NEW SOURCES FOR THE ORMULUM

In his contribution to the study of the sources of the Ormulum, Heinrich Matthes asserted that Orm had consulted an index nominorum, of unspeci- fied identity, in order to supplement material derived from his principal sources.1 Onomastic compilations and encyclopaedic works of a more general nature were used extensively by medieval writers and the presence of such a volume in Orm’s library, which is known to have contained copies of the Glossa, the pseudo-Anselm Enarrationes in MatthQi Etiangelium+ Bede’s In Lucae Expositio Evangelium and, in all probability, the same writer’s genuine Homijiae, would be unremarkable? Jerome’s De Nominibus Hebraicis, for example, the encyclopaedic works of Isidore, Bede and Raban Maur are well represented in English libraries and may well have been among the works Orm had at his disposal. Such a generalized assessment is of limited value, however; for a soundly-based appreciation of Orm’s enngfissh .s&ze, of his compositional methods and the overall design of his homilies, the firm identification of source books is a fundamental pre-requisite. To the problem of the range and identity of Orm’s sources, this paper offers a small contribution.

As Matthes noted (Die Einheitlichkeit, pp. 14Off.)? a good number of onomastic interpretations compiled by late Antique and Carolingian writers found their way into 0rm.s principal sources, notably the Glossa and the Enarrationes. In cases where it can be shown that Orm is following these sources, the influence of a separate index nominorum should be considered doubtful. However, there are instances in the Ormulum of expository matter of a loosely encyclopaedic nature which is only partially dependent on the principal sources and which certainly owes its form and content equally to the consultation of secondary works. I would like to draw attention to two such instances here in order to demonstrate the validity of this statement and thereby to identify further sources for the poem.

In his exposition of Ioan.III.16, Sic enim Deus dilexit mundum, Orm gives a long account of the spiritual significance of the concept werelfd, thus:

De werelId ISS US here sett. To tacnenn mannkinn ane. Annd forr batt manness body iss. off all be werelld fqedd. Off heffness tir. annd off be 1ifR off waterr. annd off erbe: Annd forr batt manness sawle ISS her. We1 burrh be werelld tacnedd. Forr babe fallenn inntIll an: Affterr irxkisshe spzche. Forr werelld ISS nemmnedd cossm6s. Swa summ be &kess kibenn. Forr batt ltt iss wurrblike shridd. Wibb sunne annd mone. annd sterrness Onn heffness whel. ai1 ummbetrm: burrh zodd tatt sw~ilc itt wrohhte Annd ec itt ISS wurrblike shridd. 6att wasst tu we1 to sobe 0 IifFt. o land. o waterrflod: wibb fele kinne shaffte. Annd sawie iss ec wurrblike shrldd: Durrh jjodd inn hxe kmde: Wibb unndazbshildqnesse: annd ec. Wi@ witt. annd wille. annd mmde.

Neophiiologus 68 (1984) 444-450

Stephen Morrison - New Sources for the “Ormulum” 445

Annd For+ nemmnebb godd: De sawle hiss onnlicnesse. Forr batt te33 babe sawle. annd godd. Sinndenn w$butenn ende. Annd hafenn minde. annd wiile. annd watt: Act nohht onn ane wise. Forr Eodd ltt hafebb ax3 inn hlmm. Annd zfre. annd zfre itt haffde. Annd-sawle onnfoFat<iodess hannd: All hire duhhtisnesse. @r beer he shapebb sawle off nohht. all alls hlmm sellfenn Ilkebb. Annd forrbl shall be werelld her. Bitacnenn mannkinn ane. Forr babe fallenn inntill an. Swa summ KC habbe shzwedd Forr e$$err iss wurrbhke shrldd’ Act nohht onn ane wise. Annd tohh ISS b33re babre shrud’ burrh cossmbs wel bitacnedd. Annd forrbl mahht tu nemmnenn mann. Affterr jjrikkisshe spazche. Mycrocossm&. batt nemmnedd 1s~. Affterr enntihsshe sDazche PeTlIttle werelld.*all for@. Forr batt te manness-sawle. - lss shrldd burrh kodd wurrblike annd wel. Webb cod. annd wurrbfull kmde All alls swi sum& hiss werilld ES. Wel shr]dd’&$ scone shaffteis Annd ec be werelid tacnenn rnaT3: Mannkmn all bess te bettre. batt maniess bodl3 fesedd ISS: &&d wrohht off f;wwre shafftess. Off heffness tir annd off be hfft. Off waterr annd off erbe.3

