Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:10:11.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The liturgy of St Willibrord

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Yitzhak Hen
Yitzhak Hen
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

What type of liturgy did St Willibrord, the Anglo-Saxon apostle of Frisia (d. 739), use? This is one of the most intriguing questions which a liturgist or historian of this period can ask. In order to answer such a question one has to consider a series of problems concerning the liturgical background of Willibrord himself and, by implication, of his period. With what form of liturgy was Willibrord familiar before he embarked on his mission to Frisia? What liturgy did he find on the Continent when he arrived, and did he attempt to borrow anything from what he found? These and similar questions need to be asked before any clear and coherent picture of the type of liturgy used by Willibrord can be drawn, and since, unfortunately, they cannot be answered with utter certainty, this article will offer some thoughts on the matter, without attempting to provide a solution or a clear-cut answer.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anglo-Saxon England , Volume 26 , December 1997 , pp. 41 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

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 On Augustine's mission, see Bede, , Historia ecclesiastica I.23–II.3: Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People, ed. Colgrave, B. and Mynors, R. A. B. (Oxford, 1969, rev. ed. 1991) [hereafter: Bede, HE], pp. 70–145.Google Scholar See also Wood, I. N., ‘The Mission of Augustine of Canterbury to England’, Speculum 69 (1995), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Bede, , HE III.5 and 15–17Google Scholar (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 226–9 and 260–7Google Scholar); Mayr-Harting, H., The Coming of Christianity to Anglo-Saxon England, 3rd ed. (London, 1991), pp. 94–102.Google Scholar

3 On Theodore's ecclesiastical administration, see Stenton, F. M., Anglo-Saxon England, 3rd ed. (Oxford, 1971), pp. 130–42Google Scholar; Mayr-Harting, , The Coming of Christianity, pp. 130–9Google Scholar; Biblical Commentaries from the Canterbury School of Theodore and Hadrian, ed. Bischoff, B. and Lapidge, M., CSASE 10 (Cambridge, 1994), esp. 133–55.Google Scholar

4 Bede, , HE III.13 and 27Google Scholar; V.9–11 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 252–5 and 310–15; 454–87).Google Scholar

5 The Calendar of St Willibrord, ed. Wilson, H. A., HBS 55 (London, 1918), esp. the marginal note on 39v.Google Scholar

6 Alcuin, , Vita Willibrordi, ed. Levison, W., MGH, SS rer. Merov. 7 (Hanover, 1951), 81–141 [hereafter: Alcuin, VW].Google Scholar

7 On Willibrord and his activities, see Verbist, G., St Willibrord, apôtre des Pays-Bas etfondateur d'Echternach (Louvain, 1939)Google Scholar; Levison, W., ‘St Willibrord and his Place in History’, Durham Univ. Jnl 22 (1940), 23–41Google Scholar; idem, England and the Continent in the Eighth Century (Oxford, 1946), pp. 45–59; Wampach, C., Sankt Willibrord, sein Leben and Lebenswerk (Luxembourg, 1953)Google Scholar; McKitterick, R., ‘The Diffusion of Insular Culture in Neustria between 650 and 850: the Implication of the Manuscript Evidence’, La Neustrie. Les pays au nord de la Loire de 650 à 850, ed. Atsma, H., 2 vols., Beihefte der Francia 16 (Sigmaringen, 1989) II, 395–432, at 422–9Google Scholar; Wood, I. N., The Merovingian Kingdoms, 450–751 (London, 1994), pp. 317–21Google Scholar; Hen, Y., Culture and Religion in Merovingian Gaul, A.D. 481–751 (Leiden, New York and Cologne, 1995), pp. 102–6.Google Scholar See also the various papers collected in Willibrord: Apostel der Niederlande, Gründer der Abtei Echternach, ed. Kiesel, G. and Schroeder, J. (Luxembourg, 1989)Google Scholar; Willibrord, zijn Wereld en zijn Werk, ed. Bange, P. and Wieler, A. G. (Nijmegen, 1990).Google Scholar

8 Bede, , HEV.11 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 486–7)Google Scholar; Alcuin, , VW 7 (ed. Levison, , p. 122).Google Scholar

