rewriting english literary history 1042–1215

Rewriting English Literary History 1042–1215

Mark Faulkner*University College Cork

Abstract

The last 10 years have seen a swathe of revisionary scholarship on the afterlife of Old English textsin the 12th century. This article places this research beside work on the earliest Middle Englishtexts and contemporary writing in Latin and French to suggest that the time is now ripe for anew, synthetic literary history of the period. In particular, the article identifies three key aspects ofpost-Conquest literary culture which have been neglected because they chafe against the conven-tional paradigms of literary history, with its expectation of a literature national, monolingual andconstantly original. The 12th-century norms, by contrast, were regionalism, multilingualism, andthe habitual recycling of older texts. Medievalists must insist these differences should inform widerdiscussions about the form and purpose of literary history in the 21st century.

1066, as Sellars’ and Yeatman’s brilliant parody of textbook history recognised, was theone date in English history every schoolboy knew, a shorthand cipher for a canonical ser-ies of dramatic and mostly negative changes which followed inevitably from the NormanConquest.1 Yet while today’s historians have begun to ask whether the date still matters(Bates ‘1066’; see also Chibnall Debate on the Norman Conquest; Thomas Norman Conquest;Garnett; as well as van Houts ‘Memory of 1066’; Otter on the date’s significance tomediaeval writers), for literary histories like David Wallace’s Cambridge History of MedievalLiterature, 1066 remains ‘a solid bookend of English history’ (Wallace xxi; see also Chismet al.), keeping Old and Middle English literature securely apart. While Anglo-Saxonistsof the last 10 years have problematised this periodisation by demonstrating that ‘Old’English texts continued to be read long after the arrival of William and his troops, this isyet to be reflected in literary histories.2

Though the value of writing literary history has itself been questioned in recent years,its defenders have emphasised its role in signalling the consolidation of a field of study(Hutcheon; see also Perkins Theoretical Issues; Is Literary History Possible?; Brown; and theother essays collected by Hutcheon and Valdes). Traditionally, the principal task of liter-ary history is to explain where, why, and how authors wrote the texts they did (Valdes95). This is a particularly arduous task for the long 12th century. Post-Conquest Britainwas a tri-, even multilingual, society with a literature to match. For this survey at least, itis axiomatic that English literature comprises all texts written in Britain regardless of thelanguage in which they are inscribed.3 Despite this inclusive definition, the article focusesprincipally on texts actually composed in English, partly for reasons of space, but alsobecause these English language texts offer the most vigorous challenge to the paradigmaticmethodologies of literary history.

The start- and end-points of this study of English literature in the long 12th centuryhave been chosen provocatively as a challenge to canonical periodisations. They do notpurport to mark definitive watersheds in English literary history. Beginning in 1042 withthe accession of the Normandy-raised Edward the Confessor emphasises that English con-tacts with Normandy predated the Conquest (Musset ‘Apports anglais’; Lewis), contacts

Literature Compass 9/4 (2012): 275–291, 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2011.00867.x

ª 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

which gave a European outlook to much 11th-century English writing (Tyler ‘Fictions ofFamily’; ‘Talking about History’; ‘Vita Ædwardi’; ‘OE to OF’; van Houts ‘Flemish Con-tribution’). The article elects to end in 1215 with the Fourth Lateran Council whichintroduced mandatory auricular confession and (literary history holds) gave special impe-tus to the production of vernacular religious texts (Watson 828; Millett ‘Ancrene WisseGroup’ esp. 9–13) even though the extensive 12th-century interest in English languagehomilies challenges any attempt to treat it as an originary moment.

The period between 1066 and 1200, or indeed 1042 and 1215, has typically beendescribed as transitional, witnessing, on the one hand, the gradual death of the Old Eng-lish tradition, and, on the other, its mutation into early Middle English literature (Georgi-anna ‘Coming to Terms’; Georgianna ‘Periodization and Politics’; Cannon ‘Betweenthe Old and the Middle’). Mid-20th-century literary histories were generally Whig intone and emphasised continuity (Chambers; Wilson Sawles Warde v-xxx; Lost Literature;on the Whig model, see Butterfield) on the strength of the 14th-century alliterative revi-val and presumed connections between the Katherine Group and Old English prose, butboth arguments are now discredited (Hanna ‘Alliterative Poetry’; Bethurum; Millett‘Continuity of Old English Prose’; ‘Katherine Group and Alliterative Tradition’; ‘Discon-tinuity of English Prose’). Other critics have emphasised the discontinuity of the period.Christopher Cannon began his recent monograph with a chapter melodramatically enti-tled ‘The Loss of Literature: 1066’ where he finds ‘sudden silencing is not the exception,but the rule’ (Cannon Grounds 19). To thus advocate rupture is to ignore the substantialevidence that English was an important literary language in the trilingual 12th century.By contrast, disproportionately to emphasise the very limited continuities so far tracedbetween Old and Early Middle English texts (cautiously surveyed by Frankis ‘La3amon’sEnglish Sources’; Morrison ‘Orm’s English Sources’; ‘Reminiscence of Wulfstan’; ‘Con-tinuite et innovation litteraire’), as scholars like Chambers did, does nothing to explainwhy the latter appear, or choose to appear, ‘profound[ly] isolat[ed] from immediate mod-els and examples, from any local precedent for the writing of English’ (Cannon, Grounds2). Consequently recent studies by Seth Lerer, Thomas Hahn and Elaine Treharne havetraced a delicate balance of continuity and innovation, with Treharne arguing for a post-colonial approach to the 12th century which sees English surviving against the odds as ‘aliterature of resistance’ (Lerer; Hahn; Treharne ‘Categorization, Periodization’ 269).4 Anyfuture literary history will need to emphasise the ever-dynamic efforts of 12th-centurywriters to define the English vernacular with and against the other literary languages of amultilingual Britain.

The first stage in rewriting the literary history of the long 12th century is necessarily toassemble the corpus of English literature extant from between 1042 and 1215 (literatureis here taken to encompass anything recorded in writing). Texts in Latin, the most presti-gious literary language of the period, are inventoried in Richard Sharpe’s Handlist (seealso Rigg History); texts in French in Ruth Dean’s Anglo-Norman Literature (a new editionof which is promised by Daron Burrows; see also Woledge and Clive). Twelfth-centuryAnglo-Norman literature, precocious in comparison with French writing on the conti-nent (Short ‘Patrons and Polyglots’; ‘Language and Literature’; Howlett), is receivingever-increasing attention thanks to Jocelyn Wogan-Browne’s French of England project(Watson and Wogan-Browne; Wogan-Browne et al.; also Ingram). Alongside Latin,French and English were spoken a range of other languages including Welsh, Cornish,Old Norse and Flemish, which occasionally penetrate the written record.5

There is no comparable handlist of English language texts from the long 12th century.6

This is due to a variety of factors, including the impermeable boundaries habitually

276 Rewriting English Literary History

ª 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd Literature Compass 9/4 (2012): 275–291, 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2011.00867.x

erected between ‘Old’ and ‘Middle’ English, the tendency to treat 12th-century homiliesas debased copies of older works rather than texts in their own right, and the difficultiesattendant on dating works securely. Collections of early Middle English writing have typ-ically anthologised only a very narrow selection of texts composed during this period(Hall; Dickins and Wilson; Bennett and Smithers; Gray), but, a decade after the publica-tion of Swan and Treharne’s field-defining Rewriting Old English, any new literary historymust also take into account earlier English texts copied, remediated and revised duringthe long 12th century. The following survey, though not exhaustive, is the first to incor-porate such works alongside new compositions. Verse is distinguished from prose in theconfidence that there are significant formal differences between the media, despite theexistence of a number of interstitial texts (though cf. Savage).

To judge from surviving manuscripts, English verse was substantially less widely readthan prose in this period, as earlier. Nonetheless, Henry of Huntingdon judged the earlierthe Anglo-Saxon Chronicle poems worthy of translation for inclusion in his Historia anglo-rum, registering that Brunanburh was in verse (Rigg ‘Metrical Experiments’; Greenway v.19), and the late Abingdon, Worcester and Peterborough Chronicles found room for anumber of new poems, the most substantial an ambivalent obituary for William the Con-queror in 1087.7 The vernacular text of Cædmon’s Hymn was copied in manuscripts ofBede’s Historia ecclesiastica through the 12th century and beyond, as was Bede’s Death Songembedded in the Latin of the Epistola Cuthberti de obitu Bedae (Dobbie Manuscripts;O’Donnell). Poems like The Grave, Instructions for Christians, the Worcester Fragments andthe metrical charm Against a Wen make structural use of both alliteration and rhyme andare usually considered post-Conquest compositions; the encomium urbis Durham is moreclassical in its form, but was perhaps not composed until 1100 (Kendall). Similarly metri-cally heterogenous is The Proverbs of Alfred. The topical Durham and Chronicle poemsaside, these poems are predominantly religious, as are the Poema Morale and the extraordi-narily-ambitious Orrmulum, both in septenaries (on which metre, see Solopova). Thethree English poems Godric (d. 1170) miraculously learnt stand at the head of the fledg-ling genre of the religious lyric (Brown English Lyrics). English poetry evidently continuedalso to circulate orally, since one of Aldhelm’s vernacular poems was still heard in Wil-liam of Malmesbury’s day and Gerald of Wales was able to quote and analyse sample linesof Old English alliterative verse (Winterbottom and Thomson v.190.3–4; Thorpe 240–2).Scraps of such verse, for example the lines on St Kenelm attributed to John de Cella,abbot of Saint Albans (1195–1214), are occasionally recorded in Latin texts or on flyleaves(Wilson Lost Literature 159–87).8