(ll.l7549-610)

Lines 17549-592 are based primarily, though probably not exclusively, on the Glosso whose marginal comment on tnundum reads:

Cosmos grece quod latme mundus interpretatur. ornatus dlcltur. Per mundum lgltur humana nostra sigmficatur. non quod secundum corpus ex quattuor elementIs constet. sed qma secundum animam a deo est ornata et ad lmaginem de1 est facta. quam ad hoc diligit deus vt earn eternam faclat.4

(fol. I 153)

It provides Orm with the derivation of were//d from the Greek, with its signification, with the association of body and soul in that both are wurrplike shridd, together with the doctrinally important assertions that the soul was created ivijjufenn ende and in God’s onnlicne.~se.5 Orm’s development of cossn& to A4ycrocossm~s. of world to man, owes nothing to the G~~.wI. however, and since it is unlikely to have been an independent addition, his utilization of a further source or sources can be confidently assumed.

A likely source for the equation of Mycrocossmbs - Pe little were/Id is a portion of ch.9 of Isidore’s De Ncziura Serum. The relevant passage is:

Secundum mystIcurn autem sensum, mundus competenter homo slgniticatur: qma sjcut IlIe ex quatuor concretus est elementIs, lta et lste constat quatuor humorlbus uno temperament0 comm~st~s. Unde et veteres hotnmem m commumonem fabrtcaz mundi constltuerunt, Slquldem Grazce mundus ~&J~o~, homo autem plxp&oopo<, Id est. mmor mundus, est appellatus.

(PL 83.977-78)

Both Latin texts display several points of similarity; yet a comparison shows that Orm has appropriated additional material from Isidore selectively, and integrated it into the framework supplied by the Glossu. The case for the influence of the De Nafura Rerun? does not rest solely on the parallel of tninor mundus: little wereild, however; it is strengthened by the close verbal similaritv of Orm’s

446 Stephen Morrison - New Sources for the ~‘Orrnulum”

Annd ec be werelld tacnenn ma331 Mannkinn all bess te bettre, batt manness bodis fe3edd iss: annd wrohht off fowwre shafftess. Off heffness fir. annd off be lifft. Off waterr. annd off erbe.

to kidore’s mundus competenter homo signijicatur: quia sicut J/e e-y quatlior concretes est elementis.

kIore’s influence may also be claimed for an earlier passage m which Orm expounds the significance of names applied to angels. It opens the homily on Lc.I.Xff, prompted by the gospel’s missus es angelus Gabrielu Deo in civitatem Galilaeae:

Whzr summ we lindenn o be hoc. Enniell bl name nemmneddr Wel birrb uss lokenn @rwhatt ussr Patt name ma33 bltacnenn. Forr niss himm nzfre name sett: Butt iff ltt shule tacnenn. Whatt werrc hjmm iss burrh drihhtm sett: To forbenn her onn erbe. Forr rnlchazl bitacne@ uss: Affterr batt ICC may, seggenn. Whillc iss Webb iodd all efennhc. Onn alle kmne mahhte. I%s nam bmi batt mushe ben: WI!J~ jjodd off efenn mahhte. Patt name wass hlmm sett burrh iodd: Forr batt he shollde tihhtenn. Onnyen an drake, annd cwellenn himm: Purrh hefennhke mahhte: Annd tatt wass don forr batt itt uss. full wel bltacnenn shollde. batt godess sune shollde weI1 be defell oferrswifenn. Annd RaphaZl bltacnej+ uss: affterr batt KC ma33 seggenn. drihhtmess hallxhe lzchedom: annd sawless ezhesallfe. Patt name wass hlrnrn sett burrh iodd: forr batt he wollde himm senndenn. LV$b hefennhke lzchedom: To kechenn tobess eyjhne. PISS tobi wass an halis mann’ AmanE mdisskenn bede. Annd he wass zness wurrbenn blind: Swa summ ltt drlhhtin wollde: Annd drlhhtm sende Rapha& heh enngell dun off heffne. Webb hefennhke lzchedom: to 3lfenn tumm hiss slhhbe. Annd tatt wass don forr batt ltt uss. Full wel bltacnenn shollde. Patt drlhhtm shollde yfenn US. God sawless eshe sihhbe. Purrh crtsstenndomess lzche crafft: Annd burrh be rlhhte kefe Annd burrh batt werrc batt tzr tolIp: Annd burrh batt Eode wille. Annd iabrlzl bitacnebb ussr Onn ennghssh - godess strenncbe. Annd swa wass he nemmnedd burrh iodd: Forr batt ltt tacnenn shollde. batt himm wass sett burrh drlhhtm jjodd: To k@enn. annd to shzwenn. Till zacarise Eodess prest. Annd ec hll Sannte Marse. Batt godess sune. Iesu crlst burrh hiss ioddcunnde strenncbe: Vss shollde mn ure menrusscle33c be defeil oferrswlfenn

