for much or most of the material in thirty-two chapters' (Eastwood, 'Plinian Astronomical Diagrams', p. 167, n. 19). Bede's use of pseudo-Isidore's DOC in ONT is documented by Picard, 'Bede and Irish
Scholarship', pp. 139–44.
46 Fontaine, Traité, p. 7.
INTRODUCTION
pline referred to as computus), and (2) a chronicle of the Six Ages of world history. Much of Bede's technical information came from Irish sources still available to us through the eleventh-century manuscript Bodley 309, a copy of an Irish computus anthology used by Bede himself.47 For the universal chronicle, Bede turned again to Isidore.
Bede's Attitude Toward Isidore It is a 'fact' well known among Bede scholars that Bede cites Isidore by name only three times and then only to contradict him.48 This, coupled with a disparaging remark about Isidore that Bede is said to have made on his death-bed, is largely responsible for the now widespread assumption that Bede not only held the Spanish scholar in low regard, but that he feared
Isidore's errors, if left uncorrected, might infect his students with their untruth. However, in two well-reasoned articles, William McCready has challenged the prevailing opinion.49 We revisit the issue here in view of the obvious importance of Isidore's work, whatever Bede's assessment of it, for On the Nature of Things and On Times.
It was Charles Plummer who first called attention to the 'curious' fact that Bede so seldom named Isidore.50 Two of the three places where Bede did do so are in his Retractation on the Acts of the Apostles;51 the third is in The Reckoning of Time. The Retractation contains Bede's second-thoughts, additions, comments, and corrections, to his Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles.52 The Commentary, completed by 709, may have been his second sustained work of Biblical scholarship (after his Commentary on the Apocalypse); the Retractation, ca. 725–731, like The Reckoning of Time, belongs to his later years.53
(1) Isidore was the un-named source for Bede's identification, in his Commentary, of Simon Zelotes (Acts 1:13) with Simeon (or Simon), the son of Cleophas (or Clopas), who succeeded James as bishop of 47 Jones, 'The "Lost" Sirmond Manuscript of Bede's Computus', and Ó Cróinín, 'The Irish
Provenance of Bede's Computus'.
48 See, e.g., Laistner, 'The Library of the Venerable Bede'; Jones, BOT, pp. 131–32;
Fontaine, Traité, p. 79; Meyvaert, 'Bede the Scholar', pp. 59–60.
49 McCready, 'Bede and the Isidorian Legacy'; 'Bede, Isidore, and the Epistola Cuthberti'.
50 Plummer, BOH 1, xli, n. 4.
51 Retractatio in Actus Apostolorum, ed. Laistner, CCSL 121.
52 Expositio Actuum Apostolorum, ed. Laistner, CCSL 121.
53 Laistner, Hand-List, p. 20.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
Jerusalem.54 Apparently, Bede expected to find confirmation for this identification in earlier sources, and not finding any, had come to have doubts:
'Isidore thinks that this is the Simon who, after James the brother of the Lord, ruled the church of Jerusalem and under Trajan was crowned with the martyrdom of the cross when he was one hundred and twenty years old. And I followed him a while ago in my first book on the Acts of the Apostles. Not examining scrupulously enough the things that he wrote, but simply heeding his words, I supposed that he had learned them from trustworthy reports of the ancients'.55 Even so, Bede says he dares not deny
Isidore's identification, especially since the older authorities themselves are demonstrably in error at times. As one example of their unreliability, he notes that he repeated in his Commentary something that Jerome claimed
Eusebius had said in his Ecclesiastical History (that the Thaddeus sent to cure King Abgar was the same Thaddeus who was one of the twelve apostles56), but when he later looked more carefully into Eusebius, he discovered that Jerome was mistaken: this Thaddeus was not the apostle
Thaddeus, but rather one of the seventy disciples. Clearly, Bede did not enjoy being found in the wrong, and in conclusion he excused himself by laying the blame elsewhere: 'I think the error ought not to be imputed to me, when, following the authority of the great doctors, I trusted that those things which I found in their works could be accepted without hesitation'.57
In context, it will be observed that Bede is harder on Jerome than he is on Isidore (Isidore may have been mistaken; Jerome certainly was in error), but no one argues that Bede thought poorly of Jerome. We may reasonably conclude that when Bede began compiling his Commentary on Acts he was young enough to be awestruck at the reputation of 'the great doctors'
(Isidore among them?), but by the time he came to write the Retractation he had experience enough to realize that the greatest of doctors were fallible and that their statements must be tested, and corrected when shown to be wrong.58
(2) Bede's second 'contradiction' of Isidore is nothing of the kind. In his Commentary, he explained that the boat or skiff (scapha) referred to 54 Expositio, CCSL 121, 10–11. Cf. On Times 22; The Reckoning of Time 66, AM 4069, trans. Wallis, p. 200.
55 Retractatio, CCSL 121, 107 (trans. Kendall, here and below).
56 Expositio, CCSL 121, 11.
57 Retractatio, CCSL 121, 107.
58 For an extended analysis, which comes to a similar conclusion, see McCready, 'Bede and the Isidorian Legacy', pp. 58–61.
INTRODUCTION
in Acts 27:13-16, was a flimsy craft covered with rawhide.59 He took this explanation from Isidore's Etymologies (19.1.21). In the Retractation, he comments: 'I wrote in my first book, following Isidore, that a skiff is a light vessel woven from willow and covered with rawhide; but subsequently looking through the writings of others [specifically, Vegetius] I found that small boats hollowed out from a single tree are also called skiffs …'.60 He does not say that Isidore was wrong, or that the skiff in Acts must have been a hollow log. He simply gives a second definition of 'skiff'.61
(3) Bede mentions Isidore by name for the third time in chapter 35 of The Reckoning of Time. Once again, his remarks must be seen in relation to something he said earlier. Among the units of time that he discusses in On Times are the seasons. Isidore had taken up, in three consecutive chapters of DNR, 'the Years' (ch. 6), 'the Seasons' (ch. 7), and 'the Solstice and the Equinox' (ch. 8). Bede reversed this order, putting 'the Solstice and the Equinox' first, perhaps for the excellent pedagogical reason that, unlike
Isidore, he intended to structure his definition of the seasons around them. In ch. 8 of OT, Bede reported the dates for the beginning of the four seasons as determined by 'the ancients' – the 6th ides of the months of February, May,
August, and November (8 February, 10 May, 8 August, and 8 November) – 'so that the solstices and equinoxes would be in the middle of the seasons'.62
In so doing, he silently ignored the dates proposed by Isidore – the 8th kalends of March, the 9th kalends of June, the 10th kalends of September, and the 9th kalends of December (22 February, 24 May, 23 August, and 23
November).
However, in The Reckoning of Time 35, a more ample treatment of 'the Four Seasons, Elements and Humours', Bede remarks that different authorities assign different dates to the beginning of the seasons, among them,
'Bishop Isidore the Spaniard', who in his DNR gives the dates mentioned above.63 'But the Greeks and the Romans [i.e., 'the ancients'], whose authority on these matters, rather than that of the Spaniards, it is generally preferable to follow, deem that winter begins on the 7th ides of November
59 Expositio, CCSL 121, 94.
60 Vegetius, Epitoma rei militaris 2.25.
61 Cf. McCready, 'Bede and the Isidorian Legacy', pp. 61–62.
62 Below, p. 111.
63 According to the received text, Isidore says 'the 7th [uii] kalends of December' (Fontaine,
Traité, p. 203), although Bede states 'the 9th [uiiii] kalends' (ed. Jones, CCSL 123B, 393).
However, the reading in the St-Gall manuscript of Isidore's DNR (Stiftsbibliothek 238) agrees with Bede's uiiii.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
[7 November], spring on the 7th ides of February [7 February], summer on the 7th ides of May [9 May], and autumn on the 7th ides of August [7
August]'.64 In addition to Pliny, the Scriptures, and Bishop Proterius and the Egyptians,65 Bede adduces support from 'that man of the Church St Anatolius, in his work about Easter'. In short, Bede does not claim that Isidore is in error, but rather indicates his preference between alternative attempts to circumscribe the seasons with exact dates.66 And perhaps in appealing to the authority of 'the Greeks and the Romans', Bede is being a bit disingenuous. Although Pliny puts the commencement of spring and summer on the 6th ides of February and May, respectively, he gives no definitive date for autumn and starts winter on the 3rd ides of November.67 Anatolius appears to be Bede's sole source for the notion of defining the solstices and equinoxes as the midpoint of the seasons, the logic of which probably appealed to Bede.68 He sounds a little defensive, as though he might have been criticized for ignoring Isidore's dates and felt the need to cloak himself in the broad mantle of the 'ancients'.69
Scholars who interpret these passages to imply that Bede regarded Isidore with suspicion have been influenced in their impressions by Cuthbert's mention of Isidore in his Letter on the Death of Bede. The relevant passage reads as follows in the text and translation offered by Colgrave and Mynors:
In istis autem diebus duo opuscula multum memoria digna, exceptis lectionibus quas cotidie accepimus ab eo et cantu Psalmorum, facere studuit, id est a capite euangelii sancti Iohannis usque ad eum locum in quo dicitur 'Sed haec quid sit inter tantos?' in nostram linguam ad utilitatem ecclesiae Dei conuertit, et de libris Rotarum Ysidori episcopi exceptiones [excerptiones, Plummer]70
64 The Reckoning of Time 35, trans. Wallis, p. 101. There is a one-day discrepancy between Bede's dates in On Times and his dates in The Reckoning of Time. This is undoubtedly owing to the fact that the beginning of the seasons had no computational relevance, and Bede is rarely dogmatic or concerned about precision and consistency on matters that are peripheral to his core project. Wallis, p. 321, observes that Bede himself 'at no point fixes calendar dates for the beginnings of the seasons'.
65 For the importance of the Scriptures, Proterius, and the Egyptians, see Wallis, The Reckoning of Time, pp. 320–21.
66 Cf. McCready, 'Bede and the Isidorian Legacy', pp. 46–47.
67 Pliny, NH 2.47.122-25.
68 For a thorough assessment of Bede's rather complex intents and purposes in chapter 35 of DTR, see Wallis, The Reckoning of Time, pp. 319–21.
69 Cf. McCready, 'Bede and the Isidorian Legacy', pp. 66–69.
70 Exceptio is a (frequently, legal) term meaning an 'exception, qualification, reservation'
(OLD); it came to mean 'a thing extracted' (Souter) or 'prélèvement' (Blaise); in late British
Latin it was confused with excerptio (Latham). Meyvaert, 'Bede the Scholar', p. 59, translated
INTRODUCTION
quasdam, dicens 'Nolo ut pueri mei mendacium legant, et in hoc post meum obitum sine fructu laborent'.
During those days71 there were two pieces of work worthy of record, besides the lessons which he gave us every day and his chanting of the Psalter, which he desired to finish: the gospel of St. John, which he was turning into our mother tongue to the great profit of the Church, from the beginning as far as the words
'But what are they among so many?'72 and a selection from Bishop Isidore's book On the Wonders of Nature73; for he said 'I cannot have my children learning what is not true, and losing their labour on this after I am gone.'74
The passage involves textual difficulties and has been interpreted variously in some details. It is now generally assumed to mean that in addition to translating into English all or part of John's Gospel, Bede was making a collection of extracts (or corrections) from Isidore's DNR that would shield his students from Isidore's (presumably egregious) errors. Considering the fact that he began his writing career by employing Isidore's DNR as an armature on which to construct his two textbooks On the Nature of Things and On Times, into which he incorporated numerous extracts from Isidore, and that he continued to quote in extenso from Isidore in his recent work
The Reckoning of Time, making a new set of extracts (or corrections) might strike one as an odd use of his precious final days.
An earlier generation of scholars understood one part of Bede's second project differently. Charles Plummer called it 'a translation of extracts from Isidore'.75 This involves taking exceptiones/excerptiones quasdam as a direct object of conuertit (the first 'direct object' of the verb is the prepositional phrase a capite … ad eum locum). Jones takes it in that sense, and Fontaine, too, views the project as a translation.76 However, Riché disputes exceptiones as 'corrections'. Plummer's excerptiones was based on the witness of a ninthcentury St-Gall MS; this reading has strong support in MSS that have come to light since
Plummer's day (see McCready, 'Bede, Isidore, and the Epistola Cuthberti', p. 90 and n. 51; according to McCready, idem, pp. 93–94, Meyvaert now accepts the reading excerptiones and no longer believes that Bede was hostile to Isidore). Excerptiones translates unambiguously as 'excerpts'.
71 This refers either to the 40 days from Easter to Ascension Day mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph or possibly to the whole period of Bede's last illness which began two weeks before Easter (Colgrave and Mynors, p. 580).
72 That is, John 1:1 to 6:9.
73 The liber or libri Rotarum is Isidore's De natura rerum.
74 Colgrave and Mynors, pp. 582–83; Plummer, BOH 1, clxii.
75 Plummer, BOH 1, xli, n. 4.
76 Jones, BOT, p. 131; Fontaine, Traité, p. 79.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
the idea that it was a translation,77 and Meyvaert flatly asserts: 'Bede's work on Isidore is often spoken of as a translation, but the Latin word order of Cuthbert's letter does not allow such an interpretation'.78 Where the finest scholars disagree, we may consider the question open.
Finally, it is widely assumed that mendacium ['falsehood'] refers in some way to Isidore's DNR, as in Colgrave and Mynors's rendering: 'I cannot have my children learning what is not true', or Farmer's: 'I do not wish my students to read lies'.79 But Fontaine finds in Bede's quoted words
(nolo ut pueri mei mendacium legant, et in hoc post meum obitum sine fructu laborent) a different meaning:
C. W. Jones, BOT, p. 131, sees there a criticism of the work of Isidore, which would be, according to him, the antecedent of the pronoun 'hoc'. I think, rather, that Bede was condemning some unsuccessful attempts at translating Isidore's treatise into the Northumbrian language, and that he wanted to leave to his young pupils who were unskilled in Latin a proper version. I would translate thus: 'I do not wish my sons to read a false text, and in so doing to waste their time after my death' (hoc = mendacium legere).80
If Fontaine's reading has merit, then Bede's words could apply equally cogently to faulty student translations of the Bible.
A hundred and fifty years or so after Bede's death, King Alfred gently reproached Bede's generation of scholars for their failure to translate the great books of the Christian tradition into English.81 At the end of his life,
Bede may have harboured similar misgivings. In his Letter to Egbert (734), he remarks on the number of priests who do not know their Latin and notes that he has translated the Pater Noster and the Apostles' Creed into English for their benefit. Cuthbert's Letter conveys a sense of urgency. It is remarkable that one of the works that Bede was hastily finishing was a translation.
Translating an extended text like John's Gospel was a task he apparently had never before undertaken. If both works were translations it would be more remarkable still – to concentrate on English translation in the few weeks remaining to him (he seems to have been conscious of his imminent death) after a lifetime of writing in Latin. When he was younger, he could assume that with time he would be able to remediate any deficiencies in his students' grasp of Latin. Now, on his deathbed, he may have feared that time
77 Riché, Education and Culture, p. 391, n. 193.
78 Meyvaert, 'Bede the Scholar,' p. 59.
79 In Bede: Ecclesiastical History, trans. Leo Sherley-Price, p. 359.
80 Fontaine, Traité, p. 79, n. 1 (trans. Kendall).
81 Alfred, Preface to the Pastoral Care.
INTRODUCTION
had run out; that other teachers at Wearmouth-Jarrow were not as competent as he, or that their numbers were thinning; and that his pupils could not be prevented from mistranslating and introducing error (mendacium) into their reading of the gospels or the works of Isidore.
On this reading of the evidence, the fact that Bede was working on John and Isidore on his deathbed may be taken as testimony to their importance in his scheme of things. He particularly cherished John's Gospel because, while the other evangelists narrated the facts of Christ's life, John revealed
'the mysteries of the divine nature'.82 He was engaged with Isidore from the earliest days of his career. As we have seen, he re-ordered and adapted for classroom use Isidore's DNR in his own On the Nature of Things and On Times beginning in 703, and then enormously expanded On Times into The Reckoning of Time in 725. He dropped the allegorical content of DNR
(perhaps for the same reason that he avoided overt allegorization in the Ecclesiastical History – that is, his sense that allegory is proper to the word of God, but not to secular texts), and he often added or substituted material from Pliny and other sources. But in overall structure they remain adaptations of Isidore and On the Nature of Things even keeps Isidore's title.
That Bede named Isidore only three times may be simply a measure of how much he took Isidore for granted. He never hesitates to quote him in his biblical commentaries. To go by the indices in two recent translations, only
Augustine and Jerome are cited more frequently than Isidore in On Genesis and only Augustine, Gregory, and Jerome in On Ezra and Nehemiah.83 If we were to include Bede's use of source-marks as a form of naming, moreover, the number jumps dramatically. According to Jones's chart of source-marks in selected manuscripts of Bede's On the Nature of Things, fifteen of the 51 chapters of that work list Isidore as a source in one or another of these manuscripts.84 We can not be entirely certain that all (or any) of these sourcemarks originated with Bede, but it seems likely both that some of Bede's marks have been lost and that few of those that remain have been added by later scribes. Moreover, we must also consider Bede's modus operandi as a writer. Particularly in his earlier works, Bede's habit was to lay down a sort of foundation course for his projected text using the work of a recognized authority, and then to expand, modify, elaborate and personalize his text by adding elements from other writers, particularly the greater Church
82 Bede, Homelia 1, 9 (ed. Hurst, Opera Homiletica, CCSL 122, 62).
83 See Kendall, Bede: On Genesis, pp. 355–59; DeGregorio, Bede: On Ezra and Nehemiah, pp. 258–60.
84 DNR, ed. Jones, CCSL 123A, 187.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
Fathers. The foundational writer is often never named, while the Patristic addenda are clearly identified. We can see this process very clearly in the Commentary on the Apocalypse, where the foundation course is the work of Primasius – an author heavily exploited in fact, but named only once – while the intrusive passages from Gregory or Augustine are clearly flagged. We strongly suspect that the same dynamic is at work in On the Nature of Things and On Times, and that it is this habit of composition, and not a particular animus against Isidore, that led to the apparent suppression of his name.
