Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Gameson, Richard
2011.
The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain.
Article contents
An Anglo-Saxon fragment of Justinus's Epitome
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 September 2008
Extract
In 1910, Samuel Brandt published a description and photograph of a fragment of Justinus's Epitome of the Historiae Philippicae of Pompeius Trogus. The leaf, whose present location is unknown, belonged at that time to the collection of Ernst Fischer at Weinheim. Fischer dated its script, an Anglo-Saxon minuscule, to about AD 800, which, as Brandt observed, would mean that it antedated the earliest known manuscripts of the text, which are ninth-century. Although E. A. Lowe indicated in his Codices Latini Antiquiores that the fragment was lost, it has continued to attract scholarly attention. Professor Bernhard Bischoff suggested that the fragment could be identified with a copy of Justinus listed among the books of Gerward, palace librarian of Louis the Pious. This implied connection with the Carolingian court, taken together with Alcuin's naming of Justinus's work among the books described in the poem on York and his later association with the Carolingian court, has raised the possibility of an English origin for the Weinheim manuscript and therefore also for the earliest known branch of the text. As L.D. Reynolds remarked, ‘This fragment has a significance quite out of keeping with its size.’
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987
References
1 ‘Über ein Fragment einer Handschrift des Justinus aus der Sammlung Fischer, E. in Weinheim’, Neue Heidelberger Jahrbücher 16 (1910), 109–14.Google Scholar
2 Professor Helmut Gneuss has kindly confirmed this in a letter of 12 May 1986. Another lost fragment of potential relevance to my discussion is mentioned by Lindsay, W. M., Notae Latinae (Cambridge, 1915), p. 492Google Scholar it too belonged to Fischer and was written in Anglo-Saxon script.
3 ‘Über ein Fragment’, p. 110.
4 The entry is marked with an obelus, signifying that the manuscript is untraced: Lowe, E. A., Codices Latini antiquiores, 11 vols. and suppl. (Oxford, 1934–1971; and 11Google Scholar, 2nd ed., 1972) (hereafter abbreviated CLA) IX, no. 1370.
5 Lorsch im Spiegel seiner Handschriften (Munich, 1974), p. 56.Google Scholar
6 As quoted by Reynolds, L. D. in Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics, ed. Reynolds, L. D. (Oxford, 1983), p. 197, n. 3.Google Scholar See also Lapidge, M., ‘Surviving Booklists from Anglo-Saxon England’, Learning and Literature in Anglo-Saxon England. Studies Presented to Peter Clemoes on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday, ed. Lapidge, M. and Gneuss, H. (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 39–89, at 46–7.Google Scholar
7 Texts and Transmission, ed. Reynolds, p. 197.
8 Brandt, ‘Über ein Fragment’, p. 109.
9 ‘Wie man aus den Löchern, die durch die Einheftung entstanden sind, ersieht’ (ibid.).
10 ibid. p. 112.
11 Lehmann refers to the Weinheim leaf as ‘ein Bruchstück einer in fuldischer Insulare geschriebenen Handschrift’, Erforschung des Mittelalters, 5 vols. (Stuttgart, 1959–1962) III, 161.Google Scholar
12 Professor Gneuss, in a letter of 12 May 1986, informs me that ‘among all the leading authorities’ its Insular origin ‘does not seem in doubt now’.