9 Bede, , HEV. 11 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 486–7)Google Scholar; Alcuin, , VW 5 and 13 (ed. Levison, , pp. 120–1 and 127)Google Scholar; see also Fritze, W., ‘Zur Entstehungsgeschichte des Bistums Utrecht: Franken und Frisien 690–734’, Rheinische Vicrteljabrsblätter 35 (1971), 107–51.Google Scholar

10 Bede, , H V.11 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 486–7)Google Scholar; Alcuin, , VW 24–5 (ed. Levison, , pp. 134–5).Google Scholar On Echternach, , see Wampach, C., Geschichte der Grundherrschaft Echternach im Frühmittelalter, 2 vols. (Luxembourg, 1929–1930)Google Scholar; Prinz, F., Frühes Mönchtum im Frankenreich. Kultur und Gesellschaft in Gallien, den Rheinlanden und Bayern am Beispiel der monastischen Entwicklung (4. bis 8. Jahrhundert) (Munich, 1965), pp. 200–2.Google Scholar

11 Stephen of Ripon, Vita Wilfridi, ch. 26, ed. Colgrave, B., The Life of Wilfrid by Eddius Stephanas (Cambridge, 1927), p. 52Google Scholar; Alcuin, , VW 3 (ed. Levison, pp. 117–18).Google Scholar

12 Bede, , HE V.9–10 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 474–85)Google Scholar; Alcuin, , VW 4 (ed. Levison, , pp. 118–19).Google Scholar

13 Alcuin, , VW 4 (ed. Levison, , pp. 118–19).Google Scholar

14 See, for example, Bede, , HEV.11 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 484–7)Google Scholar; Willibald, Vita Bonifatii 5, ed. Levison, W., MGH SS rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum 57 (Hanover, 1905), 24–6.Google Scholar

15 Bede, , HE III.13 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 252–3).Google Scholar

16 Bede, , Vita Cuthberti 44Google Scholar, ed. Colgrave, B., Two Lives of St Cuthbert (Cambridge, 1940), pp. 296–8Google Scholar; Vita Cuthberti auctore Anonymo IV. 16, ed. Colgrave, ibid. pp. 134–6.

17 Cróinín, D. Ó, ‘Rath Melsigi, Willibrord and the Earliest Echternach Manuscripts’, Peritia 3 (1984), 17–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, ‘Is the Augsburg Codex a Northumbrian Manuscript?’, St Cuthbert, his Cult and his Community to AD 1200, ed. Bonner, G., Rollason, D. and Stancliffe, C. (Woodbridge, 1989), pp. 189–201Google Scholar; McKitterick, R., ‘The Diffusion’, pp. 421–9Google Scholar; idem, ‘Frankish Uncial: a New Context for the Echternach Scriptorium’, Willibrord, ed. Bange, and Wieler, , pp. 374–88Google Scholar; Netzer, N., ‘Willibrord's Scriptorium at Echternach and its Relationship to Ireland and Lindisfarne’, St Cuthbert, ed. Bonner, et al. , pp. 203–12Google Scholar; idem.‘The Early Scriptorium at Echternach: the State of the Question’, Willibrord, ed. Kiesel, and Schroeder, , pp. 127–34Google Scholar; idem, Cultural Interplay in the Eighth Century. The Trier Gospels and the Making of a Scriptorium at Echternach (Cambridge, 1994), esp. pp. 4–11.Google Scholar

18 This must not be taken to imply that I assume that the same liturgy was used throughout Anglo-Saxon England.

19 On the Anglo-Saxon liturgy, see Willis, G. G., ‘Early English Liturgy from Augustine to Alcuin’, in his Further Essays in Early Roman Liturgy, The Alcuin Club Collections 50 (London, 1968), 191–243Google Scholar; Mayr-Harting, , The Coming of Christianity, pp. 168–90Google Scholar; Cubitt, C., Anglo-Saxon Church Councils C.650-C.850 (London and New York, 1995), pp. 125–52Google Scholar; idem, ‘Unity and Diversity in the Early Anglo-Saxon Liturgy’, Stud. in Church Hist. 32 (1995), 45–57.Google Scholar On the liturgical evidence from Anglo-Saxon England, see Gneuss, H., ‘Liturgical Books in Anglo-Saxon England and their Old English Terminology’, Learning and Literature in Anglo-Saxon England. Studies presented to Peter Clemoes, ed. Lapidge, M. and Gneuss, H. (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 91–141Google Scholar; and see also Gamber, K., Codices Liturgici Latini Antiquiores, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Fribourg, 1968)Google Scholar [hereafter: CLLA]. One should note, however, that Camber's information is in many places out of date.