Certainly, Bede did not regard Isidore as an expert on Easter reckoning and he looked elsewhere for the technical information he needed to pursue this subject. This is enough to explain the lack of 'warmth' that Jones speaks of in Bede's attitude toward Isidore.85 But to draw from this the broad conclusion that he distrusted Isidore's works in general would leave us in the awkward position of having to explain why it was that he made so much use of him throughout his career when there was no compelling need for him to do so. Perhaps a more balanced view would be that Bede looked upon Isidore as a worthy successor of the great doctors of the Church whose encyclopaedic knowledge of the learning of the ancient world, distilled into such convenient manuals as De natura rerum and the Etymologies, could be endlessly drawn upon as from a deep well, always provided that, like those of other doctors, his statements be subject to verification and correction.
The Easter Controversy and the Pedagogy of Computus Bede's On Times innovates by amalgamating three types of Christian writing about time: the catalogue of the units of time, or hemerology; the technical and theological discourse on computing the date of Easter; and universal history. Isidore had dispersed these three genres in different books of the Etymologies, in De natura rerum and in his Chronicles. Bede fused them.
Hidden beneath the matter-of-fact surface of On Times is an intense polemic about the correct principles for determining the date of Easter – principles which in Bede's view were bound up with both the integrity of nature as God's creation and the theological significance of Christ's death and resurrection. These are made explicit in On Times 15, 'The sacrament of the 85 Jones, BOT, p. 131.
INTRODUCTION
Easter season', where Bede defends through spiritual allegory the criteria of the Alexandrian computus, as expounded by Dionysius Exiguus.
To fashion his treatise On Times, it was not sufficient for Bede simply to extract the hemerology from Isidore's De natura rerum and package it as a separate work. Rather, Bede used Isidore's hemerology as a conceptual framework for a totally different type of book – a manual of Christian timereckoning, or computus. Just as he Christianized Isidore's cosmology by setting it in the context of creation, so also did he transform the hemerology into the architecture of a science of time that encompassed both the calculation of Easter and the unfolding of salvation-history. Some background to both the Paschal controversy and the evolution of the world-chronicle as a genre of Christian historiography is therefore in order.86
The rules for determining the date of the annual celebration of Easter were a matter of contention within the Church for many centuries. Several interconnected issues made the resolution of this question difficult. The historic Crucifixion and Resurrection took place during the Jewish feast of Passover, and its theological significance was bound up with the Passover message of sacrifice and liberation. The Jewish calendar is lunar, so the beginning of Passover – the 14th day of the month of Nisan – will not fall on the same date each year in a solar calendar, such as the Julian calendar used in the Roman Empire and in medieval Europe. Secondly, most Christians from the second century onwards chose to celebrate Easter on the historic weekday of the Resurrection, Sunday. Since 14 Nisan can fall on any day of the week, what was the range of dates within Nisan on which Easter could be celebrated? Should Christians celebrate on 14 Nisan when it fell on a Sunday? Or was 14 Nisan out of bounds, either because it would entail celebrating at the same time as the Jews (what came to be called 'Quartodecimanism') or because Easter should mark the Resurrection, and not the Passion of Christ? On which day was Christ crucified: on 15 Nisan (as the Synoptic Gospels relate) or on 14 Nisan (as John tells it)? The criteria for Passover laid out in Exodus 12:2 also state that Nisan is 'the first month' of the year, that is, it falls in spring. But spring is a solar season, not a lunar phase. When does 'spring' begin? At the astronomical equinox? And if so,
86 What follows is a summary of the historical sketch of computus and the Paschal controversy found in Wallis, Reckoning of Time, pp. xxxiv–lxiii, which contains references to the literature on this subject to 1999. Important works published since then which bear on the history of the Christian calendar prior to Bede include Declercq, Anno Domini: the Origins of the Christian Era, McCarthy and Breen, The Ante-Nicene Christian Pasch: De ratione paschali, and Mosshammer, The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
when exactly is the equinox? Given all the above, what are the permissible dates in the Julian calendar on which Easter can fall?
From about the beginning of the third century, the position of the Roman Church was that Easter should never fall before 16 Nisan, because Easter should celebrate the Resurrection. Other churches, however, held differing views, arguing that 14 or 15 Nisan should be acceptable because the feast is a commemoration of Christ's redeeming sacrifice. When the council of Nicaea in 325 condemned Quartodecimanism, the Alexandrian church interpreted this to mean that if 14 Nisan fell on a Sunday, Easter must be postponed until the following Sunday. To put it another way, the Easter limits were from the fifteenth to the twenty-first day of the first lunar month of spring. Furthermore, 'spring' was defined by Alexandria as beginning on the equinox. The earliest known table of Easter dates based on the equinox criterion was published by Bishop Dionysius of Alexandria between 257 and 265. But here again, Rome differed, preferring the date for the entry of the sun into Aries (18 March in the Julian calendar) as the 'natural' beginning of spring. The waters were further muddied by disagreement over the calendar date of the equinox. The Romans clung to the traditional date marked in Julius Caesar's calendar – 25 March. The Alexandrians, who had access to superior astronomical advice, took account of the error in the Julian calendar that caused the actual equinox to slip back in the calendar, and adjusted their date to 21 March. This date, combined with the lunar limits 15–21, meant that Alexandrians could celebrate Easter between 22 March and 25 April.
The latter date was a whole month after the former, plus seven days to take in the following Sunday, for if 15 Nisan fell on 21 March, that entire lunar month had to be disregarded, and the following lunar month would count as the first lunar month of spring. The Romans fixed the lunar limits at 16–22; but they also had an arbitrary rule about never celebrating Easter after 21
April, to avoid any coincidence of Holy Week with the celebration of the festival of the City's foundation on that date. At some point in the fourth century, the old equinox date was dropped, but the other criteria remained in force for a longer time.
There was little incentive to change the criteria, because in practical terms they made little difference. For most of the fourth and fifth century,
Rome and Alexandria actually celebrated Easter on the same date, even if they arrived at that date by different methods. However, the controversy continued to simmer, and it generated, at least from the Alexandrian side, a distinctive genre of literature consisting of a table of projected Easter dates, combined with an explanation of the principles and formulas for
INTRODUCTION
determining them. This essentially polemical type of technical tract would become the staple of the ensuing discussions.
The Alexandrians were at an advantage in this debate, because there was a Greek as well as Jewish tradition of adjusting a lunar calendar to a solar one such as the Romans used. This adjustment had to take place because the equinox is a purely solar event. But matching up the days of a lunation to the dates in a Julian calendar presents numerous problems. Twelve lunar months of about 29½ days makes a lunar year of 354 days – eleven days shorter than the solar year. This means that if the moon is three days old on 1 January this year, it will be 14 days old on 1 January next year – or 15 days if it is a leap year of 366 days. However, this is only a coarse approximation. The average lunation of 29.5306 days, when divided into the length of the mean tropical year of 365.2422 days, yields 12.3683 lunar months. This decimal excess of .3683 cannot be reduced to a common fraction: it is an irrational number, which means that no number of lunar months can ever be fitted into any number of whole solar years. In other words, it is not possible to create a flawless cycle of Easter dates in perpetuity. However, a more or less accurate cycle can be devised. The common fraction which most closely approximates the decimal excess is 7/19 (.3684), with 31/84 (.3690) as a runner up. This means that one could just about get nineteen lunar years of 12 lunar months each into nineteen solar years if one inserted 7 additional lunar months along the way. These 'embolismic' months would be added in about every third year (when the 11-day lag of the moon behind the sun would amount to a whole lunar month and a bit more), though exactly where they should be inserted, and how this might affect the calculation of the Easter full moon, remained thorny issues. Finally, the nineteen-year cycle ends with one more calculated lunar day than necessary, so at some point a day will have to be arbitrarily dropped from the lunar count. This is the 'leap of the moon'.
The nineteen-year cycle was, from an astronomical point of view, the best option, and its high level of accuracy was used to bolster the Alexandrian argument for primacy in the Paschal debate. But the eighty-four-year cycle with 31 embolismic months had a special practical advantage: 84 is evenly divisible by 28, and the weekdays on which any given calendar date will fall repeat over a cycle of twenty-eight years (7 days of the week, multiplied by the four years of the leap-year cycle). If one wishes to make a prospective table of future dates of Easter, an eighty-four-year cycle would be superior, because it would be truly cyclical for all criteria – lunar phase, solar date, and Sundays. In Bede's time, the British and some Irish communities, notably the paruchia of Iona, continued to use a version of
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
the eighty-four-year cycle. The cycle had its defects, however; over eightyfour years it would accumulate an error of two days in the lunar reckoning.
The Alexandrian nineteen-year cycle, despite its inability to accommodate a cycle of Sundays, was beginning to win adherents in the west, especially after a ninety-five-year table based on this cycle, covering AD
437–531, and fully adapted to Julian calendar dates, was published under the name of Bishop Cyril of Alexandria. In the years 444 and 455, there were serious discrepancies between the Roman and Alexandrian Easter dates.
Pope Leo I's archdeacon Hilarius commissioned the mathematician Victorius of Aquitaine to explain the differences between the Roman and Alexandrian systems, and suggest a solution. In 457, Victorius published new tables which abandoned the eighty-four-year cycle in favour of the nineteen-year cycle, but his rules for translating this cycle into dates for Easter did not completely coincide with Alexandrian practice. He retained the old Roman terminus of 18 March for 14 Nisan, as well as the Roman lunar limits of 16–22. Moreover, his table actually listed alternative dates for Easter: a 'Latin' date arrived at by his criteria, and a 'Greek' date, which to compound the confusion was not actually the Alexandrian date. Despite these flaws,
Victorius's tables enjoyed considerable success in the West because Hilarius eventually became pope. Since Victorius addressed his table to Hilarius, this gave the impression that the table had received papal endorsement. Victorian tables were used in the Gaulish church, and probably in many parts of England and Ireland before and even during Bede's lifetime.
We are accustomed to viewing the English Paschal controversy as a conflict between Iona and Rome because of the prominence Bede gives to the meeting at Whitby in his Ecclesiastical History. But in his computistical writings, Bede actually devotes as much or more space to the defects of Victorius's system as to the problems of the 'Celtic' calculation. In On Times, Bede in fact does not mention either of these systems for finding the date of Easter. His aim is strictly to expound the Paschal table of Dionysius
Exiguus. Bede is rather discreet about Dionysius, naming him only on a few occasions in On Times. He probably knew little about him, and perhaps in the light of Victorius's association with the papacy he did not wish to make much of the obscure identity of the author of the Paschal tables he embraced.
Dionysius was an eastern monk residing in Rome in the early decades of the sixth century, and he seems to have had few connections. He translated the Cyrillian ninety-five-year table into Latin, constructed a continuation for a further ninety-five years (AD 532–627), attached a prologue claiming that the Alexandrian system was approved by the council of Nicaea as well
INTRODUCTION
as a translation of the Alexandrian computistical formulae or argumenta, and sent the ensemble to an unidentified bishop Petronius. The work had little immediate impact, but in 525 another discrepancy loomed between Victorius's date for Easter and the Alexandrian date. Dionysius addressed a letter to the primicerii of Pope John I, Bonifatius and Bonus, explaining why Victorius's faulty system had produced this anomaly. The death of Pope
John prevented Dionysius from receiving an official hearing, but his tables were diffused by others, notably Cassiodorus and Isidore of Seville, who reproduced them (not entirely faithfully) in Etymologies 6.17. When exactly
Dionysius's tables supplanted Victorius's in Rome has not been established, and thereby hangs a certain degree of uncertainty over which 'Roman' system was being diffused in England and Ireland in the years preceding, or even following, the encounter at Whitby. What is perfectly clear is that Bede embraced the Alexandrian criteria expounded in Dionysius's table – a nineteen-year luni-solar cycle, lunar limits of 15–21, the vernal equinox on 21 March, and Paschal limits of 22 March–25 April. He adopted Dionysius's format of an 8-column Easter table, showing not only the date of Easter itself, but also the date of the Paschal full moon, the age of the moon on Easter Sunday, and the critical lunar and solar data (epacts and concurrents) for checking the calculation. Dionysius's table numbered the years according to his own chronology of the year of the Incarnation, followed by the indiction. Bede explained the table, column by column, in On Times
14. But when he composed the world chronicle which closes On Times, he adopted the traditional annus mundi chronology. This was a deliberate choice, for not only was the genre of Christian universal history bound up with the annus mundi chronology, but Bede had a particular argument to put forward about that chronology.
The Christian World-Chronicle Bede's understanding of time in its totality and in relation to history articulates a Christian conception that was essentially different from the classical. The Greco-Roman world had regarded the movement of history as cyclical, a progress away from, and a return to, a common point such as a universal disaster – eternal generation, destruction, and regeneration.87 Plato describes the cyclical course of the world in a story told by the Stranger in the Statesman:
87 Cf. Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
There is a time when God himself guides and helps to roll the world in its course; and there is a time, on the completion of a certain cycle, when he lets go, and the world being a living creature, and having originally received intelligence from its author and creator, turns about and by an inherent necessity revolves in the opposite direction.88
Perhaps in consequence of this conception of the cyclical nature of time, numbers which referred to the age of mankind tended to be vague or impossibly large. Plato speaks of Athens being founded nine thousand years previously,89 and Pliny refers to observations of the stars which the Babylonians maintained for seven hundred and thirty thousand years.90
The Christian concept of time was linear because Christians, like Jews, believed that the universe was created, not eternal, and that it would one day end. It owed much to Jewish thought, particularly the idea of a 'chosen people' and the expectation of a messiah. There is a specific anticipation of the Christian idea of history in the book of Daniel, in which Daniel has a vision of four successive kingdoms that are to be followed by the eternal reign of the Son of man (Dan. 7:1-27).91 In the Christian view, time had a beginning,92 middle, and end, corresponding to Creation, Incarnation, and Last Judgement. Each period was a part of God's plan which deserved to be studied. These periods were rapidly subdivided. Paul mentions a period from Adam to Moses (Romans 5:14), and Matthew assigns three periods from Abraham to Christ: 'So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto
Christ are fourteen generations' (Matt. 1:17). Matthew's threefold division, with the addition of the period from Adam to Abraham (halved by the deluge) and the period from Christ onward, gave rise to the Patristic commonplace of the Six Ages of the world, which Bede enlarged into a mystical conception of great grandeur.93
88 Statesman, Steph. 269, trans. Jowett, 2, 297.
89 Timaeus, Steph. 23 (Jowett, 2, 9).
90 Pliny, NH 7.56.193.
91 Cf. Lietzmann, The Beginnings of the Christian Church, p. 25.
92 The notion that time has a beginning largely originates in Judaeo-Christian thought.
According to Aristotle, 'as to the eternity of time all thinkers, with but a single exception, appear to agree; for they declare it to have had no origin … . Plato is the only thinker who ascribes an origin to time: it originated he declares, simultaneously with the universe, to which he also ascribes an origin' (Physics 8.1, trans. Wheelwright, From Natural Science, p. 48).
93 See especially his excursus on the Six Ages of the World in On Genesis 1.2:3a/b, trans.
Kendall, pp. 100–5; his concluding chapters (67–71) to The Reckoning of Time, trans. Wallis, pp. 239–49; and his Hymn on the Six Ages, Appendix 1, below.
INTRODUCTION
Bede included a world-chronicle in both his treatises on time-reckoning.
In each case, the chronicle was presented as an illustration of the division of time called aetas or 'age'. The notion of the 'age' marked this particular genre of Christian historiography from its inception, and had theological consequences which spilled over from history into eschatology.94
The Christian world-chronicle is to a considerable degree an adaptation of the Hellenistic genre of synchronized histories of the various communities of the Mediterranean world. For Christians, synchronization had a theological message: true history was the history of salvation, planned and executed by God, and all the separate histories of the nations were tributaries of this great historical stream. During the second and third centuries, the comparative youth of their religion subjected Christians to mockery.
The replies made by several of the early Fathers suggest that the principal scoffers were trained in Greek philosophy. In the course of their replies, these Fathers not only argued for the antiquity of the Christian religion beyond all others through its parent, Judaism, but also asserted that Moses was the ultimate fountainhead of all pagan wisdom. The second-century
Christian apologist Tatian argued:
Therefore, from what has been said it is evident that Moses was older than the ancient heroes, wars, and demons. And we ought rather to believe him, who stands before them in point of age, than the Greeks, who, without being aware of it, drew his doctrines [as] from a fountain.95
For this kind of apologetics to be successful, a comparative chronology of Hebrew and Greco-Roman history, never before attempted, was needed.
A contemporary of Tatian, Theophilus, bishop of Antioch (d. ca. AD 185), was among those who adduced evidence to prove the antiquity of the faith through Judaism. In the three books of Theophilus to Autolycus,
Theophilus attempted to persuade his friend Autolycus of the merits of Christianity. The third book contains the arguments concerning the antiquity of Judaism, and it is here that we find the earliest extant Christian chronicle, which sets the form for all the chronicles to come.96
The most influential patristic practitioner of this genre, however, was Eusebius of Caesarea (263–339). His Chronicle (Chronikoi Kanones) is a 94 See the commentary on ch. 66 in Wallis, The Reckoning of Time, pp. 353–66, and the literature cited there. A particularly profound debt is owed to the seminal article by Richard
Landes, '"Lest the Millennium Be Fulfilled"'.
