IV. The text in France lxi
T E X T U A L IN T R O D U C T I O N
lxi Dijon 574, twelfth century, from Citeaux; Montpellier, École de Médecine g2, twelfth century, in which our History follows Geoffrey of Monmouth; and Valencia Cathedral 59, a later copy belonging to a library which contains many manuscripts from England.1
Besides these, we know that the c-text spread a short distance across the Channel, as one might expect, for it is represented by:
Douai 5 J 5 , tw e lfth ce n tu ry , fro m A n c h i n ; Rouen 1177, e a rly th irtee n th ce n tu ry , fro m Ju m ie g e s , in w h ic h B e d e fo llo w s G e o ffr e y o f M o n m o u th an d H e n r y o f H u n tin g d o n ;
Rouen I 343> e a rly tw e lfth ce n tu ry , in th e a u to gra p h o f O rd e ricu s
V ita lis th e h isto ria n , w h ic h seem s to b e a c-te x t, b u t has Praeterea
. . . inueniam at th e en d o f th e p re fa ce .
Tournai, Bibi, de la Ville 134, tw e lfth c e n tu ry (K e r , n o. 3 8 7 ) , w a s a n o th er, to ju d g e b y th e d e scrip tio n in th e C a ta lo g u e o f P . F a id e r a n d P . V a n S in t Ja n ( 1 9 5 0 ) , b u t it w a s d e stro y e d in th e S e c o n d
W o r ld W a r . I t b e lo n g e d to an e a rly -se v e n te e n th -c e n tu ry can o n o f
T o u r n a i, a n d m ig h t h a ve b een a refu g ee fro m so m e fo rm e r E n g lis h m o n a ste ry.
The relation of these to the English c-text requires further study.
So does the position of Boulogne-sur-mer 103, eleventh century, from St. Bertin, the text of which might geographically be of either French (m) or English (c) type.
IV. The text in France The circulation of the History in what we now call France derives directly (with certain exceptions to be mentioned presently) from our two earliest manuscripts, L and M.
When L crossed the Channel, we do not know. The last trace of its presence in England seems to be the copying from it at the end of the eighth century (as we have seen above, p. xlvi) of Cotton
M S. Tiberius A. xiv. Nine hundred years later, it reappears in the library of a famous French collector, Count Achille de Harlay, who died in 17 12 ; and it was from France that Pierre Dubrowsky took it to St. Petersburg. One other of its descendants has been identi fied, a twelfth-century French book, now Paris, Bibliothéque de
VArsenal 115 4 , which in the seventeenth century belonged to the Benedictine Priory of Saint-Martin-des-Champs in Paris. Un fortunately, this is incomplete at beginning and end, so that its earlier history is lost, and there are indications that it is not a direct
1 E. Olmos y Canalda, Codices de la Catedral de Valencia (1943)» P53*
lxii
T E X T U A L I N T R O D U C T I O N
copy. There may well be other evidence for the history of L which has escaped me.
The fortune of M was very different. The impatience of its scribe, if that is the reason for its many superficial errors, has proved unexpectedly to our advantage; for his mistakes have made it possible to identify as its progeny not less than seven copies in Carolingian minuscule of the ninth century, listed here in a pro visional order of date:1
Bern, Burgerbibliothek 49, w ritte n p e rh a p s in th e L o ir e v a lle y in th e first q u a rte r o f th e c e n tu r y : it b ears th e n in th -c e n tu ry e x -lib ris o f F le u r y ( S a in t -B e n o it -s u r -L o ir e ) .2
Paris, Biblioiheque nationale latin 5227A, se co n d q u a rte r, m u ch p u n c tu a te d an d co rre cte d later in th e c e n t u r y ; e a rly e x -lib ris o f
S t . Ju lia n 's, T o u r s .
London, British Museum Harley 4978, th ird q u a rte r, b y se ve ra l scrib e s w o rk in g sim u lta n e o u sly, p e rh a p s at F la v ig n y ( C ó t e -d ' O r).