This corpus of verse is dwarfed by the English prose which survives from the long12th century, though, unlike the verse, the prose is frequently adapted from earlier texts.Homilies are dominant, with one scholar counting 122 such texts for the period 1100–1225 alone (Greenfield 284). Some of these homilies, such as the translation of Ralphd’Escures’ sermon for the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, were undoubtedly composedafter the Conquest (Treharne ‘Life of English’), but many are based on earlier models,with difficult content and outdated lexis or syntax replaced whenever the homilist’smeaning was liable to be misunderstood (Swan ‘Old English Made New’; Treharne ‘Lifeand Times’; Faulkner ‘Archaism, Belatedness, Modernisation’). While it is recognised thatcopying these texts was a pragmatic imperative, not an exercise in archival preservation(Treharne ‘English in the post-Conquest Period’ 404; pace Hahn 72n24), there been littleagreement on their likely readership, with scholars variously suggesting monastic pueri orconversi, members of the lower clergy with little Latin and no French, viri idonei employedto preach vicariously on behalf of the cathedral clergy and secular vowesses (Treharne

Rewriting English Literary History 277


‘Reading from the Margins’ 353–4; Fischer ‘Vocabulary of Very Late Old English’ 31;Millett ‘Pastoral Context’ esp. 52–60; Swan ‘Imagining a Readership’). Ælfric was gener-ally preferred to Wulfstan (Wilcox), and there is an overall tendency to simplify the hom-ilies and make them more accessible (Richards ‘Cotton Vespasian A. xxii’ 98; Millar andNicholls 434; Treharne ‘Making their Presence Felt’ 411).

With a few notable exceptions, such as Coleman’s lost Old English Life of Wulfstan,the putatively post-Conquest lives of Nicholas, Giles and Margaret and the extensivehagiographical element in CUL Ii. 1. 33 (Orchard; Treharne OE Life of St Nicholas; Clay-ton and Magennis; Traxel; also Proud), these homilies address the needs of the temporalerather than the sanctorale, with a particular focus on Lent and its aftermath (Treharne‘Making their Presence Felt’ 419). This strongly suggests the majority of texts were cop-ied with an eye to the spiritual needs of the laity, and there is considerable anecdotal evi-dence that 12th-century prelates considered preaching in English necessary (e.g. Wilson‘English and French’ 48–9). To judge from the surviving manuscripts, ‘Old’ English ser-mons became obsolete only with the arrival of the friars and thematic preaching (Millett‘Change and Continuity’ 234); their longevity can perhaps best be explained by inferringthat linguistic and doctrinal anxieties beset 12th-century preachers considering composingnew homilies. The West-Saxon translation of the Gospels was also copied twice in thelong 12th century (Fischer ‘Hatton MS’; Liuzza ‘Scribal Habit’; Nevanlinna); comparableefforts on the continent became implicated in heresies such as Waldensianism (Lambert2002 esp. 81–2). Other religious texts produced include two copies of the Old EnglishBenedictine Rule, one explicitly for the use of nuns, and three glossed psalters, includingthe famous trilingual Eadwine Psalter (Gibson, Heslop and Pfaff; see also Rector on con-temporary Anglo-Norman translations).

To judge from the Latin, French and English glosses added to several copies of Ælfric’sGrammar and Glossary (Menzer), the 12th-century classroom was trilingual; not until the13th century was English proscribed in favour of French (Orme 74; more generallyHunt). This probably explains the ongoing circulation of the English translation of Cato’sDistichs, a common curriculum text (Treharne ‘Form and Function’), as well as vernaculardialogues like the prose Solomon and Saturn and Adrian and Ritheus. The trilinguality ofthe post-Conquest classroom has not always been acknowledged, but is key to under-standing the place of English in 12th-century literary culture. The booklet of prognosticsnow bound in the homiliary Hatton 115, and the medical and herbal texts copied inHarley 6258B and Ashmole 1431 may be mentioned here in passing as evidence of thecurrency of English in the (pseudo-) scientific disciplines.

Translations of learned texts into English also enjoyed an audience. The 12th-centuryhomiliary Cotton Vespasian D. xiv contains portions of a translation of Honorius Au-gustodunensis’s catechetical Elucidarius, composed in Latin around 1100 (Warner 134–9,140–3, 144–5; see also Handley). There are post-Conquest copies of the pseudo-Alfrediantranslations of both Boethius’s De consolatione philosophiae and Augustine’s Soliloquies.Older manuscripts of the Old English Bede and Wærferth’s translation of Gregory’s Dia-logues also attracted the interest of 12th-century readers (Faulkner ‘Uses of Anglo-SaxonManuscripts’ 144–5).

The remaining prose texts are more or less archival. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicleattracted substantial and sustained attention. Neither C nor D, the Abingdon andWorcester Chronicles, was compiled until the mid-11th century, while E, the Peterbor-ough Chronicle, and the single-leaf fragment H, both wholly or largely monolingual, andF, the Domitian Bilingual, are all post-Conquest. E, which continues until 1154, containssubstantial new material. To these can be added the Caligula Annals, initially compiled in



1073, but with annals in English until 1130 (Baker 129–34). When it is also consideredthat the two other extant copies, A and B, attracted additions and emendations from12th-century scribes, and that historians from John of Worcester to Geoffrey Gaimar usedthe Chronicle as a source for pre-Conquest history (McGurk, Darlington and Bray; ShortGeffrei Gaimar), it becomes difficult to overstate the text’s importance. Also relevant hereare the great legal compendia, the Textus Roffensis and CCCC 383, as well as the substan-tial corpus of English vernacular documents collected, copied, adapted, composed andforged during the long 12th century.9

The texts inventoried above constitute a substantial corpus that leaves the prejudicethat the post-Conquest period was ‘the deadest century for English literature of any fromfrom the seventh to the twentieth century’ untenable (anonymous reviewer, qtd Georgi-anna ‘Periodization and Politics’ 154), even without reference to contemporary texts inFrench and Latin, or to several other important English language texts which cannot besecurely dated but may perhaps have been written before 1215. These include the earliestsustained prose texts to be written since Ælfric’s homilies, in the Katherine Group, Woo-ing Group and Ancrene Wisse, as well as long poems like Lawman’s Brut, Vices and Virtuesand the Owl and the Nightingale (the last traditionally dated 1189x1216 though on unsatis-factory evidence; it may be as late as the 1280s). All in all, despite Cannon’s convictionthat 1066 meant ‘the loss of literature’, a new trilingual literary history of the long 12thcentury need not want for material, Latin, French or English.

One of the principal tasks of this new literary history is to ask why some texts werewritten in English and not in French, Latin or any of the other languages available. The12th century saw the transition from linguistic pluralism to multilingualism, with multi-lingualism perhaps the norm among the educated from the 1160s.10 Even then, individuallanguage competencies varied substantially, something not all surveys of 12th-centurymultilingualism have acknowledged (e.g. Wilson ‘English and French’; Richter; Short‘On Bilingualism’; but cf. Trotter for sophisticated analysis of the later Middle Ages). Forexample, Henry II apparently understood spoken English but could not himself speak it(Thorpe 123–4; discussed Richter 50–3). Continental churchmen appointed to Englishbenifices like Peter of Blois (1125x30–1212) did not benefit from the trilingual educationprevailing in England and seem to have struggled to learn a new vernacular (Richter 67).Some, perhaps including William of Longchamp, bishop of Ely (1189–97), were toosnobbish to learn English (Richter 73–4). Consequently, interpreters, important in theimmediate aftermath of the Conquest, remained necessary (Bullock-Davies; Tsurushima).There was a clear hierarchy of linguistic prestige with Latin at the top, French in themiddle and English at the bottom; and English is often condemned as barbarous or harsh-sounding (Chibnall Orderic 6:555; also Thomas English and Normans 251, 256), though itseems to have retained considerable status as a language of authenticity.11 Conversely,English speakers’ regard for French is evident from the adoption of Anglo-Norman nick-names (Clark ‘People and Languages’). In pragmatic situations, all three languages couldfunction complementarily (Hunt 1:434–5), though in its lack of internal dialectal variationand affinity and even contiguity with Latin, Anglo-Norman had several advantages overEnglish (Pouzet ‘Mapping Insular French Texts?’; Short ‘Patrons and Polyglots’ 242).Despite this complementarity, there is no evidence that English became creolised (seemost recently Danchev), and nothing comparable to the disruptively interlingual latemediaeval macaronic documents edited by Laura Wright survives from the long 12thcentury (Wright ‘Macaronic Writing’; Wright ‘Civic London Text’; Wright ‘Bills,Accounts, Inventories’). Medievalists nonetheless stand to learn much from recent workon bilingualism and language contact (e.g. Matras; Thomason etc).



