Two Revisions of Rolle's English Psalter Commentary and the Related Canticles, Vol. 1 ed. by Anne Hudson (review)

Anne Hudson has long been established as a leading authority in the field of later medieval texts and the interpretation of English religious controversy. Her erudite contributions in the recovery and editing of manuscripts has changed the way scholars approach the study of religion and her impact upon textual criticism cannot be overstated. Her attention to detail, archival sources, and a close study of manuscripts is once again reflected admirably in this volume. Since no critical edition of Richard Rolle's original English Psalter exists, Hudson focuses on the revised editions and presents the Latin text, English translation, and English commentary. This is achieved through a thorough codicological examination of the manuscripts. An intensive linguistic analysis follows, with numerous helpful allusions to Lollard literature, and Hudson observes that Rolle's translation is more accurate than the Wycliffite Bible. Challenges abound. The revised version was not made from Rolle's autograph but from a scribal version. The second version is not fully edited in this volume and it is assumed that the first version is Lollard, though Hudson points out this does not mean the commentaries provide a full account of Wycliffite belief. However, she argues there is sufficient evidence to see Lollard sympathies, though these writers do not represent a unified Lollardy.

The examination of the ideology of the texts compels the reader to wonder to what extent the ideas were replicated in other late medieval heresies. Importantly, we encounter new evidence indicating that material taken from Rolle shows Lollard antecedents before Wyclif. The textual difficulties are myriad and exacerbated by the presence of multiple revisers. The question of authorship remains unresolved. Richard Wyche and William Thorpe have been suggested and while the arguments seem compelling they strain the evidence. One must also ponder the purpose of the revised commentary. For whom was it prepared? How was it used? Medieval Psalters were most often used in monastic communities; Hudson rules out that possibility for the Rolle revisions. A lay liturgical function seems unlikely. Useful comparisons cannot be drawn to the Opus arduum. Several extant manuscripts suggest a public function but where, how, and for whom? Hudson suggests the puzzle is unanswerable and perhaps its intended usage was deliberately concealed, like so much Lollard literature.

Exacting, academic, and unimpeachably scholarly, one can only anticipate volumes two and three of this edition.