20 Bertha was the daughter of the Merovingian king Charibert I (561–7). See Gregory, of Tours, , Decent libri historiarum IV.26 and IX.26, ed. Krusch, B. and Levison, W., MGH SS rer. Merov. 1.1 (Hanover, 1937–1951), 157 and 445.Google Scholar

21 Bede, , HE 1.25 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 72–5).Google Scholar I cite the translation of Colgrave, B., revised by McClure, J. and Collins, R., Bede: The Ecclesiastical History of the English People (Oxford, 1994).Google Scholar

22 See Ecgberht, , Dialogus ecclesiastical institutions, c. xviGoogle Scholar (‘De primo ieiunio’), ed. Haddan, A. W. and Srubbs, W., Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great Britain and Ireland, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1869–1878) III, 411–12Google Scholar, where Ecgberht states that Augustine brought with him an antiphonal and a mass-book composed by Gregory. The assertion that Augustine brought a Gregorian Sacramentary was, however, refuted by Ashworth, H., ‘Did St Augustine Bring the “Gregorianum” to England?’, Ephemerides Liturgicae 72 (1958), 39–43.Google Scholar

23 Ashworth, H., ‘Did St Gregory the Great Compose a Sacramentary?’, Stadia Patristica 2 (1955), 1–16Google Scholar; Vogel, C., Medieval Liturgy. An Introduction to the Sources, trans. Storey, W. G. and Rasmussen, N. K. (Washington, DC, 1986), pp. 80–7.Google Scholar See also the introduction to Le Sacramentaire Grégorien, ed. Deshusses, J., 3 vols., Spicilegium Friburgense 16,24 and 28 (Fribourg, 1971–1982) I, 50–60.Google Scholar Several copies of the Gregorianum are known to us, none of which is earlier than the ninth century. All these copies go back to one exemplar (known as the Hadrianum), sent by Pope Hadrian I to Charlemagne in 784/5.

24 Bede, , HEI.21 (ii) (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 80–3).Google Scholar On Gregory's open-minded attitude, see Meyvaert, P., ‘Diversity within Unity: a Gregorian Theme’, Heythrop Jnl 4 (1963), 141–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Markus, R., ‘Gregory the Great and a Papal Missionary Strategy’, Stud. in Church Hist. 6 (1970), 29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cubitt, , ‘Unity and Diversity’Google Scholar. On the Libellus responsionum, see, for example, Markus, R., ‘The Chronology of the Gregorian Mission to England. Bede's Narrative and Gregory's Correspondence’, JEH 14 (1963), 16–30Google Scholar; Meyvaert, P., ‘The Registrum of Gregory the Great and Bede’, RB 80 (1970), 162–6Google Scholar; idem, ‘Bede's Text of the Libellus responsionum of Gregory the Great to Augustine of Canterbury’, England before the Conquest. Studies in Primary Sources presented to Dorothy Whitelock, ed. Clemoes, P. and Hughes, K. (Cambridge, 1971), pp. 15–33Google Scholar; Meens, R., ‘A Background to Augustine's Mission to Anglo-Saxon England’, ASE 23 (1994), 5–17.Google Scholar

25 See Gregory the Great's remark in Bede, HE1.27 (ii) (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 80–3).Google Scholar

26 The Leonine Sacramentary is basically a collection of libelli missarum that were adopted from the papal use for the presbyters of the Roman tituli. It survives in only one manuscript, datable to the first quarter of the seventh century. On the Verona Collection of libelli missarum (Verona, Biblioteca Capitolare, LXXXV), see Lowe, E. A., Codices Latini Antiquiores, 11 vols. and supplement (Oxford, 1934–1971) [cited hereafter as CLA], IV, no. 514Google Scholar; Vogel, , Medieval Liturgy, pp. 38–46Google Scholar; Hope, D. M., The Leonine Sacramentary (London, 1971).Google Scholar For an edition, see Sacramentarium Veronense, ed. Mohlberg, L. C., Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta. Series maior 1 (Rome, 1956).Google Scholar