While the personnel changes secular and ecclesiastical attendant on the Conquest redi-rected patronage towards texts in French and, to a lesser extent, Latin, there indisputablyremained an audience for writing in English. This is evident from the surviving manu-scripts and from isolated episodes recounted in Latin and French texts, like the MiraculaS. Etheldredae abbatissae where an Ely monk recalls his learned father reading English textsaloud in the early 12th century (Richter 77). For some texts, like sermons, the choice oflanguage was dictated by pragmatic concerns like the projected linguistic limitations ofthe intended audience; in other situations, where no such constraints applied, authorscould chose the linguistic medium freely. Despite older arguments (e.g. Turville-PetreEngland the Nation), there is no need to assume that reading English texts was a marker ofEnglish ethnic allegiance (Thomas English and Normans 377–90; Ashe 94–5). While it isbecoming common to conceptualise the relationship between French and English texts asantagonistic (Frankis ‘Vernacular Lives of St Giles’ 115; Treharne ‘Vernaculars of Medie-val England’ 219), the relationship need not have been so, though it is curious that textsrarely seem to be in dialogue across the two languages.

Writing in English was confronted with considerable challenges beyond the handicapof its limited prestige. 1042–1216 was a dramatic and perhaps traumatic period for theEnglish language, which saw the collapse of the late West Saxon Schriftsprache, a standardlanguage which had underpinned the wide contemporary and posthumous circulation ofÆlfric’s prose (Gneuss; Gretsch ‘Winchester Vocabulary’; ‘In Search of Standard OldEnglish’; ‘Key to Ælfric’s Standard Old English’),12 and its replacement by a series oflocal, more or less ad hoc spelling systems, the most famous of which are ‘AB’ and theuniquely idiosyncratic orthography adopted by Orrm for his eponymous Orrmulum (Tolk-ien; Black; Smith; Dance, 2003 ‘AB Language’; Turville-Petre ‘Studies’; Burchfield;Markus; Fulk; Anderson and Britton).13 Unfortunately the principal and otherwiseinvaluable resource for studying the language during this period, the Linguistic Atlas ofEarly Middle English, judged 12th-century copies of pre-Conquest texts ‘not usable’ andwas unaware of several sources of ‘spontaneously produced, up-to-date written English’from the period (‘Preliminaries’ to Laing and Lass 4; see also comments of Faulkner‘Archaism, Belatedness, Modernisation’). This deficiency can be supplemented with refer-ence to careful philological studies of individual texts and manuscripts (e.g. Irvine Bodley343 lv-lxxvii; Liuzza OE Gospels ii. 174–96; Traxel), but a comprehensive overview of12th-century English spelling to replace Schlemilch’s early 20th-century doctoral disserta-tion is an absolute desideratum. Moreover, while historical linguists have zealously tracedthe processes by which ‘Old’ English became ‘Middle’ English (Moore ‘Loss of Final n’;‘Earliest Morphological Changes’; Malone; Marckwardt; Jones; Kitson ‘OE Dialects’;‘When did ME Begin?’), less attention has been paid to the sociolinguistic implications ofthe collapse of the Schriftsprache. Space constraints mean it is only possible to treat two ofthe most important of these consequences in detail here: texts’ lack of national vision,and their self-conscious belatedness.

One of the most fruitful consequences of the theoretical deconstruction of the para-digms underpinning national literary histories has been an increased emphasis on regionalliteratures (Turville-Petre ‘North-East Midlands’; Beadle; Hanna ‘Yorkshire Writers’; Lon-don Literature; ‘North Yorkshire Scribes’; Barrett). In the 12th century, the absence of astandard language like the late West Saxon Schriftsprache meant vernacular writing wasmore often than not addressed to local, coterie audiences, but the geographical distribu-tion of English textual activity has not yet been mapped with precision. On the strengthof the perhaps misleading ease with which extant manuscripts can be associated withBenedictine cathedrals like Canterbury and Rochester, this textual activity has sometimes



been connected with the antiquarian monastic reaction to the Conquest described byRichard Southern (Clanchy 212; on Rochester see Richards Texts and Traditions;‘Rochester Cathedral Library’) and Worcester and the West Midlands in particular haveloomed deceptively large in scholars’ minds as a consequence of the distinctive but defi-nitely sui generis activities of the Tremulous Hand (Franzen; on Worcester see Weinberg;Frankis ‘Regional Context’). However it is clear that the new religious orders, especiallythe Augustinian canons, also solicited English material (Frankis ‘Vernacular Lives of StGiles’ 112–3; and more generally Faulkner ‘Uses of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts’ 59–64)and were involved in the composition of new texts (Hanna ‘Augustinian Canons and MELiterature’; Pouzet ‘Augustinian Canons and Insular French Books’). Nugatory informa-tion like Serlo of Bayeux’s description of Wilton as fæcunda versibus urbs (‘a city eloquentin poetry’) is available for various locations (Wright Anglo-Latin Satirical Poets ii. 233; qtdTyler ‘OE to OF’ 174), but remains to be compiled (on Exeter, e.g. see Treharne ‘Pro-ducing a Library; Bishops and Texts’; but esp. ‘Making their Presence Felt’ 421); Anglo-Norman may have been most vigorous in the South East and Home Counties (Rothwell259). Though Elaine Treharne has suggested the maintenance of a ‘Regularis concordia net-work’ into the 12th century and Ralph Hanna has written interestingly on the exemplarsused in the compilation of the Lambeth Homilies (Treharne ‘Life and Times’ 212; Hanna‘LPL 487’; also Sisam; Millett ‘Pastoral Context’), the paths through which English textscirculated are not well known. Analysing English post-Conquest texts regionally mayultimately also help place the vast body of unprovenanced material.

A consequence of the limited, local circulation of newly composed English texts wasthat it compelled authors to look into the past for models, colouring their writings with aknowing belatedness that manifested itself as a stylistic veneer of archaism. This explainsthe Katherine Group Life of St Margaret’s striking belief it is written in ‘Old’ English(Millett and Wogan-Browne 82–5; briefly discussed Galloway ‘ME as a Foreign Lan-guage’ 99–100) and perhaps Gerald of Wales’ equally peculiar conviction that the dialectof South-West England heeded the antiquum loquendi modum (‘ancient mode of speech’)through to the late 12th century (Thorpe 231; discussed Faulkner ‘Gerald of Wales andStandard OE’). Archaism has most often been discussed with reference to Lawman’s Brut(Stanley ‘La3amon’s Antiquarian Sentiments; also Donoghue), but aspects of 12th-centuryEnglish orthography have long been considered archaic and even archaising (e.g. Cook;and more recently Lutz). This archaism perhaps explains why authors consciously orunconsciously avoided using French-derived vocabulary (compare Stanley ‘La3amon’sAntiquarian Sentiments’; and Roberts ‘La3amon’s Plain Words’), which is generally rarein 12th-century English texts and becomes common only in the early 13th century whenimitating sophisticated continental culture became increasingly fashionable (Clark ‘Studies’89; Richards ‘Cotton Vespasian A. xxii’; Frankis ‘Vernacular Lives of St Giles’ all notethe relative absence of French lexical tokens; see also Skaffari for a recent overview ofword borrowing in early Middle English). One examination of 12th-century manuscriptsof Ælfric’s homilies has argued that ‘much of the English copied and read in the 12thcentury was archaic and, seemingly proud of it’ (Faulkner ‘Archaism, Belatedness, Mod-ernisation’), and archaism might indeed be considered a defining characteristic of theEnglish language writing of this period, even if it can be difficult to define (Cartlidge236–7).

To synopsize this article’s questions, conclusions and suggestions for the future, I wantto return to the hoary problem of the effects of the Norman Conquest on language andliterature. One difficulty here is the lack of studies of pre-Conquest Norman culture, par-ticularly its literature Latin and vernacular, and its libraries (on Normandy before 1066,



see Bates Normandy; Searle; Tabuteau; Albu). The historian Orderic Vitalis twice postu-lated that Norman interest in the liberal arts began only with William the Conqueror andLanfranc of Bec (Chibnall Orderic 2:3, 251), but, though this verdict ignores much sub-stantive literary activity such as the circle of poets around Robert, archbishop of Rouenaround the millennium (Musset ‘Rouen et l’Angleterre’), its validity is difficult to assessin the absence of a handlist of pre-Conquest Norman writers and texts. Some French lit-erature – such as the saints’ lives translated from Latin by the cleric Theobald de Vernon,who is known to have been chancellor of Rouen around 1060 (Spear 224, 263; also vanHouts Gesta Normannorum Ducum 1:xxx; ‘Historiography and Hagiography’ 236n27) –seems to have been composed in pre-Conquest Normandy, but it is unclear howindebted Old French literature is to the inspiration of Old English (Howlett) and indeedhow long before the Conquest the Normans, originally a Scandinavian people, firstadopted French as their vernacular. Similarly, despite the foundational work of GenevieveNortier, Norman libraries remain understudied, particularly in the pre-Conquest period(exceptions include Chibnall Orderic i. 11–23 on Saint-Evroult; Alexander on Mont StMichel; Branch on Fecamp; van Houts Gesta Normannorum Ducum i. xxii–xxxi on Jumie-ges). It is nevertheless possible to identify the programmatic replacement of the nativesecular and religious elites as one consequence of the Conquest which had profoundrepercussions for the English literature in the long 12th century. This plantation, thoughit did not create a colonial society, introduced French as a prestige language and shiftedpatronage away from English texts to French and Latin, whilst removing the institutionalsupport on which a standard language like the late West Saxon Schriftsprache relies. Cul-turally, it brought England definitively into the European mainstream, as the new prelatesenthusiastically sought to keep up with the latest architectural, artistic and intellectualtrends (Fernie on architecture; Kauffmann; Zarnecki, Holt, and Holland on art; Webber;Gameson; Thomson on manuscripts). This Europeanization is ultimately responsible forthe multilingual and polyvocal richness of English writing in the long 12th century, mostmemorably traced by Elizabeth Salter.