(Il. 1827-84)

Orm introduces his three-fold onomastic interpretation with a statement that the names applied to angels are indicative of their God- given functions and are thus worthy of attention. A number of interdependent sources for this statement (and for the passage as a whole) need to be considered here. In the principal sources, the G/ossu and Bede’s In Lucam, one reads: ldclrco angel1 prluans nornmibus censentur ut signetur per uocabula etlarn m operatlone qmd ualeant.. Ad Marlam ergo uirgmem Gabrlhel nuttltur qm Del fortltudo nommatur. Ilium qmppe nuntlare uemebat qm ad debellandas aerlas potestates humIlls apparere dignatus est. .6

(in Lucam 1426-35)

Gabriel. Be. ldeo angel1 ex nornme aliquando slgnantur ut ex IPSO normne quod rnmlstratun veniant demonstretur. Gabriel fortitudo del: qula illum nunclat qut ad debellandum diabolum vemebat,

(Ghsa, fol.llOOv)

Stephen Morrison - New Sources for the “Ormulum” 441

either of which, it seems, Orm could have drawn upon for his opening remark. Neither text, however, extends the discussion to include the interpretation of Michalef and Rapha&, for which another source was used. The relevant section in book VII, ch.5, De Angelis, of Isidore’s EtJmofogiae displays such close similarities to Orm’s verses that its direct influence merits serious consideration. The text, which draws and expands on Jerome’s Comm. in Danielem. VIII. 16,17, reads:

Qmdam autem archangelorum prtvatts nommtbus appehantur, ut per vocabula ipsa in opere sue qmd valeant designetur. Gabriel Hebraice m hnguam nostram vertttur fortrtudo Del. Vbt emm potentta dwma vel fortttudo mamfestatur, Gabrtel mtttttur Vnde et eo ternpore, quo erat Dommus nasctturus et trmmphaturus de mundo, Gabrtel venit ad Mariam, ut tllum adnunttaret qut ad debehandas aertas potestates humths vemre dtgnatus est. Mtchael mterpretatur, QUI smut Dew Quando emm ahqutd m mundo mtrae virtutis fit, hit archangelus mtttttur. Et ex IPSO opere nomen est ems, qma nemo valet facere quod facere potest Deus. Raphael interpretatur curatio vel medtcma Det. Vbtcumque emm curandt et medendt opus necessarmm est, htc archangelus a Deo mtttttur; et inde medicina Dei vocatur. Vnde et ad Tobiam rdem archangelus mtssus ocuhs eius curationem adhibuit, et caecitate detersa visum ei restituit.’

The wording of Isidore’s opening sentence is closely similar to the corresponding statements from the Glossa and the Ln Lucam, given above. The latter’s in operatione quidualeant and 1sidore.s in opere sue quid valeant offer more precise parallels to Orm’s Whatt werrc himm is ,burrh drihhtin sett than the corresponding comment in the Glossa, whose influence may, therefore, be considered doubtful here.

In order to establish the direct influence of the Et)mo/ogiae on the interpretations of Micha&, RaphaLe and Gabrkl, it is necessary to show, however, that Isidore’s material stands in closer relationship to the Ormulum than does the corresponding explanation in Gregory’s Homilia XX.YZP’ in Erangelia, which likewise gives onomastic interpretation and explication of the archangels’ names. Direct gregorian influence is unlikely for several reasonsQ First. Gregory’s treatment of the subject is embedded in his exposition of LLK.XV. 1- 10; Orm’s expository method is to treat each verse of the pericope individually, selecting explanatory matter from his principal sources which deal with those verses. His use of the Glossa, the Enarrutiones and Bede’s Ztz Lucam exemplifies this procedure well, and it is therefore improbable, though not impossible, that he should turn to an exposition of LzK.XV. l-10 in the composition of his piece on Luc.I.26ff. Furthermore. some of the elements of Gregory’s explanation which correspond to Orm’s verses have been appropriated by Bede in his Ltr Lucam; since Orm is known to have made use of Bede’s work, it is likely that. in these cases, the gregorian material has reached Orm through the intermediary of Bede. Finally, close textual comparison shows that the precise verbal articulation of these traditional ideas in Isidore provides a closer parallel to the Ormufum than does that in Gregory.