13 For a guide to the various centres and for references to facsimiles see Bischoff, B., Mittelalterliche Studien, 3 vols. (Stuttgart, 1966–1981) iii, 5–38Google Scholar. See also his Paläographie des römischen Altertums und des abendländischen Mittelalters (Berlin, 1979), pp. 119–22Google Scholar, and Lowe, , CLA VIII, p. viGoogle Scholar. For individual centres see Bischoff, B. and Hofmann, J., Libri S. Kyliani: Die Würzburger Schreibschule und die Dombibliothek im VIII. und IX. Jahrhundert (Würzburg, 1952)Google ScholarLindsay, W. M. and Lehmann, P., ‘The (Early) Mayence Scriptorium’, Palaeographia Latina 4 (1925), 15–39Google ScholarSpilling, H., ‘Angelsächsische Schrift in Fulda’, Von der Klosterbibliothek zur Landesbibliothek, ed. Brall, A. (Stuttgart, 1978), pp. 47–98Google ScholarKöllner, H., Die illuminierten Handschriften der Hessischen Landesbibliothek Fulda I (Stuttgart, 1976)Google ScholarLieftinck, G. I., ‘Le ms. d'Aulu-Gelle à Leeuwarden exécuté à Fulda en 836’, Bullettino dell' ‘Archivio paleografico italiano’ 2nd ser. I (1955), 11–17Google ScholarDrögereit, R., Werden und der Heliand (Essen, 1950)Google Scholar. Also on this subject see Spilling, H., ‘Irische Handschriftenüberlieferung in Fulda, Mainz und Würzburg’, Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. Löwe, H., 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1982) ii, 876–902Google ScholarAutenrieth, J., ‘Insulare Spuren in Handschriften aus dem Bodenseegebiet bis zur Mitte des 9. Jahrhunderts’, in Paläographie 1981, ed. Silagi, G. (Munich, 1982), pp. 145–57Google Scholar and Baesecke, G., Der Vocabularius Sti Galli in der angelsächsischen Mission (Halle, 1933)Google Scholar, but note that Baesecke's comparisons with English material apparently datable to the eighth century require reassessment, since many of the charters which he cites would now be considered copies or forgeries of the ninth and even early tenth centuries (e.g. S 56, S 59, S 264 and S 1188).
14 See also Cróinín's, D.Ó alternative hypothesis in ‘Rath Melsigi, Willibrord, and the Earliest Echternach Manuscripts’, Peritia 3 (1984), 17–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15 CLA IX, no. 1427.
16 ‘Angelsächsische Schrift’, p. 51.
17 ibid. pp. 94–5.
18 CLAS, nos. 1703 and 1685. This view has been opposed controversially by Ó Cróinín, who regards Rath Melsigi as ‘the scriptorium in which the first-generation Echternach scribes received their formation’ («Rath Melsigi’, p. 42).
19 For example CLA S, no. **1400: Oxford, Bodleian Library, Laud misc. 263Google Scholar (S.C. 1000).
20 ‘Kurz vor und um 800 ist die Schrift meist gerade, mit langen Unterlängen, oft etwas schwunglos’ (Palāographie, p. 121).
21 Spilling, ‘Angelsächsische Schrift’, p. 93.
22 These additional criteria were suggested to me by Dr M. Lapidge.
23 Der Vocabularius, esp. pp. 18–23. It should be noted that Baesecke was comparing half-uncial and not minuscule scripts.
24 CLA II, no. *196b.
25 CLA I, no. 90.
26 CLA II, no. *196b, col. B, line 7; CLA I, no. 90, line 7.
27 CLA II, no. 139; ed. in facsimile by Blair, P. Hunter (with a contribution by Mynors, R. A. B.), The Moore Bede: an Eighth-century Manuscript of the Venerable Bede's Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum in Cambridge University Library (Kk. 5.16), EEMF 9 (Copenhagen, 1959).Google Scholar
28 Bischoff, B., ‘Die Hofbibliothek Karls des Grossen’, Mittelalterliche Studien III, 149–69.Google Scholar
29 CLA XI, no. **1339.
30 Werden und der Heliand, pl. 6 and pp. 25–6.
31 CLA XI, no. 1621.
32 On this manuscript see Parkes, M. B., The Scriptorium of Wearmouth–Jarrow, Jarrow Lecture 1982 (Jarrow, 1983)Google Scholar. For fascimiles see Parkes, ibid. pls. 1 and 3, and Lowe, E. A., Palaeographical Papers 1907–1965, ed. Bieler, L., 2 vols. (Oxford, 1972) iiGoogle Scholar, pls. 95–6.
33 Brown, T. J., ‘The Irish Element in the Insular System of Scripts to circa A.D. 850’, in Die Iren und Europa, ed. Löwe, I, 101–19, at 115.Google Scholar
34 Palaeographical Papers, ed. Bieler, I, 448.
35 The Scriptorium, p. 7.
36 Palaeographical Papers, ed. Bieler, II, 441–9 at 449.
37 CLA II, no. *216.
38 The bifolium now serves as flyleaves for a late tenth-century manuscript which Lowe (in CLA, Ibid.) describes as ‘palaeographically related’ to London, BL, Royal 2. B. v.