English literary history therefore reflects the ‘constant vibrancy and vitality, no matterwhere attention turns’ that R. N. Swanson surveyed in his undergraduate textbook TheTwelfth-Century Renaissance (186), a primer which nevertheless devotes but one paragraphto English language literature:

Other languages revealed different patterns of emergence rather than continuity. The emergenceof English, as distinct from Anglo-Norman, from the shadows of the Norman Conquest, was aslow process. That England had a living tradition of written vernacular in the 12th century,whose scale is inadequately revealed by surviving material, is shown by the continuation of theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle at Peterborough through to 1154, by the existence of an Anglo-Saxonversion of the Elucidarius of Honorius Augustodunensis, and by the inclusion of works like Solo-mon and Saturn in 12th century manuscripts. Such texts show that Anglo-Saxon remained a via-ble language used for reading, writing and composing for some generations after 1066. TheElucidarius even suggests the continuity of an ‘academic Anglo-Saxon’. By 1200 something moreobviously ‘English’ had emerged, although exactly when is debated. The 12th-century dating ofThe Owl and the Nightingale is now challenged, meaning that the first surviving Middle Englishworks may derive only from the first years of the 13th century, in Layamon’s Brut and thepeculiar Ormulum. (Swanson 174)

The responsibility for this jejune account that underestimates the amount of Englishlanguage writing contemporary with the 12th-century Renaissance lies not with Swansonbut with the literary scholars who have failed to do justice to the period. Recent researchhas made considerable progress in understanding the long 12th century’s ‘cultural,



linguistic and orthographical conditions of dizzying complexity’ (Wallace xiv), and newand compelling narrative of its literary history is now imperative. Such a revision musttake due account of texts written in Latin and French as well as English, must incorporatenot just newly composed works, but also remediated versions of older texts, and mustheed the regional, localised dynamics of much post-Conquest writing.

Short Biography

Mark Faulkner’s research focuses mediaeval English literature, but particularly multilingualBritain in the long 12th century. His recent articles include ‘Gerald of Wales and Stan-dard Old English’ and ‘Ælfric, St Edmund and St Edwold of Cerne’, while his ‘Archaism,Belatedness and Modernisation: ‘‘Old’’ English in the Twelfth Century’ is forthcoming inThe Review of English Studies. He is currently working on a major monograph, Ignotalingua: English literatures in the long twelfth century, which will be the first full-length studydevoted to the English language texts read, adapted and composed in this important per-iod. After completing his doctorate at St John’s College, Oxford in 2008, Faulkner hastaught at the universities of Oxford and Swansea and is currently Lecturer in Old Englishat University College Cork.

Notes

* Correspondence: School of English, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland. Email:[email protected]

1 Thanks are due to Jenifer Nı Ghradaigh and Laura Ashe for reading drafts of this article, and to the two anony-mous reviewers for their thoughtful comments.2 Following in the tracks of the newly completed Production and Use of English Manuscripts, 1060 to 1220 (DaRold et al.), several recently funded projects do however promise a substantive 12th-century component. Theseinclude the Early English Laws project, the Electronic Ælfric project, the Manuscript Innovation in the Twelfth-Century Renaissance project at Leiden and the Digipal project at King’s College London.3 This conflation is not as problematic as it may appear: while Britain and England were never geographicallycoterminous, the 12th-century elites considered themselves to be English but inhabitants of Britain (Thomas Englishand Normans 264–5).4 The applicability of post-colonial theory to mediaeval literature has been much discussed (Dagenais and Greer;Holsinger; also West on the Norman Conquest specifically).5 Examples include the Cornish redaction of Ælfric’s Glossary in London, British Library, Cotton Vespasian A. xiv,fols. 7-10r (Jackson 60–1) and the Old Norse inscription on the Pennington Tympanum from Furness, Cumbria(Townend 193–4; also Dance, Words Derived from ON; Pons-Sanz).6 One must generally go back to the manuscripts, inventoried for the early period by Ker and for the later byLaing. Cameron’s corpus of ‘Old’ English texts is also invaluable, but there is no equivalent for ‘Middle’ Englishtexts, beyond overarching resources like Severs and Hartung’s (1967) Manual of Writings in Middle English and Boffeyand Edwards’ (2005) Index of Middle English Verse which by virtue of their scope cannot always be relied upon.7 Six of the seventeen passages printed by Plummer as verse are relevant here: 1057D, 1065CD, 1067E ⁄ 1076D,1086E, 1104E. These are respectively poems on the deaths of Edward the Atheling and Edward the Confessor, acouplet on Margaret of Scotland’s reluctance to marry Malcolm, two short metrical passages in a prose account ofthe rebellion of Ralph de Gael, the poem on the death of the Conqueror mentioned above and a couplet lamentingHenry I’s misrule (see further Bredehoft 72–118). There is some disagreement about whether all these passages arein fact verse.8 Cambridge, Pembroke College, 82, fol. 1r (discussed Wilson Lost Literature 99–100). Similar inferences about theoral circulation of English verse are drawn by Bredehoft (Early English Metre 110–20).9 William the Conqueror began to use Latin for his writs in 1070. Older documents issued in English were gener-ally preserved in their original language when copied into cartularies. Isolated vernacular post-Conquest documentsare inventoried by Pelteret. The earliest extant document in French is from 1140, and it was not before 1170 thatsuch documents became common (Clanchy 218–20).10 To judge from the disappearance of the formula angli et franci from documents (Sharpe ‘Peoples and Languages’);the glosses in Ælfric’s Grammar and Glossary suggest trilingualism became common somewhat earlier.



11 A phenomenon which warrents study: the basic material would include the spurious English sources claimed by12th-century texts like the romance Waldef (Holden lls. 1–59) and the vernacular diplomata forged after the Con-quest. Compare Frankis’ observation, ‘Anglo-Saxon England was in some way different, romantic and exciting’(‘Views of Anglo-Saxon England’ 228).12 Linguists generally agree that the Schriftsprache collapsed during the course of the 12th century, but have failed toemphasise that the speed of its collapse must have varied regionally (Bauer 203; Clark ‘Domesday Book’ 320; Rob-erts ‘Disappearance of Old English’ 38; but cf. Irvine ‘Linguistic Peculiarities’ 241; Millett ‘Pastoral Context’ 62–3;Hanna ‘LPL 487’ 83).13 A contemporary Scandinavian analogue is the Icelandic First Grammatical Treatise, composed in the secondquarter of the 12th century (Haugar).

Works Cited

Albu, Emily. The Normans in their Histories: Propaganda, Myth and Subversion. Woodbridge: Boydell, 2001.Alexander, J. J. G. Norman Illumination at Mont St. Michel, 966–1100. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970.Anderson, John M., and Derek Britton. ‘Double Trouble: Geminate Versus Simplex Graphs in the Ormulum.’ Stu-

dies in Middle English Linguistics. Ed. Jacek Fisiak. Trends in Lingustics: Studies and Monographs 103. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter, 1997. 23–58.

Ashe, Laura. Fiction and History in England, 1066–1200. Cambridge Studies in Medieval Literature. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press, 2007.

Baker, Peter S. MS F. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: A Collaborative. Edition 8. Eds. David N. Dumville and SimonKeynes. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2000.

Barrett, Robert W., Jr. Against All England: Regional Identity and Cheshire Writing. ReFormations. Notre Dame: Uni-versity of Notre Dame Press, 2009.

Bates, David. ‘1066: Does the Date Still Matter?’ Historical Research 78 (2005): 443–64.——. Normandy before 1066. London: Longman, 1982.Bauer, Gero. ‘Medieval English Scribal Practice: Some Questions and Some Assumptions.’ Linguistics across Historical

and Geographical Boundaries. Eds. Dieter Kastovsky and Aleksander Szwedek. Vol. 1. 2 vols. Trends in Linguistics:Studies and Monographs 32. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1986. 199–210.

Beadle, Richard. ‘Prolegomena to a Literary Geography of Later Medieval Norfolk.’ Regionalism in Late MedievalManuscripts and Texts. Ed. Felicity Riddy. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1991. 89–108.

