Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:33:12.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ælfric's use of etymologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Joyce Hill
Joyce Hill
Affiliation:
The University of Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Augustine, Jerome, Bede, Gregory, Smaragdus and Haymo, the exegetical authorities acknowledged by Ælfric in the Latin preface to the Catholic Homilies, frequently used etymologies as one of their techniques for penetrating the words of the biblical text in order to arrive at their spiritual essence. To the modern student of language their interpretations often seem arbitrary, even bizarre, but the idea that there was an intimate connection between the signifying name and the person, place or thing signified was well established within the scriptural canon and was extended and confirmed by the cumulative authority of the exegetes themselves. It was Isidore of Seville, in his Etymologies, who provided the most systematic definition of this tradition of etymologizing. As he explained it, it was a method for determining the true essence of the thing designated by the process of penetrating its appellation, since all things and all activities which were named ‘secundum naturam’ (as opposed to those arbitrarily named ‘secundum placitum’) were designated by those words which had etymologies enshrining the very quality or idea so designated. Given this definition, with its underlying philosophical and linguistic assumptions, it is easy to understand why etymologies were exploited in Christian exegesis and teaching. It was accepted that biblical names were in the category ‘secundum naturam’ since they were God-given or at least divinely sanctioned, and the rationale and method of their penetration had the advantage of harmonizing closely with the general interpretative process that was employed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anglo-Saxon England , Volume 17 , December 1988 , pp. 35 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church: the First Part containing the Sermones Catholici or Homilies of Ælfric, 2 vols., ed. Thorpe, B. (London, 1844–6) 1, 1.Google Scholar

2 Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi Etymologiarum sive originum libri XX, ed. Lindsay, W.M., 2 vols. (Oxford, 1911) 1.xxix. For discussion of Isidore's definitions, seeGoogle ScholarEngels, J., ‘La Portée de l'etymologique isidorienne’, SM 3rd ser. 3 (1962), 99–128, andGoogle Scholarde Poerck, G., ‘Etymologia et origo à travers la tradition latine’, ANAMNHCIC: Gedenkboek Prof. Dr. E.A. Leemans (Bruges, 1970), pp. 191–228, esp. 212–19.Google Scholar

3 Schelp, H., ‘Die Deutungstradition in Ælfrics Homiliae Catholicae’, ASNSL 196 (1959), 273–95, andGoogle ScholarRobinson, F.C., ‘The Significance of Names in Old English Literature’, Anglia 86 (1968), 14–58, esp. 16–24.Google Scholar The problem with the study by Pearce, T. M. (‘Name Patterns in Ælfric's Catholic Homilies', Names 14 (1966), 150–6) is that it shows no awareness of Ælfric's indebtedness to specific sources.Google Scholar

4 The point is clearly made in the Old English preface to the Catholic Homilies, throughout both series of homilies in Ælfric's observations on what he regards as unreliable, sensational or otherwise problematic material, and in the concluding prayer to the Second Series. For the First Series, see The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe; for the Second Series, see Ælfric's Catholic Homilies: the Second Series, Text, ed. Godden, M., EETS ss 5 (London, 1979). A similar attitude is to be found elsewhere in Ælfric's work.Google Scholar

5 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 210.

6 Bedae Venerabilis opera. Pars III: Opera homiletica. ed. Hurst, D., CCSL 122 (Turnhout, 1955), 200–6, first identified byGoogle ScholarFörster, M., ‘Über die Quellen von Ælfrics exegetischen Homiliae Catholicae”, Anglia 16 (1894), 1–61, at 21–2, and shown byGoogle ScholarSmetana, C. L. to have been known to Ælfric through its inclusion in the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus (‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, Traditio 15 (1959), 163–204, at 188–9); and Haymo, Homiliae de Tempore, PL 118, cols, 353–8, identified byGoogle ScholarSmetana, C. L., ‘Ælfric and the Homiliary of Haymo of Halberstadt’, Traditio 17 (1961), 457–69, at 459–60, including brief comment on Haymo's dependence on Bede.Google Scholar

7 Bede, Opera homiletica, ed. Hurst, pp. 14–20 and 21–31, identified by Förster, ‘Über de Quellen’, p. 20, and shown by Smetana, ‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 188, to have been available through the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus (which, however, did not have the Feast of the Annunciation).

8 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, , 1, 196 (Gabriel) and 198 (Israel and Jacob).Google Scholar

9 ‘Names’, p. 18, n. 11.

10 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 199. The mistranslation is repeated, Ibid. p. 587.

11 Ed. de Lagarde, P., CCSL 72 (Turnhout, 1959), 67, ‘Iacob subplantator’.Google Scholar

12 ‘Name Patterns’, p. 155. Thorpe's second mistranslation (see above, n. 10) evidently prompted Pearce's comment, although no reference is given.