A clear demonstration of the validity ofthis last point is the treatment of the name Raphael. Orm says that the name betokens haIlshe khedom~

448 Stephen Morrison - New Sources for the “Ormulum”

annd sawless eshesallfe? for which Isidore’s curatio \lel medicina Dei” is a more satisfactory source than Gregory’s simple medicina Dei (PL 76.125 1C). Similarly, the description of the healing of Tobias, as given by Isidore, hit archangelus a Deo mittitur.. . Vnde et ad Tobiam idem archangelus missus oculis ems curationem adhibuit, et caecitate detersa Gum ei restit&,” on which Orm’s heh enngell and to Sifenn himm hiss sihhbe are clearly dependent, is to be preferred to Gregory’s dum Tobia oculos quasiper ofjicium curatioms tetigit, cacitatis ejus tenebras tersit (PL 76.125lC).

More problematical is the textual evidence for the interpretation of Michael. The relevant section of the Etynologiae, given above, owes nothing to Jerome; it appears to be an abbreviation of Gregory’s explanation, which reads:

Mxhael namque, qms ut Dew. Et quotles rnux vlrtutls ahquld agltur. Mxhael mIttI perhibetur% ut ex tpso actu et nomme detur mtelligi quia nullus potest facere quod facere prazvalet Deus.

(PL 76 125lA)

The wording of the two accounts is so similar that either. on the basis of this evidence alone. may be regarded as the source for Forr michaal bitacnepb uss . . Wipb godd ojfejenn mahhte. The reason Orm then gives for the application of the name to the archangel has no parallel in the sources under discussion. Gregory, interestingly, inserts a quotation from Ap0c.XI1.7~ Factum est pralium cum Michaele archangelo, in dealing with the concept of the rebel angels’ pride, a quotation which may have prompted Orm to include reference to the fight with the dragon. Equally plausible, however, is the assertion that Orm made the connection himself and translated, in a loose manner, the appropriate verses from Apocalypsis; compare Ire shollde jihh tenn/OnnSan an drake with Michuel et angeh ems prueliabantur cum dracone (Apoc.XII.7); fiurrh hejennlike muhhte with Grtus, et regnum Dei nostri, et potestus Christi eius (v. 10) and pe dejell ujerrswijenn with serpens untiquus, qui t’ocatur diabolus . Et ipsi licerunt (vv.9,ll).

The case for direct gregorian Influence is further weakened by examining the textual evidence for Orm’s treatment of gubrial. His explanation derives from material in Bede, supplemented by important details taken from the EtJnzologiae. Bede’s account is taken almost perbutim from Gregory’s homilia JYxxlV, which latter was also clearly drawn on by Isidore. From the common material, Orm extracts the simple onomastic interpretation: for the spiritual significance ofgode,y.y strenncpe in the lines that follow, Orm has made use of details in the Etjmologiae not found in the other sources. His reference to Christ’s goddcunnde strenncpe translates potentia dtlina l>el jortitudo, ” the detail of Christ’s humanity appears to have been prompted by eo temporet quo erat Dominus nasciturus, and the statement of victory, be dejell ojerrswijenn (a repetition

Stephen Morrison - New Sources for the ~~Ormulurn” 449

designed to harmonize with the earlier treatment of Michu&) owes as much to Isidore’s triurnphaturus de mundo as to the verses in Apocul>qpsis.‘3

The manner in which Orm utilized these additional sources shows that he was not slavishly dependent on his principal authorities. His recourse to the De Nutura Rerum and the Etymologiue may have been stimulated, in a general way, by recollection of their contents and then close association with matter derived from the Glos.~ and the In LAKYXV. More importantly, the procedure exemplifies the intended comprehensiveness of his expositions, in which teaching is occasionally introduced? independently of the precise wording of the pericope. for the sake of .yukc/e nede. It may also be noted that the two extracts discussed here belong to the earliest portions of the composed text.14 thus indicating that these secondary sources were available to Orm at the outset of his endeavour. Their influence extends the range of books to which Orm is known to have had access and suggests that others await identification.

