LAwr.oij — The Cathach of St. Columha. 267 



has made one drastic change in copying his exemplar. He has rejected all 

 the rnbries of p, and sulDstituted for them the tituU of the version from the 

 Hebrew. Thus for the rubrics we can only use E. But an examination of 

 the E rubrics shows that they stand in exactly the same relation to the 

 Amiatine rubrics as the p text to the Amiatine text; that is to say, they are 

 derived from a common archetype, no doubt o. It will suffice to give proof 

 of this for the headings and liturgical notes : though it would be equally easy 

 to establish the same conclusion for the titvli by a similar argument. 



E reproduces the headings and liturgical notes of A in a majority of cases, 

 inclu'.ling some in which A is certainly incorrect. There are, in fact, only 

 aboat 37 instances in which the two manuscripts differ from one another, 

 and in more tihan half of these the variation is insignificant. We find in 

 R 18 clerical errors from which A is free,' and in A 4 similar (and easily 

 corrected) errors, from which R is free.- But 16 rubrics remain' in 

 which the differences are of more importance, and which exclude the hypo- 

 thesis of direct derivation of the E series from that of A. They are the 

 following : — 



Ps. ii. A : legenclus ad euangelium lucac uox pairin et apostolorum et christi 

 ad caput scribendiim. 



M adds ad christuvi after patris, and at the end increjMtio potestatum. 



Evidently the clause which follows the liturgical note in AE is not a 

 psalm-heading. It may be explained thus : A scribe was employed to make 

 a copy of the Psalter from an exemplar in which there were no headings. 

 This clause was written on the exemplar as a direction to insert the headings 

 from another source in the proper places. The scribe not only obeyed the 

 direction, but actually transcribed it as part of the rubric of the second 

 psalm — the first which had a rubric in the exemplar.* It may be noted that 

 the exemplar, though it lacked headings, probably had a more or less com- 

 plete series of notes ; for the direction follows the note both in A and E, and 

 it obviously applies in strictness only to headings beginning with the word 

 uox. It is clear, then, that A has no heading for Ps. ii. On the other hand, 

 E has a heading which suits the psalm. We must assume that it was derived 

 from a. 



Ps. V. A : civristus ad patrevi. 

 E adds dicit. 



' Pss. XXXV, xliii (two errors), xlvi, liv, Ivi, Ixiii, Ixviii, Ixxv, Ixxxii, xcv, xcvi, xcix, 

 cv, cxxx, cxliii, cxlvii, cxlix. Mere differences of spelling are not counted. 

 -Pss. xvi, xxi, xxxi, Ixviii. 

 ^ The heading of Ps. Ii is erased in R. 



^ Ps. i had no titulus — a fact which is often remarked upon'by early commentators. 



[39*] 



