No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2025
Using the poems of John Scottus Eriugena as a case study, the author aims to show that glossaries that preserve the lemmata and glosses of a text in the same order as that of a codex unicus of the work can be used to construct the common exemplar from which the entries of the glossary and the text of the codex unicus derive. Thus, at least for Medieval Latin texts, glosses can be an essential component of the recensio codicum. The author argues further that where a dating order of poems can be established (as in the case under consideration), such constitutes evidence of editorial management on the part of the author or an associate.
1 Iohannis Scotti Eriugenae Carmina, ed. M. Herren, Scriptores Latini Hiberniae 12 (Dublin, 1993), 18–20 (hereafter SLH edition); and Iohannis Scotti Eriugenae Carmina, ed. M. Herren and A. Dunning, CCCM 167 (Turnhout, 2020), ix–xc and 1–66, at xxi–xxiii (hereafter CCCM edition).
2 Iohannis Scotti Carmina, ed. L. Traube, MGH, Poetae Latini Aevi Carolini 3 (Berlin, 1896), 523.
3 Dutton, P., “Eriugena the Royal Poet,” in Jean Scot Écrivain: Actes du IVe colloque international, Montréal, 28 août – 2 septembre 1983, ed. Allard, G.-H. (Montreal, 1986), 51–80 Google Scholar, at 62–76; and Carmina (SLH edition), ed. Herren, 135–61. Dates for poems (where possible), along with the dating evidence, are provided in the commentaries to the individual poems. See Carmina (SLH edition), 135–61. Poem 1, written in 859, laments the battle fought by Charles against Louis in November 858.
4 Dutton, “Eriugena the Royal Poet,” 51–52.
5 É. Jeauneau, The Autograph of Eriugena (Turnhout, 1996).
6 Contreni, J. J., “ Review Essay: An Eriugenian Diptych,” Journal of Medieval Latin 31 (2021): 289–301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Chiesa, P., “Review,” Filologia mediolatina 28 (2021): 352–56Google Scholar.
7 Contreni, “An Eriugenian Diptych,” 298.
8 Chiesa, “Review,” 354.
9 Iohannis Scotti Carmina, ed. Traube (n. 2 above), 523–24; Bischoff, B., Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts (mit Ausnahme der wisigotischen) , 4 vols. (Wiesbaden, 1998–2017)Google Scholar, 3:440 (no. 6786) and 3:442 (no. 6798, with cross reference to the folios in no. 6786 that contain the poems of John Scottus); and Mostert, M., The Library of Fleury: A Provisional List of Manuscripts (Hilversum, 1989), 284 Google Scholar and 287 (nos. 1511 and 1531).
10 See the edition by E. Miller, “Glossaire grec-latin de la bibliothèque de Laon,” Notices et extraits 29 (1880): 1–230.
11 Poems 1–17 belong to the first section of the edition (in both the SLH and CCCM versions), but the entire first section also includes poems 18 and 19 because they are attested by inscriptions. Professor Contreni (“An Eriugenian Diptych,” 294) took the contents of Ω to include the epigrams nos. 18 and 19. However, Ω was restricted to the Latin poems transmitted by R (including the fragments) and the Greek poems transmitted by L2, as stated in the CCCM edition (xxi–xxii). Moreover, a glance at the stemma codicum (xxiii) shows that V does not descend directly from Ω, but uses glosses from L, which descends directly from Ω; thus, V belongs to the tradition indirectly.
12 ΙΔΑΛΜΑΤΑ for correct ἰνδάλματα.
13 The two-part gloss accounts for the participle ὄντα as an accusative masculine singular and a nominative and accusative neuter plural.
14 John inserted four-line subscriptions at the end of poems 1, 2, and 6 complaining of the king’s failure to reward him for his efforts.
15 See Carmina, ed. Herren (CCCM edition), lxxvii–lxxviii for evidence arguing that John lived at least to the year 876.
16 Poems 12a and 12b are differing versions of a poem addressed to Hincmar of Laon. They share many words, but 12a is longer. Using the lemmata of L1, I endeavoured to construct a fuller version of 12a in the CCCM version than that printed in the SLH.