Glessen STEPHEN MORRISON

Notes

1. Heinrich C. Matthes, Dte Einheitlichkeit des Orrmulum: Studien zur Textkritik, zu den Quellen undzur sprachlichen Form von Orrrmns Evangeltenbuch (Heidelberg, 1933). vv. 14Off. -

2. For a recent statement on the principal sources, see my article-?ources~for the Ormulum A Re-exammation,” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 84 (1983), 419-36.

3. Textual quotation is based on.Roberi Holt, ed., The Ormultum. v&h the Notes and Glossary of Dr. R. M. White, 2 vols (Oxford, 1878). Departures from this edition are explained in my “Sources for the Ormulum,” fn.5 I prmt the fifteen-syllable. full typographic hne: lineation, however, is that of the White-Hoh edmon.

4. Biblia cum Glossa Ordinaria Walafrid. Strabonis (Venice, 1495). The edition of the Glossa m J-P. Mtgne, Patrologia Latina, 113,114 (Paris, 1844-64) hereafter abbreviated to PL followed by volume and column numbers, is not trustworthy.

5. The attributes of the world in Orm’s passage (ll.l7561-568) bear some simtlarny to Isidore’s account of De Mundo in his Etymologiae (X111.1), in the phrases: Mundus est caelum et terra. mare .; caelum, sol, luna, aer, maria and Graeci vero nomen mundo de ornament0 adcommodaverunt, propter diversitatem elementorum et pulchritudinem stderum. So general and obvious is the descrtption, however, that it may equally plausibly be Orm’s Independent elaboration. That no spectfic source should be demanded for the nammg of the four elements is shown by Orm’s earlier- almost identical, explanation m II.1 1501-504. On Isidore’s Etymologtae, see below, fn. 8.

6. D. Hurst, ed,, Bedae Venerabilis Opera, Pars tI.3. In Lucae Expositio Evangelium, bt Marci Expositio Evangehum. Corpus Christianorum Series Latma, CXX (Turnbut, l$J(iO), cited by book and line numbers. Bede draws his comment from Gregory’s Homilra .Y~~IP in Evangelta, PL 76. 1250-51.

7. The Glossa compiler based his comment on Bede’s treatment of Gabrihel m his homelia 3, In Adventu. m D. Hurst. ed., Bedae Venerabths Opera Homiletica, Homeharum Evangelii, Ltbrt II. Corpus Chrtstianorum Series Latma, CXXII (Turnhout, 1955). p. 15.

8 W. M. Lindsay, ed., Isidori Hispalensts Episcopt: Etymologiarum sive Origines, 2 vols (Oxford, 1911). The corresponding passage in the De Return Naturts of Raban Maur (PL I 11.28) is copied almost verbatim fro-m Isidore with the result that, on the evidence discussed here, it is not possible to state unreservedly which of the versions was available to Orm. Subsequent references to Isidore’s Etymologiae should be interpreted, therefore, as meanmg either the original work or Raban’s later adaptation which, m Migne’s edition, bears the title De Utnrerso. Isidore’s explanation, when compared with that of Jerome m his commentary

450 Stephen Morrison - New Sources for the “Ormulum”

on Dun~e1, in PL 25.538, IS seen to have a much closer relattonshrp to Orm’s verses. Gregor Sarrazin, “Ueber die Quellen des Orrmulum,” Enghche Studien, 6 (1883). l-27 argues cursorily, uncritically and unconvincingly for the influence of several of Isrdore’s works.

9. For a more general treatment of the question, see Matthes, Die Einheiflichkeit, pp. 79- 83.

10 As Jerome, PL 25.538. 11. Absent from Jerome’s account, Ibid., loc.cit. 12 Raban Maur’s De Rerum Naturis reads simply potentia velfortitudo (PL 111.28) a

slight and insubstantial indication that Orm was reading Isidore here. 13, This and the previous Latin phrase have been taken verb&m from Jerome. 14, Ll.l7549-610 are clearly among the last-composed verses of the extunt text whtch IS,

however, a fragment. If one accepts that the whole work, the scope of which is Indicated by the Latin pertcopes, was brohht tillende (Dedtcatron ,28), these lines should be considered as early rather than late m the poem’s chronology.