13 ‘Die Deutungstradition’, p. 291, n. 46.

14 Gregory, XL Homiliarum in evangelia, PL 76, cols. 1135–8, identified by Förster, ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 11. Its availability in the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus was pointed out by Smetana, ‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, pp. 187–8.

15 ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 44.

16 ‘Ælfric and the Homiliary of Haymo of Halberstadt’, p. 462. The homily is in PL 118 at cols. 190–203.

17 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 172. Ælfric brings together material from PL 118, cols. 198 and 201–2.

18 For a list of the Latin notes in this manuscript, see Ker, N.R., Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957), p. 13. Their origin is discussed by Godden, Ælfric's Catholic Homilies, p. lxxxiii.Google Scholar

19 The source of Ælfric's exegesis of the calling of Andrew has been identified by Davis, C. R., ‘Two New Sources for Ælfric's Catholic Homilies’, JEGP 41 (1942), 510–13, as a homily by Gregory, but it has no etymologies. Ælfric's comments on the apostles' names stand as a postscript, introduced with the words, ‘We habbað nu ðyses godspelles traht be dæle oferurnen, nu wylle we eow secgan ða getacnunge ðæra feowera apostola namena, þe Crist æt fruman geceas’ (The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 586). The etymologies of Andrew (‘ðegenlic’) and John (‘Godes gifu’) were standard. The etymologies of the other three names are not as strange as they at first appear: for Jacob/James (‘forscrencend’), see above, p. 37 and nn. 8–13, and for Simon (‘gehyrsum’) and Peter (‘oncnawende’), see Robinson, ‘Names’, pp. 23–4 and 17–18.Google Scholar

20 Ælfric's Catholic Homilies, ed. Godden, , pp. 30 (Cana and Galilee) and 37 (Babylon and Jerusalem). The Bedan source, identified by Förster, ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 22, is in Opera homiletica, ed. Hurst, at pp. 95–104. As Smetana noted (‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 196), it was available in the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus. The homily by Haymo, identified by Smetana, ‘Ælfric and the Homiliary of Haymo of Halberstadt’, pp. 463–4, is in PL 118 at cols. 126–37.Google Scholar

21 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 224. The source, identified by Förster, ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 2, and shown by Smetana, ‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 189, to have been available via the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus, is in PL 76, at cols. 1169–74.

22 Sancti Fulgentii Episcopi Rupensis opera, ed. Fraipont, J., CCSL 91A (Turnhout, 1968), 905–9, identified by Smetana, ‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, pp. 183–4. For further comment on the sources of this homily, seeGoogle ScholarCross, J. E., ‘Ælfric and the Medieval Homiliary–Objection and Contribution’, Scripta minora Regiae Societatis Litterarum Lundensis 4 (1961–2), 18–20.Google Scholar

23 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 50. ‘Stephanus is a Greek name, which is Coronatus [Crowned] in Latin, which we called Gewuldorbeagod [Crowned in Glory] in English, because he has the eternal crown of glory, just as his name predicted for him.’

24 The Homilies of Ælfric: a Supplementary Collection, 2 vols., ed. Pope, J.C., EETS os 259–60 (London, 1967–8), 234. For the frequency of this image in the writings of Augustine and its relationship to the broader Christian tradition, seeGoogle ScholarArbesmann, R., ‘The Concept of “Christus Medicus” in St Augustine’, Traditio 10 (1954), 1–28. It is striking how many of the instances cited by Arbesmann are in Augustine's sermons, which indicate that he regarded it as a useful image for teaching the people. Christine Mohrmann (‘Das Wortspiel in den Augustinischen Sermones’, Mnemosyne 3rd ser. 3 (1935–6), 33–61) has analysed Augustine's rhetorical devices in his sermons (which differ from those in such works as De civitate dei) and noted the extent to which a reader would be made aware of words as such. One of the devices she has discussed is the drawing together of words which have an apparently similar root.Google Scholar

25 The Homilies of Ælfric, ed. Pope, pp. 230–2.

26 Ibid. p. 234, lines 95–7. ‘His name is Hælend [Healer, Saviour] because he heals his people, just as the angel said of him before he was born, “He will heal his people from their sins.”’

27 Ibid. p. 359, with reference to lines 59–62.

28 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 198.

29 For details of the source, see above, pp. 36–7 and n. 7. Bede's reference to Jesus's name (‘Nam manifestissime dominum lesum, id est saluatorem nostrum’) is in the first of the two homilies at Opera homiletica, ed. Hurst, p. 16.

