Although writings of Aldhelm (c. 635–c. 709) were widely known in early Spain, in modern Spain they are hardly known at all. An entry on Aldhelm in a recent Spanish book on medieval Latin makes the latter point vividly: ‘Bibliografía: Escasa. Autor casi olvidado. Totalmente ausente en algún catálogo bibliográfico.’ A survey of the transmission of Aldhelm's writings from a Spanish viewpoint, however, is able to alter this perspective and to show new aspects of his influence.

After the conversion of the various Anglo-Saxon royal houses to Christianity in the seventh century, the mythology of the late pagan cults which had supported their sovereignty was supplanted, but not utterly destroyed, by the sacred history of the Bible. Myths in which the old gods sired the founders of current dynasties proved uniquely adaptive. These foundation myths were preserved at a secondary stratum in the new ideological order, in that body of dynastic pseudo-history and heroic legend which was important but subordinate to the authoritative canon of Christian scripture. As J. M. Wallace-Hadrill suggested, the nascent Anglo-Saxon dynasties needed legitimizing ancestors as much after, as before, their conversion. And if they could no longer have gods, they would settle for men of the same name.

This supplement brings up to date my Hand-List of Anglo-Saxon Non-Runif Inscriptions (Cambridge, 1971). It contains twenty-eight entries, including all the Anglo-Saxon non-runic inscriptions which have come to my notice since the publication of the first supplement. The entries are followed by the Bibliography. This gives in full the references quoted in abbreviated form throughout this second supplement unless they have already appeared in the General Bibliography of the Hand-List or of the first supplement. This is followed by Addenda to the Hand-List and to the first supplement, where additional information about several inscriptions is given. Then follows a list of Corrigenda to the Hand-List and to the first supplement and, finally, a list of Addenda to the bibliographies of the entries in the Hand-List and the first supplement, to bring them up to date.

The study of the sources of the Anglo-Saxon medical texts began more than a hundred years ago with T.O. Cockayne's monumental edition of most of the medical, magical and herbal material extant in Old English. Cockayne demonstrated that the most significant text in this corpus, the late ninth-century compilation known as Bald's Leechbook, drew on an impressive range of Latin source materials. Recent work by C.H. Talbot and M.L. Cameron has further extended our knowledge of the classical texts which underlie the Leechbook. Among the significant sources is the text known as the Physica Plinii. Although the Physica survives in several recensions, there has as yet been no systematic study of the relationship between these recensions and the version of the Latin text used by the Old English compiler. The present article investigates Bald's Leechbook as a witness to the history of the Physica Plinii, and demonstrates the complexity of the transmission of the latter work.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, Tanner 10 is the oldest extant copy of the Old English translation of Bede, Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum. The volume dates from the early tenth century. This in itself adds significantly to its interest, for manuscripts produced in England during the sixty or so years from s. ix2–x1 are scarce. It is ornamented with a remarkable set of decorated initials which are of considerable importance for understanding the characteristics and development of manuscript art during this period, and this is our primary concern here. The text of Tanner 10 was edited at the end of the last century, its codicology and palaeography have recently been reviewed, and a complete facsimile edition is currently being prepared: an examination of its extensive decoration is long overdue. To put this art-work in its context, before turning to the manuscript itself, it will be helpful first to review briefly the main classes of decorated initials which appear in late Anglo-Saxon books as a whole, and then to examine the early history of the particular type that was used in the Tanner Bede.

The Regularis Concordia was issued by the synod which met in Winchester in the early years of the 970s at the height of the English Benedictine reform movement. At this time perhaps as many as fifteen monasteries were either being planned or were in the course of construction. In spite of this building activity, very little is said directly in RC about the buildings of a community, but it contains a considerable amount of primary evidence concerning the assumptions and expectations which its compilers had about the buildings needed by an English monastery at that time. In RC there is no consciously stated ideal setting, like that of the later Cistercians, in which a monastic community should live the life prescribed in this consuetudinary. Certain anxieties are shown about the use to which some of the buildings are to be put, and, in one area – the guest house – improvements are suggested, but for the most part any information which we can gather is from incidental or casual reference.

In May 1909 a medieval wall-painting was discovered behind the fitted bookshelves of the Morley Library at Winchester Cathedral. A brief description was published locally at the time of the discovery, but neither the precise subject matter nor the date of the painting were established. Thereafter the wall-painting lay virtually forgotten until it was re-examined early in 1990 by the present writer. It now seems possible that the painting includes the earliest known representation of Winchester Cathedral in its original, Romanesque form, and that it also portrays an important artifact within that church: the reliquary of St Swithun. This identification is supported by the other scene in the wall-painting, which, it is argued, represents either the saint's burial in 862 or (more probably) his translation in 971. In the second part of this paper the history of the reliquary of Swithun is traced. This important and welldocumented artifact had been presented by King Edgar to the Old Minster in 971–4 and was transferred to the Romanesque cathedral in 1093. It is suggested that this major piece of Anglo-Saxon metalwork may have survived until c. 1450.

In his Latin preface to the First Series of Catholic Homilies, Ælfric lists six source authors: Augustine, Jerome, Bede, Gregory, Smaragdus and Haymo. The fact that Haymo is named in a phrase of his own at the end, ‘et aliquando Haymonem’, and is specified as being used ‘aliquando’, suggests that he was in some sense a supplementary source, as modern studies have tended to confirm. Smaragdus, by contrast, stands with Augustine, Jerome, Bede and Gregory as if Ælfric, in thinking back over the work he had done for the Catholic Homilies, had found Smaragdus as useful as the others and had consulted him about as frequently. Yet it is a puzzling fact that modern source studies have identified very little material drawn from Smaragdus's exegetical Expositio libri comitis. It is possible, of course, that Ælfric's claim to have used Smaragdus was unjustified, but although medieval writers often made false claims, Ælfric did not habitually do so; on the contrary, he was very conscious of his relationship to authoritative sources and, when he named an authority, his claims were usually as reliable as contemporary traditions allowed.

Archbishop Wulfstan enjoyed a high reputation as a stylist amongst his contemporaries; when he was still bishop of London (996–1002) one correspondent spoke of the ‘very sweet wisdom of [his] eloquence and the richness of [his] composition fittingly organised’, whilst the wide dissemination of his sermons and their susceptibility to imitation bear dual witness to his popularity throughout the eleventh century.