Köln, Dombibliothek MS 213 Collectio canonum Sanblasiana

Abstract

149. Koln, Dombibliothek MS 213

Collectio canonum Sanblasiana

[Ker 98*, Gneuss 836, Lowe 8:1163]

HISTORY: A collection of counciliar canons and papal decretals in the "Sanblasian" recension, compounded of several Sc collections (the "Isidorian" and "Priscian") as augmented and stabilized in the second revision of Dionysius Exiguus during the papacy of Hormisdas (514-523) (Maassen 1870: 500-12; Gaudemet 1985: 139; more generally, Schwarz 1936/1960 and Peitz 1960). The manuscript is usually considered to have been produced at Lindisfarne in the early Sc, though possibly written in a continental insular house such as Echternach (Hofmann 1964: 34-36); very similar in its style of ornament, script, execution, size, and preparation to the group comprising the Lindisfarne Gospels (B.L. Cotton Nero C. iv) [206], Durham Cathedral Library A. ii. 17 [118], the Echternach Gospels (Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale lat. 9389), the Book of Kells (Trinity College Dublin 58 [A.I.6]), and B.L. Royal 1 B vii [281]. Bischoff and Lapidge (1994: 154) suggest that Kain 213 might have been used by a Northumbrian scholar when the "Iudicia" of Archbishop Theodore were being revised, and this is supported by other evidence adduced by Brett (1995: 136-37), who points out that the "Sanblasiana" was the only collection discernably known to Theodore and his circle. McKitterick (1985: 109-15) argues that Kain 213 was produced at Köln itself in the mid-Sc by a Northumbrian scribe of the Bonifatian mission, Sigibert, whose [probably spurious] colophon shows at any rate its early Köln provenance. At bottom of f. 143r appears 'SIGIBERTUS | SCRIPSIT' and the same name, in the same style of writing and probably the same hand, 'SIGIBERTUS; BINDIT . LIBELLUM' ['bindit' = "uendit"? see McKitterick 1985: 110] appears in the colophon of Kain, Dombibliothek MS 212 (f. 167v), also a Collectio canonum, written in the west-Frankish area during the papacy of Gregory I (590-604), a book never in England as far as is known. It is considered by Lowe and others that MS 212 was in Kain (and by inference, because of the "Sigibert" colophons, also MS 213) by the mid-9c at the latest, for on the verso of the flyleaf of MS 212 is written in a hand of the mid-9c 'In d<e>i nomen hildibaldus,' presumably referring to Hilde bald, Bishop ofKoln (785-819) (but the wormholes in this very old flyleaf do not match those on the leaf following). The warrant for including this manuscript in the series is a single OE gloss, 'hroemgu<m>', f. 122v/23, left margin (scratched, in small, practiced insular minuscule), which could have been added while the MS was still in England. A single OHG gloss, 'ch elactrot', bottom of f. 65r (in caroline minuscule, just below inked 'notetur'), "moglicherweise noch tief aus dem VIII. Jahrhundert stammend" (Bischoff 1981: 75), was probably added at Koln. There are also several scratched Latin glosses. MSS 213 and 212, though of quite diverse origins, were thought of as a suite from the time of "Sigibert" up to the end of the Middle Ages, for the two, of similar size (212 is 335 x 268 mm.) and contents, received matching binding in the late Middle Ages. MS 213, along with many of the manuscripts of the Dombibliothek, was evacuated to Darmstadt in 1794 on the eve of the invasion by French revolutionary forces. Its Darmstadt number, written on both flyleaves, was 2336. The manuscript was returned to Koln, with the others, in 1867 Gaffe and Wattenbach 1874: iii). [Note: On f. 122v/23 0eft margin) 'hroemgū' (WS hremig) "happy" is glossing 'conpotis uotis' (recte "compotes uoti"); on 65r, bottom, the German scratched gloss, 'ch elactrot,' appears to be a low Franconian form of 'gilahtrot' from * lahtri5n, "to shame." It refers probably to line 24 'inpor'tu' nitas depravctur' (written in cursive minuscule, correction in the main script), and is scratched immediately below the correction in the bottom margin, 'notctur,' which partially agrees with the non-Sanblasian reading "improbitas notctur" and for which 'chelactrot' would be a more accurate gloss; sec | lofmann 1963: 43-44.j