Appendix in BnF lat. 1454 - Revision history

TStueber: specified contents

2026-04-14T19:59:18Z

specified contents

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:59, 14 April 2026
Line 45:		Line 45:
	\|-		\|-
	\|4		\|4
	\|''Iudicia Theodori'' (''discipulus Umbrensium'')		\|''Iudicia Theodori'' (''discipulus Umbrensium'') - excerpts
	\|216<sup>r</sup>–222<sup>v</sup>		\|216<sup>r</sup>–222<sup>v</sup>
	\|66<sup>ra</sup>–71<sup>rb</sup>		\|66<sup>ra</sup>–71<sup>rb</sup>

TStueber: changed formatting

2026-04-14T19:58:12Z

changed formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:58, 14 April 2026
Line 8:		Line 8:

	==Transmission==		==Transmission==
	In two manuscripts of the ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana]]'' ([[Paris, BnF, lat. 1454]], saec. IX<sup>³/⁴</sup> [= Q] and [[Paris, BnF, lat. 3842A\|lat. 3842A]], saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the composite manuscript [[Paris, BnF, lat. 1458]], saec. IX<sup>¹/²</sup> [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana\|Quesnelliana]]'' manuscripts, {{Author\|Mordek}}, Bibliotheca p. 413 already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana]]''.		In two manuscripts of the ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana]]'' ([[Paris, BnF, lat. 1454]], saec. IX<sup>3/4</sup> [= Q] and [[Paris, BnF, lat. 3842A\|lat. 3842A]], saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the composite manuscript [[Paris, BnF, lat. 1458]], saec. IX<sup>1/2</sup> [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana\|Quesnelliana]]'' manuscripts, {{Author\|Mordek}}, Bibliotheca p. 413 already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana]]''.

	==Date and place of composition==		==Date and place of composition==

TStueber: added italics

2026-04-14T19:56:44Z

added italics

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:56, 14 April 2026
Line 135:		Line 135:
	\|-		\|-
	\|19		\|19
	\|~~‚Notitia Galliarum‘~~ (incl. Laterculus of Polemius Silvius)		\|''Notitia Galliarum'' (incl. ''Laterculus'' of Polemius Silvius)
	\|244<sup>r</sup>–246<sup>r</sup>		\|244<sup>r</sup>–246<sup>r</sup>
	\|86<sup>rb</sup>–87<sup>va</sup>		\|86<sup>rb</sup>–87<sup>va</sup>

TStueber: included links, literature

2026-04-14T19:54:53Z

included links, literature

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:54, 14 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{DISPLAYTITLE:Appendix in BnF lat. 1454}}

	{{Infobox collection		{{Infobox collection
	\| century = saec. VIII/IX		\| century=saec. VIII/IX
	\|wikidata=?\|structure=farrago\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454		\|wikidata=?\|structure=farrago\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454
	\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]		\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]
	\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}		\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}

	==~~Manuscripts~~==		==Transmission==
	In two manuscripts of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' (Paris, ~~Bibliothèque nationale de France~~, lat. 1454, saec. ~~IX³~~/⁴ [= Q] and Paris, ~~Bibliothèque nationale de France~~, lat. 3842A, saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the ~~canonical miscellany~~ Paris, ~~Bibliothèque nationale de France~~, lat. 1458, saec. ~~IX¹~~/² [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''Quesnelliana'' manuscripts, Mordek, Bibliotheca ~~capitularium~~ p. ~~415)~~ already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana''.		In two manuscripts of the ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana]]'' ([[Paris, BnF, lat. 1454]], saec. IX<sup>³/⁴</sup> [= Q] and [[Paris, BnF, lat. 3842A\|lat. 3842A]], saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the composite manuscript [[Paris, BnF, lat. 1458]], saec. IX<sup>¹/²</sup> [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana\|Quesnelliana]]'' manuscripts, {{Author\|Mordek}}, Bibliotheca p. 413 already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''[[Collectio Quesnelliana]]''.

	==Date and place of composition==		==Date and place of composition==
	All three surviving manuscripts originate from northern France and were produced in the ninth century. However, the contents of the appendix open the possibility of an earlier date of composition: the ''terminus post quem'' for its compilation is the beginning of the eighth century, to which Michael D. Elliot dates the most recent text included therein (no. 4 = the penitential of Theodore of Canterbury in the recension of the so-called ''Discipulus Umbrensium''). Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.		All three surviving manuscripts originate from northern France and were produced in the ninth century. However, the contents of the appendix open the possibility of an earlier date of composition: the ''terminus post quem'' for its compilation is the beginning of the eighth century, to which Michael D. Elliot dates the most recent text included therein (no. 4 = the penitential of Theodore of Canterbury in the recension of the so-called ''[[Canones Theodori\|Discipulus Umbrensium]]''). Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.

	==Structure and contents==		==Structure and contents==
	The appendix itself exhibits no discernible organizing principle, whether thematic or chronological. It is therefore unlikely to represent a deliberately pre-conceived compilation of canonistic materials. Its formation is perhaps better understood as follows: to the archetype – a manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' – additional quires were appended, which the owner(s) gradually had filled with texts they considered worth preserving and that were otherwise unavailable in their library.		The appendix itself exhibits no discernible organizing principle, whether thematic or chronological. It is therefore unlikely to represent a deliberately pre-conceived compilation of canonistic materials. Its formation is perhaps better understood as follows: to the archetype – a manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' – additional quires were appended, which the owner(s) gradually had filled with texts they considered worth preserving and that were otherwise unavailable in their library.
	Two items, namely a text entitled ''Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum'' (no. 1) – a late antique treatise on the merits of monastic life – and the ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), an episcopal letter from Merovingian Gaul written around 560 AD, are transmitted exclusively in the appendix.		Two items, namely a text entitled ''Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum'' (no. 1) – a late antique treatise on the merits of monastic life – and the ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), an episcopal letter from Merovingian Gaul written around 560 AD, are transmitted exclusively in the appendix.




