Collectio canonum Sancte Genoveve
| Title | Collectio canonum Sancte Genoveve |
|---|---|
| Key | GE |
| Wikidata Item no. | Q134052779 |
| Terminus post quem | 1100 |
| Terminus ante quem | 1120 |
| Century | saec. XII |
| European region of origin | Northern France |
| Author | Linda Fowler-Magerl |
| Author | Christof Rolker |
| Structure | by topic |
| No. of manuscripts | one |
The Collectio Sancte Genoveve extant only in the fragmentary copy Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, 166 (GE) was probably compiled at the beginning of the twelfth century in northern France. The most important formal sources were the Liber decretorum of Burchard and the Ivonian Decretum.
Content and Structure
The beginning of the collection is missing, but it is apparent that the collection had four parts, each of which was divided into books. Each of these books has its own capitulatio. The copy is fragmentary, but the rubrics in the capitulationes can be used in some cases to restore missing texts by comparing them with the rubrics of related collections. The first part of the collection has four books. The copy begins with canon 1.2.12.1. The second and third parts are divided into five books apiece. In the third part the canons from the second to the fifth book are missing. Only the third part has a title of its own: de diversis transgressionibus. The fourth part consists of three books. Book three has survived.
The book titles are as follows:
1.2 De sacramento baptismatis et confirmationis; 1.3 De sacramento altaris; 1.4 De ecclesiis; 2.1 De episcopis; 2.2 De clericis; 2.3 De iudicibus; 2.4 De coniugiis; 2.5 De deo dicatis et de ieiunio; 3.1 De homicidiis; 3.2 De auguriis; 3.3 De periurio; 3.4 De ebrietate; 3.5 De fornicatione; 4.2 De confessione; 4.3 De penitentia.
Formal sources
Both Ivo and Burchard as formal sources
Fournier established that the Collectio Sancte Genoveve draws on both Burchard and Ivo. Fournier's observation is, as so often, correct. Given that Ivo's Decretum contains most of Burchard's Liber decretorum, the combination of the two works may seem like an odd choice, but it is the best explanation for the content and structure of the collection. Given that much material in the first extant book of the collection was gathered in the first Arsenal collection one could wonder whether it was used for the canons Fournier thought to come from Ivo. The Arsenal collection (unknown to Fournier) was compiled presumably by Ivo in the mid-1090s as a preparatory work for his Decretum and contains most non-Burchardian material already in the sequence of the Decretum; these passages can easily be confused with the respective Decretum passages. However,
The material on baptism in the first section that is still extant (the second book of the first part; GE01.02) manifestly draws on Ivo. Much material is not found in any earlier collection, and some misattributions, while not found in Ivo, can be explained by the use of Ivo. Only the Decretum contains all these materials, Tripartita and Panormia cannot have been the formal source. If one looks only at the canons on baptism, the first Arsenal collection in theory could have provided the material as all the canons in question here are already found in this preparatory collection Ivo had compiled for his Decretum at a relatively late stage of the work. However, other passages of the collection make clear that indeed a mature version of Ivo's Decretum was used, not the preparatory collection partly extant in Arsenal 713. The last canons from GE01.02 are taken from Ivo who in turn partly relied on Burchard, partly the Arsenal collection; no canon is found in both these sources of Ivo, but all are found towards the end of the first book of Ivo's Decretum. Although the sequence is not always that of Ivo, not other known collection could have served as the formal source of the Sainte-Genéviève Collection.
The Burchard version used for the Collectio Sancte Genoveve
Building on Fournier, Landau, Dekret p. 35 added that a "French" version of Ivo was used. The Burchard version used has never been studied, except that Jasper observed that Seligenstadt canons 1-20 are found after Burchard 19.159.
To judge from the Burchardian material in the Collectio Sancte Genoveve, the compiler used a Burchard version that displayed none of the well-known pecularities of many Italian copies. Specifically, the Collectio Sancte Genoveve contains the short version of Burchard 1.21, not the interpolated one. It does not contain Si episcopus after Burchard 1.23. Burchard 1.112 is found in the short version and followed by 113, not Erga simoniacos. There are no additions after Burchard 1.234, either. The series Burchard 2.18-24 is found in the normal sequence, while c. 23 is displaced in many copies ultimately dependend on Italian models.
Literature
See Fournier – Le Bras, Histoire 2.265–268. Also Fournier, Les collections canoniques attribuées à Yves de Chartres, pp. 426–430; reprinted in his Mélanges 1 pp. 607–611. – For the texts taken from Burchard see Brommer, Kurzformen p. 42. For the texts taken from the Ivonian Decretum see Landau, Das Dekret, p. 35; reprinted in his Kanones und Dekretalen p. 151*. – Kéry, Collections p. 284; Jasper, MGH Conc. 8 p. 21. [206]