27 See Bede, , HE I. 24 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 70–3)Google Scholar; Gregory the Great, Registrum Epistularum VI.51–2, 54–5, 59–60, IX.223 and XI.45, ed. Norberg, D., CCSL 140 and 140A (Turnhout, 1982), 423–5, 427–8, 432–3, 794–6 and 942–3.Google Scholar

28 Bede, , HE I.27 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 78–9).Google Scholar Such links have been taken to imply that some sort of political hegemony was exercised by the Franks over at least south-west England during the sixth and early seventh century, but there is no evidence that this was the case, nor that it was ever recognized in Anglo-Saxon times. See Wood, I. N., The Merovingian North Sea (Alingsas, 1983)Google Scholar; idem, ‘The Franks and Sutton Hoo’, People and Places in Northern Europe, 500–1600, ed. Wood, I. N. and Lund, N. (Woodbridge, 1991), pp. 1–14Google Scholar; idem, ‘The Channel from the Fourth to the Seventh Century A. D.’, Maritime Celts, Frisians and Saxons, ed. McGrail, S., CBA Research Reports 71 (London, 1990), 93–7.Google Scholar

29 On the flexible attitude of the early Church regarding liturgical composition, see Hen, Y., ‘Unity in Diversity: die Liturgy of Prankish Gaul before the Carolingians’, Stud. in Church Hist. 32 (1995), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

30 See Cubitt, , ‘Unity and Diversity’Google Scholar; idem, Anglo-Saxon Church Councils, pp. 125–52.Google Scholar On the question of liturgical uniformity on the Continent, see Hen, ‘Unity in Diversity’; McKitterick, R., ‘Unity and Diversity in the Carolingian Church’, Stud. in Church Hist. 32 (1995), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 On the Roman elements in Anglo-Saxon liturgy, see Willis, , ‘Early English Liturgy’, pp. 201–19Google Scholar; Mayr-Harting, , The Coming of Christianity, pp. 168–82Google Scholar; Cubitt, , Anglo-Saxon Church Councils, especially pp. 132–42.Google Scholar See also Hohler, C., ‘Theodore and the Liturgy’, Archbishop Theodore. Commemorative Studies on his Life and Influence, ed. Lapidge, M., CSASE 11 (Cambridge, 1995), 222–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 On this issue, the fullest discussion is found in Biblical Commentaries, ed. Bischoff, and Lapidge, , esp. pp. 155–72.Google Scholar See also Hohler, , ‘Theodore and the Liturgy’, pp. 226–8.Google Scholar Some of these Italian and Roman practices were subsequently introduced in Merovingian Gaul, an issue to which I shall refer later.

33 See Biblical Commentaries, ed. Bischoff, and Lapidge, , pp. 166–7Google Scholar; Hohler, , ‘Theodore and the Liturgy’.Google Scholar

34 Bede, , HE V.19 (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 520–1).Google Scholar

35 See Dumville, D., ‘The Importation of Mediterranean Manuscripts into Theodore's England’, Archbishop Theodore, ed. Lapidge, , pp. 96–119.Google Scholar

36 On the Irish influence on the Anglo-Saxon liturgy, see Hughes, K., ‘Some Aspects of Irish Influence on Early English Private Prayer’, Studio Celtica 5 (1970), 48–61Google Scholar; Bullough, D. A., ‘The Mission to the English and the Picts and their Heritage (to c. 800)’, Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelaller, ed. Lowe, H., 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1982) 1, 80–98.Google Scholar

37 On the Irish liturgy, see J. Stevenson's valuable introduction to Warren, F. E., The Liturgy and the Ritual of the Celtic Church (London, 1881Google Scholar; repr. 1987). See also Henning, J., ‘Studies in the Liturgy of the Early Irish Church’, Irish Eccles. Record 5th ser. 75 (1951), 318–33.Google Scholar

38 See Mayr-Harting, , The Coming of Christianity, pp. 174–82Google Scholar; Cubitt, , Anglo-Saxon Church Councils, pp. 127–32Google Scholar; idem, ‘Unity and Diversity’.

