‘Textus Roffensis’: Law, Language, and Libraries in Early Medieval England eds. by Bruce O’Brien and Barbara Bombi (review)

As Patrick Wormald observed in The Making of English Law, ‘Textus Roffensis has nearly always been the most famous early English legal manuscript’ (p. 244). Compiled in the early 1120s, probably under the monk–bishop Ernulf, the twin volumes constitute the largest surviving compendium of Anglo-Saxon laws, along with accurate copies of charters from St Andrew’s, Rochester. The single scribe was well trained in Anglo-Saxon language and history, and left a rich legacy, including the only surviving copy of probably the earliest writing in English, the Laws of Æthelberht of Kent. The collection was compiled to protect the monks and their endowments from outside interests, and to highlight the glorious past of their foundation. The continued prestige and practical function of the book is reflected in its title ‘Textus’ and its special place on or near the altar of the cathedral, rather than with other books in the monastic library.

The volume under review prints papers from a conference on Textus Roffensis (hereafter TR) hosted by the University of Kent in 2010, and, sadly, forms a memorial for two distinguished contributors who have since died: Nicholas Brooks and Lisi Oliver. Bruce O’Brien presents a succinct introduction setting out key issues surrounding the history, function, and content of the TR, and briefly outlines the content of each paper. The first four chapters deal with the book itself. Mary Richards extends her work on the books from Rochester and argues for TR as one example of the activity at this centre to preserve and update English materials while combining them with related Norman works. Nicholas Karn explores the likely function of TR as a public book employed in the rituals and ceremonies of the Kentish courts. Later in the volume, Tracey-Anne Cooper explores the Cattle-Theft Charm as an instance of a quasi-legal performance text, further reinforcing the book’s public role. Thomas Gobbit extends analysis of TR in comparison with another key legal encyclopaedia: Cambridge, Corpus Christi College MS 383, from St Paul’s in London. Stefan Jurasinski focuses on scribal emendations to laws concerning slavery and homicide in the same manuscript to show how laws were studied and misunderstood by readers in the twelfth century, and how well the work of the TR scribe stands in comparison with some of his contemporaries.

The first three of several papers that examine legal texts are devoted to the earliest law code of Æthelberht. Nicholas Brooks discusses ‘Preservation, Content, and Composition’, Carole Hough examines the language in the light of recent work on Kentish dialect, and Daniela Fruscione provides an analysis of the hapax legomenon ‘drihtinbeag’ in the code. All three papers point to the code’s archaic nature, with roots in the oral laws of Kent, which Brooks even suggests might have been recorded in runes before Augustine’s arrival. Andrew Rabin discusses Wulfstan’s ‘Compilation on Status’, or the ‘Geþyncðu group’ of texts, arguing that the TR version is a later one in Wulfstan’s development of his ‘project to envision a holy society’ (p. 189). Julie Mumby writes on the textual crux ‘fæderan’ in the Wergeld tract. Lisi Oliver discusses the sources for Alfred’s Laws, arguing that the ‘Mosaic Prologue’ probably derived from a penitential text brought from Francia by Grimbald or his colleagues, and that the personal injury tariffs, with parallels in the Laws of Æthelberht and the problematic Lex Frisionum, reflect ‘long-standing common traditions of Anglo-Frisian legal culture’ (p. 251).

The section devoted to Charters in TR begins with Ben Snook’s analysis of a corpus of early charters. He argues that their stylistic affinities and their apparent sources reflect reforms introduced in the time of Theodore and Hadrian, including an archetypal charter...