notes and queries 1996 murray 397 9

8/2/2019 Notes and Queries 1996 MURRAY 397 9

1/3

December 1996 NOTES AND QUERIES 397and he had been dead three years by the time hisdaughter Catalina sold the gospels.The standard history of the Golden Gospelsmay be criticized in another way. Gregorio deAndres has pointed out that there seemsnothing to prove that Zurita possessed theGolden Gospels at all. They do notfigure n thedetailed catalogue of Zurita's library publishedin 1680, which refers merely to numerousbibles, together with a wealth of historicalliterature.13 Nor do they appear in the 1627catalogue of Olivares's library by Lucas deAlaejos (d. 1630), who mentions all othermanuscripts of Zurita acquired by Olivares.uIf the Golden Gospels, 'an extraordinarymanuscript de luxe, in which no means werespared to achieve variety' (Lowe), belonged toZurita, it is curious there seems no evidence toprove this. Gregorio de Andres observes that ashowpiece like the G olden Gospels might havebeen excepted from normal catalogues; or, ifthey did not belong to Zu rita, that they reachedSpain later than supposed. He suggests theymay have reached Olivares as a gift from PrinceCharles on his visit to Madrid in 1623, orthrough the book-collecting activities of theMarques de la Hinojosa, or of the Conde deGondomar (1567-1626), who had beenambassador in London. Even if we reject this asmere speculation, the apparent lack of proofthat the Golden G ospels were in Spain until wellinto the seventeenth century reminds us of thelimitations of our knowledge. At present, itseems that the history of ^he Golden Gospels atthis date is obscure until January 1690, whenthey were sold by Catalina de Haro, eighthMarquesa de Heliche, to Johan Gabriel Spar-wenfeldt15

ANDREW BREEZEUniversity of Navarre, Pamplona13 Andres and Dormer, 249." Gregorio de Andres, 'Historia de la biblioteca delConde-Duque de Olivares y description de sus codices',Cuademosbibliogrdficos,xxviii(1972), 131 -42,a t 134 n. 7,and XJ U (1973) , 5-73, at 1 0 - 1 1 .15 No te, however, the script-facsimiles in MS Arundel 50 4mentioned by Ker, suggesting the Gospels were in Englandc. 1600 .

A LITTLE-KNOWN MEMBER OF THEROYAL FAMILY OF CRU SADERJ ERU SALEM IN WILLIAM OFMALMESBURVSGESTA REGUM ANGLORUM

In Book El of his Gesta Regum Anglorum Wil-liam of Malmesbury includes a fairly extensivesection dealing with the First Crusade and itsaftermath. Grabois has shown that this sectioncan be regarded as consisting of four separateparts, dealing respectively with the council ofClermont, the course of the expedition, descrip-tions of major cities, and the subsequent historyof the Crusader States. In this last part 'thechronological sequence has been laid aside andmaterial is arranged in a series of shor t notices,dealing with the most important leaders of theCrusade and of the Latin East'.1 In this respectWilliam's account is quite different from mostof the other contemporary histories of thecrusade. O ne of these notices describes a battlefought between Baldwin I of Jerusalem and theTurks of Syria, in which a mysterious per-sonage is mentioned:

Altera illi pugna posterioribus annis fuit, inqua milites nostri, Turcorum copia pressi etin fugam acti, etiam salutare vexillum ami-sere: sed cum longiuscule fugissent, reversi;pudor famae trepidos animavit ut ignomi-niam propulsarenL Ingens ibi pugna virorumfuit, collato pede et adverso pectore remagentium. Nostri crucem reportarunt, fusisadversariis campum vindicantes. Cecideruntibi plures quos ego quoque noram ; inter quosGodefridus, abntpos ejus nothus, jam inde apueritia umbram virtutis vultu colorans, veri-tatem animo spirans. Ambae ergo fugaefuere in principio quasi fomentum igno-minae, sed in fine verax alimentum gloriae:ilia nominatior, sed ista fructuosior.2(In later years he fought a second battle, inwhich our knights, hard pressed by the Tur-kish numbers, were forced to retire, and evento abandon the standard of their salvation;but after a flight of some duration they rallied,for, shaken though they were, concern for

1 A. Grabois, "The Description of Jerusalem by William ofMalmesbury: A Mirror of the Anglo-Norman Mind', inAnglo-Norman Studies, X III, ed. M. Chibnall (Wood bridge,1991) .7 William of Malmesbury, De Gestis Regum Anglorum,Rolls Series 90 (London, 18 87-9 ), n, 451.