39 CLA VIII, no. 1134.
40 See above, n. 30.
41 CLA v, no. 584. Arguments for the Irish origin of a binding fragment from an Echternach volume, now fol. 201 of this manuscript, are put forward by ÓCróinín, ‘Rath Melsigi’, pp. 26–8.
42 ‘dem 8. Jahrhundert angehörenden Codex von Bedas Kirchengeschichte im Britischen Museum’.
43 CLA S, no. 1703; CLA II, no. 191.
44 Gatch, M. McC., ‘John Bagford as a Collector and Disseminator of Manuscript Fragments’, The Library, 6th Ser. 7 (1985), 95–114. at 96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45 ibid. p. 109.
46 Quoted by Wright, C. E., Fontes Harleiani: A Study of the Sources of the Harleian Collection of Manuscripts preserved in the British Museum (London, 1972), p. 59.Google Scholar
47 London, BL Sloane 4040, 347r.
48 Collins, R. L., ‘Two Fragments of Ælfric's Grammar: The Kinship of Ker 384 and Ker 242’, Annuale Mediaevale 5 (1964), 5–12.Google Scholar
49 ‘Über ein Fragment’, p. 111.
50 Sims-Williams, P., ‘Milred of Worcester's Collection of Latin Epigrams and its Continental Counterparts’, ASE 10 (1982), 21–38, at 25, n. 27.Google Scholar
51 Die Bibliothek des Klosters Fulda im 16. Jahrhundert: die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse, ed. Christ, K. (Leipzig, 1933), p. 268.Google Scholar
52 ‘Über ein Fragment’, p. 112–14.
53 ibid. p. 113.
54 ‘Modius, der auf seine Justinausgabe nur wenig Zeit und Fleiss verwandt hat, führt unglücklicherweise seine Handschriften nur sehr selten an’ (‘Die Textesquellen des Justinus’), Jahrbücher für classische Philologie, Suppl. Band 6 (Leipzig 1872–1873), 1–160, at 87–8.Google Scholar
55 Texts and Transmission, ed. Reynolds, p. 198.
56 Lehmann, P., ‘Das älteste Bücherverzeichnis der Niederlände’, Het Boek 12 (1923), 207–13.Google Scholar
57 ‘Sollten wir da den Stammvater der vermutlich im englischen York würzelnden deutschen und französischen Justinüberlieferung haben?’ (ibid. p. 213).
58 Lorsch, p. 56.
59 ‘Studien zu den Annales Xantenses’, DAEM 8 (1951), 58–99, at 88.Google Scholar Löwe quotes Einhard's report of a miracle which befell ‘Gerwardus palatii bibliothecarius’ on his return from Nymwegen to the court at Aachen. See below, n. 60.
60 Translatio Sanctorum Marcellini et Petri auctore Einbardo, ed. O. Holder-Egger, MGH, SS 15 (Hannover, 1887), 239–64, at 258.Google Scholar
61 Lorsch, pp. 53–4.
62 Löwe, ‘Studien’, pp. 91–8.
63 CLA I, no. 84.
64 Hofmann, J., ‘Altenglische und althochdeutsche Glossen aus Würzburg und dem weiteren Missionsgebiet’, BGDSL 85 (1963), 27–131.Google Scholar
65 CLA VIII, no. 1139. Hofmann, ‘Altenglische und althochdeutsche Glossen’, pp. 50–2. On this manuscript see Parkes, M. B., ‘The Handwriting of St Boniface: a Reassessment of the Problems’, BGDSL 98 (1976), 161–79.Google Scholar
66 Lowe, , Palaeographical Papers, ed. Bieler, I, 239–50.Google Scholar
67 For Levison's view, see ‘Bischof Theutbert von Wijk bij Duurstede’, Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 33 (1907–1908), 517–25Google Scholar, and England and the Continent in the Eighth Century (Oxford, 1946), pp. 62 and 82Google Scholar. One alternative was supported by Lehmann, , ‘Das älteste Bücherverzeichnis’, p. 210Google Scholar: ‘Thiaterd in dem jungen Bischofskatalog des 14. Jahrhunderts ist wohl eine späte Entstellung von Thiatbert, Theutbert’. See also Wattenbach, W. and Levison, W., Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter. Vorzeit und Karolinger, 5 vols. (Weimar, 1953–1973) i, 173–4Google Scholar. For a plate of the inscription see Analecta Liviana, ed. T. Mommsen and G. Studemund (Leipzig, 1873)Google Scholar, pl. 4. On Theutbert's manuscript see also Brown, T. J., ‘An Historical Introduction to the Use of Classical Latin Authors in the British Isles from the Fifth to the Eleventh Century’, SettSpol 22 (1975), 237–93, at 279.Google Scholar
68 Historia abbatum, §4 (Venerabilis Baedae opera historica, ed. C. Plummer, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1896) I, 364–87, at 367).Google Scholar
69 ibid. §6 (ed. Plummer, p. 369).