Bennett, J. A. W. and G. V. Smithers. Early Middle English Verse and Prose. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968.Bethurum, Dorothy. ‘The Connection of the Katherine Group with Old English Prose.’ Journal of English and Ger-

manic Philology 34 (1935): 553–64.Black, Merja. ‘AB or Simply A? Reconsidering the Case for a Standard.’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 100 (1999):

155–74.Boffey, Julia and A. S. G. Edwards. A New Index of Middle English Verse. London: British Library, 2005.Branch, Betty. ‘Inventories of the Library of Fecamp from the Eleventh and Twelfth Century.’ Manuscripta 23

(1979): 159–72.Bredehoft, Thomas A. Early English Metre. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005.——. Textual Histories: Readings in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001.Brown, Carleton. English Lyrics of the Thirteenth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1932.Brown, Marshall, ed. The Uses of Literary History. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1995.Bullock-Davies, Constance. Professional Interpreters and the Matter of Britain. Cardiff: Cardiff University Press, 1966.Burchfield, R. W. ‘The Language and Orthography of the Ormulum MS.’ Transactions of the Philological Society, 55

(1956): 56–87.Butterfield, Herbert. The Whig Interpretation of History. London: G. Bell and Sons, 1931.Cameron, Angus F. ‘A List of Old English Texts.’ A Plan for the Dictionary of Old English. Eds. Roberta Frank and

Angus F. Cameron. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1973. 25–306.Cannon, Christopher. ‘Between the Old and the Middle of English.’ New Medieval Literatures 7 (2005): 203–21.——. The Grounds of English Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.Chambers, R. W. ‘On the Continuity of English Prose from Alfred to More and his School.’ The Life and Death of

Sr Thomas Moore, Knight, Sometymes Lord High Chancellor of England ⁄ Written in the Tyme of Queene Marie byNicholas Harpsfield, L. D. Eds. E. V. Hitchcock and R. W. Chambers. EETS o. s. 186. London: Oxford Univer-sity Press, 1932. xlv–clxxiv.

Chibnall, Marjorie. The Debate on the Norman Conquest. Issues in Historiography. Manchester: Manchester Univer-sity Press, 1999.

——, ed. The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis. 6 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969–80.Chism, Christine, et al. ‘Colloquium: The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature.’ Studies in the Age of Chau-

cer 23 (2001): 471–519.Clanchy, M. T. From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307. 2nd ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1993.



Clark, Cecily. ‘Domesday Book – A Great Red-Herring: Thoughts on Some Late-Eleventh-Century Orthogra-phies.’ England in the Eleventh Century: Proceedings of the 1990 Harlaxton Symposium. Ed. Carola Hicks. HarlaxtonMedieval Studies 2. Stamford: Paul Tyas, 1992. 317–31.

——. ‘People and Languages in post-Conquest Canterbury.’ Journal of Medieval History 2.1 (1976): 1–33.——. ‘Studies in the Vocabulary of the Peterborough Chronicle, 1070–1154.’ English and Germanic Studies 5 (1952–

1953): 67–89.Clayton, Mary and Hugh Magennis. The Old English Lives of St Margaret. CSASE 9. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-

versity Press, 1994.Cook, Albert S. ‘Archaic English in the Twelfth Century.’ Scottish Historical Review 12 (1915): 213–5.Dagenais, John and Maragret R. Greer. ‘Decolonizing the Middle Ages: Introduction.’ Journal of Medieval and Early

Modern Studies 30 (2000): 431–48.Da Rold, Orietta, Takako Kato, Mary Swan, and Elaine Treharne. The Production and Use of English Manuscripts

1060 to 1220. University of Leicester, 2010. [Online]. Retrieved on 20 September 2011 from: http://www.le.ac.uk/english/em1060to1220/index.html.

Dance, Richard. ‘The AB Language: The Recluse, the Gossip and the Language Historian.’ A Companion to AncreneWisse. Ed. Yoko Wada. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2003a. 57–82.

——. Words Derived from Old Norse in Early Middle English: Studies in the Vocabulary of the South-West Midlands Texts.Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 246. Tempe: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies,2003b.

Danchev, Andrei. ‘The Middle English Creolization Hypothesis Revisited.’ Studies in Middle English Linguistics. Ed.Jacek Fisiak. Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs 103. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1997. 79–108.

Dean, Ruth J. Anglo-Norman Literature: A Guide to Texts and Manuscripts. ANTS Occasional Publications Series 3.London: Anglo-Norman Text Society, 1999.

Dickins, Bruce and R. M. Wilson. Early Middle English Texts. London: Bowes and Bowes, 1951.——. The Manuscripts of Cædmon’s Hymn and Bede’s Death Song. New York: Columbia University Press, 1937.Donoghue, Daniel. ‘Layamon’s Ambivalence.’ Speculum 65 (1990): 537–63.Faulkner, Mark. ‘Archaism, Belatedness and Modernisation: ‘Old’ English in the Twelfth Century.’ Review of English

Studies (forthcoming).——. ‘Gerald of Wales and Standard Old English.’ Notes and Queries n. s. 58.1 (2011): 19–24.——. ‘The Uses of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts c. 1066–1200.’ Diss. University of Oxford, 2008.Fernie, Eric. The Architecture of Norman England. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Fischer, Andreas. ‘The Hatton MS of the West Saxon Gospels: The Preservation and Transmission of Old English.’

The Preservation and Transmission of Anglo-Saxon Culture. Eds. Paul E. Szarmach and Joel T. Rosenthal. Studies inMedieval Culture XL. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications, 1997. 353–67.

——. ‘The Vocabulary of Very Late Old English.’ Studies in English Language and Literature: ‘Doubt Wisely’: Papersin Honour of E. G. Stanley. Eds. M. J. Toswell and E. M. Tyler. London: Routledge, 1996. 29–41.

Frankis, John. ‘Languages and Culture in Contact: Vernacular Lives of St Giles and Anglo-Norman Annotations inan Anglo-Saxon Manuscript.’ Leeds Studies in English n. s. 38 (2007): 101–34.

——. ‘La3amon’s English Sources.’ J. R. R. Tolkein, Scholar and Storyteller: Essays in Memoriam. Eds. Mary Salu andRobert T. Farrell. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1979. 64–76.

——. ‘Towards a Regional Context for Lawman’s Brut: Literary Activity in the Dioceses of Worcester and Here-ford in the Twelfth Century.’ La3amon: Contexts, Language and Interpretation. Eds. Rosamund Allen, Lucy Perryand Jane Roberts. King’s College London Medieval Studies 19. London: King’s College Centre for Late Antiqueand Medieval Studies, 2002. 53–78.

——. ‘Views of Anglo-Saxon England in Post-Conquest Vernacular Writing.’ Orality and Literacy in Early MiddleEnglish. Ed. Herbert Pilch. ScriptOralia 83. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 1996. 227–47.

Franzen, Christine. The Tremulous Hand of Worcester. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991.Fulk, R. D. ‘Consonant Doubling and Open Syllabic Lengthening in the Ormulum.’ Anglia: Zeitschrift fur Englische

Philologie 114 (1996): 481–513.Galloway, Andrew. ‘Middle English as a Foreign Language, to ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘them’’ (Gower, Langland, and the Author

of The Life of St. Margraret).’ Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Teaching 14.1 (2007): 89–102.Gameson, Richard. The Manuscripts of Early Norman England (c.1066–1130). British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow-

ship Monograph. Oxford: Published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press, 1999.Garnett, George. The Norman Conquest: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.Georgianna, Linda. ‘Coming to Terms with the Norman Conquest: Nationalism and English Literary History.’

REAL: Yearbook of Research in English and American Literature 14 (1998): 33–53.——. ‘Periodization and Politics: The Case of the Missing Twelfth-Century in English Literary History.’ Modern

Language Quarterly 64.2 (2003): 153–68.Gibson, Margaret T., T. A. Heslop, and Richard William Pfaff. The Eadwine Psalter: Text, Image, and Monastic Cul-

ture in Twelfth-Century Canterbury. Publications of the Modern Humanities Research Association 14. London:Pennsylvania State University Press, 1992.



Gneuss, Helmut. ‘The Origin of Standard Old English and Aethelwold’s School at Winchester.’ Anglo-Saxon Eng-land 1 (1972): 63–83.

Gray, Douglas. From the Norman Conquest to the Black Death: An Anthology of Writings from England. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2011.

Greenfield, Kathleen. ‘Changing Emphases in English Vernacular Homiletic Literature, 960–1225.’ Journal of Medie-val History 7 (1981): 283–97.

Greenway, Diana A., ed. Henry, Archdeacon of Huntingdon: Historia Anglorum. Oxford Medieval Texts. Oxford: Clar-endon Press, 1996.

Gretsch, Mechthild. ‘In Search of Standard Old English.’ Bookmarks from the Past: Studies in Early English Languageand Literature in Honour of Helmut Gneuss. Eds. Lucia Kornexl and Ursula Lenker. Texte und Untersuchungen zurenglischen Philologie 30. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2003. 33–67.