Paris lat. 5226, th ird q u a rte r, p e rh a p s w ritte n in th e L o ir e v a lle y : p ro v e n a n c e u n k n o w n .
Berlin Phillipps 1873, th ird o r fo u rth q u a rte r, p e rh a p s w ritte n at A u x e r r e : e x -lib ris o f S t . M a x im in 's, T r ie r , a n d a fte rw a rd s at th e
Je s u it C o lle g e d e C le rm o n t in P a ris, w h e re it se rv e d as th e b asis o f
C h iffle t's ed itio n o f 1 6 8 1 .
Brussels, Royal Library I I 2 2 9 5 (1353), fo u rth q u a rte r, fro m S ta v e lo t, so u th -e a st o f L ie g e .
Paris lat. 5227, fo u rth q u a rter, in severa l F r e n c h h a n d s ; fro m M o n t ie r -e n -D e r (H a u te -M a r n e ).
All these (except Paris lat. 5226, which is incomplete at the end) have a short piece De consanguinitate, on marriage within the pro hibited degrees, at the end of Bede's text. This is put together from Isidore's Etymologiae ix. 6. 28-29, and from the canons of the Roman Council of 721, with at the end in some copies the first few words of a sermon which has been ascribed to St. Augustine of Canterbury. It has been printed, and its use in later canonlaw collections has been examined, by Dorn Lambert Machielsen3.
1 The evidence will be found (with some misdating of scripts due to my own ignorance) on pp. 34-36 of the facsimile of M (Copenhagen, 1959), and need not be repeated here. The provisional dating and placing of the ninth-century copies I owe (with much else) to Professor Bernhard Bischoff, K arl der Grosse, i i . Das geistige Leben (Düsseldorf, 1965), p. 56.
2 O. Homburger, Die illustrierten H S S der Burgerbibliothek Bern (1962), p. 56 and figs. 35 and 135.
3 Sacris Erudiri, xii (1961), 496 ff.; Revue Bénédictine, l x x iii (1963), 33-47 and 314-16.
T E X T U A L I N T R O D U C T I O N
lxiii Now the same De consanguinitate stands at the end of M (the last leaf lost), in a Continental hand of around the year 800; and this hand has been recognized by Professor Bischoff as very close to the minuscule used in the 'Golden Gospels/ M S. Harley 2788, a product of the Court school of Charles the Great. He there fore describes M as 'perhaps the only surviving manuscript whose provenance from Charlemagne's court library is certain' ;1 and if M found, however briefly, a home so distinguished and so central, it is not surprising that it should have generated a large and early progeny. Yet these are derived from it not directly, but through an intermediary, in which the De consanguinitate was first added. This is shown, first by the common errors of the transcripts which are not found in M or inevitably provoked by it; and also by the fact that in the Isidore-excerpt, the scribe who made the addition in M omitted by an easy jump of the eye a clause which is present in nearly all the other copies, so that they cannot be derived from M as it stands. When M arrived at the Court, we may suppose that it attracted attention, especially perhaps by its lives of saints
{passim), by its Responsiones (i. 27) and other details connected with Gregory the Great, and by its visions of the next world
(v. 12-14 ); but the close Northumbrian script was inconvenient, and so a copy was made for general use, and the De consanguini tate added thereto, for its relevance to no. 5 of the Responsiones
From this the others are descended; while it was thought good to add the supplement to M as well.
As was to be expected, there are plenty of later copies whose descent from the Carolingian progeny of M is established by characteristic readings in the text. Let it suffice to list them here, and leave their filiation to be worked out by others.