2/3

398 NOTES AND QUERIES December 19%their reputation inspired them to fight backagainst disgrace. It was a heroic struggle:hand to hand, breastplate against breastplatewas the order of the day; but our men wonback the Cross, routed their adversaries, andremained masters of the field. There fell onthat spot many men whom even I knew,among them Godfrey, his bastard abnepos,who from his early boyhood had embodiedthe ideal of courage in his countenance, andin his spirit breathed the air of truth. Boththese retreats, to start with, were the stuff ofwhich disgrace is made, but in the end theyproved the true material of reputation; thefirst was more widely celebrated, the secondmore fruitful in results].3

William is vague as to the exact date and cir-cumstances of this engagement. Immediatelybefore he has described the Second Battle ofRam la (1102), fought by Baldwin I against theforces of Fatimid Egypt, an engagement whichis used as a contrast in the passage quotedabove. The terminus ad quern is provided byBaldwin I's marriage to Adelaide of Sicily in1113, since William mentions the marriage asoccurring shortly after the battle.4 The keyinformation is the reference to the vexillumsalutare, which the Christian knights lost. Weare told that they redeemed themselves byrecovering the crux. Both expressions there-fore m ust relate to the portion of the True Crosswhich was frequently carried into battle by thearmies of the kingdom of Jerusalem, and indeedis described as having been carried at Ramla.This information makes it possible to identifythe engagement in question as a bat tle fought on28 June 1113 at as-Sinnabrah to the south ofLake Tiberius, in which Baldwin I and his armywere defeated by the joint forces of Sharaf al-DTn Mawdud, lord of Mosul, and Tughtagin,atabek of Damascus, and which was also de-scribed by Fulcher of Chartres.5

3 I am grateful to P rofessor Rodney Thom son (U niversityof Tasmania) for providing this English translation. A newediti on, translation, and commentary is currently inprogress:William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum, ed. andtrans. R. A. B. Mynors, R. M. Thomson , and M . Winterbot-tom, 2 vols (O xford, forthcoming).4 William of Malmesbury, II, 451: 'Denique ad supple-mentum rerum quas amiserat, simul et ad legitimum connu-bium, non multo post comitissa Siciliae Jerosolimam venif.' Fulcher of Chartres, Hisioria Hierosolymitana (1095-1127), ed. H. Hagenmeyer (Heidelberg, 1913), 11.49,

The particular problem posed by William isthe identity of this Godfrey, who is not men-tioned in any other narrative source. In theexpression abnepos ejus nothus the word ejusmust refer back to Mi... fiiit. In turn Mi mustrefer to Baldwin I of Jerusalem (11 00 -18 ), whois the principal subject of the previous section.The normal medieval meaning of the wordabnepos is 'great-grandson' or 'great-great-grandson'.7 However, this is a chronologicalimpossibility; Baldwin was born in the thirdquarter of the eleventh century (probably in1058), and thus could not have had a great-grandson old enough to take part in a militaryexpedition in 1113, even though, he must havebeen fairly young as William's description indi-cates.8 The word nothus indicates illegitimatebirth. Baldwin himself is not recorded as havingchildren, legitimate or otherwise, despite havingbeen married three times.9 Indeed, his death in1118 without direct heirs led to a dispute overthe succession betweenrivalfactions among thenobility.

However, we can find confirmation of God-frey's existence in docum entary evidence. Oneof the many Jerusalem docum ents preserved bythe Order of the Hospital was a copy of acharter of Baldwin I confirming the possessionsof the Hospital of Jerusalem, and da ted 20 Ju ne1112.' The witness-list includes the ann ounce-ment of the seal of 'Godfrey, nephew of theking' (S . Gotafredi, nepotis regis); Godfrey isgiven a fairly prominent position among the laywitnesses, sealing immediately after the kingand his household officers, the constable andthe seneschal. On its own, either of the pieces ofevidence cited here might well be viewed withconsiderable scepticism, but the fact that thetwo sources of quite different genres and p ro-venance agree in identifying a relative of thepp. 5 6 5 - 7 3 ; A History of the Crusades, I, Th e First HundredYears, ed. Marshall W. Baldwin (Philadelphia, 1958 ), 40 2 -3 .' Mediae Laiinitatis Lexicon Minus, ed. J. F. Niermeyer(Leiden, 1976), 5.7 Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources, fasc.I, ed. R. E Latham (London, 1975 ), 6." S. Scheui, 'Baldum V, Lexikon des Mittelalters, I, 1366.* B. Hamilton, 'Women in the Crusader States: TheQueens of Jerusalem (11 00 -11 90 )' , in Medieval Women,ed.D. Baker, Studies in Church H istory, Subsidia 1 (Oxford ,1978) , 143-74 .10 Cartulaire giniral de VO rdrc des HospitaJiers de Saint-Jean de Jerusalem, 1100-1310, ed. J. Delaville Le Roulx(Paris, 1894-1906), I, no. 28, 27-8.