——. ‘A Key to Ælfric’s Standard Old English.’ Leeds Studies in English n. s. 37 (2006): 161–77.——. ‘Winchester Vocabulary and Standard Old English: The Vernacular in late Anglo-Saxon England.’ Bulletin of

the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 83 (2001): 41–87.Hahn, Thomas. ‘Early Middle English.’ The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Ed. David Wallace.

Paperback ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 61–91.Hall, Joseph. Selections from Early Middle English: 1130–1250. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1920.Handley, Rima. ‘British Museum MS. Cotton Vespasian D. xiv.’ Notes and Queries n. s. 21 (1974): 243–50.Hanna, Ralph. ‘Alliterative Poetry.’ The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Ed. David Wallace. Cam-

bridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 488–512.——. ‘Augustinian Canons and Middle English Literature.’ The English Medieval book: Studies in Meory of Jeremy Grif-

fiths. Eds. A. S. G. Edwards, Vincent Gillespie and Ralph Hanna. London: The British Library, 2000. 27–42.——. ‘Lambeth Palace Library, MS 487: Some Problems of Early Thirteenth-Century Textual Transmission.’ Texts

and Traditions of Medieval Pastoral Care: Essays in Honour of Bella Millett. Eds. Cate Gunn and Catherine Innes-Par-ker. Woodbridge: York Medieval Press, 2009. 78–88.

——. London Literature, 1300–1380. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.——. ‘Some North Yorkshire Scribes and Their Context.’ Medieval Texts in Context. Eds. Denis Reveney and Gra-

ham D. Caie. London: Routledge, 2008. 167–91.——. ‘Yorkshire Writers.’ Proceedings of the British Academy 121 (2003): 91–109.Haugar, Einar, ed. First Grammatical Treatise: The Earliest Germanic Phonology. 2nd ed. The Classics of Linguistics.

London: Longman, 1972.Holden, A. J., ed. Le Roman de Waldef (Cod. Bodmer 168). Cologny-Geneve: Fondation Martin Bodmer, 1984.Holsinger, Bruce. ‘Medieval Studies, Postcolonial Studies, and the Genealogies of Critique.’ Speculum 77 (2002):

1195–227.Howlett, David. The English Origins of Old French Literature. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1996.Hunt, Tony. Teaching and Learning Latin in Thirteenth-Century England. 3 vols. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1991.Hutcheon, Linda. ‘Rethinking the National Model.’ Rethinking Literary History: A Dialogue on Theory. Eds. Linda

Hutcheon and Mario J. Valdes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 3–49.Hutcheon, Linda and Mario J. Valdes, eds. Rethinking Literary History: A Dialogue on Theory. Oxford: Oxford Uni-

versity Press, 2002.Ingram, Richard, ed. The Anglo-Norman Language and its Context. York: York Medieval Press, 2010.Irvine, Susan. ‘Linguistic Peculiarities in Late Copies of Ælfric and their Editorial Implications.’ Essays on Anglo-

Saxon and Related Themes in Memory of Lynne Grundy. Eds. Jane Roberts and Janet Nelson. London: King’s Col-lege London, Centre for Late Antique & Medieval Studies, 2000. 237–57.

——. Old English Homilies from MS Bodley 343. EETS o. s. 302. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.Jackson, Kenneth. Language and History in Early Britain. Edinburgh University Publications: Language and Literature

4. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1953.Jones, Charles. Grammatical Gender in English: 950 to 1250. London: Croom Helm, 1988.Kauffmann, C. M. Romanesque Manuscripts, 1066–1190. Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles 3.

London: Harvey Miller, 1975.Kendall, Calvin B. ‘Dry Bones in a Cathedral: The Story of the Theft of Bede’s Relics and the Translation of

Cuthbert into the Cathedral of Durham in 1104.’ Mediaevalia 10 (1988) [for 1984]: 1–26.Ker, N. R. Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957.Kitson, Peter R. ‘Old English Dialects and the Stages of the Transition to Middle English.’ Folia Linguistica Historica

11 (1992) [for 1990]: 27–87.——. ‘When did Middle English Begin? Later Than you Think!’ Studies in Middle English Linguistics. Ed. Jacek

Fisiak. Trends in Lingustics: Studies and Monographs 103. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1997. 221–69.Laing, Margaret. Catalogue of Sources for a Linguistic Atlas of Early Medieval English. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1993.Laing, Margaret and Roger Lass. A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325. 2007. Edinburgh. [Online].

Retrieved on 22 May 2011 from: http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme1/laeme1_frames.html.



Lambert, Malcolm. Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation. 3rd ed. Oxford:Blackwell, 2002.

Lerer, Seth. ‘Old English and its Afterlife.’ The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Ed. David Wallace.Paperback ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 7–34.

Lewis, C. P. ‘The French in England before the Norman Conquest.’ Anglo-Norman Studies 17 (1994): 122–44.Liuzza, R. M. The Old English Version of the Gospels. EETS o. s. 304, 314. 2 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press,

1994–2000.——. ‘Scribal Habit: The Evidence of the Old English Gospels.’ Rewriting Old English in the Twelfth Century. Eds.

Mary Swan and Elaine Treharne. CSASE 30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Library, 2000. 143–65.Lutz, Angelika. ‘When did English Begin?’ Sounds, Words, Texts and Change: Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, San-

tiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000. Eds. Teresa Fanego, Belen Mendez-Naya and Elena Seoane. Amster-dam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science: Series 4: Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 224.Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2002. 145–71.

Malone, Kemp. ‘When Did Middle English Begin?’ Language 6.4 (1930): 110–7.Marckwardt, Albert H. ‘Verb Inflections in Late Old English.’ Philologica: The Malone Anniversary Studies. Eds. T. A.

Kirby and H. B. Woolf. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1949. 78–88.Markus, Manfred. ‘The Spelling Peculiarities in the Ormulum from an Interdisciplinary Point of View: A Reapprai-

sal.’ The Living Middle Ages: Studies in Medieval English Literature and Its Tradition. Eds. Uwe Boker, Manfred Mar-kus and Rainer Schowerling. Regensburg: Belser Stuttgart, 1989. 69–86.

Matras, Yaron. Language Contact. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,2009.

McGurk, Patrick, R. R. Darlington, and Jennifer Bray. The Chronicle of John of Worcester. Oxford Medieval Texts. 2vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995-.

Menzer, Melinda J. ‘Multilingual Glosses, Bilingual Text: English, Anglo-Norman and Latin in three Manuscriptsof Ælfric’s Grammar.’ Old English Literature in its Manuscript Context. Ed. Joyce Tally Lionarons. Medieval Eur-opean Studies V. Morgantown: West Virginia University Press, 2004. 95–119.

Millar, Robert McColl and Alex Nicholls. ‘Ælfric’s De initio creaturae and London, BL Cotton Vespasian A. xxii:Omission, Addition, Retention and Innovation.’ The Preservation and Transmission of Anglo-Saxon Culture. Eds.PaulE. Szarmach and Joel T. Rosenthal. Studies in Medieval Culture XL. Kalamazoo: Medieval Institute Publications,1997. 431–63.

Millett, Bella. ‘Change and Continuity: The English Sermon Before 1250.’ The Oxford Handbook of Medieval Litera-ture in English. Eds. Elaine Treharne and Greg Walker. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. 221–39.

——. ‘The Discontinuity of English Prose: Structural Innovation in the Trinity and Lambeth Homilies.’ Text andLanguage in Medieval English Prose: A Festschrift for Tadao Kabouchi. Eds. Akio Oizumi, Jacek Fisiak and John Sca-hill. Studies in English Medieval Language and Literature 12. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2006. 129–50.

——. ‘‘‘Hali Meiðhad,’’ ‘‘Sawles Warde’’ and the Continuity of Old English Prose.’ Five Hundred Years of Wordsand Sounds for E. J. Dobson. Eds. E. G. Stanley and Douglas Gray. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1983. 100–8.

——. ‘The Pastoral Context of the Trinity and Lambeth Homilies.’ Essays in Manuscript Geography: Vernacular Manu-scripts of the English West Midlands from the Conquest to the Sixteenth Century. Ed. Wendy Scase. Medieval Textsand Cultures of Northern Europe 10. Turnhout: Brepols, 2007. 43–64.

——. ‘The Saints’ Lives of the Katherine Group and the Alliterative Tradition.’ Journal of English and Germanic Phi-lology 87 (1988): 16–34.

—— and Jocelyn Wogan-Browne, eds. Medieval English Prose for Women: From the Katherine Group and AncreneWisse. Paperback ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992.

Moore, Samuel. ‘Earliest Morphological Changes in Middle English.’ Language 4.4 (1928): 238–66.——. ‘Loss of Final n in Inflectional Syllables of Middle English.’ Language 3.4 (1927): 232–59.Morrison, Stephen. ‘Continuite et innovation litteraire en Angleterre au xiie siecle: la predication de la militia

Christi.’ Cahiers de civilisation medievale 44.3 (2001): 139–57.——. ‘Orm’s English Sources.’ Archiv fur das Studium der Neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 221 (1984): 54–64.——. ‘A Reminiscence of Wulfstan in the Twelfth Century.’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 96 (1995): 229–34.Musset, Lucien. ‘Les apports anglais en Normandie de Rollon a Guillaume le Conquerant.’ Les liens entre l’Angleterre

medievale et la France de l’Ouest: actes du colloque de Poitiers. Ed. Jean-Louis Duchet. Publications de l’Associationdes medieivistes anglicistes de l’enseignement superieur IV. Poitiers: Centre d’etudes superieures de civilisationmedievale, 1977. 59–82.