Berlin, Hamilton 70, e le ve n th c e n tu r y .2 3 Milan, Ambrosiana C. 72 inf., late ele ven th ce n tu ry , w ith th e De con sanguinitate at th e en d . F r o m S t . M a r t in 's, M a s s a y (d io c. B o u r g e s ): it fo rm s a v o lu m e w ith D ic ty s , E u tro p iu s , P a u lu s, an d Jo rd a n e s , a n d a p p e a rs in th e tw e lfth -c e n tu r y ca ta lo g u e as Historia Anglorum
Troianorum Romanorum Longobardorum Gothorum in uno codiceJ 1 B. Bischoff, Karl der Grosse, II. 56—57.
* For information about this manuscript, I am much indebted to Dr. H.
Boese and Professor Giles Constable.
See E. Franceschini in Atti del Istituto veneto di scienze, etc. xcvii. 2. 15862, and Mélanges J . de Ghellinck, I (Gembloux, 1951), 154-9.
l x i v
T E X T U A L I N T R O D U C T I O N
Paris, Bibl. nat. latin 5230, e le v e n th ce n tu ry , fro m S t . M a r tia l's,
L im o g e s .
Paris lat. 5230A, eleven th ce n tu ry , fro m S t . F lo r e n t-le -V ie il (d io c.
A n g e rs ).
Paris lat. 5232, late tw e lfth ce n tu ry , fro m S a v ig n y , w ith N e n n iu s an d H e n r y o f H u n tin g d o n .
Paris lat. 5233, late tw e lfth ce n tu ry , a h a n d so m e b ook , w ith G e o ffr e y o f M o n m o u th .
Paris lat. 5234, late tw e lfth ce n tu ry , fró m S t. J o h n 's, A m ie n s .
Paris lat. 10184, tw e lfth ce n tu ry , w ritte n fro m f. 8 0 o n w a rd s o v e r an era sed te xt in in su la r m in u scu le .
Paris lat. I2g42, late tw e lfth ce n tu ry , fro m S a in t-G e r m a in -d e s -P r é s , sig n e d b y an E n g lis h scrib e ca lle d R a d u lfu s.
Paris lat. I 2g43, also late tw e lfth c e n tu ry an d fro m S a in t-G e r m a in , w ith th e De consanguinitate still at th e e n d : B e d e 's De locis sanctis an d G e o ffr e y o f M o n m o u th fo llo w .
Paris lat. i6oy8, ele ven th ce n tu ry , fro m th e S o rb o n n e .
Paris, Bibi, de VArsenal g8g, tw e lfth ce n tu ry , fro m F o n te n a y (d io c.
A u tu n ).
Reims 142g, ele ven th ce n tu ry , sig n e d b y a scrib e R a in e ru s.
Trier, Stadtbibl. u g^ jói, first h a lf o f tw e lfth c e n tu ry , fro m S S .
E u c h a riu s an d M a tth ia s , T r ie r .
Trier, Stadtbibl. igg3jÓ4y, fifteen th ce n tu ry , p e rh a p s fro m E b e r h a rd sk la u sen .
Vatican Library, Ottoboni lat. 8yy, e le ven th c e n tu ry , w ith a tw e lfth ce n tu ry e x -lib ris m ark w h ic h sh o u ld b e legib le.
Vatican Reginensis lat. 122, late tw e lfth c e n t u r y : fo rm e rly b elo n g ed to A le x a n d e r P e ta u (b o th th ese V a tic a n co p ie s are no d o u b t F r e n c h ).
Vendóme, Bibi, municipale 53, e le ven th c e n tu ry , fro m L a T r in it é at V e n d ó m e .
It seems likely therefore that the circulation of the History in France will repay further study. That the family of M, except for outliers in Trier, spread so little to the eastward, is not surprising when we find another family in possession across the Rhine and as far west as Saint-Hubert in the Ardennes. But even in France it met with competition on two fronts. In the north, as we have seen, the c-type of text had a footing across the Channel. And to the south we shall find an invasion by the German family, to which we must now turn. In Avignon, the two copies traceable in the Papal library seem to belong respectively to German and Italian traditions. All this, be it remembered, is only a preliminary survey, and very likely over-simplifies.