Liturgy and the Ecclesiastical History of Late Anglo-Saxon England: Four Studies. By David N. Dumville. [Studies in Anglo-Saxon (Rochester,NewYork: Boydell Press. 1992. Pp. x, 193. $59.00.) David N. Dumville's important collection of previously unpublished essays on matters related to the liturgy during the tenth and eleventh centuries is dedicated to Helmut Gneuss,on his sixty-fifth birthday in gratitude for his formidable contributions to the study of Anglo-Saxon liturgy and manuscripts. Such a tribute to Professor Gneuss is appropriate, for his work on liturgical manuscripts is central to the contemporary study of the liturgy; equally central, however, are Dumville's own studies on the provenances and interrelationships of ninth-, tenth-, and eleventh-century manuscripts, and the collection of studies under review presupposes access, if not indeed familiarity, with Dumville's Wessex and England from Alfred to Edgar and Caroline Script and Monastic History, volumes three and six respectively in the Studies in Anglo-Saxon History series, as well as his important essays on English Square minuscule script in volumes 16 and 23 of Anglo-Saxon England. first study, The Kalendar of the Psalter, examines the neglected kalendar (fols. 2'-7) of Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS. 27, the so-called Junius Psalter. feasts in this kalendar that were graded high are indicated by hexametrical verses which replicate the lines in a metrical martyrology, sometimes known as the Hampson martyrology, the earliest surviving manuscript of which is London, British Library, MS. Cotton Galba A.xviii. Dumville constructs an elaborate but plausible hypothesis which suggests Canterbury as the probable point of origin of both the metrical martyrology and the liturgical material in the Psalter's kalendar, which therefore allows the attribution of MS. 27 to Canterbury In The Kalendar of Anglo-Saxon Glastonbury: a Chimaera? Dumville argues that the kalendar of Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS. Bodley 579, the Missal, does not derive from a Glastonbury original, but from Canterbury His case for freeing the kalendar from Glastonbury is strong, indeed, since the Glastonbury attribution was constructed on a scholarly repetition of E E. Warren's flawed argument for such an origin when he edited the Leofric Missal in 1883; the case for attributing the kalendar to Canterbury remains, as Dumville admits, to be proven. third article, entitled Liturgical Books for the Anglo-Saxon Episcopate: A Reconsideration, begins with Gneuss's data concerning only those books which would have been used by a bishop or archbishop, to which Dumville adds a brief essay on relevant paleographical and codicological considerations for each book. …