30 Ælfric's Catholic Homilies, ed. Godden, p. 122. Possible sources for parts of the homily were proposed by Förster, ‘Über die Quellen’, pp. 46–7, but further source identification is clearly needed.

31 Ælfric's Catholic Homiles, ed. Godden, pp. 273–4. ‘The Lord said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a physician, but the sick.” He is called Hæland [Healer, Saviour] because he heals both the bodies of men and their souls. And thus he came to mankind because he wanted to direct the sinful and to heal their souls. He who thinks he is healthy is sick. That is, he who trusts in his own righteousness does not care about heavenly healing.’

32 Bede, Opera homiletica, ed. Hurst, pp. 148–55 (p. 152 for the passage under discussion), identified as the source by C. R. Davis, ‘Two New Sources’, pp. 510–13.

33 The best non-Ælfrician use of etymologies that I have found is Vercelli xvii, an exegetical homily structured in the same way as Ælfric's, where Jerusalem is etymologized as ‘sybbe gesyhðe’ and where ‘sybbe’ is then reiterated in the following sentences: Vercelli Homilies ix-xxiii, ed. Szarmach, P. (Toronto, 1981), p. 52. No specific source has yet been identified. Blickling vi also gives the standard etymology for JerusalemGoogle Scholar (The Blickling Homilies, ed. Morris, R., EETS os 58, 63 and 73 (London, 1874–80), 81), but no rhetorical or didactic use was made of it; it is, in any case, a muddled and unfocussed homily, as will be shown in a forthcoming article in Leeds Studies in English by C. A. Lees (‘The Blickling Palm Sunday Homily and its Revised Version’). There is an unsatisfactory attempt at etymologizing in Blickling xii (ed. Morris, p. 135), where interpretations of Paraclete are offered without the name itself being present in the text (cf., e.g., Ælfric's retention of ‘Paraclitus’ in The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 322). In view of what we have seen of Ælfric's practices, it is interesting to note that neither Blickling xiv, on the birth and naming of John the Baptist, nor Vercelli xxiii, on St Guthlac, takes the obvious opportunities to provide etymolgies.Google Scholar

34 Die Vercelli-Homilien: I.-VIII. Homilie, ed. Förster, M., Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Prosa 12 (Hamburg, 1932), 107–31. The etymology of Bethlehem is on p. 121.Google Scholar

35 Gatch, M. McC., ‘Eschatology in the Anonymous Old English Homilies’, Traditio 21 (1965), 117–65, at 139. The Gregorian source (PL 76, cols, 1103–5) was first identified byGoogle ScholarWillard, R., ‘The Vercelli Homilies, an Edition of Homilies i, iv, v, vii, viii, xi, and xii’ (unpubl. PhD dissertation, Univ. of Chicago, 1934), p. 160. Gatch notes that it was a source ‘only in a general way’, but, if something more precise is found, the contrast with Ælfric will remain.Google Scholar

36 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 32–4.

37 See above, n. 35. The homily was first identified as one of Ælfric's sources by Förster, ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 13; its availability in the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus was pointed out by Smetana, ‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 182.

38 ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 13. Smetana, ‘Ælfric; and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 182, in referring to Förster's identification, cited it as ‘Smaragdus (PL 102, cols. 24–5)’, with the obvious implication that he considered Ælfric to have known this material as transmitted verbatim by Smaragdus. For Förster's general comments on Ælfric's use of the Smaragdus material in PL 102, see ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 39.

39 ‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 182. The Bedan homily certainly used is an Opera homiletica, ed. Hurst, at pp. 37–45; the other is at pp. 46–51.

40 Liber interpretationis, ed. de Lagarde, p. 139.

41 The Blickling Homilies, ed. Morris, pp. 15–25, esp. 17.

42 The common source (PL 76, cols, 1081–6) was identified for Blickling 11 by Gatch, ‘Eschatology’, p. 120, and for Ælfric, CH I x, by Förster, ‘Über die Quellen’, p. 2. As Smetana has pointed out, (‘Ælfric and the Early Medieval Homiliary’, p. 187), it was also used for Quinquagesima Sunday in the homiliary of Paulus Diaconus.

43 The Homilies of the Anglo-Saxon Church, ed. Thorpe, 1, 154. The corresponding passage in Gregory is PL 76, col. 1082. For another use by Ælfric of the ‘moon’ etymology, see Ælfric's Catholic Homilies, ed. Godden, p. 122. For comment on the sources of this homily, see above, n. 30.

44 For comments on the relationship between etymology and grammar, see de Poerck, ‘Etymologia et origo’.

45 Ælfrics Grammatik und Glossar, ed. Zupitza, J. (Berlin, 1880), p. 293.Google Scholar

46 Etymologiarum sive originum libri XX, ed. Lindsay, 1.xxix.3.