95 Address to the Greeks 40, ANF 2, 81. The same ground is covered by Theophilus,
Theophilus to Autolycus, and by Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata.
96 Theophilus to Autolycus, ANF 2.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
time-line, beginning with Abraham, that gradually ties the histories of the ancient Near Eastern empires, the Greeks and the Romans into a single, continuous chronological braid. Eusebius's Chronicle was translated into Latin by Jerome, who added entries to AD 378; thereafter, continuations were composed by Prosper (ca. 390–463) to 455 and Marcellinus Comes to 534. Bede had access to this Latin version of Eusebius, but in On Times, he relied on the chronicles of Isidore of Seville, for reasons which will be explained below.
The chronological backbone of Eusebius's Chronicle was a running total of years from the birth of Abraham. In his preface, however, Eusebius laid out the framework for a periodization of sacred history into 'ages'. Eusebius divided the span between Abraham and Christ's earthly ministry into four periods, punctuated by the Exodus and the construction of the first and second Temples, and added two periods preceding Abraham, divided by the Flood. Eusebius's decision to omit the first two ages from the Chronicle was based in part on the problematic chronology of this period, since the number of years and generations of the Patriarchs differed between the Septuagint and Hebrew versions of the Old Testament. Tacitly, however, Eusebius favoured the Septuagint figure, because he dated the beginning of Christ's ministry to annus mundi 5228. Christ therefore would have been born in AM
5197 or 5198; Jerome preferred 5199, which became the conventional date in most Western world-chronicles.
Eusebius's somewhat casual essay in periodization, however, attracted a great deal of attention, notably from Augustine, who transformed the Chronicle's six ages of pre-Christian history into six ages of world history by merging two of Eusebius's eras and extending the last to encompass all time since the advent of Christ. For Augustine the number six held a special fascination, both on the level of number symbolism and as a Biblical figura (particularly in connection with the six days of Creation). He was by no means original in this respect, nor was his schema of six ages entirely unprecedented. Nonetheless, Augustine's enormous influence, especially in the west, made him the principal spokesman for these concepts, and a major influence on Bede. Augustine proposed two analogies which Bede would adopt and elaborate. First, each age of world history was like a day, with an optimistic dawn, a zenith, and a troubled period of decline. In On Genesis against the Manicheans (De Genesi contra Manichaeos) and particularly in The City of God, Augustine also developed a comparison between the six ages of world history and the six ages of human life which Bede paraphrased in On Times 16. However, Augustine was not particularly concerned with
INTRODUCTION
chronological issues, including the discrepancy between the Septuagint and Hebrew tally of the years of the Patriarchs. He was not even consistent about whether the Sixth Age began at the Incarnation or with the inception of Christ's ministry.
It was Isidore of Seville who took the crucial step of fusing Augustine's numerological theology of history with Eusebius's chronology. Isidore's two chronicles – a self-standing Chronicon and the chronicle incorporated into Etymologies 5.29 – constitute the first Christian world-history to begin with Creation and to lay out the past in six aetates duly dated according to the annus mundi. Isidore's chronology was based, like Eusebius's, on the Septuagint. He organized the first three ages according to the generations of the Hebrew Patriarchs, and then according to the reigns of the judges and kings of Israel. After the fall of the Jewish kingdom, the chronological framework was supplied by the kingdoms which ruled over Judea – Macedon, Ptolemaic Egypt, and Rome. He dated reigns according to their closing year (not their inception), and also fixed the beginning of the Sixth Age definitively at Christ's birth. All these features, and much of the substance of Isidore's chronicles, were taken over by Bede in On Times.
Bede nonetheless made two very significant changes. First, he stripped out Isidore's chronological marker dates. The result is that Bede's chronicle provides a sequence of the events in each age, and in some cases the duration of those events (notably the length of reigns), but it avoids explicit dating.
Given that Bede re-inserted Isidorean marker dates in the revised version of the Chronicle in The Reckoning of Time 66, their omission in On Times may be connected with Bede's other great alteration to Isidore. Bede set aside the Septuagint dating of Eusebius and Isidore, and substituted his own innovative chronology, based on the 'Hebrew' account of the first two Ages found in Jerome's Vulgate translation of the Bible. The Septuagint assigned two thousand two hundred and forty-two years to the First Age (Adam to Noah); Bede and Jerome calculated only one thousand six hundred and fiftysix. Bede likewise reduced the Second Age (Noah to Abraham) from nine hundred and forty-two to two hundred and ninety-two years. The result was to shave more than one thousand two hundred years from the total age of the world to date, and to reposition Christ's birth at AM 3952. And in fact, the only point at which Bede provides an explicit annus mundi date within the Chronicle is at the birth of Christ.
None of this would have caused any controversy had it not been for the notion that because the six World-Ages corresponded to the six days of creation, each Age must be one thousand years in length. This assumption
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
rested on 2 Peter 3:8 (echoing Psalm 90:4): 'with the Lord one day is a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day'. Bede's ages were not each one thousand years long, but then, neither were Isidore's. However, by dating Christ's birth to AM 5196, Isidore at least put the beginning of the sixth World-Age close to the start of the sixth millennium. For Bede, as for others, this raised a serious problem. If the sixth World-Age were destined to last one thousand years and its beginning were known, it would be possible to predict precisely when it would end. Moreover, it was scheduled to end fairly soon – about AD 800 to be precise. But Christ himself forbade such speculation – indeed, he claimed that even he did not know when the End would come; only the Father knows that (Matt. 24:36; Mark 13:32; cf. Acts
1:7). Before Bede, several writers had attempted to defuse such apocalyptic speculation by tinkering with the Eusebian annus mundi chronology to postpone the millennium. Bede took a more radical approach by uncoupling the six World-Ages from a Septuagint annus mundi chronology that implicitly supported the thousand-year world-age theory. The consequence was that a few years later, at a banquet hosted by Bishop Wilfrid, someone publicly accused Bede of heresy with respect to this chronology. Bede would respond, in the first instance, with the Letter to Plegwin; later he would restate and reinforce his revisionist chronology in ch. 66 of The Reckoning of Time. Despite the protests of all of these scholars, the Six Ages continued to be associated with millenarian thought.97 Still, Bede's orthodox formulation did much to dampen millenarian speculation in the Carolingian period and beyond.98
Bede's Science: Continuities and New Directions On the Nature of Things and On Times are important for our understanding of some of Bede's most ambitious and original writing. His commentary on the opening chapters of Genesis,99 on which he laboured for many years, contains profound and original reflections on the creation of the universe, and on the structure and spiritual meaning of time (e.g., in his exegesis of the story of Noah). Issues surrounding nature and time are woven into other works by Bede as well, for example his innovative exegetical writings
97 Cf. Jones, Saints' Lives, p. 25.
98 Landes, '"Lest the Millennium Be Fulfilled"', p. 176.
99 In Gen., ed. Jones, CCSL 118A; trans. Kendall, On Genesis.
INTRODUCTION
on the Tabernacle and the Temple.100 The interest in time-reckoning which On Times stimulated and the shocking accusation of heresy that Bede had to face over the world-ages chronology led directly to The Reckoning of Time and the computistical letters. In The Reckoning of Time Bede re-united cosmology and time-reckoning to form a unified science of computus that would become the framework for Carolingian and Scholastic basic scientific education.
Bede's achievement as a student of what we can, for the sake of convenience, call 'science' has recently received renewed attention in AngloAmerican and German scholarship. On a wider stage, Hervé Inglebert's
Interpretatio Christiana provides a stimulating framework for considering Bede's role in the process of adapting ancient cosmology and geography to a Christian doctrina that had a distinctively un-classical approach to time and history. Moreover, re-assessments of medieval science by Edward Grant and others make the case that theology and creative scientific thinking were mutually dependent, and neither alien nor hostile to one another.101 These new trends in scholarship add to the interest of On the Nature of Things and On Times. Bede presented himself as a teacher to his people and his age, and these two short works show him selecting, editing, and clarifying a mass of difficult and sometimes dangerous material. He insisted that his reader understand the mathematical and physical basis of time, and though he was dependent on his textual sources, he also included observations of his own. But Bede is also a Christian exegete who thought deeply and earnestly about how salvation-history connected to natural history and the history of the peoples of the earth. To comprehend his religious mentality, we have to take on board his views on 'science' – and vice versa.102
Another domain in which Bede's work as a computist exerted a parti cularly significant influence is early medieval 'numeracy'.103 Bede's competence as a mathematician is under-appreciated, partly because it takes an effort of the imagination to realize just how remarkable this competence was. Mathematics was for him not a science, but a tool for calculating the duration of relative movements of the sun, the moon and the stars. The opera100 De tabernaculo, ed. Hurst, CCSL 119A; trans. Holder, De templo, ed. Hurst, CCSL
119A; trans. Connolly.
101 Ingelbert, Interpretatio Christiana, esp. ch. 1; Grant, God and Reason in the Middle
Ages.
102 The dialogue between 'science' and theology in ONT and OT forms much of the burden of our commentary on these texts. For an overview of Bede's conception of nature and knowledge about nature ('science') see Wallis, 'Si Naturam Quaeras' and 'Bede and Science'.
103 See the perceptive comments of Contreni, 'Counting, Calendars, and Cosmology'.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
tions involved did not go beyond simple addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, and the use of fractions. He knew nothing of the higher mathematics of Antiquity, and he made no advances in arithmetic that could be passed on to the future. So, what is there to remark? A general observation may help to set the stage. Alexander Murray describes the four to five centuries before the year 1000 as a 'dark age' of mathematics. Numeracy was rare and confined to the Church. However elementary Bede's skills may seem to modern eyes, he was the probably the most accomplished mathematician of western Europe in this long period.104 The Easter controversy, which demanded mathematical reasoning, was largely responsible. Theodore and Hadrian inaugurated the study of 'ecclesiastical arithmetic' in the schools of Canterbury in the 670s. In a broad sense, they may be considered refugees from the spread of Islam, and Murray hazards the guess that they imported the mathematical skills of the Near East, Egypt and Syria, among other disciplines, to southern England. But even before their arrival in England, they had been in Rome when Benedict Biscop and Wilfrid made their first visits there. Wilfrid studied Roman methods for calculating Easter, which may have owed something to Theodore's studies of the computus in Constantinople, and vigorously supported them at the synod of Whitby in 664.105
The few men who studied arithmetic in this five-hundred-year period invariably complained of its difficulty: Aldhelm is an example. And they seem invariably to have studied it as adults.106 Bede is, apparently, an exception to both generalizations. He never complains about the difficulty of mastering arithmetic. Indeed, he seems pretty much to take it for granted as a quite unremarkable, but useful, tool. And, he evidently studied it as a boy because he issued his first sure-footed textbook on the computus at about the age of thirty, doubtless after teaching the subject for much of the previous decade. Ceolfrith, who was one of his teachers as a boy, had been to Rome on one occasion with Benedict Biscop and was a protégé of Wilfrid's at Ripon. There is some dispute as to whether he was really the author of the Letter to Nechtan, a lucid exposition of the Easter controversy from the 'Roman' perspective, which Bede inserted under his name into the Ecclesiastical History.107 But it is clear evidence that he was considered an authority on the computus, and he may have been the master who taught
Bede arithmetic as a boy.
104 Murray, Reason and Society, pp. 141–61.
105 Bede, EH 3.25.
106 Murray, Reason and Society, pp. 148 and 152.
107 Bede, EH 5.21.
INTRODUCTION
What aids to calculation Bede may have learned from Ceolfrith or others we do not know. Two systems of representing numbers were in general use: Roman numerals and Greek letters. There is no evidence that Greek letters were used for calculation. As well as being particularly liable to be miscopied, Roman numerals, lacking a one-to-one correspondence between integers and place-values, are notoriously clumsy to calculate with.108 Bede may have had access to some short cuts to calculation, but we have no idea what they might have been. The system of finger-calculation that he describes in the first chapter of The Reckoning of Time strikes a modern reader as more ingenious than useful. Similarly, his account in chapter 4 of 'The Reckoning of Duodecimal Fractions' does not advance much beyond the naming of parts. The abacus, the 'high-speed' calculator of Antiquity, seems to have been forgotten until the time of Gerbert in the late tenth century.109
Despite these handicaps, Bede could solve a complex arithmetical problem with seeming ease and without bothering to say how he did so, and then devise simple algorithms to enable his readers to replicate the results without having to perform any difficult operations. A prime example is chapter 21 of On the Nature of Things, which he titled: 'Method for Determining the Course of the Moon through the Signs of the Zodiac'. We attempt to unpack the computistical reasoning that underlies this chapter in Appendix 2.
The Transmission of ONT and OT Within a generation of his death, Bede's works were in demand both in England and on the Continent, and by the Carolingian period he had become a recognized authority, whether as an exegete or as a schoolmaster, to be named in the same breath with the Fathers of the Church – Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory.
For reasons that have already been hinted at,110 the transmission history of On the Nature of Things and On Times cannot be properly understood without taking the history of The Reckoning of Time into account as well. In the Preface to the latter work, Bede remarks:
108 On the difficulty of performing calculations with Roman numerals, see Wallis, The Reckoning of Time, pp. 254–63. As Murray, Reason and Society, p. 163, says, 'Roman numerals manifested and partly occasioned the paralysis of early medieval arithmetic'.
109 Murray, Reason and Society, p. 163. Stevens, 'Scientific Instruction', p. 97, finds evidence for the abacus in Aldhelm's use of the term calculi, but it seems more likely to be an abstract reference to arithmetic or calculation than a specific one to a counting board.
110 See above, pp. 4–5.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
Some time ago I wrote two short books in a summary style which were, I judged, necessary for my students; these concerned the nature of things, and the reckoning of time. When I undertook to present and explain them to some of my brethren, they said that they were much more concise than they would have wished, especially the book on time, which was, it seems, rather more in demand because of the calculation of Easter. So they persuaded me to discuss certain matters concerning the nature, course, and end of time at greater length.
I yielded to their enthusiasm, and after surveying the writings of the venerable
Fathers, I wrote a longer book on time.111
Insofar as The Reckoning of Time was regarded as an enlarged revision of On Times,112 it tended to take the place of the earlier work, and by the same token, since On the Nature of Things and On Times were conceived of as companion texts, in the absence of On Times, On the Nature of Things tended to be transmitted along with its 'replacement', The Reckoning of Time.
Keeping these relationships in mind, it is instructive first of all to look at figures compiled by Joshua Westgard.113 Surveying the surviving manuscripts of all Bede's works from the eighth through the fifteenth century, Westgard finds that The Reckoning of Time with 146 manuscripts is second only to the Ecclesiastical History (158) in total numbers, while On the Nature of Things is fourth with 113 and On Times is thirteenth with 67.114 On the evidence of survivals, Bede's most widely copied book of Biblical exegesis was his
Commentary on the Catholic Epistles with 114 manuscripts, well short of the Ecclesiastical History and The Reckoning of Time. The twelfth century appears to be the high-water mark in the popularity of Bede's works; after that time there is a marked decline in the numbers of copies that were made of many of them.115 If we confine our attention to the first five centuries
(eighth–twelfth), an even more remarkable pattern emerges. The Reckoning of Time leads the list with 130 manuscripts. On the Nature of Things is second with 95.5.116 The Ecclesiastical History drops to third with 92. And 111 Wallis, The Reckoning of Time, p. 3.
112 In the MSS, The Reckoning of Time (De temporum ratione) is often entitled Liber de temporibus maior to distinguish it from its predecessor On Times (Liber de temporibus).
113 Westgard, 'Bede and the Continent in the Carolingian Age and Beyond', pp. 206–11, and table 1.
114 Westgard excludes epitomes and extracts, which accounts for the difference between his figures for ONT and OT and ours.
115 A notable exception is Bede's textbook, The Art of Poetry and Rhetoric, which seems to have fallen out of favour in the twelfth century but otherwise continued to be copied at a steady rate right up to the Renaissance.
116 Westgard, p. 210, explains that '[c]omposite manuscripts with parts originating in
INTRODUCTION
On Times rises to tenth with 62. That is, for the first five centuries after their composition, up to and including the century when copying of his works was at its peak, Bede's textbooks on time and on natural history were in greater demand than anything else he wrote (always with the caveat that the accidents of survival and in particular the loss and destruction of manuscripts in the Anglo-Saxon period in England have inevitably distorted the picture that we see).
Insular manuscripts of these texts are both comparatively few (less than one in ten) and almost entirely post-Conquest, and in most cases can be shown to derive from French exemplars117 – clear evidence that English monastic libraries were obliged to re-import them from abroad to make up for the attrition caused by the wear and tear of constant use as well as the destruction wrought by the Viking invasions of the previous centuries.118 In all, thirteen Insular manuscripts of On the Nature of Things (DNR, nos. 7,
19, 21, 23, 43–46, 69, 71–72, 75, and 105) and nine or ten of On Times (DT, nos. 29 [?], 30, 32–33, 37, 39, 51–53, and 55) survive.119 The only potential witness to the survival of a pre-Viking age manuscript of either text in England is the text of On Times in Oxford, St John's College 17 (DNR, no.
75/DT, no. 55).120
We have already noted that On the Nature of Things is immediately followed in surviving manuscripts by On Times 56 times; the reverse order different centuries and those dated around the turn of a century have been divided equally between the centuries in question'. Hence, the fractional number.
117 Jones, CCSL 123A, 184 (referring specifically to DNR).
118 Beeson, 'The Manuscripts of Bede', p. 73.
119 Manuscripts held in British libraries are as likely to be Continental in origin as Insular; in the absence of some stated provenance they cannot be assumed to be Insular, and are not so-counted. Manuscripts in Continental libraries on the other hand are almost certainly Continental, even if nothing more is known of their origins.