39 Wilfrid, who was trained at Undisfarne, had to relearn the psalter according to the Roman use at Kent (Stephen, of Ripon, , Vita Wilfridi cc. 2–3 and 6–8 (ed. Colgrave, , pp. 6–8 and 12–18))Google Scholar, and the anonymous author of the Vita S. Cuthberti, who was based at Lindisfarne, quotes regularly from the Gallican version (Bullough, D. A., ‘Columba, Adomnan and the Achievement of lona: Part I’, Scottish Hist. Rev. 43 (1964), 111–30, at 130).Google Scholar

40 Stephen, of Ripon, , Vita Wilfridi c. 17 (ed. Colgrave, , pp. 34–6).Google Scholar See also Mayr-Harring, , The Coming of Christianity, pp. 180–1.Google Scholar

41 Hohler, C., ‘Some Service-Books of the Later Saxon Church’, Tenth-Century Studies, ed. Parsons, D. (London, 1975), pp. 60–83 and 217–27, at 61.Google Scholar

42 Ibid. p. 61.

43 Ibid.

44 On this manuscript, see CLA I, no. 105; Lowe, E. A., ‘The Vatican MS of the Gelasian Sacramentary and its Supplement at Paris’, JTS 27 (1925–1926), 357–73Google Scholar; Ziegler, U., ‘Das Sakramentar Gelasianum Bib. Vat. lat. 316 und die Schule von Chelles’, Archiv für Geschichte des Buchwesens 16 (1976), cols. 1–142Google Scholar; Hen, , Culture and Religion, pp. 44–5.Google Scholar For an edition, see Liber sacramentorum Romanae ecclesiae ordinis anni circuli (Sacramentarium Gelasianum), ed. Mohlberg, L. C., Rerum Ecclesiasricarum Documenta. Series maior 4 (Rome, 1960).Google Scholar

45 See Vogel, , Medieval Liturgy, pp. 66–9Google Scholar for an excellent summary of research on this question. For Chavasse's attempt to reconstruct the supposed Roman books on which the Old Gelasian is based, see Chavasse, A., Le Sacramentaire Gélasien (Paris, 1957).Google Scholar This attempt, however, is extremely unconvincing and controversial. See Janini, J., ‘Review of A. Chavasse, Le Sacramentaire Gélasien’, Analecta Tarraconensia 31 (1958), 196–8Google Scholar; Coebergh, C., ‘Le Sacramentaire gelasien ancien’, Archiv für Liturgieiwissenschaft 1 (1961), 45–88Google Scholar; and Thompson, J. D., ‘The Contribution of Vaticanus Reginensis 316 to the History of Western Service Books’, Stadia Patristica 13 (1975), 425–9.Google Scholar

46 On this issue, see Hen, , Culture and Religion, esp. pp. 58–60.Google Scholar

47 On the liturgical evidence from early medieval Italy, see Vogel, , Medieval Liturgy, pp. 36–46, 92–7 and 109–10.Google Scholar

48 For Camber's interesting but groundless assertion that Paulinus of Nola compiled the original Old Gelasian, see Gamber, K., ‘Das kampanische Messbuch als Vorläufer des Gelasianum. 1st der hl Paulinus von Nola Verfasser?’, Sacris Erudiri 12 (1961), 5–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

49 Cubitt, , Anglo-Saxon Church Councils, pp. 132–42Google Scholar; idem, ‘Unity and Diversity’.

50 Hohler, , ‘Some Service-Books‘, p. 61.Google Scholar

51 See, for example, The Wincbcombe Sacramentary, ed. Davril, A., HBS 109 (London, 1995)Google Scholar; The Missal of Robert of Jumiéges, ed. Wilson, H. A., HBS 11 (London, 1896)Google Scholar; and London, BL Cotton Vitellius A. xviii (the unprinted sacramentary of Giso of Wells).

52 See The Sacramentary of Echternach, ed. Hen, Y., HBS 110 (London, 1997).Google Scholar

53 Mayr-Harring, , The Coming of Christianity, pp. 182–90Google Scholar; Hen, , Culture and Religion, pp. 121–2.Google Scholar This Anglo-Saxon influence on the Galilean liturgy is even more apparent when one examines the private prayerbooks, which were unknown on the Continent before the eighth century, and then gradually emerged from centres with Insular traditions. See Sims-Williams, P., Religion and Literature in Western England, 600–800, CSASE 3 (Cambridge, 1990), 275–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also Angenendt, A., ‘Missa Specialis. Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Entstehung der Privatmassen’, Frübmittelalterliche Studien 17 (1983), 153–221.Google Scholar

54 See Sacramentarium Gelasianum, ed. Mohlberg, , Il.li, liii and Ixi, at pp. 155–6, 157 and 161 respectively.Google Scholar These saints were rarely venerated in Merovingian Gaul.