70 Cf. also the similar collectíon of Cuthwine, bishop of the East Angles: Whitelock, D., ‘The pre-Viking Age Church in East Anglia’, ASE I, (1972), 1–22, at 9.Google Scholar
71 ‘Bibliothecam…nobilissimam copiosissimamque’: Historia abbatum, §11 (ed. Plummer, p. 375).Google Scholar
72 Laistner, M. L. W., ‘The Library of the Venerable Bede’, in Bede: his Life, Times and Writings, ed. Thompson, A. H. (Oxford, 1935), pp. 237–66.Google Scholar
73 Brown, ‘An Historical Introduction’, pp. 276 and 286.
74 CLA x, no. 1578a. Cf. Texts and Transmission, ed. Reynolds, p. 309. See also Brown, ‘An Historical Introduction’, p. 275; Alcuin: The Bishops, Kings, and Saints of York, ed. Godman, P. (Oxford 1982), p. 125Google Scholar, n. to line 1549.
75 See Bede, , Historia ecclesiastica, IV. 23Google Scholar. This is Bishop Oftfor whom Sims-Williams associates with the travels of an uncial codex: see below, n. 78.
76 Cf. remarks, Parkes's, The Scriptorium, p. 15.Google Scholar
77 CLA IX, no. 1430a.
78 See Sims-Williams, P., ‘Cuthswith, seventh-century Abbess of Inkberrow, near Worcester, and the Würzburg Manuscript of Jerome on Ecclesiastes’, ASE 5 (1976), 1–21Google Scholar, especially 13–21.
79 CLA IX, no. 1430b.
80 CLA VIII, no. 1197.
81 Hofmann, ‘Altenglische und althochdeutsche Glossen’, p. 47.
82 On Liudger see Drögereit, , Werden und der Heliand, pp. 66–82Google Scholar, especially 66–71.
83 In his review of Werden und der Heliand in Anzeiger für deutsches Altertum 66 (1952–1953), 7–12.Google Scholar
84 ‘Die Textesquellen des Justinus’.
85 Texts and Transmission, ed. Reynolds, p. 197.
86 ‘Über ein Fragment’, p. 113–14.
87 M. Iuniani Iustini epitoma bistoriarum Philippicarum Pompei Trogi (Stuttgart, 1972).Google Scholar
88 ibid. pp. vii-viii.
89 My thanks are due to Dr David Dumville for drawing the Bagford fragment to my attention and for subsequent discussions and guidance on the matter, to Professor Helmut Gneuss for his prompt response to my enquiry about Fischer's fragment, and to Professor Michael Reeve, Dr Michael Lapidge and Dr Rosamond McKitterick for their comments after kindly reading this paper in draft. To n. 13 should be added McKitterick, R., ‘The Diffusion of Insular Culture in Neustria between 650 and 850: the Implications of the Manuscript Evidence’, in La Neustrie. Les pays au nord de la Loire de Dagobert à Charles le Chauve ed. H. H. Atsma (forthcoming).Google Scholar
90 There are two scribal marginal notes. Of that on the recto, only the following can be distinguished: ‘[ius iuran]du[m] ?mei [pron]us [ ] sororis’. On the verso ‘ptholemeus filius sororis interficit ipsam post nuptias in exilium mittit’.
- 1
- Cited by