120 St John's 17 was written entirely at Thorney Abbey, between 1102 and 1110. However, the text traditions of ONT and OT in that manuscript are different. Both ONT and De temporum ratione in St John's 17 are related to the French family of texts associated with Abbo of Fleury. St John's 17's text of OT, on the other hand, belongs to a more archaic recension, most exemplars of which hail from southern Germany and Switzerland. These Continental manuscripts ultimately depend on Karlsruhe 167 (s. ix¹) (our DNR, no. 36/DT, no. 22) or its exemplar, which may have come directly from the British Isles. St John's 17's exemplar may have migrated back to Britain from Germany, for its text is in close agreement with both Karlsruhe 167 and its putative twin, St Gall 250; however, it is also possible that it came from an ancient English codex which never left the islands, and which somehow survived the depredations of the Viking years. DNR, no. 43, and DT, nos. 30 and 37, each contain a single chapter only, and may never have been part of complete texts.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
On Times/On the Nature of Things occurs only three times.121 The attrition of On Times that we mentioned above, caused by The Reckoning of Time, is significant, though not overwhelming. Apparently Bede's reputation was enough to insure that On Times was not necessarily neglected even when
The Reckoning of Time was available. The two works on time often travel together. Of the 59 manuscripts with ONT and OT in either order, 45 also carry The Reckoning of Time. Still, The Reckoning of Time is found with On the Nature of Things in 22 manuscripts that lack On Times.122
It is instructive to compare the provenance of manuscripts of the eighth and ninth centuries with those of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. In the eighth and ninth centuries we can discern a dissemination of manuscripts from England across the North Sea in a broad arc across northern France and the Lowlands and then bending toward the south into Burgundy and the Rhineland, Bavaria, and Switzerland and on into northern Italy. In the broad band of the arc are the great abbeys and ecclesiastical centres of the Carolingian Empire – St-Amand, Corbie, St-Quentin, Metz, Trier, Cologne,
Mainz, Lorsch. On the outer periphery along the fringes of the Empire are the abbeys founded, in some cases, by Irish and Anglo-Saxon missionaries
– Corvey, Fulda, St Emmeram's (Regensburg), Reichenau, St Gall and Einsiedeln. A lesser stream may be noticed in north-central France, flowing across the Channel into Normandy and Brittany and then inland up the Seine and the Loire – Jumièges, St-Germain, and Auxerre; St-Aubin (Angers),
Tours, Fleury, and Nevers. Based on 11 variants, which he analysed in 37 manuscripts, Jones postulates two distinct recensions of On Times, both of which may have originated in Northumbria (though the earliest exemplars are Continental). One can be traced as far back as a manuscript from northeastern France, Karlsruhe 167 (our DT, no. 22), which is perhaps at one remove from the British Isles. Apparently directly descended from it are four
St-Gall manuscripts from the ninth and tenth centuries (our DT, nos. 77–78, 106, 110), two eleventh-century manuscripts from Italy and Bavaria (our DT, nos. 43, 48) and a single twelfth-century English manuscript from Thorney
(our DT, no. 55). The other recension survives in French manuscripts of the ninth through the eleventh centuries (our DT, nos. 5, 21, 35, 50, 56,
63, 90). Then in the twelfth century and after, French manuscripts of this recension apparently provide the exemplars for most of the copies made in England (our DT, nos. 32–33, 39, 51). The remaining manuscripts that Jones
121 Above, p. 5.
122 Two of these manuscripts, however, include the shorter chronicle from On Times.
INTRODUCTION
examined comprise a third 'mixed' recension.123
Copying of manuscripts of On the Nature of Things and On Times went on all over western Europe in the eleventh and twelfth centuries from Ripoll in the Spanish Pyrenees to Melk on the Danube in eastern Austria, from Tortona in the Po Valley to the Abbaye de Lyre in Normandy. There is very little overlap with the provenance of eighthand ninth-century manuscripts and no pronounced geographical lines of distribution. In some cases copying can be explained by the need of new foundations to build up their collections
(Cîteaux, Prüfening, St Michael's of Hildesheim); in others the motivation for copying may have been more a matter of filling gaps and replacing worn-out or destroyed codices (Winchcombe, Malmesbury, Thorney). But whatever the immediate impetus, the overall picture remains clear – Bede's works on nature and time were and remained authoritative texts everywhere in western Europe right through the twelfth century.
Nor did they disappear from view after that time, although demand for them fell off. They continued to be copied at a slower rate right up to the age of printing. Seven printed editions of On the Nature of Things and of On Times (two without the shorter chronicle) appeared between the sixteenth and the twentieth centuries; two editions of the shorter chronicle alone, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
The Reception of ONT and OT: Glosses and Excerpts The principal immediate zone of reception of On the Nature of Things and On Times was Carolingian Europe. The impact of the two texts, and particularly of ONT, peaked in the ninth century. It can be traced not only through the production of manuscripts, but through two complementary activities of processing and assimilating these texts for teaching and study: glossing and excerpting. Excerpting digests a text by selecting elements deemed particularly useful or pertinent, while glossing amplifies the impact of a text not only by explaining it, but also by linking it to other contexts, such as religious symbolism. In both cases, ONT proved to be a more successful and valued text than OT. In its glossed form it garnered additional attention and prestige by being yoked to Bede's highly successful De temporum ratione. Some of the more important gloss families, such as the Laon-Metz glosses preserved in Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Phillipps 1832 (our DNR, no.
10/DT, no. 6), cover both works, and in Hervagius's 1563 printed edition, 123 Jones, BOT, pp. 161–64.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
glosses once belonging to ONT were borrowed to fill in cognate sections of De temporum ratione. Nonetheless, the glossing tradition of ONT follows a different trajectory than does that of De temporum ratione.
The first, and to date still the fullest and most useful overview of the ONT glosses produced in the Carolingian period is the 1961 Yale doctoral dissertation of Frances Randall Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries on Bede's De natura rerum'. Lipp identified four principal families of glosses dispersed through manuscripts and (in the case of the 'B glosses' (i.e., the glosses by Byrhtferth of Ramsey and the 'Incerti auctoris glossae') Hervagius's 1563 edition of Bede and its later reprintings. Each of these families illustrates a distinctive approach to Bede's text.
The FG group is represented by Vatican City, B.A.V., Reg. lat. 1260
(Lipp's MS F; our DNR, no. 125), s. ix, Fleury, and Paris, B.N. nouv. acq. lat. 1615 (Lipp's MS G; our DNR, no. 95), s. ix, Auxerre or Fleury. The goal of the FG glosses is to clarify: they are overwhelmingly interlinear lexical and syntactic explanations. In addition, both codices contain 'graphic glosses', such as a wind rose to supplement chapter 10. The Vatican codex also includes a diagram showing the relative positions of the sun, the moon and earth during a solar and a lunar eclipse; and Paris contains a schematic map. Moreover, some of the Tironian glosses in Paris seem to refer to other illustrations not included in this copy. Bede's policy of banishing illustrations from his re-working of Isidore's DNR was evidently reversed by his glossators; furthermore, the Tironian glosses indicate that the FG glosses were drawing on a more extensive commentary.
This is also the pattern exhibited by Lipp's AC family, better known as the Laon-Metz glosses. In Jones's Corpus christianorum edition of On the Nature of Things, Lipp's edition of the glosses from Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Phillipps 1832, ca. 873 (Lipp's MS A; our DNR, no. 10), appears as a separate apparatus. John J. Contreni has established that this manuscript was without question written in Laon, though it later resided in Metz. The hand of Laon's famous scholasticus Martin the Irishman can be seen in corrections to the text and glosses of On the Nature of Things. However, unlike the DTR glosses in this codex, the glosses of On the Nature of Things were not composed at Laon, but selectively copied from a pre-existing source.124
The Laon commentary on ONT, unlike the FG family, aims to expand and expound on Bede's text. It is very ample – half again as long as the text itself – and 'very nearly constitutes a treatise on cosmology and astronomy
124 Contreni, 'Bede's Scientific Works', pp. 249–51; Contreni, The Cathedral School of Laon, pp. 124–26; Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries', pp. 49–50.
INTRODUCTION
in its own right'.125 The commentator was an able scholar and a dedicated teacher who liked to construct glosses in question-and-answer format. He expended considerable effort to fill the gaps in Bede's often brief and general statements, adding information from sources unknown to Bede, such as Martianus and Macrobius, and indicating where Bede and these authorities differed. He also showed a predilection for explanations that rationalize the workings of nature – for example, he disagrees with Bede that we are obliged to take the 'waters above the firmament' literally (ONT 8). Lipp concludes that he was strongly influenced by John Scottus Eriugena, and possibly associated with a centre like Reims, Laon or Auxerre.126 He wrote in a straightforward and accessible manner, assuming little background knowledge on the part of his student readers. This glossator's work was incorporated almost in its entirely into Byrhtferth's glosses (see below), and was used extensively by the two other manuscripts, Amiens 222 (Lipp's MS
Ca; our DNR, no. 3), s. ix, northeastern France, and Paris, B.N. nouv. acq. lat. 1632 (Lipp's MS Cp; our DNR, no. 96) s. ix, Fleury. Moreover, both these two manuscripts and Byrhtferth appear to have borrowed from the Laon glosses via intermediaries, which suggests that the Laon glosses were quite widely diffused.127
The HI group comprises Milan, Ambrosiana D 48 inf. (Lipp's MS H; our DNR, no. 60), s. xi, Tortona, and Vatican City, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 644 (Lipp's
MS I; our DNR, no. 130) s. x, St. Gall. The Milan version of the glosses was probably composed in the later ninth or early tenth century; Lipp argues that it represents a selection from the vastly longer St Gall recension. These glosses also aim to expand Bede's text: however, the level of scientific knowledge is much lower than in the Laon glosses, and there is a marked tendency to dilate on religious and moral observations. The HI glosses were exploited heavily by a fourth family, which Lipp calls B, and which survive only in printed form. The B commentaries comprise the Byrhtferth glosses128 printed in Hervagius's 1563 edition of Bede's works, plus the glosses Hervagius
125 Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries', p. 46.
126 Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries', pp. 78–79.
127 Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries', pp. 46–47.
128 Hervagius ascribed these glosses to the English computist Byrhtferth of Ramsey, who flourished in the final decades of the tenth century and the early years of the eleventh. Byrhtferth's authorship of the glosses was challenged by Jones, 'The Byrhtferth Glosses', because large portions of the glosses could be found in ninth-century glosses. The issue is currently in dispute. Gorman, 'The Glosses on Bede's De temporum ratione', and Lapidge, 'Byrhtferth of Ramsey', argue in favour of Byrhtferth's authorship; Contreni, 'Bede's Scientific Works', and personal communication, against.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
called Incerti auctoris glossae.129 The former were allegedly composed by the English computist, historian and hagiographer Byrhtferth of Ramsey
(fl. ca. 986–ca. 1020), and so are post-Carolingian, but they illustrate the diffusion and creative adaptation of the Carolingian glossing tradition. They are also of considerable intrinsic interest, and will be referred to frequently in the notes and commentary of this translation. The Byrhtferth glosses on ONT comprise not only the glosses accompanying this text (which we refer to as BDNR) but also some that were transposed into the glosses on De temporum ratione (BDTR).130 While the Byrhtferth glosses on De temporum ratione seem closely connected to Heiric and Remigius of Auxerre, the ONT glosses compile materials from the earlier independent traditions enumerated above: the Laon glosses, the FG group (especially in the form found in the Paris manuscript) and the St Gall branch of the HI family, with its strong interest in religious, and to some degree computistical themes.131 The Incerti auctoris glossae also exhibit this pronounced religious orientation, usually by appending an allegorical interpretation to a natural explanation.
There are in addition at least four significant commentaries on ONT which lie outside any affiliation. These are the glosses in Tironian notes in Melk 412 (our DNR, no. 59) by Heiric of Auxerre, the Latin and Old Irish glosses in Karlsruhe 167 (our DNR, no. 36),132 the glosses in Paris, B.N. lat. 5543 (our DNR, no. 83; AD 847, Fleury), largely confined to the first ten chapters of Bede's text, and the Old Breton glosses in Angers 477 (our
DNR, no. 5).
From their ninth-century high-water mark of eight manuscripts, glossed codices of ONT drop off steeply in number. There is a slight revival in the eleventh century (three manuscripts) and in the twelfth century, notably in England, but nothing thereafter. On the other hand, re-cycling ONT in the form of extracts was a much more sustained activity. While there is evidence that ONT was exploited by authors of particular Carolingian texts, notably
129 Hervagius also prints a Vetus commentarius and scholia, which he took over from Noviomagus's edition. The Vetus commentarius comes from a MS associated with Abbo of Fleury (p. 192, n. 7 – see van de Vyver, 'Les oeuvres inédits d'Abbon de Fleury', p. 150 sq.).
Noviomagus divided it up to serve as a commentary on DNR and on parts of DTR and DT. The Incerti auctoris glossae gloss the prefatory verses and all or part of 15 chapters.
130 For a list of these displaced glosses, see Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries', pp.
199–200.
131 Lipp, 'The Carolingian Commentaries', pp. 195, 205–6; Contreni, 'Bede's Scientific
Writings', p. 258.
132 Published by Stokes and John Strachan, Thesaurus Paleohibernicus 2, 10–13; analysed by Killion, 'Bede's Irish Legacy', pp. 125–41.
INTRODUCTION
the astronomical text known as Aratus latinus,133 it was the encyclopaedic compilations of cosmology, astronomy and computus that set the fashion for excerpting Bede.
The creation of integrated anthologies of computus lore was one of the signal achievements of the Carolingian period and later.134 These anthologies were characterised by the arrangement of excerpts from different sources into new structures, formally organized into books and chapters
(though these were not always 'canonized' and were subject to constant re-working and revision).135 Bede's scientific writings were heavily mined for these productions, but in terms of the two texts under consideration here,
ONT was much more prominent than OT. The absorption of ONT in toto into the seven-book 'Aachen Computus Encyclopaedia of 809' (where it forms the first part of book 7) signals an interest in expanding computus to encompass more and more astronomical and cosmological content.136 More commonly, however, individual chapters of ONT were lifted out of their original context and inserted into fresh compilations of cosmography and computus. For example, Vatican City, B.A.V. Vat. lat. 5530 (AD 896; our
DNR, no. 132) contains chapters 1–3 of ONT excerpted into a computistical compilation of 180 chapters.
The trend continued well into the eleventh and twelfth centuries. In Vatican City, B.A.V., Reg. lat. 123 (A.D. 1056: our DNR, no. 121), Abbot
Oliva of Ripoll, perhaps inspired by Carolingian models, created an encyclopaedia of computus, cosmology and astronomy in four books, using DTR interlarded with chapters of ONT, as well as extracts from Hyginus, Isidore,
Pliny and others.137 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Canon lat. 560 (s. xi), fols.
4v–24 (our DNR, no. 70), pulls apart the text of ONT and in some cases abbreviates it, assembling it in a very different order. Chapters on the universe as a whole and the upper heavens (1–9) are succeeded by sections on lightning
(ch. 19), eclipses (chs. 22–23), weather signs (ch. 36), and the stars, celestial zones, zodiac, moon and planets (chs. 11, 10, 16, 20, 12–13, 15, 14). The realm of air (ch. 15) is joined to the chapters on meteorological phenomena
(chs. 28–35, 37). By contrast, only two chapters about earth are included, one of the sphericity of the planet (ch. 46) and a second on earthquakes.
133 King, 'An unreported early use of Bede's De natura rerum'.
134 Borst, Schriften, pp. 146 sqq.
135 Borst, Schriften, pp. 182–86.
136 Borst, Schriften, pp. 1054–86, 1321–22; Borst, 'Alcuin und die Enzyklopädie von 809'.
137 For a detailed survey of the contents of this manuscript, see Puigvert, 'El manuscrito
Vat. reg. Lat. 123'.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
These are followed by five chapters on waters (38, 40–43). A twelfth-century English codex, Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery 73 (our DNR, no. 7), made a more restricted selection of chapters from ONT, filling in with extracts from Bede's sources, Isidore and Pliny (a not unusual practice).138 Quite the opposite approach was adopted by the compilers of Paris, B.N. lat. 7418 (our
DNR, no. 87): in this case, ONT was 'exploded' into a 98-chapter augmented version by interleaving additional material from Isidore's Etymologies. In sum, to a significant degree ONT was transmitted in partial or modified form through extracts and re-arrangements. Indeed, of all Bede's works, ONT seems to have been the one most subjected to this kind of re-processing.
Principles Governing this Translation These are the first English translations of Bede's On the Nature of Things and On Times to appear in print. For our translation of On the Nature of Things (De natura rerum), we used the text edited by Charles W. Jones in CCSL 123A, 189–234. For On Times (De temporibus), chs. 1–16, we used the text prepared by Jones in his Bedae opera de temporibus, pp.