17 For Greek and Latin words used by John to mean ‘king’ or ‘ruler,’ see the CCCM edition, lxxvii–lxxviii.
18 Contreni, J. J., The Cathedral School of Laon from 850 to 930: Its Manuscripts and Masters (Munich, 1978), 86 Google Scholar, points out that a copy of John’s commentary on Pseudo-Dionysius’ Celestial Hierarchy (lost) was at Laon.
19 For an edition, see Dolbeau, F., “Le liber XXI sententiarum (CPL 373): Édition d’un texte de travail,” Recherches augustiniennes 30 (1997): 113–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar. According to Dolbeau, the treatise represents a posthumous edition of Augustine’s “papiers” datable to the years 386–95, discovered at Hippo after 430.
20 A plausible explanation for the mistake is that John learned the word in transliterated form and misread the final s as an r.
21 Contreni, “An Eriugenian Dyptich” (n. 6 above), 298.
22 There are no two- or three-line Greek verses in poems 9 and 10, transmitted by Reg. Lat. 1709.
23 The entries in L1, though specific to poem 12a, also incude 12b.
24 Iohannis Scotti Carmina, ed. Traube (n. 2 above), 697.
25 Contreni, The Cathedral School of Laon (n. 18 above), 136–37.
26 Inexplicably, there is no gloss for poem 17.
27 It is possible that TOY was meant to go with IOANNOY, as the use of the article before a name can denote a familiar person or friend, or well-known person. However, the two elements are invariably adjacent to each other.
28 Sophocles, E. A., Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods from B.C. 146 to A.D. 1100, 2 vols. (New York, 1900)Google Scholar, 1:451.
29 Herren, M., “Evidence for ‘Vulgar Greek’ from Early Medieval Latin Texts and Manuscripts,” in The Sacred Nectar of the Greeks: The Study of Greek in the West in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Herren, M. and Brown, S. A. (London, 1988), 57–84 Google Scholar, at 72.
30 A. C. Dionisotti, “Greek Grammars and Dictionaries in Carolingian Europe,” in The Sacred Nectar of the Greeks, ed. Herren, 1–56, at 47.
31 SLH edition, 102–103.
32 Dionisotti, “Greek Grammars and Dictionaries,” in The Sacred Nectar of the Greeks, ed. Herren, 48.
33 Dutton, “Eriugena the Royal Poet” (n. 3 above), 73–75.
34 Dutton, “Eriugena the Royal Poet” (n. 3 above), 67–68.
35 See the SLH edition, 148–49.
36 Annales Bertiniani, a. 867, ed. G. Waitz, MGH, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum 5 (Hannover, 1883), 86. The Annals of St-Bertin, trans. J. Nelson (Manchester, 1991), 138.
37 Herren, M., “Eriugena’s ‘Aulae Sidereae,’ the ‘Codex Aureus,’ and the Palatine Church of St. Mary at Compiègne,” Studi Medievali n.s. 28 (1987): 593–608 Google Scholar.
38 Annales Bertiniani, a. 869, ed. Waitz, 106-107; The Annals of St-Bertin, trans. Nelson, 163–64.
39 Annales Bertiniani, a. 869, ed. Waitz, 107; The Annals of St-Bertin, trans. Nelson, 164.
40 Annales Bertiniani, a. 868–69, ed. Waitz, 97; The Annals of St-Bertin, trans. Nelson, 152 (a. 868 ad fin.) and 152–53 (a. 869 ad init.).
41 Three of these recensions were published in the SLH and CCCM editions (Appendix 9 in both). A fourth recension was recently discovered and published by Papahagi, Adrian, “In the Margins of the Predestination Controversy: The Manuscript Context of the Hincmar Mock Epitaph,” Catholic Historical Review 105 (2019): 53–75 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 55.
42 Where this lemma recurs in the same line, the gloss is not repeated.