55 Sacramentarium Gelasianum, ed. Mohlberg, , I.lxxxiv.676–82, at pp. 104–5 (lightly corrected).Google Scholar

56 See Hohler, , ‘The Type of Sacramentary Used by St Boniface’, Sankt Bonifatius (Fulda, 1954), pp. 89–93, at 91Google Scholar; The Wnchcombe Sacramentary, nos. 639–43 (ed. Davril, , pp. 114–15).Google Scholar

57 See Hohler, , ‘The Type of Sacramentary’, p. 91Google Scholar; The Sacramentary of Echternach, I.cxv.688–93 (ed. Hen, , pp. 196–7).Google Scholar

58 On Agilbert, see Bede, , HE III.7 and IV.l (ed. Colgrave, and Mynors, , pp. 232–7 and 330–1).Google Scholar See also Blair, P. Hunter, ‘Whitby as a Centre of Learning in the Seventh Century’, Learning and Literature in Anglo-Saxon England, ed. Lapidge, and Gneuss, , pp. 1–32, esp. 30–2.Google Scholar

59 Campbell, J., ‘The First Century of Christianity in England‘, in his Essays in Anglo-Saxon History (London, 1986), pp. 49–68, at 57–9.Google Scholar On the foundation of Jouarre, see Guerout, J., ‘Les Origines et le premier siècle de l'abbaye’, L'Abbaye royale de Notre-Dame de Jouarre, ed. Chaussey, Y. (Paris, 1961), pp. 1–67.Google Scholar

60 On Agilbert's tomb, see The Marquise de Maillé, Le Crypte de Jouarre (Paris, 1971), pp. 195–220.Google Scholar

61 Bischoff, B., ‘Die Kölner Nonnenhandschriften und das Skriptorium von Chelles’, in his Mittelalterliche Studien, 3 vols. (Stuttgart, 1966–1981) I, 16–34Google Scholar; McKitterick, R., ‘Nuns' Scriptoria in England and Francia in the Eighth Century’, Francia 19 (1992), 1–35.Google Scholar Both Chelles and Jouarre are in the diocese of Meaux, not far from Agilbert's Paris diocese.

62 On this issue, see Hen, , Culture and Religion, pp. 102–7.Google Scholar

63 Biblical Commentaries, ed. Bischoff, and Lapidge, , pp. 155–72Google Scholar; Hohler, , ‘Theodore and the Liturgy’.Google Scholar

64 Baumstark, A., ‘Untersuchungen’, Die ältestt erreicbbar Gestalt des Liber Sacramentorum anni circuli der römischen Kirche (Cod. Pad. D 47, fol. 11r-100r), ed. Mohlberg, L. C. and Baumstark, A., Liturgiegeschichtliche Quellen 11–12 (Münster, 1927), pp. 146*–148*.Google Scholar This view is now discredited: see Hohler, , ‘The Type of Sacramentary’.Google Scholar

65 For the Sacramentary of Fulda, see Sacramentarium Fuldense saeculi X, ed. Richter, G. and Schönfelder, A. (Fulda, 1912), repr. HBS 101 (London, 1980).Google Scholar

66 See The Sacramentary of Echternach, ed. Hen, .Google Scholar

67 On the eighth-century Gelasians, see Vogel, , Medieval Liturgy, pp. 70–8Google Scholar; Moreton, B., The Eighth-Century Gelasian Sacramentaries: A Study in Tradition (Oxford, 1976).Google Scholar

68 See, for example, Vogel, C., ‘Saint Chrodegang et le début de la romanisation du culte en pays franc’, Saint Chrodegang (Metz, 1967), pp. 91–109Google Scholar; Riché, P., ‘Le Renouveau culturel à la cour de Pépin III’, Francia 2 (1974), 59–70Google Scholar; idem, ‘Les Motifs de la romanisation du culte sous Pépin le Bref (751–68)’, Culto cristiano politico imperiale carolingia. Atti del XVIII convegni di studi sulla spiritualità medievale, 9–12 ottobre 1977 (Todi, 1979), pp. 323–42Google Scholar; Moreton, , The Eighth-Century Gelasian Sacramentaries, pp. 14–19Google Scholar; McKitterick, R., The Prankish Kingdom under the Carolingians, 751–987 (London, 1983), pp. 41–5 and 53–9Google Scholar; idem, ‘Royal Patronage of Culture in the Prankish Kingdoms under the Carolingians: Motives and Consequences’, SettSpol 39 (1992), 93–135.Google Scholar