293–303, and for On Times, chs. 17–22, the edition of Theodore Mommsen, published in Chronica minora 3 (MGH: AA 13), 223–354; these two texts have been reprinted without change in CCSL 123C, 579–611. Throughout, we have consulted the printed editions of Giles and Migne and the on-line reproductions of St-Gall MSS 248 and 251. All our departures in translation from the printed texts of Jones and Mommsen are signalled with supporting evidence in the notes. Page references to the CCSL editions are inserted in bold between virgules for the convenience of readers who wish to consult the original Latin. For the most part, we have followed the principles and procedures enunciated by each of us separately in our previous translations in the Liverpool University Press series 'Translated
Texts for Historians'.139 Our aim has been to render Bede's text as faithfully as possible while conforming to the conventions of modern English word order and style. Technical terms that have no precise English equivalent
(e.g., bes, computus, momentum, punctus) are retained in their Latin form with explanations as appropriate. Unlike the prose in his historical works and biblical commentaries, Bede's Latin in these treatises is sometimes
138 Bober, 'An Illustrated Medieval School-Book'.
139 See Wallis, Bede: The Reckoning of Time, pp. xcix–ci; Kendall, Bede: On Genesis, pp. 53–57.
INTRODUCTION
elliptical (though rarely to the point of obscurity).140 In such cases we typically expand silently to avoid as much as possible the use of intrusive square brackets. Jones and Mommsen thoroughly investigated Bede's sources, and we have needed to make only a few corrections and additions to their identification of verbatim borrowings. We follow Jones's practice of italicizing such quotations. However, the value of his other findings with respect to possible sources and parallels varies considerably, and of these we have made only limited and selective use.
Inventory of Manuscripts and Editions of Bede's ONT and OT Our inventory is intended to gather together and collate information about the manuscripts and editions of Bede's On the Nature of Things and On Times that is at present scattered and in part out of date.141 Sources consulted include: Beeson, 'The Manuscripts of Bede'; Bischoff, Katalog; Borst,
Schriften; Gameson, Manuscripts; Gneuss, Handlist; HMML; Jones, CCSL 123A, 174–84 [DNR], and CCSL 123C, 580–83 [DT]; Jones, 'MSS of Bede's
DNR'; Jones, BP, pp. 111–40; Jones, BOT, pp. 161–67; Jones, CCSL 123B, 242–56; Jordanus; Laistner, Hand-List, pp. 139–48; Lowe, CLA; Medieval
Manuscripts in Dutch Collections; Mommsen, CM 3 (MGH: AA 13), 223–354; Mostert, The Library of Fleury; Rep. Chron.; Stevens, Appendix I; and information supplied by Joshua Westgard. Manuscript depositories are cited in the form given in Kristeller, Latin Manuscript Books before 1600.
For each MS we indicate whether it contains any or all of Bede's related writings, including De temporum ratione (DTR). DNR = De natura rerum;
DT = De temporibus; DT chronicle = the chronica minora of DT alone. The writings are listed in the order they appear in the MSS. A virgule (/) between items means they follow each other consecutively in the MS (e.g., DNR/DT); a plus sign (+) indicates that a gap of more than one page separates the two
(e.g., DTR + DT). Where the order is unknown to us, only the additional item is listed, with the plus sign (e.g., + DTR). Manuscripts personally examined by Faith Wallis are indicated by an asterisk.
140 On Bede's style in these early treatises, see the perceptive remarks of Richard Sharpe,
'The Varieties of Bede's Prose', esp. pp. 352–53.
141 For the purposes of this inventory, we find it convenient to refer to Bede's works by the initials of their Latin titles: DNR (De natura rerum) = On the Nature of Things; DT (De temporibus) = On Times; DTR (De temporum ratione) = The Reckoning of Time.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
Sigla from the editions of Jones and Mommsen are added in bold for MSS to which we make reference in our textual notes. In addition, we have examined the on-line ('e-codices, Virtual Manuscript Library of Switzerland'
<http://www.e-codices.unifr.ch>) reproductions of St Gall 248 and 251.
For Bede's On the Nature of Things, the sigla are:
A (Jones), Melk 412 C (Jones), Amiens 222 G (Jones, also Kendall/Wallis), St Gall 251
L (Jones), Vatican, Pal. lat. 1449
M (Jones), Berlin 130 N (Jones), Paris, B.N., N.a.l. 1615
Sg (Kendall/Wallis), St Gall 248 Sv (Jones), Vienna, Nationalbibliothek 387 For Bede's On Times, chs. 1–16, they are:
B (Jones), Berlin 128 K (Jones), Karlsruhe, Aug. perg. 167
O (Jones), Oxford, Bodl. Libr., Auct. F 3 14 S (Jones), St Gall 250 Sg (Kendall/Wallis), St Gall 248 Z (Jones), Oxford, St John's College 17 For Bede's On Times, chs. 17–22, they are:
E (Mommsen), Einsiedeln 167 F (Mommsen), Berlin 128 H (Mommsen, also Kendall/Wallis), St Gall 251
M (Mommsen), Paris, B.N. 4860
P (Mommsen), Vatican, Pal. lat. 1448
Sg (Kendall/Wallis), St Gall 248 MANUSCRIPTS of Bede's De natura rerum 1. ABERYSTWYTH, National Library of Wales Peniarth 540, two bifolia, s. xii1. Chs. 27–48. Stevens, App. 1, p. 678.
2. ADMONT, Stiftsbibliothek 111, s. xi. + DTR.
3. AMIENS, Bibliothèque Communale de la Ville 222, fols. 19–27, s. ix3/3, northeastern France. 'Versus Bedae presbiteri'. Quatrain and capitula.
Heavy glosses. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', 431; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 36. DT (incomplete; see below) + DTR + DNR. (C, Jones)
INTRODUCTION
4. ANGERS, Bibliothèque municipale 476 (460), fols. 59v–66, s. ix2, Brittany (Redon?); provenance St-Aubin. Jones, CCSL 123A, 174;
Bischoff, Katalog, no. 67. DTR + DNR.
5. ANGERS, Bibliothèque municipale 477 (461), fols. 10–18v, 897, Brittany (Léon); provenance St-Aubin. With glosses, some in Breton vernacular. See Lambert, 'Les gloses en vieux-breton aux écrits scientifiques de Bède'. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 69. DNR/DT + DTR.
6. AUSTIN, University of Texas, Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, Phillipps 816, fols. 2v–11v, s. xi, Niederaltaich, scribe: Abbot
Ellinger of Tegernsee (ca. 975–1056). 'Incipit excerptum Bedae De naturali historia Plinii'. With glosses. Jones, CCSL 123A, 175, 177.
7. BALTIMORE, Walters Art Gallery 73, fols. 1–9v, s. xii, English.
Excerpts, incorporated into a compilation on cosmology and computus, from or based on DTR chs. 24, 12 and 2, and from the following chs. of DNR: 16, 17, 19, 12, 11, 20, 22, 24, 25, 18, 23, 39, with figurae.
Jones, CCSL 123A, 175. Bober, 'Illustrated Medieval Schoolbook'.
DNR (extracts) + DTR (extracts)?
*8. BAMBERG, Staatsbibliothek, Patr. 101 (B V 19), fols. 86–100v, s. ix/x, central Italy; provenance Bamberg, Dombibliothek. With glosses.
Bischoff, Katalog, no. 236. DNR/DT.
9. BERLIN, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Phillipps 1831 (Rose 128), fols. 91–99v, s. ix in., Verona; provenance Metz. 'Versus baeda presbiteri'. Quatrain. 'Capitula libri de naturis rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 437. DTR + DNR/DT.
10. BERLIN, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Phillipps 1832 (Rose 130), fols. 1–9, ca. AD 873, Laon; provenance Metz (see
Contreni, 'Bede's Scientific Works', pp. 249–51). Quatrain, 'De natura rerum capitula haec sunt'. 'De quadrifario dei opere ex opusculis augustini episcopi'. Heavy glosses. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431;
Bischoff, Katalog, no. 436; DNR/DT DTR. (M, Jones) 11. BERN, Burgerbibliothek 285, fols. 99v–108v, s. xii, Fleury? 'Versus bede presbiteri. in libro dae [sic] natura rerum'. Quatrain. No capitula.
Chs. not numbered. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431; not listed in Mostert, The Library of Fleury. DNR/DT.
*12. BERN, Burgerbibliothek 610, fols. 52v–69v, s. ix3/3, vicinity of Tours.
No quatrain; no capitula. Chapters are numbered consecutively 14–65 (= DNR, chs. 1–51, with a discrepancy of one chapter), following chs.
1–13 only of DT. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 609; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 81 (BF221). DT/DNR + DTR.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
13. BESANÇON, Bibliothèque municipale 186, fols. 26–32, s. ix3/3, eastern France (?). Incomplete; begins with ch. 8, and many pages illegible or torn. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 627. DNR + DTR.
14. BORDEAUX, Bibliothèque municipale 11, fols. 198v–213, s. xii, La Sauve. Jones, CCSL 123A, 175; chs. 1 and 2 only?, Laistner, p. 140.
But, according to Jones, CCSL 123B, 244, fols. 198v–213 are DTR.
Unconfirmed; possibly extracts only. + DTR.
15. BRUSSELS, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier 9728–9734, fol. 197v, s. xiii, Ste-Rictrude de Marchiennes. Quatrain and list of capitula to xxxvii only. Jones, CCSL 123A, 175. DNR quatrain and capitula + DT capitula.
16. BRUSSELS, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier 9837–9840 [1361], fols.
1v–8, s. xii, St Amand. 'Item versus eiusdem bedae de sequenti opere'.
Quatrain. 'Incipiunt capitula in libro de temporibus edito a venerabili beda presbitero'. Capitula. 'Incipit liber venerabilis Bedae presbiteri. de natura rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431. DNR/DT + DTR.
17. BRUSSELS, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier 9932–9934 [1359], fols.
1v–12, s. xi, St Laurent, Liège. 'Versus Bedae Presbiteri'. Quatrain and capitula. Source attributions in titles. 'Explicit liber de naturis rerum'.
Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431. DNR/DT + DTR.
18. CAMBRAI, Bibliothèque municipale 249, fols. 2–8v, s. xii, St Sépulcre.
19. CAMBRIDGE, Library of Corpus Christi College 359, fols. 73v–74, s. xiv1, English. No capitula. Ends in ch. 15.
*20. CAMBRIDGE, Library of Trinity College O. 8. 6 (1381), fols. 1–10v, s. xii.
21. CAMBRIDGE, University Library Ff I 27, p. 116, s. xiii, English.
Quatrain only. Jones, CCSL 123A, 175. DTR + DNR.
22. CAMBRIDGE, University Library Gg II 21, fols. 190–200, s. xii/xiii.
DT Chronicle/DNR.
23. CAMBRIDGE, University Library Ii I 32, fols. 203–11, s. xiv, Norwich.
24. CARPENTRAS, Bibliothèque Inguimbertine 1792, s. xv–xvii. Chapter 12 and some other extracts only. Laistner, p. 140; omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123A, 176.
25. CAVA DE' TIRRENI, Archivio e Biblioteca della Badia della SS.
Trinità 3, fols. 137–50, 192–208v, s. xi. Scattered excerpts. Jones, CCSL 123A, 176; HMML no. Italy Cava de' Tirreni Biblioteca della
SS. Trinità. Codex Cavensis 3. DTR + DNR.
*26. COLOGNE, Dombibliothek 103, fols. 23v–35, s. viii/ix, written for Hildebald, Archbishop of Cologne, 785–819. The basis for the edition
INTRODUCTION
of Noviomagus. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431; Lowe, CLA 8, 39 (no. 1158); Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1916. DNR/DT + DTR.
27. DIJON, Bibliothèque municipale 77, fol. 209v, s. xii, Cîteaux. Quatrain only. Jones, CCSL 123A, 176.
28. DIJON, Bibliothèque municipale 448, fol. 25v (ch. 12, extract), fols.
201–203v + fols. 173–176, s. x (Jones, CCSL 123A, 176); s. x and xii (Laistner, p. 140), St-Bénigne. Some gatherings of the MS have been disarrayed. Fols. 196–203 actually belong between folio 172 and 173. DTR fols. 108–172 + fols. 196–200; DT fols. 176–181. Jeudy and Riou, Les manuscrits classiques latins, 1, 483–500. Fol. 201: 'Incipiunt duo libelli de natura rerum et ratione temporum Bede presbiteri'. DTR/
DNR/DT.
29. ESCORIAL, Real Biblioteca de San Lorenzo de El Escorial L I 3, AD 1047?, fol. 233v–238V. Excerpts. Laistner, p. 140 (Laistner gives the shelf number as 'Q I 3'); Jones, CCSL 123A, 176.
30. ESCORIAL, Real Biblioteca de San Lorenzo de El Escorial R III 9, fol.
120v, s. xii2.
31. FLORENCE, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana XXIX 24, fols. 63–69v, s. xi. + DT.
32. FLORENCE, Biblioteca Riccardiana, Cod. 379, fols. 1–19, s. xiii1.
Jordanus.
33. FREIBURG IM BREISGAU, Erzbishöfliches Archiv Hs. 35, ix3/4, Lotharingia (vicinity of Prüm). Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1279.
34. GENEVA, Bibliothèque Publique et Universitaire 50, fols. 24–32, s. ix1/4, Massay. 'Fol. 24, containing the quatrain, capitula, and odd computistical statements, is in a definitely later hand. Fol. 25 begins Ch.
1 without rubrics' (Jones, BP, p. 117). Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p.
431; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1351. DNR/DT + DTR.
35. GRAZ, Universitätsbibliothek 297 (39/9f.), fols. 1–9v, s. xii. HMML no. 26209. DNR/DTR.
36. KARLSRUHE, Badische Landesbibliothek, Aug. perg. 167, fols. 18–20v (Jones CCSL 123A, 176: fols. 18–23v; but see Jones, CCSL 123B, 246;
CCSL 123C, 580 [no. 75]), AD 848, northeastern France (Soissons?).
No incipit. Quatrain. Irish glosses; source-marks. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1676. DNR/DT/DTR.
37. KARLSRUHE, Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe 442, fols.
21v–27v, s. ix2/4, western Germany. 'Incipit liber de natura rerum'.
Laistner, p. 141; Jones, CCSL 123A, 176; Bischoff, Katalog, no.1782; Jordanus. + DT (?).
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
38. KLOSTERNEUBURG, Stiftsbibliothek 685, fols. 1v–8v, s. xii. Historiated initial O of Bede dressed as a monk. HMML no. 5666. DNR/DT/
DTR.
39. LEIDEN, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Voss. Lat. Q 57, fols. 128v–136, s. xvmid. Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections. DNR/DT.
40. LEIDEN, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Voss. Lat. Q 75, fols. 118v–127, s. ix2, eastern France. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2226; Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections.
41. LONDON, British Library, Additional 34749 (Phillipps 1056), fol.
3–14, s. xii2. One folio missing; begins in ch. 2.
*42. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Caligula A XV, fol. 71, s. viii2, northeastern France. Copied from an exemplar written AD 743. Ch. 17 only, as part of the 'Computus Cottonianus', the core of which was composed in Spain in the seventh century: see Cordoliani, 'Textes de comput espagnol du
VIIe siècle: le Computus Cottonianus', and Gómez Pallarès. Jones, CCSL 123A, 176; Lowe, CLA 2, 19 (no. 183).
43. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Domitian I, fol. 2, s. x2. Ch. 2. Gneuss, Handlist, no. 326.
*44. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Tiberius E IV, fols. 125-131v, s. xii1-2/4, Winchcombe. Complete but burned. Marginal glosses and diagrams. Gameson,
Manuscripts, no. 409. DTR/DNR/DT (excerpts only of DT).
45. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Vespasian B XIII, fols. 22v–26v, s. xiii?, English.
*46. LONDON, B.L., Egerton 3088 (Beatty 59, Phillipps 12200), fols.
68v–76v, c. 1243, Dore Abbey. 'Versus Bede in librum de natura rerum quem ex libris plinii secundi. excerpsit'. Quatrain. Source-marks. Jones,
'MSS of Bede's DNR', pp. 432–33. DTR/DNR/DT.
47. LONDON, B.L., Harley 3091, fols. 6–12, s. ix2/3, Nevers (?). 'Incipiunt versus bedae prbi'. Quatrain. 'Incipit liber bedae presbiteri de natura rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433; Bischoff, Katalog, no.
2476. DNR/DT + DTR.
48. LONDON, B.L., Harley 3105, fols. 90–99, s. xii. Laistner, 141; Jones, CCSL 123A, 177 ('Harley 3015').
49. LONDON, B.L., Harley 3735, fols. 3v–5, s. xiv. 'Crammed (together with Bede's DT, foll. 5r–5v) on flyleaves of the original codex (95 lines per column)'. Jones, CCSL 123A, 177. DNR/DT.
*50. LONDON, B.L., Royal 13 A XI, fols. 14–22, s. xiiin, Normandy or NW France (Gneuss, Handlist). 'Incipiunt duo libelli bede presbiteri de natura rerum et ratione temporum. Incipit liber primus de quadri-
INTRODUCTION
fario dei opere'. Source-marks. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433; Gameson, Manuscripts, no. 548. DNR/DT + DTR.
51. LONDON, B.L., Sloane 2030, fols. 3–9, s. xii/xiii.
52. LONDON, Quaritch Catalogue No. 833 (1962), No. 1, s. xii. Jones, CCSL 123A, 177. Present location unknown.
53. LONGLEAT, Collection of the Marquess of Bath, 117, pt. 1, fols. 2v–8v, s. xiii, St Augustine's, Canterbury. 'Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum in Bibliotheca Nobilissimi viri Johannis Alexandri Thynne
Marchionis Bathiae apud Longleate in Comitatu Wiltoniae Asservatorum' (handwritten catalogue of 1864), pp. 89–90.
54. LUCCA, Biblioteca Capitolare Feliniana 490, fols. 310–31 (Laistner, p. 141); fols. 310–21 (Jones, CCSL 123A, 177), ca. 800, Lucca. Lowe,
CLA 3, 10 (no. 303e); Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2524.
55. LYON, Bibliothèque de la Ville 45, fols. 149–56, s. xiv and xvi, Adamoli.
56. MADRID, Biblioteca Nacional 19 (A 16), fols. 114–34, s. xii, Ripoll.
'Incipit liber venerabilis Bede presbyteri de naturis rerum de quadrifario opere dei'. Laistner, p. 141; Jones, CCSL 123A, 177; Jordanus.
