Open main menu

Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 42.djvu/260

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

which was produced at Drury Lane on 10 March 1825 (Gent. Mag. 1849, ii. 546; Genest, ix. 292). She had three sisters on the stage—one, who married Hughes of Drury Lane, and died young; a Mrs. Fawcett, a performer in the country; and a Mrs. Lazenby, who appeared at the Olympic. Her daughter, who married one Reinagle, was known as a pianiste.

[Genest's Account of the English Stage; Dibdin's Edinburgh Stage; Oxberry's Dramatic Chronology, vol. ii.; Dramatic and Musical Review, various years; Pollock's Macready; Biography of the British Stage, 1824; Georgian Era; Era, 21 Oct. 1849; Gent. Mag. 1849, ii. 545–6.]

J. K.

ORIEL, Lord. [See Foster, John, 1740–1828, speaker of the Irish House of Commons.]

ORIVALLE, HUGH de (d. 1085), bishop of London, was the first bishop appointed by William the Conqueror to the see of London, and was consecrated by Lanfranc in 1075. William of Malmesbury simply calls him ‘Hugonem quendam’ (Gest. Pontiff. p. 145). Mr. Freeman speaks of him as ‘an obscure name enough’ (Norman Conquest, iv. 375). Dean Milman calls him ‘Hugh of Orwell,’ but he gives no authority; and, if Orwell in Suffolk is the place intended, it must be regarded as in the highest degree unlikely that William should have selected a native Englishman for the bishopric of his capital. We may feel pretty certain that, like William's other bishops, he was a Norman. The only thing recorded of him is that he was afflicted with leprosy, which attacked the lower parts of his abdomen; by the advice of his physicians, Orivalle resorted to the remedy adopted by Origen, ‘but for the health of his body and not of his soul’ (Freeman, ib.) It proved ineffectual; he remained a leper to the day of his death, and thus, in Malmesbury's words, ‘opprobrium spadonis tulit, et nullum invenit remedium.’

[Godwin, De Præsul. i. 175.]

E. V.

ORKNEY, Earls of. [See Hamilton, Lord George, 1666–1737; Paul, d. 1099; Sinclair, William, Earl of Caithness, d. 1480; Stewart, Robert, fl. 1581; Stewart, Patrick, d. 1615.]

ORLEANS, Duchess of, fifth daughter of Charles I. [See Henrietta or Henrietta Anne, 1644–1070.]

ORLTON or ORLETON, ADAM of (d. 1345). bishop of Winchester. [See Adam.]

ORM or ORMIN (fl. 1200?), author of ‘Ormulum,’ probably of Danish family, was a monk of the order of St. Augustine, and evidently lived in the Danish territory of England, ‘in the north-eastern part of the former kingdom of Mercia.’ His book, which is a series of homilies in verse extending from the Annunciation into the Acts, is ‘named Ormulum,’ according to the opening lines of the preface—‘for that Orm wrought it.’ The name ‘Orm’ (= Worm) betokens the Scandinavian descent of the author; the variant ‘Ormin’ was possibly formed on the model of ‘Austin’ and similar names. Professor Zupitza's view, that the ending is the French diminutive, seems doubtful (Guy of Warwick, Text B, Early English Text Society, note to l. 9529). There is a strong temptation to see in the suffix the Scandinavian agglutinative definite article; but there is no evidence of its use in proper names at this early period. In a long metrical dedication to Walter, Orm's threefold brother—‘in the flesh, in baptism, and in the order’—the author explains how, encouraged by his brother, he devoted himself to the task of ‘turning into English speech’ the Gospels of the year, so that English folk might thereby be won to salvation. His method was to give a paraphrase of the Gospel of the day, adding thereto a quaint and mystical exposition. The main sources of his commentary were Bede, Gregory, and perhaps Josephus and Isidore. As Ten Brink pointed out, there seems to have been in the cloister where Orm dwelt little knowledge of the ecclesiastical writers of the new era—men like Anselm, Abelard, Bernard, the celebrities of St. Victor, or like Honorius Augustodunensis. On the other hand, it is saying too much to claim for Orm direct acquaintance with the writings of Ælfric; the alleged influence of Augustine is also very doubtful (Englische Studien, vi. 1–26). Judging by the tone of his dedication, there can be no question that the author regarded the finished work with considerable pride, and felt assured of its popularity. He was anxious—needlessly so—that the original transcript should be faithfully followed in the minutest details by future scribes. There is strong reason to believe that no second copy was ever made, nor can we detect the poet's literary or theological influence on his contemporaries.

Historically the ‘Ormulum’ is of special value as the first noteworthy piece of Anglian (i.e. Northern) literature after the Conquest. From this point of view it is hardly second in importance to Layamon's ‘Brut,’ which, about the same date, marked the reawakening of poetry in the Southern territory. It is significant that, whereas the Saxon Layamon used both Teutonic alliteration and Romance rhyme, the Danish Orm