Lawi.ok — The Cathach of St, Columha. 281 



in B can hardly be accepted. For super we should have expected de ; and the 

 allusion in a psalm-heading to a person who existed only in a parable is 

 without parallel. Perhaps the simplest explanation is that the final clause is 

 (or represents) a lectionary note — a reference, in fact, to St. Luke xvi. 19 ff. 

 In that case a may give the rubric nearly in its original form, and may be 

 identical with ^. Bede, not perceiving that super lazaro was a lectionary note, 

 would regard the first clause as a somewhat pointless generalization of it, and 

 would accordingly omit it. 



Ps. xlix. de aduentu christi propheta dieit et iudicio futuro increpatio 

 iudaeorum. 



B omits. But the S text appears to have had a heading which to some 

 extent corresponded with it : the rubric of S runs, dauid dicit ad increpandum 

 pcccatores. And in the argumentum oi the printed text there are coincidences 

 both with this heading and with that of a : " Nunc ad iudaeos loquitur, con- 

 sternare uolens et emendare peccantes . . . quod totum exsequitur terribiliore 

 suggestu, quasi tribuncd mdiciale describens." It will be noticed, however, 

 that increpatio occurs in a, and increpandum in S, but no cognate word in the 

 printed text of B. It is not impossible, therefore, that /3 agreed with «. 



Ps. Ixiv. ^(,ox ecclesiae ante baptismum p)aschalismatiim. 



B omits the last word, which must surely be original. But it may have 

 been in /3. So strange a word would have been liable to omission hy an 

 editor or scribe. 



Ps. Ixix. uox ecclesiae ad dominum. 



B has uox christi uel ecclesiae ad dominum ; and S supports it in some 

 measure : uox christi ad patrem. But obviously christi was a marginal note 

 incorporated in the text by a scribe (cp. K, Ps. Ixxv : uox christi ecclesiae ad 

 christum), and it consorts ill with ad dominum. Accordingly S substitutes 

 ad patrem. It is scarcely possible that B preserves Bede's text, 



Ps. Ixxxv. _per ieiunium uox christi ad patrem. 



B omits the liturgical note, per ieiunium. Probably a scribe's error. 



Ps. Ixxxvii. uox christi de passione sua dicit ad piatrcm. 



B omits dicit. 



Ps. xcvi. ad confessionxm prophetia uox ecclesiae ad aduentum christi. 



B omits the first three words. But there is no difficulty in the supposi- 

 tion that they were in )3, and were omitted by Bede, or by a scribe of 

 his work. 



Ps. c. uox christi ad patrem de requic sanctorum. 



For reqitie B has the wholly unsuitable reliqucte. Bede must have written 

 rcquie, with a. The exemplar of S (which has deqide) obviously read de requie. 

 Probably, therefore, |3 agreed with a. 



K.I. A. PROC, VOL, XXXIII, SECT. C. [41] 



