Hand: Ten Glosses (130v, 131r, 133v, 157v), TCC O.2.30 (1134), fols. 129–72

Stokes, English Vernacular Script, ca 990–ca 1035, Vol. 2 (PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2006)

These glosses were probably written by a single scribe with fairly dark ink and a thick pen. Ascenders are as long as or slightly longer than minims and have small wedges or are clubbed. Descenders are slightly shorter and are straight. Minims have approach-strokes or wedges and usually have short ticks for feet. Caroline a was used throughout except perhaps for a marginal gloss on 133v: the form there looks round and single-compartment but the letter has been partially erased and so is difficult to make out. Caroline a was also used in æ, the eye of which is squinting, the tongue straight and rising, and the hook rounded. Round or slightly horned e was used, the hook and tongue usually like those of æ, but the tongue can be horizontal and just below cue-height, in which case the hook is rounded and slightly bulging. The back of d is short, angled at about 45°, and can be round, straight, or turned up. The hook and tongue of f are short, and the letter is once Caroline (for, 131r24) but is otherwise Insular. The top of g is flat and relatively wide, and the mid-section is straight and close to vertical before turning sharply right and then curving around in a wide open hook which turns up slightly at the tip. The mid-section and tail of g are both very short so that the letter is close to bilinear. The shoulders of h, m, n, and r are moderately rounded but can be more angular. Low and tall s were both used, low at the starts of words and once when doubled (both times in ‑fulnesse, 157v4). Long s is very narrow with a short hook at or slightly above ascender-height, and the hook of low s branches from slightly below cue-height. No ð and only one occurrence of þ is found (forþi, 131r24). Straight-limbed dotted y was used. Two glosses in this hand were mostly lost due to trimming but were written with Caroline letter-forms; these letter-forms suggest that the glosses were in Latin, a suggestion which is consistent with what little can be recovered (‑rum, 133v20; ‑ram, 157v4).