y

,

q

j

g
http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/


3/3

December 1996 NOTES AND QUERIES 399king named Godfrey within a period of just overa single year indicates that there is no reason todoubt the historical existence of this individual.The charter evidence would suggest that Wil-liam's word abnepos should probably beunderstood in the sense of nepos, which was incommon use from the post-Augustan periodonwards in the sense of a brother's or sister'sson. Who, then, precisely was this Godfrey? It isnot inconceivable that Baldwin's father EustaceII of Boulogne had illegitimate offspring, andthat one of these was the father of Baldwin'snephew ; the most patent possibility, however, isthat the bastard Godfrey was the son of one ofBaldwin's two known brothers. Godfrey ofBouillon or Eustace III of Boulogne." Theonomastic evidence is inconclusive. Admittedlythe name Godfrey was very common in theArdennes-Bouillon dynasty (i.e. the maternalancestry of the three brothers), but it was notunknown in the family of the counts of Bou-logne; Eustace II had a younger brother calledGodfrey who was bishop of Paris (d. 1095).12The only indication one way or the other maywell be given by William of M almesbury's par-ticular knowledge and interest. The phrasececiderunt ibi plures quos ego quoque noramwould seem to imply a personal acquaintancewith, or knowledge of Godfrey. Since the countsof Boulogne were major landholders in Eng-land, this personal knowledge could mostreadily be explained by the assumption thatGodfrey the Bastard was a son of Eustace III,rather than of Godfrey of Bouillon who hadspent most of his adult life before the FirstCrusade in Lotharingia. Eustace is also knownto have had other illegitimate children; two ofthem, Ralph and E ustace, are mentioned in theColchester cartulary in connection with a grantof land.13 Certainly the case of Godfrey is notthe only instance of William's interest in indi-

' ' On the childre n of Eus tace II and Ida of Bouillon, seeN . Huyghebaert, 'La mere de Godefroid de Bouillon: Lacomtesse Ide de Boulogne1, in Publications de la Section his-torique de I'lnsiilut Grand-Ducal de Luxembourg, xcv(1981) , 4 3 - 6 3 .[I H. J. Tann er, 'The Exp ansion of the Power and Influ-ence of the Co unts of B oulogne un der E ustace II", in Anglo-Norman Studies, XrV, ed. M. Chibnal l (Woodbridge, 1992) ,25 1- 77 , Tables III.13 J. H. Round, Studies in Peerage and Fa mily History(Westmins t er , 1901), 14 7-8 0 ,1 63 ; Tanne r , Th e Expans ionof the Power and Influence of the Counts of Boulogne' .

viduals with English connections in the Cru-sader States. In his account of the Second Battleof Ramla he is careful to record the part playedby Robertus Anglus, an Englishman, Robertson of Godwin, who had come to the Holy Landwith Edgar the Atheling.14William of Malmesbury and the Hospitallercartulary reveal that in the second decade of thetwelfth century the nobility of the kingdom ofJerusalem included a bastard of the Bouillon-Boulogne family who was associated with hisuncle Baldwin I. The absence of any mention ofthis individual in the numerous accounts of theFirst Crusade suggests that he did not arriveuntil some time after the capture of Jerusalemby the crusaders, and that his relatively shortinvolvement in crusading history was termin-ated by his death in battle in 1113. Godfrey theBastard was unique in one respect he was thesole close male relative of the king among theJerusalem nobility during the reign of Baldwin I.It is only after the accession of his distant cousinBaldwin II (of Bourcq) in 1118 that we findmany of his kinsmen acquiring power and influ-ence thanks to their royal connections.15

ALAN V. MURRAYUniversity of Leeds14 William of Malmesbury, II, 310,449.15 A. V. M urray, 'Dynastic C ontinuity or Dy nasu c

Change? The Accession of Baldwin II and the Nobility of heKingdom of Jerusalem', Medieval Prosoprography, xiii(1992) , 1-28.

PEINTUNGE AND SCHADEWE INANCRENE WISSE PART 4 '

IN Part 4 of Ancrene Wisse, the author departsat one point from the main line of his argumentto give some additional advice on meditation onthe Four Last Things:Efter ower sunnen, hwen-se -y t J?enche6 ofhelle wa ant of heoueriches wunnen, under-stondeS J?et Godd walde o sum wise schawinham to men i J?is world bi worltliche pinen antworltliche wunnen, ant schawefl ham for8 asschadewe - for na lickre ne beo8 ha to pewunne of heouene ne to pe wa of helle pen is

1 I am grateful to my colleague , Dr J J M cG avin , for hisadvice on the concepts of imago an d cikdn discussed in thisarticle.
http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/

notes and queries 1996 murray 397 9

Documents