——. ‘Rouen et l’Angleterre vers l’an mil: du nouveau sur le satiriste Garnier et l’ecole litteraire de Rouen autemps de Richard II.’ Annales de Normandie 24 (1974): 287–90.

Nevanlinna, Saara. ‘Lexical Variation in the Old English Gospel Manuscripts and a Note on Continuation.’ ToExplain the Present: Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen. Eds. Terttu Nevalainenand Leena Kahlas-Tarkka. Memoires de la Societe neo-philologique a Helsingfors 52. Helsinki: Societe Neophi-lologique, 1997. 135–48.



Nortier, Genevieve. Les bibliotheques medievales des abbayes benedictines de Normandie. Caen: Societe d’impressionsCaron, 1966.

O’Donnell, Daniel Paul. Cædmon’s Hymn: A Multimedia Study, Archive and Edition. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2005.Orchard, Andy. ‘Parallel Lives: Wulfstan, William, Coleman and Christ.’ St Wulfstan and his World. Eds. Julia S.

Barrow and Nicholas Brooks. Studies in Early Medieval Britain 4. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005. 39–57.Orme, Nicholas. Medieval Schools: From Roman Britain to Renaissance England. New Haven: Yale University Press,

2006.Otter, Monika. ‘1066: The Moment of Transition in Two Narratives of the Norman Conquest.’ Speculum 74

(1999): 565–86.Pelteret, D. A. E. Catalogue of English post-Conquest Vernacular Documents. Woodbridge: Boydell, 1990.Perkins, David. Is Literary History Possible? Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1992.——, ed. Theoretical Issues in Literary History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991.Pons-Sanz, Sara M. Norse-Derived Vocabulary in Late Old English Texts: Wulfstan’s Works, a Case Study. North-Wes-

tern European Language Evolution Supplement 22. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2007.Pouzet, Jean-Pascal. ‘Augustinian Canons and their Insular French Books in Medieval England: Towards an Assess-

ment.’ Language and Culture in Medieval Britain: The French of England c.1100-c.1500. Eds. Jocelyn Wogan-Browne, et al. York: York Medieval Press, 2009. 266–89.

——. ‘Mapping Insular French Texts? Ideas for Localisation and Correlated Dialectology in Manuscript Materials ofMedieval England.’ The Anglo-Norman Language and its Contexts. Ed. Richard Ingram. York: York MedievalPress, 2010. 102–29.

Proud, Joanna. ‘Old English Prose Saints’ Lives in the Twelfth-Century: The Evidence of the Extant Manuscripts.’Rewriting Old English in the Twelfth Century. Eds. Mary Swan and Elaine Treharne. CSASE 30. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Library, 2000. 117–31.

Rector, Geoff. ‘An Illustrious Vernacular: The Psalter en romanz in Twelfth-Century England.’ Language and Culturein Medieval Britain: The French of England c.1100–c.1500. Ed. Jocelyn Wogan-Browne, et al. York: York MedievalPress, 2009. 198–206.

Richards, Mary P. ‘MS Cotton Vespasian A. xxii: The Vespasian Homilies.’ Manuscripta 22 (1978): 97–103.——. ‘The Rochester Cathedral Library: A Review of Scholarship 1987–2005, Including Annotations to the 1996

Edition of the Catalogues in CBMLC, v. 4.’ Leeds Studies in English n. s. 37 (2006): 283–313.——. Texts and their Traditions in the Medieval Library of Rochester Cathedral Priory. Transactions of the American Phi-

losophical Society 78.3. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1988.Richter, Michael. Sprache und Gesellschaft im Mittelalter: Untersuchungen zur mundlichen Kommunikation in England von

der Mitte des elften bis zum Beginn des Vierzehten Jahrhunderts. Monographien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters 18.Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1979.

Rigg, A. G. ‘Henry of Huntingdon’s Metrical Experiments.’ Journal of Medieval Latin 1 (1991): 60–72.——. A History of Anglo-Latin Literature, 1066–1422. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Roberts, Jane. ‘La3amon’s Plain Words.’ Middle English Miscellany: From Vocabulary to Linguistic Variation. Ed. Jacek

Fisiak. Poznan: Motivex, 1996. 107–22.——. ‘On the Disappearance of Old English.’ The Kemble Lectures on Anglo-Saxon Studies, 2005–2008. Eds. Alice

Jorgensen, Helen Conrad-O’Briain and John Scattergood. Dublin: School of English, Trinity College, Dublin,2009. 12–43.

Rothwell, William. ‘Language and Government in Medieval England.’ Zeitschrift fur franzosische Sprache und Literatur93 (1983): 258–70.

Salter, Elizabeth. ‘An Obsession with the Continent.’ English and International: Studies in the Literature, Art and Patron-age of Medieval England. Eds. Derek Pearsall and Nicolette Zeeman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1988. 1–100.

Savage, Anne. ‘Old and Middle English: Poetry and Prose.’ Studies in the Age of Chaucer 23 (2001): 503–11.Schlemilch, Willy. Beitrage zur Sprache und Orthograhie spataltengl. Sprachdenkmaler der Ubergangszeit. Studien zur eng-

lischen Philologie 34. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1914.Searle, Eleanor. Predatory Kinship and the Creation of Norman Power, 840–1066. Berkeley: University of California

Press, 1988.Sellars, W. C. and R. J. Yeatman. 1066 and All That: A Memorable History of England, Comprising all the Parts You

Can Remember, Including 103 Good Things, 5 Bad Kings and 2 Genuine Dates. London: Methuen, 1930.Severs, J. Burke and Albert E. Hartung. A Manual of Writings in Middle English. 11 vols. New Haven: Connecticut

Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1967-.Sharpe, Richard. A Handlist of the Latin Writers of Great Britain and Ireland Before 1540. Publications of the Journal of

Medieval Latin 1. Turnhout: Brepols, 1997.——. ‘Peoples and Languages in Eleventh- and Twelfth-Century Britain and Ireland: Reading the Charter Evi-

dence.’ The Reality Behind Charter Diplomatic in Anglo-Norman Britain. Ed. Dauvit Broun. Glasgow, forthcoming.1–119.

Short, Ian. Geffrei Gaimar: Estoire des Engleis: History of the English. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.



——. ‘Language and Literature.’ A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World. Eds. Christopher Harper-Bill and Elisa-beth van Houts. Cambridge: Boydell, 2002. 191–213.

——. ‘On Bilingualism in Anglo-Norman England.’ Romance Philology 33.4 (1980): 467–79.——. ‘Patrons and Polyglots: French Literature in Twelfth-Century England.’ Anglo-Norman Studies 14 (1992):

229–49.Sisam, Celia. ‘The Scribal Tradition of the Lambeth Homilies.’ Review of English Studies n. s. 2.6 (1951): 105–13.Skaffari, Janne. Studies in Early Middle English Loanwords: Norse and French Influences. Anglicana Turkuensia 26 Turku:

University of Turku, 2009.Smith, Jeremy. ‘Standard Language in Early Middle English?’ Placing Middle English in Context. Ed. Irma Taavitsai-

nen et al. Topics in English Linguistics 35. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000. 125–39.Solopova, Elizabeth. ‘The Metre of the Ormulum.’ Studies in English Language and Literature: ‘Doubt Wisely’: Papers in

Honour of E. G. Stanley. Eds. M. J. Toswell and E. M. Tyler. London: Routledge, 1996. 423–39.Southern, R. W. ‘Aspects of the European Tradition of Historical Writing: The Sense of the Past.’ Transactions of

the Royal Historical Society 5th Series 23 (1973): 243–63.Spear, David S. The Personnel of the Norman Cathedrals during the Ducal Period, 911–1204. London: Institute of His-

torical Research, 2006.Stanley, E. G. ‘La3amon’s Antiquarian Sentiments.’ Medium Aevum 38 (1969): 23–37.Swan, Mary. ‘Imagining a Readership for Post-Conquest Old English Manuscripts.’ Imagining the Book. Eds. Ste-

phen Kelly and John J. Thompson. Medieval Texts and Cultures of Northern Europe. Turnhout: Brepols, 2005.145–57.

——. ‘Old English Made New: One Catholic Homily and Its Reuses.’ Leeds Studies in English n. s. 28 (1997): 1–18.

—— and Elaine M. Treharne. Rewriting Old English in the Twelfth Century. CSASE 30. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2000.