69 Sims-Williams, , Religion and Literature, pp. 273–5Google Scholar; Cubitt, , Anglo-Saxon Church Councils, pp. 137–8.Google Scholar

70 On the Merovingian liturgical compositions, see Hen, , Culture and Religion, pp. 41–60 (with further references).Google Scholar

71 See Hen, , ‘Unity in Diversity’Google Scholar; Cubitt, , ‘Unity and Diversity’Google Scholar; McKitterick, , ‘Unity and Diversity’.Google Scholar

72 The existence of an active scriptorium at Echternach is attested by four manuscripts, all written and decorated in die Insular style, three of which were signed by scribes who also wrote charters for Echternach (Paris, BN lat. 9382 (CLA V, no. 577), signed by Virgilius, and Augsburg, Universitätsbibliothek, Cod. 1.2.402 (CLA VIII, no. 1215) and Paris, BN lat. 10837, fols. 1–33 (CLA V, no. 605) signed by Laurentius). The fourth contains a short autobiographical statement by Willibrord himself (Paris, BN lat. 10837, fols. 34–41 (CLA V, no. 606a)). On the early scriptorium of Echternach, see Nordenfalk, C., ‘On the Age of the Earliest Echternach Manuscripts’, Acta Archaeologica 3 (1932), 57–62Google Scholar; McKitterick, , ‘The Diffusion’, pp. 422–30Google Scholar; Netzer, , ‘The Early Scriptorium at Echternach’, pp. 127–37Google Scholar; idem, ‘Willibrord's Scriptorium at Echternach’, pp. 203–12; idem, Cultural Interplay, pp. 4–11; Ferrari, M. C., Sancti Willibrordi ven-erantes memoriam. Echternacber Schreiber und Schriftsteller von den Angelsachsen bis Johann Bertels (Luxembourg, 1994), pp. 9–17.Google Scholar

73 CLA V, no. 605a. See the edition of H. A. Wilson, The Calendar of St Willibrord, as well as his excellent introduction to the text. An origin in the scriptorium of Rath Melsigi and an earlier date were suggested by Cróinín, D. Ó, ‘Pride and Prejudice’, Peritia 1 (1982), 352–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, ‘Rath Melsigi’. However, most scholars nowadays agree that it was produced at Echternach at the beginning of the eighth century. See, for example, McKitterick, , ‘Prankish Uncial‘, pp. 374–88Google Scholar; and Netzer, , ‘The Early Scriptorium at Echternach’, pp. 127–34.Google Scholar

74 For a fuller discussion of the calendar and its implications, see Hen, , Culture and Religion, pp. 102–6.Google Scholar

75 See Cubitt, , Anglo-Saxon Church Councils, pp. 138–40Google Scholar; Hohler, , ‘Theodore and the Liturgy’, pp. 230–2Google Scholar, and further references cited there.

76 It is the ninth out of thirty-six volumes of collected fragments which were bound in the Bibliothèque Nationale at the beginning of the nineteenth century. On this particular manuscript, see Huglo, M., ‘Les fragments d'Echternach (Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, MS lat. 9488)’, Willibrord, ed. Kiesel, and Schroeder, , pp. 144–9.Google Scholar

77 Ibid. p. 145. On the neumes of Echternach, see Corbin, S., ‘Le Fonds d'Echternach à la Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris’, Annuaire de l'Écolepratique des Hautes Études, IIIe section, sciences historiques et philosophiqucs (Paris, 1972), pp. 374–7Google Scholar, and cf. Lochner, F. C., ‘La “Notation d'Echternach” reconsidérée’, Revue beige de musicologie 44 (1990), 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