DTR + DNR.
57. MADRID, Biblioteca Nacional 3307, fol. 72, s. ix1, Metz. An important manuscript of the 'Aachen Encyclopaedia of 809' (discussed above p.
41); Book 7 contained all of DNR, but due to the loss of some leaves only chapters 47–51 remain: Borst, Schriften, pp. 248–49 and 1321–22.
Jones, CCSL 123A, 177. DTR + DNR.
58. MELK, Stiftsbibliothek 348 (382, G 48), pp. 1–17, s. xii. HMML no.
1355. DNR/DT/DTR.
59. MELK, Stiftsbibliothek 412 (370, G 32), pp. 1–16, s. ix1/4, Auxerre.
Glosses in Tironian notes, by Heiric of Auxerre. Jones, BP, p. 123; Bisch off, Katalog, no. 2739; HMML no. 1957. DNR/DT + DTR. (A, Jones)
60. MILAN, Biblioteca Ambrosiana D 48 Inf., fols. 57–66, AD 1018, from Tortona. 'Incipiunt capitula libri primi de natura rerum'. Capitula; no quatrain. Sources in chapter-titles. Glosses. DTR/DNR/DT.
61. MONZA, Biblioteca Capitolare f 9/176, fols. 83–92v, s. ix3/4, western Germany. Jones, CCSL 123A, 178; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2892.
62. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 175, fols. 1–8v, s. xv.
Pages lost after rubric for ch. 43.
*63. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 210, fols. 129v–145, AD 818, upper Austria. Quatrain; no incipit. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR, p. 433; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2923. DNR + DTR.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
64. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 4355, fols. 6–16v, s. xv, from Augsburg. DTR/DNR.
65. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 17145, fols. 57–66v, s. xii, Scheftlarn. Laistner, p. 142; Jones, CCSL 123A, 178; Jordanus.
*66. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 21557, fols. 84–93v, s. xi, Weihenstephan. 'Incipit Liber Bedae Presbiteri De Naturis Rerum'.
Capitula and quatrain. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433. DTR/DNR/ DT.
67. NEW HAVEN, Yale University Medical Library 25, fols. 73v–74, ca.
1450, Germany. Ch. 25 only. Jordanus; Faye and Bond, Supplement to the Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts, p. 59.
68. ORLÉANS, Bibliothèque municipale 31 (28), pp. 221–29, s. ix med., Loire vicinity; provenance Fleury. 'Incipiunt versus bedae presbiteri'.
Quatrain. 'Incipiunt capitula I. bedae presbiteri de natura rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 3660; Mostert,
The Library of Fleury, p. 116 (BF442). DNR/DT + DTR.
*69. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, Auct. F. 3.14 (Western 2372), fols. 20–27v, s. xii1 (pre 1125), Malmesbury. Quatrain and capitula. 'Explicit liber bedae venerabilis presbiteri de natura rerum'. Source-marks in margin.
Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433; Gameson, Manuscripts, no. 626.
DNR/DT + DTR.
70. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, Canon. lat. 560, fols. 4v–24, s. xi. 'An assemblage containing part or all of DNR chapters in this order: 1–9,
19, 22–23, 36, 11, 10, 16, 20, 12–13, 15, 14, 25, 28–35, 37, 46, 49, 38, 40–43'. Jones, CCSL 123A, 178.
*71. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, Digby 63, fols. 33v–34v, s. ix2 (?), Winchester. 'Some paraphrases of DNR, but only a sentence or two copied'. Jones, CCSL 123A, 178; not listed in Bischoff, Katalog. DTR
(ch. 1) + DNR + DTR (ch. 19).
72. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, e Museo 223, fols. 153–161, s. xiii, St Augustine's, Canterbury. 'Bedae excerpta ex plinio de imagine mundi et temporum'. Through ch. 49. Very corrupt. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's
DNR', p. 433.
73. OXFORD, Lincoln College 96, fols. 127v–132, s. xiii.
74. OXFORD, Magdalen College 183, fols. 1–11, s. xv. Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433. DNR/DT/DTR.
*75. OXFORD, St John's College 17, fols. 62–65, ca. 1092–1110, Thorney.
Starts at ch. 16. Interlinear and marginal glosses. 'Explicit de natura rerum liber'. A few glosses. See Wallis, 'The Calendar and the Cloister',
INTRODUCTION
and n. 120, above. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433; Gameson, Manuscripts, no. 794. DT + DNR/DTR.
76. PARIS, Bibliothèque Mazarine 175, fol. 160v, s. xii, St Victor. Excerpt only. + DTR.
77. PARIS, Bibliothèque nationale lat. 446, fols. 198–202v, s. xii–xiii, Bonport. Ends with ch. 49.
78. PARIS, B.N. lat. 1956, fols. 76–81, s. xii2.
79. PARIS, B.N. lat. 2340, s. xi. Lost. DNR/DT/DTR?
80. PARIS, B.N. lat. 3563, s. xiv. Jones, CCSL 123A, 179.
81. PARIS, B.N. lat. 4860, fols. 108–111v, s. ix2, Bodensee (Reichenau?).
'Incipit Liber Bedae presbiteri de naturis rerum versus eiusdem'.
Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 433. DTR/DT chronicle + DNR.
*82. PARIS, B.N. lat. 5239, fols. 24–32, s. x, St Martial, Limoges. Quatrain.
'Incipit liber bedae presbiteri de natura rerum'. Capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434; Jones, BP, p. 128; Jones, CCSL 123A, 179
(mis-numbered 'B.N. 5329'). DNR/DT + DTR.
*83. PARIS, B.N. lat. 5543, fols. 76v–85, AD 847, Fleury. 'Incipiunt Versus Bedae presbiteri'. Quatrain. 'Incipit Liber Bedae presbiteri de natura rerum'. Capitula. Glosses. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434;
Mostert, The Library of Fleury, pp. 207–8 (BF1058). DTR/DNR/DT.
*84. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7299A, fols. 66v–70, s. xii, southwest France, possibly Limoges. Ends in ch. 24. Borst, Schriften, pp. 272–73. DNR + DTR.
85. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7361, fol. 42v, s. xi, Germany, perhaps Lower Rhine.
'Versus Bedae Presbiteri'. Quatrain only. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434; Borst, Schriften, pp. 273–74. DNR quatrain/DT chronicle.
86. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7400B, fols. 12–27, s. ix3/4, France; provenance Fleury?. Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 216 (BF1104). DNR/DT.
87. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7418, fols. 123–137v, s. xiv. 98 chapters; mixed with materials from Isidore, Etym., etc. DTR + DNR.
88. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7887, s. ixex, provenance Fleury? 'This is called 7581 in Laistner's list' (Jones, CCSL 123A, 180); Paris, Cat. III, 4, 410;
Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 220 (BF1128).
89. PARIS, B.N. lat. 11130, fols. 69v–81v, s. xii. Quatrain and capitula.
Many rotae and figurae. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434.
90. PARIS, B.N. lat. 13013, fols. 30–37, ca. 830, Auxerre. DNR and DT joined without quatrain, capitula, or rubrics. DNR/DT + DTR.
*91. PARIS, B.N. lat. 14088, fols. 50–59, s. ix, France? Garbled capitula and rubrics. Beeson, p. 79; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 235. DTR +
DNR/DT.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
92. PARIS, B.N. lat. 15685, fols. 1–10, s. ix, belonged to Sorbonne. 'Incipi unt versus bedae presbiteri'. Quatrain. 'Incipit liber bedae presbiteri de natura rerum'. Capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434. DNR/DT.
*93. PARIS, B.N. lat. 16361, pp. 1–18, s. xii, belonged to Sorbonne. 'Versus Bedae'. Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434.
DNR/DT + DTR.
94. PARIS, B.N., Nouv. acq. lat. 1612 (Libri 87), fols. 1–7, s. ix, Tours.
Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434. DNR/DTR.
*95. PARIS, B.N., Nouv. acq. lat. 1615 (Libri 90), fols. 128v–135, s. ix, Auxerre or Fleury?; provenance Fleury. 'Versus Bedae Presbiteri'.
Quatrain, capitula, glosses using Tironian notes. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 243 (BF1258).
DTR + DNR/DT. (N, Jones) 96. PARIS, B.N., Nouv. acq. lat. 1632 (Libri 41), fols. 1–9, s. ix, Fleury?; provenance Fleury. 'Versus Bede presbiteri'. Quatrain, capitula, extensive glosses. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 247 (BF1277).
97. POMMERSFELDEN, Gräflich Schönbornsche Bibliothek 53, fols.
1v–13v, s. xii. DNR/DT + DTR.
98. ROUEN, Bibliothèque municipale A292 [26], fols. 164–173v, s. ix, Jumièges. 'Versus bedae presbyteri'. Quatrain. 'Capitula libri de naturis rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434. DNR/DT.
99. ROUEN, Bibliothèque municipale U74 [1177], fols. 282v–288v, s. xii, Jumièges. 'Explicit libellus bede presbiteri de natura rerum quem secundam maiorem partem descripsit de libro plinii secundi naturali hystoriae'. DT/DNR + DT.
100. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 248, pp. 83–92, s. ix, St Gall or northern France. No incipit. Quatrain. Source-marks. 'Finit liber primus [DNR] incipit secundus [DT]'. Copy of Karlsruhe, B. L., Aug. perg. 167 (see
DT, St Gall, 248, below)? Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434; Borst, Schriften, p. 288. DNR/DT + DTR. (Sg, Kendall/Wallis)
*101. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 250, pp. 121–45, ca. 889, St Gall. 'Versus Bedae presbiteri'. Quatrain. 'Explicit liber de natura rerum'. Jones,
'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 434. DTR (excerpts) + DNR/DT/DTR.
102. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 251, pp. 33–44, before 820, St Gall. 'Versus Betae [sic] presbiteri'. Quatrain. 'Inc. de naturis rerum'. Source-marks in margin. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DT chronicle + DNR/
DTR. (G, Jones, also Kendall/Wallis) 103. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 397, pp. 123–40, s. ix2, St Gall. Quatrain.
INTRODUCTION
'Explicit liber de naturis rerum'. Scattered chapters of DTR before DNR; only ch. 4 is contiguous with DNR. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's
DNR', p. 435. DTR (extracts)/DNR.
104. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 878, pp. 242–62, AD 827–829, Fulda?
Part of a vade mecum prepared by Walafrid Strabo at Fulda before he became abbot of Reichenau: Bischoff, 'Eine Sammelhandschrift
Walahfrid Strabos', pp. 39–40. DNR/DT.
105. SAN MARINO, Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery, HM 1345, s. xiv, fols. 40–46v, English. 'Incipiunt excepta que beda ex libris plinii secundi de naturis rerum excepit'. Somewhat garbled capitula and rubrics.
106. SCHAFFHAUSEN, Stadtbibliothek 61, fols. 1–9, s. x. 'Versus Bedae Presbyteri'. Quatrain and capitula. 'Explicit liber de natura rerum'.
Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DNR/DT + DTR.
Stonyhurst College, see WHALLEY.
107. STRASBOURG, Bibliothèque municipale 326, fols. 1–10v, s. x, Angoulème or Limoges? DNR/DT/DTR.
108. STRASBOURG, Bibliothèque du Grand Séminaire, fragment of four fols. Munster (Alsace). Jones, CCSL 123A, 182.
109. STUTTGART, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, Theol. Q 172, fols. 1–7v, s. xii, Chomberg. 'Incipit liber bede presbiteri de natura rerum'. Quatrain. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DNR/DTR.
110. TRIER, Bistumsarchiv 6, fols. 58–65, s. xi/xii, from St Michael's Abbey, Hildesheim. HMML no. 40372.
111. TRIER, Stadtbibliothek/Stadtarchiv 2500, fols. 142v–149, s. ix, St Maximin's, Trier. Franz and Lehnart, Karolingische Beda-Handschrift aus St. Maximin (Westgard); Laistner's Munich, 'untraced', p. 144; formerly Koblenz, Görrische Bibliothek 16; see also Jones BOT, p.
160. DNR/DT/DTR.
112. UTRECHT, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit 73, fols. 95–109v, AD 1462, Carthusians near Utrecht.
113. VALENCIA, Biblioteca de la Catedral 93 (240?). Jones, CCSL 123A, 182.
114. VALENCIA, Biblioteca Universitaria 46, s. xv. Laistner, p. 143; Jordanus; 'Biblioteca de Valencia. Catálogo de los códices procedentes del monasterio de San Miguel de los reyes', Revista de Archivos,
Bibliotecas y Museos V (1875) 13. Omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123A, 182.
115. VALENCIENNES, Bibliothèque municipale 174, fols. 1v–13v, s. ix,
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
St Amand. 'Incipiunt versus bedae presbiteri'. Quatrain and capitula.
'Incipit liber de natura rerum'. Heavily glossed. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's
DNR', p. 435. DTR + DNR/DT + DTR.
116. VALENCIENNES, Bibliothèque municipale 343, fols. 14–22v, s. x, St Amand. 'Incipit capitula libri bedae de natura rerum ex opusculis sancti augustini'. Capitula. Glosses. 'Explicit liber bedae de naturis rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DT/DNR + DTR.
117. VATICAN CITY, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Barberini lat. 477, fols. 72v–88, s. xi. Capitula and quatrain. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DNR/DT.
118. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Ottobon. lat. 6, fols. 15–18v, s. xii. Begins in ch. 20. 'Finit liber Baede de natura rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's
DNR', p. 435. DNR/DT/DTR (ch. 4 only).
119. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Pal. lat. 317, fols. 111–114v, s. xiv. 'Beda de naturis rerum'. Capitula and quatrain. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435.
120. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Pal. lat. 1449, fols. 105–112v, s. ix, Mainz or Lorsch. Quatrain and capitula. 'Explicit liber de natura rerum'. Jones,
'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435; Borst, Schriften, p. 300. DTR (chs.
1–65)/DNR/DT + DTR (chs. 66–71). (L, Jones) *121. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 123, fols. 127–219v, AD 1056,
Ripoll; prepared by Abbot Oliva. Most of DNR in scattered chapters intermingled with chapters from DTR. This is an encyclopaedic treatment of computus, cosmology and astronomy organized in four books, and composed of excerpts from Bede, Isidore, Hyginus, Pliny and others: see García Avilés, El tiempo y los astros, ch. 78; and Puigvert,
'El manuscrito Vat. reg. lat. 123 y su posibile adscripción al scriptorium de Santa María de Ripoll'. (DTR + DT(?) + DNR).
*122. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 309, fols. 107v–117, s. x, St Denis. 'Versus Baedae Praesbiteri'. Quatrain. 'Capitula libri De naturis rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DTR + DNR.
123. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 755, fols. 88–92v, s. x, St-Columba, Sens (Jones), St-Trinité of Fécamp or St-Berthe of Blangy. Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 276 (BF1463). DTR/DNR/DT.
124. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 1038, fols. 129–135v, s. x. Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DTR/DNR/DT.
125. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 1260, fols. 1–7v, s. ix, Fleury.
'Incipit liber Baedae Presbiteri. De natura rerum'. Quatrain. Heavy
INTRODUCTION
glosses. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 279 (BF1482). DNR/DT.
126. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 1405, fols. 56–84, s. xi. 'Versus Bedae presbiteri'. Capitula and quatrain. 'Explicit liber Bedae Presbi teri de naturis rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435. DNR/DT.
*127. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Rossi lat. 247, fols. 8–19v, AD 1018?, St-Chaffre du Monastier. Capitula, quatrain, and glosses. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 435; Borst, Schriften, p. 308. DNR/DT + DTR.
128. *VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 642, fols. 1–6v, s. xi, from Lyon.
'Incipit liber bede presbiteri de natura rerum'. Capitula and quatrain.
Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 436. DNR/DT + DTR.
129. *VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 643, fols. 1–9, s. xii, Melk? Capitula and quatrain. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 436. DNR/DT/DTR.
130. *VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 644, fols. 1v–6v, s. x, St Gall. Lost gatherings; text from chs. 9–47. Heaviest marginal glosses of any DNR
MS; several times the length of the text. DNR/DT + DTR.
131. *VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 645, fols. 81v–92v, s. ix, most likely St-Quentin. Quatrain and capitula. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p.
436; Borst, Schriften, pp. 311–12. DTR + DNR.
132. *VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 5530, fols. 3–4, AD 896. DNR, chs.
1–3, excerpted into a computistical compilation of 180 chapters. Jones,
CCSL 123A, 183.
133. VERCELLI, Archivio Capitolare 138, pp. 69–96, s. x. 'Bede de Naturis rerum liber I'. Jones, CCSL 123A, 183.
134. VIENNA, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 387, fols. 130v–156v, s. ix, Salzburg. Jordanus; HMML no. 17564. DTR + DNR. (Sv, Jones)
135. VIENNA, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 522, fols. 3–29, s. x, Salzburg. HMML no. 13852. DNR + DTR.
136. VIENNA, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 12600, fols. 97–105, s. xii/xiii, from Prüfening.
137. WHALLEY, Stonyhurst College 26, fols. 2–10v, s. xii2–xiii in., written in England. Ker, Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries 4, 396 (2).
138. WOLFENBÜTTEL, Herzog August Bibliothek, Helmst. 696, fol. 62v, s. xv. Excerpts.
139. WOLFENBÜTTEL, Herzog August Bibliothek, Weiss. 66, fols.
54–61v, s. ix/x, eastern France?
140. YORK, Minster Library 42. 'V. Beda de naturis rerum ex Plinio'.
Jones, CCSL 123A, 184.
141. ZÜRICH, Zentralbibliothek C 62, fols. 224v–232v, s. x, St Gall.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
Quatrain. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 436. DNR/DT.