Swanson, R. N. The Twelfth-Century Renaissance. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1999.Tabuteau, Emily Zack. Transfers of Property in Eleventh Century Norman Law. Studies in Legal History. Chapel Hill:

University of North Carolina Press, 1988.Thomas, Hugh M. The English and the Normans: Ethnic Hostility, Assimilation, and Identity 1066-c. 1220. Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 2003.——. The Norman Conquest: England after William the Conqueror. Critical Issues in History. Lanham: Rowan and Lit-

tlefield, 2008.Thomason, Sarah Grey. Language Contact: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2001.Thomson, R. M. Books and Learning in Twelfth-Century England: The Ending of ‘Alter Orbis’. Walkern: The Red Gull

Press, 2006.Thorpe, Lewis. Gerald of Wales: The Journey through Wales and the Description of Wales. Harmondsworth: Penguin,

1978.Tolkien, J. R. R. ‘Ancrene Wisse and Hali Meiðhad.’ Essays and Studies 14 (1929): 104–26.Townend, Matthew. Language and History in Viking Age England: Linguistic Relations between Speakers of Old Norse and

Old English. Studies in the Early Middle Ages 6. Turnhout: Brepols, 2002.Traxel, Oliver M. Language Change, Writing and Textual Interference in Post-Conquest Old English Manuscripts: The Evi-

dence of Cambridge, University Library, Ii. 1. 33. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2004.Treharne, Elaine. ‘Bishops and their Texts in the Later Eleventh Century: Worcester and Exeter.’ Essays in Manu-

script Geography: Vernacular Manuscripts of the English West Midlands from the Conquest to the Sixteenth Century. Ed.Wendy Scase. Medieval Texts and Cultures of Northern Europe 10. Turnhout: Brepols, 2007. 13–28.

——. ‘Categorization, Periodization, and the Silence of (the) English in the Twelfth Century.’ New Medieval Litera-tures 8 (2006a): 247–73.

——. ‘English in the Post-Conquest Period.’ Blackwell Companion to Anglo-Saxon Literature. Eds. Phillip Pulsianoand Elaine Treharne. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001. 403–14.

——. ‘The Form and Function of the Old English Dicts of Cato.’ Journal of English and Germanic Philology 102(2003a): 465–85.

——. ‘The Life and Times of Old English Homilies for the First Sunday in Lent.’ The Power of Words: Anglo-SaxonStudies Presented to Donald G. Scragg on his Seventieth Birthday. Eds. Hugh Magennis and Jonathan Wilcox. Mor-gantown: West Virginia University Press, 2006b. 205–40.

——. ‘The Life of English in the Mid-Twelfth-Century: Ralph d’Escures Homily on the Virgin Mary.’ Writers ofthe Reign of Henry II. Eds. Ruth Kennedy and Simon Meecham-Jones. The New Middle Ages. Basingstoke: Pal-grave Macmillan, 2006c. 169–86.

——. ‘Making their Presence Felt: Readers of Ælfric, c. 1050–1350.’ A Companion to Ælfric. Eds. Hugh Magennisand Mary Swan. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Boston: Brill, 2009. 399–422.

——. The Old English Life of St Nicholas with the Old English Life of St Giles. Leeds Texts and Monographs: new ser-ies 15. Leeds: Leeds Studies in English, 1997.



——. ‘Producing a Library in Late Anglo-Saxon England: Exeter 1050–1072.’ Review of English Studies 54 (2003b):155–72.

——. ‘Reading from the Margins: The Uses of Old English Homiletic Manuscripts in the Post-Conquest Period.’Beatus Vir: Studies in Early English and Norse Manuscripts in Memory of Phillip Pulsiano. Eds. A. N. Doane andKirsten Wolf. Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 319. Tempe: Arizona State University Press, 2006d.329–58.

——. ‘The Vernaculars of Medieval England, 1170–1350.’ The Cambridge Companion to Medieval English Culture.Ed. Andrew Galloway. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. 217–36.

Trotter, D. A., ed. Multilingualism in Later Medieval Britain. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2000.Tsurushima, Hirokazu. ‘Domesday Interpreters.’ Anglo-Norman Studies 18 (1995): 201–22.Turville-Petre, J. E. ‘Studies on the Ormulum MS.’ Journal of English and Germanic Philology 46 (1947): 1–27.Turville-Petre, Thorlac. England the Nation: Language, Literature, and National Identity, 1290–1340. Oxford: Claren-

don Press, 1996.——. ‘Some Medieval English Manuscripts in the North-East Midlands.’ Manuscripts and Readers in Fifteenth-Century

England: The Literary Implications of Manuscript Study. Ed. Derek Pearsall. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1983. 125–41.

Tyler, Elizabeth M. ‘Fictions of Family: The Encomium Emmae reginae and Virgil’s Aeneid.’ Viator 36 (2005a): 149–79.

——. ‘From Old English to Old French.’ Language and Culture in medieval Britain: The French of England c.1100–c.1500. Ed. Jocelyn Wogan-Browne et al. York: York Medieval Press, 2009. 164–78.

——. ‘Talking about History in Eleventh-Century England: The Encomium Emmae Reginae and the Court ofHarthacnut.’ Early Medieval Europe 13.4 (2005b): 359–83.

——. ‘The Vita Ædwardi: The Politics of Poetry at Wilton Abbey.’ Anglo-Norman Studies 31 (2008): 135–56.Valdes, Mario J. ‘Rethinking the History of Literary History.’ Rethinking Literary History: A Dialogue on Theory. Eds.

Linda Hutcheon and Mario J. Valdes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 63–115.van Houts, Elisabeth. ‘The Flemish Contribution to Biographical Writing in England in the Eleventh Century.’

Writing Medieval Biography: Essays in Honour of Professor Frank Barlow. Eds. David Bates, Julia Crick and SarahHamilton. Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer, 2007. 111–28.

——. ‘The Memory of 1066 in Written and Oral Traditions.’ Anglo-Norman Studies 19 (1997): 167–79.van Houts, Elisabeth M. C., ed. The Gesta Normannorum Ducum of William of Jumieges, Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of

Torigni. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992–1995.Wallace, David, ed. The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Paperback ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-

versity Press, 2002.Warner, Rubie D. N. Early English Homilies from the Twelfth Century MS Vesp. D. XIV. EETS o. s. 152. London:

Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1917.Watson, Nicholas. ‘Censorship and Cultural Change in Late-Medieval England: Vernacular Theology, the Oxford

Translation Debate, and Arundel’s Constitutions of 1409.’ Speculum 70.4 (1995): 822–64.—— and Jocelyn Wogan-Browne. ‘The French of England: The Compileison, Ancrene Wisse, and the Idea of

Anglo-Norman.’ Journal of Romance Studies 4.3 (2004): 35–59.Webber, Teresa. ‘The Patristic Content of English Book Collections in the Eleventh Century: Towards a Conti-

nental Perspective.’ Of the Making of Books: Medieval Manuscripts, their Scribes and Readers. Eds. P. R. Robinsonand Rivkah Zim. Aldershot: Scolar, 1997. 191–205.

Weinberg, Carole. ‘‘‘By a Noble Church on the Bank of the Severn’’: A Regional View of La3amon’s Brut.’ LeedsStudies in English n. s. 26 (1995): 49–62.

West, Francis James. ‘The Colonial History of the Norman Conquest?’ History 84 (1999): 219–36.Wilcox, Jonathan. ‘Wulfstan and the Twelfth Century.’ Rewriting Old English in the Twelfth Century. Eds. Mary

Swan and Elaine M. Treharne. CSASE 30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 83–97.Wilson, R. M. ‘English and French in England, 1100–1300.’ History 28 (1943): 37–60.——. The Lost Literature of Medieval England. 2nd ed. London: Methuen, 1970.——., ed. Sawles Warde: An Early Middle English Homily Edited from the Bodley, Royal and Cotton MSS. Kendal: Titus

Wilson, 1938.Winterbottom, Michael and R. M. Thomson. William of Malmesbury: Gesta pontificum Anglorum: The History of the

English Bishops. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007.Wogan-Browne, Jocelyn, et al., eds. Language and Culture in Medieval Britain: The French of England c. 1100–1500.

York: York Medieval Press, 2009.Woledge, Brian and H. P. Clive. Repertoire des plus anciens textes en prose francaise: depuis 842 jusqu’aux premieres annees

au XIIIe siecle. Publications Romanes et Francaises 79. Geneva: Droz, 1964.Wright, Laura. ‘Bills, Accounts, Inventories: Everyday Trilingual Activities in the Business World of Later Medieval

England.’ Multilingualism in Later Medieval Britain. Ed. D. A. Trotter. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 2000. 149–56.——. ‘Macaronic Writing in a London Archive.’ History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Lin-

gustics. Ed. Matti Rissanen, et al. Topics in English Linguistics 10. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1992. 762–70.



——. ‘Medieval Latin, Anglo-Norman and Middle English in a Civic London Text: An Inquisition of the RiverThames, 1421.’ De Mot en Mot: Aspects of Medieval Linguistics: Essays in Honour of William Rothwell. Eds. StewartGregory and D. A. Trotter. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1997. 223–60.

Wright, Thomas. The Anglo-Latin Satirical Poets and Epigrammatists of the Twelfth Century. RS 59. 2 vols. London:Longman, 1872.

Zarnecki, George, Janet Holt, and Tristram Holland., eds. English Romanesque Art 1066–1200. London: Weidenfeldand Nicholson, 1984.