78 CLA V, no. 581; CLLA no. 803.

79 Mayr-Harting, , The Coming of Christianity, p. 180.Google Scholar

80 Bannister, H. M., ‘Liturgical Fragments’, JTS 9 (1907–8), 398–427, at 398.Google Scholar

81 Netzer, , Cultural Interplay, esp. pp. 111–21.Google Scholar

82 The text was published by Bannister, , ‘Liturgical Fragments’, pp. 402–5.Google Scholar

83 Ibid. pp. 399–400, and see the collation table in the Appendix, below. For the St Gallen Sacramentary (St, Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, 348Google Scholar; CLA VII, no. 936; CLLA no. 830), see Das fränkische Sacramentarium Gelasianum in alammanischer Uberlieferung, ed. Mohlberg, L. C., 3rd ed., Liturgigeschichtliche Quellen 1–2 (Münster, 1971).Google Scholar For the Rheinau Sacramentary (Zürich, Zentralbibliothek, Rh. 30; CLA VII, no. 1019; CLLA no. 802), see Sacramentarium Rhenaugiense, ed. Hanggi, A. and Schönherr, A., Spicilegium Friburgense 15 (Fribourg, 1970).Google Scholar

84 CLA V, no. 582; CLLA no. 416. See also Bannister, , ‘Liturgical Fragments’, pp. 400–1Google Scholar, who assigns it a date later than 900.

85 Palaeographically, this fragment is similar to the St Chad's Gospels in Lichfield, which were written, according to Lowe, ‘in a Welsh centre following Irish calligraphic traditions’ (CLA II, no. 159). See also Brown, D., The Lichfield Gospels (London, 1982)Google Scholar;Henderson, G., From Durrow to Kelts: the Insular Gospel Books, 650–800 (London, 1987), pp. 122–9Google Scholar; The Making of England. Anglo-Saxon Art and Culture, AD600–900, ed. Webster, L. and Backhouse, J. (London, 1991), p. 127.Google Scholar

86 See Netzer, , ‘Willibrord's Scriptorium at Echternach’, pp. 203–12.Google Scholar This Irish element was overemphasized by Ó Cróinín, who subsequently attributed Echternach's earliest manuscripts to Ireland. See Ó Cróinin, , ‘Rath Melsigi’Google Scholar; idem, ‘Is the Augsburg Codex a Northumbrian Manuscript?’; idem, ‘Pride and Prejudice’, pp. 352–62. For a general account of the Irish influence on the Anglo-Saxon system of script, see Brown, T. J., ‘The Irish Element in the Insular System of Scripts to circa A.D. 850’, Die Iren, ed. Löwe, I, 101–19.Google Scholar

87 On the neumes and the script of the Sacramentary of Echternach, see The Sacramentary of Echternach, ed. Hen, , pp. 9–18.Google Scholar

88 The text was published by Bannister, , ‘Liturgical Fragments’, pp. 405–6.Google Scholar

89 Ibid. p. 400.

90 On this issue, see Hen, , ‘Unity in Diversity’Google Scholar.

91 Paris, BN lat. 10837, fols. 42v–43r; CLA V, no. 606b; CLLA no. 414. The text was published by Bannister, , ‘Liturgical Fragments’, pp. 409–11.Google Scholar

92 Ibid. pp. 407–8.

93 CLA V, no. 606b.

94 Bannister, , ‘Liturgical Fragments’, pp. 408–9.Google Scholar

95 Eizenhöfer, L., ‘Zu Bannisters Echternacher Meßformular für Vigil von Chrisd Himmelfahrt’, Colligere Fragments. Festschrift Alban Dold zum 70. Gerburtstag am 7.7.1952, ed. Fischer, B. and Fiala, V. (Beuron, 1952), pp. 166–72.Google Scholar

96 Hohler, .‘The Type of Sacramentary’, p. 89.Google Scholar

97 Ibid. p. 90.

98 This statement must not be taken to imply that other influences and continental liturgical practices did not find their way into the early liturgy of Echternach.

99 See Vogel, , Medieval Liturgy, p. 103Google Scholar, and see the introduction to The Sacramentary of Echternach, ed. Hen, , pp. 23–42.Google Scholar

100 See the collation table in the Appendix, below, pp. 61–2.

101 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the congress ‘Van Willibrord tot Adelbold’ in Utrecht, 23–5 November 1995. I am grateful to members of the congress for their comments and suggestions. I should also like to thank Rosamond McKitterick, who kindly read an earlier draft of this paper and made numerous valuable comments, and Michael Lapidge, who went far beyond the call of duty in improving this paper.