142. ZÜRICH, Zentralbibliothek Car C 176, fols. 188–202v, s. x/xi. St Gall.
No quatrain; figurae. DTR is said to be fols. 174–231v (Jones, CCSL 123B, 255). Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 436. DT/DNR inserted into DTR?
143. ZWETTL, Zisterzienserstift 296, fols. 3–12v, s. xii/xiii. HMML no.
6889. DNR/DT/DTR.
MANUSCRIPTS of Bede's De temporibus Manuscripts of chs. 16/17–22 of De temporibus (= the Chronica minora) alone, are preceded by a dagger (†).
1. ANGERS, Bibliothèque municipale 477 (461), fols. 18–22, AD 897, Brittany (Leon); provenance St-Aubin. Ends with ch. 15. Jones, CCSL
123C, 580 (no. 5); Bischoff, Katalog, no. 69. DNR/DT + DTR.
2. AVRANCHES, Bibliothèque municipale 135, fols. 120–121, s. xii/xiii.
Fragment. Jones, CCSL 123C, 582 (Avranches, '155'); Stevens, App.
1, p. 678; cf. Jones, CCSL 123B, 243 (Avranches, 135).
3. BAMBERG, Staatsbibliothek, Patr. 101 (B V 19), fols. 100v–111, s. ix/x, central Italy; provenance Bamberg Dombibliothek. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 236. DNR/DT.
†4. BERLIN, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Lat. fol. 307, s. xiii. First three ages only. Mommsen, 3, 241; Jones, BOT, p. 167; Rep. Chron. Omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123C,
580–83.
5. BERLIN, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Phillipps 1831 (Rose 128), fols. 100–106, s. ix in., Verona; provenance
Metz. 'Incipit liber Bedae de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 231; 241; Jones, BOT, pp. 163–64; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 437. DTR + DNR/DT.
(B, Jones; F, Mommsen) 6. BERLIN, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz,
Phillipps 1832 (Rose 130), fols. 9v–14v, ca. AD 873, Laon; provenance Metz (see Contreni, 'Bede's Scientific Works', pp. 249–51). 'Incipiunt capitula libri secundi de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 231; 241;
Jones, BOT, p. 164; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 436, DNR/DT + DTR.
†7. BERLIN, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Lat.
956, fols. 5v–8, s. xii, from Havelberg; written in France. Chs. 16–22.
Jones, CCSL 123C, 582.
INTRODUCTION
8. BERN, Burgerbibliothek 285, fols. 109–112, s. xii, Fleury? Ends ch. 13 with a spurious ch. 14. 'Incipit ii' de ratione temperum [sic]'. Jones,
BOT, p. 165; not listed in Mostert, The Library of Fleury. DNR/DT.
*9. BERN, Burgerbibliothek 610, fols. 47v–52v, s. ix3/3, vicinity of Tours.
Chs. 1–13 only. Chs. 14–65 are really DNR. 'Incipit liber ii de temporibus et momentis'. Jones, BOT, p. 165; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 609;
Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 81 (BF221). DT/DNR + DTR.
10. BRUSSELS, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier 9728-9734, fol. 197v, s. xiii, Ste-Rictrude de Marchiennes. Jones, CCSL 123C, 582. DNR quatrain and capitula + DT capitula.
11. BRUSSELS, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier 9837-9840 [1361], fols.
8v–13v, s. xii/xiii, St-Amand. 'Incipit liber de temporibus i'. Mommsen, CM 3, 233; 241; Jones, BOT, p. 165. DNR/DT + DTR.
12. BRUSSELS, Bibliothèque Royale Albert Ier 9932-9934 [1359], fols.
12–18v, s. xi, St Laurent, Liège. 'Incipit liber secundus de temporibus'.
Mommsen, CM 3, 241; Jones, BOT, p. 165. DNR/DT + DTR.
13. CAMBRIDGE, Library of Trinity College, B. 3. 5 (84), fols. 144–144v, s. xiex, Canterbury, Christ Church. Extract. Gameson, Manuscripts, no.
140.
†14. CAMBRIDGE, University Library Gg II 21 [not Gg II 31, as in Mommsen and Jones], pp. 183–89, s. xiii. 'Libellus Bedae presbiteri temporibus minor'. Excerpts. Mommsen, CM 3, 241. DT Chronicle/DNR.
*15. COLOGNE, Dombibliothek 103, fols. 35–43v, s. viii/ix, Cologne, written for Hildebald, bishop of Cologne, 785—819. 'Incipit liber secundus de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 234; 241; Jones, BOT, p. 164; Lowe,
CLA 8, 39 (no. 1158); Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1916. DNR/DT + DTR.
16. DIJON, Bibliothèque municipale 448, fols. 176–181, s. xi (Jones, CCSL 123B, 245); s. x and xii (Laistner, p. 148), St-Bénigne. Jones,
CCSL 123C, 580 (no. 54). See DNR, no. 28. DTR/DNR/DT.
17. DURHAM, Cathedral Library, Hunter 100, s. xiiin, Durham. Delete from list: see below, p. 65.
†18. EINSIEDELN, Stiftsbibliothek 167, fols. 387–390, s. x. 'De sex aetatibus mundi'. Mommsen, CM 3, 241; Jones, CCSL 123C, 582. (E,
Mommsen) †19. FLORENCE, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Ashburnham 1554, fol.
75, s. xi. Ch. 22 only. Mommsen, CM 3, 241.
20. FLORENCE, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana XXIX 24, s. xi. Borst, Schriften, pp. 229–30. + DNR.
21. GENEVA, Bibliothèque Publique et Universitaire 50, fols. 32–37v, s.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
ix1/4 (in a later hand than bulk of MS which is ca. 804), Massay. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 164; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1351.
DNR/DT + DTR.
22. KARLSRUHE, Badische Landesbibliothek, Aug. perg. 167, fols.
21–23, AD 848, northeastern France (Soissons?). Bischoff, Katalog, no. 1676. DNR/DT/DTR. (K, Jones) 23. KARLSRUHE, Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe 442, s. x–xi.
Laistner, p. 145 and p. 141; Jones, BOT, p. 167; Bischoff, Katalog, no.
1782. + DNR.
24. KLOSTERNEUBURG, Stiftsbibliothek 685, fols. 8v–14, s. xii. HMML no. 5666. DNR/DT/DTR.
25. LEIDEN, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Scaliger 44, fol. 87–87v, s. xv.
Excerpt. Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections.
†26. LEIDEN, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Voss. Lat. Q 12:4, fols. 73–73v, s. x.
Excerpt. Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections.
27. LEIDEN, Universiteitsbibliotheek, Voss. Lat. Q 57, fols. 136– 139v, s. xvmid. Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections. DNR/DT.
28. LONDON, British Library, Additional 22635, fols. 51–52, s. xiv. Chs.
15, 17–22. Jones, BOT, p. 165. DTR/DT.
29. LONDON, B.L., Additional 36591, fol. 40, s. xv (William Langley, 1476). Fragment from a binding. Jones, CCSL 123C, 582.
*30. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Tiberius B V, s. xi, Christ Church, Canterbury?
Winchester? (prov. Battle). Ch. 14. Gneuss, Handlist no. 373. + DTR.
*31. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Tiberius C I, fol. 2v, s. xii1-2/4 (between 1122 and 1135?), Peterborough. Excerpt ch. 11. Jones, CCSL 123C, 581 (no.
89); Gameson, Manuscripts, no. 404.
*32. LONDON, B.L., Cotton Tiberius E IV, fols. 131v–135, s. xii1-2/4, Winchcombe. Excerpts. Jones, BOT, p. 165; CCSL 123C, 581 (no. 90);
Gameson, Manuscripts, no. 409. DTR/DNR/DT.
*33. LONDON, B.L., Egerton 3088 (Beatty 59, Phillipps 12200), fols.
76v–79v, ca. AD 1243, Dore Abbey. Ch. 14 split into separate chapters; ch. 15 with rubric 'De ratione et misterio pasche'. 'Incipit eiusdem
(Bedae) liber de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 165. DTR/DNR/DT.
*34. LONDON, B.L., Harley 3017, fols. 168v–172v, s. ix3/4, France. Chs.
1–11 and 13, with an omission in ch. 3, because part of ch. 3 and ch.
12 are found elsewhere in codex (Jones, BOT, p. 165); fols. 143–190v:
'Excerpts intermingled with the text of DTR' (Jones, CCSL 123C, 581 [no. 94]). Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2466; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 107 (BF382). + DTR.
INTRODUCTION
35. LONDON, B.L., Harley 3091, fols. 12v–16v, s. ix2/3 , Nevers (?). 'Incipit liber ii de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 235; 241; Jones, BOT, p. 165;
Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2476. DNR/DT + DTR.
36. LONDON, B.L., Harley 3735, fols. 5r-v, s. xiv. Chs. 1–16 only. Jones,
BOT, p. 165. DNR/DT.
†37. LONDON, B.L., Royal 2 B V, s. x/xi. Ch. 16. Gneuss, Handlist no. 451.
38. LONDON, B.L., Royal 12 F II, s. xii. Rep. Chron.; see Jones, CCSL
123B, 247.
*39. LONDON, B.L., Royal 13 A XI, fols. 22–28, s. xiiin, English or French.
'Incipit ii' de temporibus horis et momentis'. After ch. 15: 'Explicit liber bede presbiteri de temporibus secundus de mundi aetatibus'. Mommsen,
CM 3, 234; 241; Jones, BOT, p. 165; Gameson, Manuscripts, no. 548.
DNR/DT + DTR.
40. LUCCA, Biblioteca Statale, 2297, s. xv. Rep. Chron.
41. MELK, Stiftsbibliothek 348 (382, G 48), pp. 17–30, s. xii. World diagram at p. 30 (end of DT). Jones, BOT, p. 167; HMML no. 1355.
DNR/DT/DTR.
42. MELK, Stiftsbibliothek 412 (370, G 32), pp. 16–26, s. ix1/4, Auxerre.
Jones, BP, p. 123; CCSL 123C, 581 (no. 110); Bischoff, Katalog, no.
2739; HMML no. 1957. DNR/DT + DTR.
43. MILAN, Biblioteca Ambrosiana D 48 Inf., fols. 66–72, AD 1018, San Marziano of Tortona. Glosses. 'Incipit liber secundus de temporibus'.
'Explicit liber de temporibus Bede presbiteri feliciter'. Mommsen, CM
3, 241. DTR/DNR/DT.
44. MILAN, Biblioteca Ambrosiana M 12 Sup., pp. 3–12, ca. 866, written partly in Lobbes, partly in Herford. Palimpsest in Tironian notes. Jones,
BOT, p. 165; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 2645. DT + DTR.
45. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 4423, pp. 158v–164, s. xv.
Jones, BOT, p. 167; Laistner, p. 146; Jones, CCSL 123C, 581, no. 125; but see Jones, CCSL 123B, 249, no. 125, where he states that DTR is found on pp. 157–64. + DTR.
†46. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 14746, fols. 91–98, s. ix1, Regensburg St Emmeram. Mommsen, CM 3, 241; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 3258.
†47. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 18628, s. x, Tegernsee.
Mommsen, CM 3, 241.
*48. MUNICH, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek CLM 21557, fols. 93v–99, s. xi, Weihenstephan. 'Incipit liber ii de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 242;
Jones, BOT, p. 166. DTR/DNR/DT.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
49. NAPLES, Biblioteca Nazionale Vittorio Emanuele II V A 13, fols.
45–48, s. ix3/4, Corbie. Chs. 1–11. Bischoff, Katalog, no. 3575; Stevens, App. 1, p. 678.
50. ORLÉANS, Bibliothèque municipale 31 (28), pp. 229–35, s. ix med., Loire vicinity; provenance Fleury. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. Jones,
BOT, p. 166; Bischoff, Katalog, no. 3660; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 116 (BF442). DNR/DT + DTR.
*51. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, Auct. F.3.14 (Western 2372), fols. 27v–33, s. xii1 (pre 1125), Malmesbury. Mommsen, CM 3, 235; 242; Gameson,
Manuscripts, no. 626. DNR/DT + DTR. (O, Jones) 52. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, Auct. F infra 1.2 (Western 1926), fols.
189–191v, s. xiv, Reading. 'Incipit liber bede de temporibus primus'.
Jones, BOT, p. 166. DT + DTR.
*53. OXFORD, Bodleian Library, Digby 56, fol. 192v, s. xii, west England.
Ch. 15 only. DTR/DT.
54. OXFORD, Magdalen College 183, fol. 11, s. xv. 'Incipiunt capitula libri secundi de temporibus', with list of chapters but no text; DTR begins on same folio. Jones, BOT, p. 166. DNR/DT/DTR.
*55. OXFORD, St John's College 17, fols. 58v–61v, AD 1109–10, Thorney.
'A poor text, but nearest to Hervagius' manuscript, which was copied in all editions since saec. xvi'. Jones, BOT, p. 165. 'Incipiunt capitula super librum minorem bedae presbiteri de temporibus'. Gameson,
Manuscripts, no. 794. DTR + DT + DNR. (Z, Jones) 56. PARIS, Bibliothèque Nationale lat. 1829, fols. 71–75v, s. xi. Chs. 1– 14.
'Incipit liber de ratione temporum'. Jones, BOT, p. 166. DTR/DT.
57. PARIS, B.N. lat. 2236, fols. 1–2, s. x. Chs. 14–17. Jones, CCSL 123C, 582.
58. PARIS, B.N. lat. 2340, s. xi. 'Misplaced or lost', Jones, BOT, pp. 160 and 167. Omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123C, 580–83. DNR/
DT/DTR?
†59. PARIS, B.N. lat. 2629, fols. 90–91v, s. xi. Chs. 17–22. Jones, CCSL
123C, 582.
†60. PARIS, B.N. lat. 4860, fols. 88v–89v, s. ix2, Bodensee [Reichenau?].
Portion of the chronicle only. Mommsen, CM 3, 235; 242. DNR/DT/ DTR? (M, Mommsen) †61. PARIS, B.N. lat. 5001, ca. AD 855?, France. Mommsen, CM 3, 242
('principium deficit'); Laistner, p. 147; Rep. Chron.; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 206 (BF1052). Omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123C, 582.
INTRODUCTION
*62. PARIS, B.N. lat. 5239, fols. 32–38, s. x, St-Martial, Limoges. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 236; 242; Jones, BOT, p. 166.
DNR/DT + DTR.
*63. PARIS, B.N. lat. 5543, fols. 85–90v, AD 847, Fleury. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Jones, BOT, p. 166; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, pp. 207–8. DTR/DNR/DT.
†64. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7361, fol. 42v, s. xi. Chronicle continued to AM 4761 (AD 810). DNR quatrain/DT chronicle.
65. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7400B, fols. 27–31v, s. ix3/4, France; provenance Fleury? Through part of ch. 13 without capitula or rubrics. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 166; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p.
216 (BF1104). DNR/DT.
66. PARIS, B.N. lat. 7418A, fols. 26–33, s. xii, Brittany. Stevens, App. 1, p. 678; Borst, Schriften, pp. 274–76.
67. PARIS, B.N. lat. 13013, fols. 37–40v, ca. 830, Auxerre; later St-Germain.
Chs. 1–16. No titles or rubrics. Jones, BOT, p. 166. DNR/DT + DTR.
†68. PARIS, B.N. lat. 13372, s. xi, St Germain. Mommsen, CM 3, 242.
69. PARIS, B.N. lat. 14088, fols. 59r-v, 82–84v, s. ix, France? Chs. 1–5, 11–14, 20–22. Jones, BOT, p. 166; Beeson, p. 79; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 235. DTR + DNR/DT.
70. PARIS, B.N. lat. 15685, fols. 10–14, s. ix, prov. Sorbonne. No incipit.
Chs. 1-16. Jones, BOT, p. 166. DNR/DT.
*71. PARIS, B.N. lat. 16361, p. 18, s. xii, prov. Sorbonne. No incipit.
Gathering lost after title to ch. 2. Jones, BOT, p. 166. DNR/DT + DTR.
*72. PARIS, B.N. Nouv. acq. lat. 1615 (Libri 90), fols. 135–140v, s. ix, Auxerre or Fleury?; provenance Fleury. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'.
Mommsen, CM 3, 237; 242; Jones, BOT, p. 166; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 243 (BF1258). DTR + DNR/DT.
73. POMMERSFELDEN, Gräflich Schönbornsche Bibliothek 53, fols.
13v–23v, s. xii. Jones, CCSL 123C, 581 (no. 182). DNR/DT + DTR.
†74. PRAGUE, Národní Knihovna IV C 4 [Universitätsbibliothek 630], fols.
240–241v; fols. 294v–296, s. xv. Two copies of the Chronica minora.
Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Rep. Chron.
75. ROUEN, Bibliothèque municipale A292 [26], fols. 173v–180, s. ix, Jumièges. No capitula. Formulae in ch. 13 give AD 811 as annus praesens. 'Liber bede de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 166; Rep. Chron.
DNR/DT.
76. ROUEN, Bibliothèque municipale U74 [1177], fols. 278v–282v; 299–302 [Mommsen, 'f. 229'], s. xii, Jumièges. Two copies of DT.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
(a) 'Incipit libellus Bede presbyteri de temporibus minor. Tempora momentis horis … secundum LXX vm dcccc xxv. Explicit libellus Bede de temporibus minor' (evidently, a copy of a text transcribed in AD 727
[5925–5198 (years to the Incarnation according to the Septuagint) = 727]) (b) 'Tempora momentis horis … Artarxexes [sic] annis xl Esdra legem …' (ch. 21). Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Jones, CCSL 123C, 581
(no. 187) [but this is Rouen 1177, not 524, as Jones's cross-reference to CCSL 123B, 252 (no. 187) implies]; Rep. Chron. DT/DNR + DT.
77. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 248, pp. 92–98, s. ix, St Gall or northern France. 'Incipit secundus'. After ch. 15: 'Finit liber ii. incipit de sex aetatibus mundi'. Last page (Herminigildus rex … Deo soli patet) lost.
Separate capitula, p. 227, s. xi. Mommsen, CM 3, 237; 242; Jones, BOT, p. 166; Borst, Schriften, p. 288. DNR/DT + DTR. (Sg, Kendall/Wallis)
*78. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 250, pp. 146–63, ca. 889, St Gall. 'De Tem poribus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 237; 242. DTR + DNR/DT/DTR. (S, Jones)
†79. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 251, before 820, pp. 26–32, St Gall.
Mommsen, CM 3, 237; 242. DT chronicle + DNR/DTR. (H, Mommsen, also Kendall/Wallis) †80. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 570, s. ix, pp. 1–6, St Gall. Mommsen, CM
3, 242.
81. ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 878, pp. 262–76, AD 827–829, Fulda?
Walafrid's computus. Mommsen, CM 3, 242. DNR/DT.
82. SCHAFFHAUSEN, Stadtbibliothek 61, fols. 9–15, s. x. 'Incipiunt capitula libri ii de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 166. DNR/DT + DTR.
†83. SIENA, Biblioteca Comunale degli Intronati K X 23. Excerpts.
Mommsen, CM 3, 242.
84. STRASBOURG, Bibliothèque municipale 326, fols. 11–15v(?), s. x.
Jones, BOT, p. 161; 167. DNR/DT/DTR.
85. STUTTGART, Württembergische Landesbibliothek V 20, s. ix/x. Rep.
Chron.
86. TOURS, Bibliothèque municipale 334, s. ix. Rep. Chron.; see Jones,
CCSL 123B, 253.
†87. TRIER, Stadtbibliothek/Stadtarchiv 1975/624 4°, fols. 357–358, s. xv. Chs. 16–22. Laistner, p. 147; Jones, CCSL 123C, 583; Franz and Lehnart, Karolingische Beda-Handschrift, p. 68 (Westgard).
88. TRIER, Stadtbibliothek/Stadtarchiv 2500, fols. 149–156, s. ix, St Maximin's, Trier. Franz and Lehnart, Karolingische Beda-Handschrift
(Westgard); Laistner's Munich, 'untraced', p. 147; formerly Koblenz, Görrische Bibliothek 16; see also Jones BOT, p. 160. DNR/DT/DTR.
INTRODUCTION
89. TURIN, Biblioteche Civiche 176, AD 926–950? St Gall? Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Jones, CCSL 123C, 583.
90. VALENCIENNES, Bibliothèque municipale 174, fols. 13v–22, s. ix, St Amand. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 167. DTR + DNR/
DT + DTR.
91. VALENCIENNES, Bibliothèque municipale 343, fols. 8–13, s. x, St Amand. Heavy glosses. 'Liber bedae de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p.
167. DT/DNR + DTR.
92. VATICAN CITY, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Barberini lat. 477, fols. 88–99, s. xi. 'Incipit liber de tempora et horis et momentis'. Jones,
BOT, p. 167. DNR/DT.
93. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Ottobon. lat. 6, fols. 18v–22v, s. xii. 'Incipit eiusdem de ratione temporum'. 'Explicit breviarum bedae de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Jones, BOT, p. 167. DNR/DT/DTR (ch.
4 only).
†94. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Pal. lat. 973, s. ix/x. Mommsen, CM 3, 242.
95. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Pal. lat. 1447, fols. 3–6, s. ix1, Mainz. 'Bede's De Temp in garbled form'. Ch. 1 from another source; ends with ch. 13.
'This text is copied exactly in Pal. Lat. 1448, which also contains [DT in fols. 82v–92]'. Jones, BP, p. 135; BOT, pp. 164–65; Laistner, p. 147;
Jones, CCSL 123C, 583.
96. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Pal. lat. 1448, fols. ?–?; 82v–92, s. ix1, Trier; Mainz. Two copies of DT. The first is an exact copy of Pal. lat. 1447 (see above). The second, fols. 82v–92: no incipit. Mommsen, CM 3, 242;
Jones, BP, p. 135; BOT, p. 164. Jones's CCSL 123C, 581 (no. 212), 'foll. 3r–6r', is probably meant for Pal. lat. 1447 (see CCSL 123B, 253
(no. 212). DT/DTR + DT/DTR. (P, Mommsen) 97. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Pal. lat. 1449, fols. 112v–117, s. ix, Mainz or Lorsch. 'Incipit liber de tempora et horis et momentis'. Jones, BOT, p.
167; Borst, Schriften, p. 300. DTR/DNR/DT + DTR.
*98. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 123, fols. 18, 27v, 33v, 46v–48v, 86v, 95, 105, AD 1056, Ripoll. Scattered chapters (5, 7, 8, 17–22, 12,
11, 15) intermingled with chapters from DTR. Mommsen, CM 3, 236; 242; Jones, BOT, p. 167. (DTR + DT + DNR).
99. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 755, fols. 93–95, s. x, St-Columba, Sens (Jones); St-Trinité of Fécamp or St-Berthe of Blangy. Chs. 1–6 lost. 'Explicit libellus minor bedae de temporibus'. Mommsen, CM 3,
236–37; 242; Jones, BOT, p. 167; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p.
276 (BF1463). DTR/DNR/DT.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
100. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 1038, fols. 135v–139v, s. x. 'Incipit liber de temporibus'. A few lines are missing. Mommsen, CM 3, 242;
Jones, BOT, p. 167. DTR/DNR/DT.
101. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 1260, fols. 7v–12, s. ix, Fleury.
Careless; rubrics never filled in. Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Jones, BOT, p. 167; Mostert, The Library of Fleury, p. 279 (BF1482). DNR/DT.
102. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Regin. lat. 1405, fols. 84–102, s. xi. Without capitula. 'Incipit eiusdem liber primus de temporibus'. Mommsen,
CM 3, 242; Jones, BOT, p. 167. DNR/DT.
*103. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Rossi lat. 247, fols. 19v–23, s. AD 1018?
St-Chaffre du Monastier. Ends with ch. 14, which is split, as in London, Egerton 3088, and Zürich, C 62. 'Incipit secundus de ratione temporum'. Jones, BOT, p. 167; Borst, Schriften, p. 308. DNR/DT +
DTR.
104. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 642, fols. 6v–11, s. xi, from Lyons.
'Incipit liber bedae de temporibus'. Jones, BOT, p. 167. DNR/DT + DTR.
105. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 643, fols. 9–15, s. xii, Melk? 'Incipit liber secundus'. Jones, BOT, p. 167. DNR/DT/DTR.
106. VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 644, fols. 7–11, s. x, St Gall. Chs.
1–3 lost. Heavy marginal glosses. Jones, BOT, p. 167. DNR/DT + DTR.
†107. VIENNA, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 557, s. xii. Mommsen,
CM 3, 242.
†108. VIENNA, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 580, s. xi. Chronicle only. Mommsen, CM 3, 242; Laistner, p. 148; Jones, CCSL 123C, 583.
109. VIENNA, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 3399, s. xvi. Rep.
Chron.
110. ZÜRICH, Zentralbibliothek C 62, s. x, fols. 232v–236, St Gall. Chs.
1–15. Chs. 1 and 2 combined. Ch. 5 (6) 'De ordinatione romanorum'; ch. 7 (8) 'De iiii temporibus annis'. Ch. 13 (14) is split, as in London,
Egerton 3088, and Vatican City, Rossi 247. No chronicle. 'Explicit liber bedae de natura rerum et de ratione temporum'. Jones, BOT, p.
167. DNR/DT.
111. ZÜRICH, Zentralbibliothek Car C 176, fols. 182–187, s. x/xi. Chs.
1–16. 'Incipit liber minor bede de temporibus'. DTR is said to be fols.
174–231v (Jones, CCSL 123B, 255). Jones, BOT, p. 167. DT/DNR inserted into DTR?
112. ZWETTL, Zisterzienserstift 296, fols. 12v–20v, s. xii/xiii. HMML no.
6889. DNR/DT/DTR.
INTRODUCTION
The following manuscripts listed or mentioned by Laistner, Jones, or others have been excluded:
AMIENS, Bibliothèque municipale 222, DT, fols. 1–7v, s. ix. Incomplete.
Stevens, App. 1, p. 678. However, Jones, BOT, 149, who personally examined the manuscript, assigns these folios to DTR. See DNR, no. 3.
BASEL, Universitätsbibliothek B IV 23, DNR. Laistner, p. 144, under DOUBTFUL: 'It is not clear that these excerpts are from DNR'; omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123A, 175.
CAMBRIDGE, St John's College 221, DNR. Delete; confusion with DTR, see Jones, CCSL 123A, 176.
CHARTRES, Bibliothèque municipale 19, DNR, fols. 87v–94v, s. x, Chapter library. Destroyed. No title. 'Finit liber primus'. DTR/DNR. Jones,
'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431.
CHARTRES, Bibliothèque municipale 70, DNR, fols. 72–73, s. ix.
Destroyed. Began in ch. 44: 'ut uinculis discurrentibus …' 'Explicit liber de naturis rerum'. Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 431.
CHARTRES, Bibliothèque municipale 80, DNR, s. ix, fols. 19–34v, St Père.
Destroyed. Incomplete. Laistner, p. 140.
*DURHAM, Durham Cathedral, Hunter 100, DT, fols. 59r–60v, s. xii1. These folios contain definitions based on Bede's DTR/DNR, but which are not actual quotations from these works. E.g., 'De die. Duobus modis dicitur dies. Naturaliter et uulgariter. … De sole et luna et stellis. Sol dicitur eo quod solus luceat. Et luna dicitur lucina. Stelle autem dicuntur a stando. eo quod fixe sunt in firmamento …'. éVREUX, Bibliothèque municipale 60, DNR, s. xii, Abbaye de Lyre. +
DTR. Laistner, p. 140; omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123A, 176. According to the Catalogue général des manuscrits 2, 438, this MS contains only DTR. éVREUX, Bibliothèque municipale 67, DNR, s. xii, Abbaye de Lyre. +
DTR. Laistner, p. 140; omitted without comment by Jones, CCSL 123A, 176. According to the Catalogue général des manuscrits 2, 439, this MS contains only DTR.
KARLSRUHE, Landesbibliothek, Carol. 339, No. 1, DNR. Delete, see Jones, CCSL 123A, 176.
KASSEL, Landesbibliothek 442, DNR. Delete, see Jones, CCSL 123A, 176.
LEIDEN, Universiteitsbibliotheek, BPL 154, fol. 87–87v, s. xii. Medieval Manuscripts in Dutch Collections. Jones, CCSL 123B, 246, lists this folio as belonging to DTR.
MUNICH, Staatsbibliothek 4423, DNR. Delete, see Jones, CCSL 123A, 178.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
OXFORD, Merton College 88 (B. 1. 11), fols. 101–121. Laistner, p. 147, followed by Jones, CCSL 123C, 582, erroneously identified this as Bede's shorter chronicle (DT 17–22). However, it is clear from the incipit/ excipit recorded in Thomson, The Medieval Manuscripts of Merton
College, p. 82 ('Incipiunt chronica uenerabilis Bede presbiteri. Adam annorum centum triginta genuit Seth … tanto patri honore condidit') that this is Bede's Chronica maiora 66 (CCSL 123B, 465–535).
PARIS, B.N., Nouv. acq. lat. 2169, fols. 5v–9v. Jones, CCSL 123A, 180, inserts this as an unnumbered cross-reference to LONDON, Cotton
Caligula A XV (above): see his note on the latter MS, CCSL 123A, 176.
However, fols. 5–9 are a compilation of computus argumenta. They have been edited by Gómez Pallarès, Studia Chronologica, pp. 67–76, and do not contain any excerpt from DNR.
ST GALL, Stiftsbibliothek 299, DNR, fols. 293–300v, s. ix2, St Gall. Glosses for DNR, DT, and DTR, but no texts: see Jones, CCSL 123A, 181.
VATICAN CITY, B.A.V., Vat. lat. 1053, DNR. Delete, see Jones, CCSL
123A, 183.
VIENNA, Nationalbibliothek 12600, DNR, fols. 97–105, s. xii/xiii, from Prüfening. Jones, CCSL 123A, 183 (with asterisk indicating he personally examined the MS). But DTR is said to be fols. 42–135v (Jones,
CCSL 123B, 255); 'doubtful', Laistner, p. 144 See also Hermann, Beschreibendes Verzeichniss der illuminierten Handschriften in Österreich, pp. 73–81, and an article by an art historian who wrote her thesis on this MS, who mentions only DTR on fols. 42–135: Trnek,
'Die Darstellung der vier Elemente in Cod. 12600 der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek in Wien', 7–56. Neither of them indicate that DNR is embedded in DTR.
EDITIONS of Bede's De natura rerum and De Temporibus (A) De natura rerum SICHARDUS (Basel, 1529). The editio princeps of De natura rerum, De temporibus, and De temporum ratione, edited by John Sichardus, under the title Bedae Presbyteri Anglosaxonis Viri Eruditissimi, de Natura
Rerum et Temporum Ratione Libri Duo. Sichardus 'used an unknown manuscript of French type'.142 Sichardus, fols. 1–6v.
142 Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 430.
INTRODUCTION
NOVIOMAGUS (Cologne, 1537). Another edition of the three works on nature and time, together with much other computistical material, edited by John Bronchorst of Nijmegen (known as Noviomagus),143 under the title Bedae opuscula complura de temporum ratione … . Noviomagus used Cologne, Dombibliothek 103.144 Noviomagus 2, fols. 1–23v.
HERVAGIUS (Basel, 1563; repr. Cologne, 1612, 1688). The first collection of the complete works of Bede, in eight volumes, under the title
Opera Bedae Venerabilis presbyteri, Anglosaxonis: viri in diuinis atque humanis literis exercitatissimi, edited by Ioannes Hervagius (Johann
Herwagen, the Younger). A reprint of Noviomagus, with additional materials. Hervagius 'used an inferior manuscript'.145 Hervagius 2, 1–49.
MANSI (Lucca, 1761). A published transcript of Lucca, Biblioteca Capitolare 490 (our DNR, no. 54), edited by Gian Domenico Mansi in Stephani
Baluzii Tulelensis Miscellanea, vol. 1, pp. 423–28.
GILES (London, 1843). In vol. 6 of the complete works in twelve volumes, Venerabilis Bedae Opera quae Supersunt Omnia, edited by J.A. Giles.
Giles, pp. 99–122, a reprint of Noviomagus and Hervagius, with some material omitted.
MIGNE (Paris, 1850). In PL 90, ed. J.-P. Migne. Migne, cols. 187–278, a reprint of Giles and Hervagius.
JONES (Turnhout, 1975). A new critical edition, prepared by Charles W.
Jones, in Bedae Opera Didascalica 1 (CCSL 123A, 173–234).
(B) De temporibus (chaps. 1–16) SICHARDUS (Basel, 1529). See above. Sichardus, fols. 7–9v.
NOVIOMAGUS (Cologne, 1537). See above. Noviomagus 2, fols. 25–28v.
HERVAGIUS (Basel, 1563; repr. Cologne, 1612, 1688). See above. Hervagius 2, 205–210v, a reprint of Noviomagus, with additional materials.
GILES (London, 1843). In vol. 6 of the complete works in twelve volumes, Venerabilis Bedae Opera quae Supersunt Omnia, edited by J. A. Giles.
Giles, pp. 123–32, a reprint of Noviomagus and Hervagius, with some material omitted.
MIGNE (Paris, 1850). In PL 90, ed. J.-P. Migne. Migne, cols. 277–88, a reprint of Giles and Hervagius.
143 John (Jan van) Bronchorst (1494–1570) was a native of Nijmegen (Noviomagus) in the Netherlands, not, as is sometimes asserted, Neumagen in Germany. For a bibliographical notice, see IBN: Index Bio-Bibliographicus, part C:1, vol. 24, 14054, and the references therein.
144 Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 430 (our DNR, no. 26/DT, no. 15).
145 Jones, 'MSS of Bede's DNR', p. 430.
BEDE: ON THE NATURE OF THINGS AND ON TIMES
JONES (Cambridge, MA, 1943). A new critical edition, prepared by Charles W. Jones, in Bedae Opera de Temporibus, pp. 293–303.
JONES (Turnhout, 1980). A reprint of Jones 1943, in Jones, Bedae Opera Didascalica 3 (CCSL 123C, 579–601).
(C) De temporibus (chs. 17–22) SICHARDUS (Basel, 1529). See above. Sichardus, fols. 10–11v.
NOVIOMAGUS (Cologne, 1537). See above. Noviomagus 2, fols. 28v–29v.
HERVAGIUS (Basel, 1563; repr. Cologne, 1612, 1688). See above. Hervagius 2, 211–212, a reprint of Noviomagus.
GILES (London, 1843). In vol. 6 of the complete works in twelve volumes, Venerabilis Bedae Opera quae Supersunt Omnia, edited by J. A. Giles.
Giles, pp. 132–38.
MIGNE (Paris, 1850). In PL 90, ed. J.-P. Migne. Migne, cols. 288–92, a reprint of Giles and Hervagius.
MOMMSEN (Berlin, 1898). A critical edition of the shorter chronicle, in Chronica minora 3 (MGH: AA 13), 223–354, edited by Theodore
Mommsen.
JONES (Turnhout, 1980). A reprint of Mommsen 1898, in Jones, Bedae Opera Didascalica 3 (CCSL 123C, 601–611).