Line 46:		Line 45:
	\|-		\|-
	\|4		\|4
	\|~~Rechtsbuch des~~ ''discipulus Umbrensium''		\|''Iudicia Theodori'' (''discipulus Umbrensium'')
	\|216<sup>r</sup>–222<sup>v</sup>		\|216<sup>r</sup>–222<sup>v</sup>
	\|66<sup>ra</sup>–71<sup>rb</sup>		\|66<sup>ra</sup>–71<sup>rb</sup>
Line 52:		Line 51:
	\|-		\|-
	\|5		\|5
	\|Troianus ~~von~~ Saintes an Eumerius von Nîmes		\|Troianus of Saintes to Eumerius von Nîmes
	\|222<sup>v</sup>		\|222<sup>v</sup>
	\|71<sup>rb</sup>		\|71<sup>rb</sup>
Line 136:		Line 135:
	\|-		\|-
	\|19		\|19
	\|‚Notitia Galliarum‘ (~~mit~~ Laterculus ~~des~~ Polemius Silvius)		\|‚Notitia Galliarum‘ (incl. Laterculus of Polemius Silvius)
	\|244<sup>r</sup>–246<sup>r</sup>		\|244<sup>r</sup>–246<sup>r</sup>
	\|86<sup>rb</sup>–87<sup>va</sup>		\|86<sup>rb</sup>–87<sup>va</sup>
	\|190<sup>r</sup>–191<sup>r</sup>		\|190<sup>r</sup>–191<sup>r</sup>
	\|}		\|}

			==Literature==
			{{Author\|Mordek}}, Bibliotheca pp. 409-410, 412-414, 438-439; {{Author\|Stüber}}, [https://doi.org/10.1515/fmst-2022-0002 Scintillae de canonibus]

TStueber: added section headers

2026-04-14T19:30:28Z

added section headers

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 14 April 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Infobox collection		{{Infobox collection
	\| century = saec. VIII/IX		\| century = saec. VIII/IX
	\|wikidata=~~Q127692628~~\|structure=farrago\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454		\|wikidata=?\|structure=farrago\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454
	\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]		\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]
	\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}		\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}

			==Manuscripts==
	In two manuscripts of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1454, saec. IX³/⁴ [= Q] and Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 3842A, saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the canonical miscellany Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1458, saec. IX¹/² [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''Quesnelliana'' manuscripts, Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium p. 415) already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana''.		In two manuscripts of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1454, saec. IX³/⁴ [= Q] and Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 3842A, saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the canonical miscellany Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1458, saec. IX¹/² [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''Quesnelliana'' manuscripts, Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium p. 415) already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana''.

	All three surviving manuscripts originate from northern France and were produced in the ninth century. However, the contents of the appendix open the possibility of an earlier date of composition: the ''terminus post quem'' for its compilation is the beginning of the eighth century, to which Michael D. Elliot dates the most recent text included therein (the penitential of Theodore of Canterbury in the recension of the so-called ''Discipulus Umbrensium'').		==Date and place of composition==
			All three surviving manuscripts originate from northern France and were produced in the ninth century. However, the contents of the appendix open the possibility of an earlier date of composition: the ''terminus post quem'' for its compilation is the beginning of the eighth century, to which Michael D. Elliot dates the most recent text included therein (no. 4 = the penitential of Theodore of Canterbury in the recension of the so-called ''Discipulus Umbrensium''). Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.

			==Structure and contents==
			The appendix itself exhibits no discernible organizing principle, whether thematic or chronological. It is therefore unlikely to represent a deliberately pre-conceived compilation of canonistic materials. Its formation is perhaps better understood as follows: to the archetype – a manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' – additional quires were appended, which the owner(s) gradually had filled with texts they considered worth preserving and that were otherwise unavailable in their library.
	Two items, namely a text entitled ''Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum'' (no. 1) – a late antique treatise on the merits of monastic life – and the ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), an episcopal letter from Merovingian Gaul written around 560 AD, are transmitted exclusively in the appendix.		Two items, namely a text entitled ''Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum'' (no. 1) – a late antique treatise on the merits of monastic life – and the ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), an episcopal letter from Merovingian Gaul written around 560 AD, are transmitted exclusively in the appendix.

	The appendix itself exhibits no discernible organizing principle, whether thematic or chronological. It is therefore unlikely to represent a deliberately pre-conceived compilation of canonistic materials. Its formation is perhaps better understood as follows: to the archetype – a manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' – additional quires were appended, which the owner(s) gradually had filled with texts they considered worth preserving and that were otherwise unavailable in their library.

	Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The aforementioned ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'', for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.

	{\| class="wikitable"		{\| class="wikitable"
	\|		\|

TStueber: added contents list (table)

2026-04-14T18:38:09Z

added contents list (table)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:38, 14 April 2026
Line 15:		Line 15:

	Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The aforementioned ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'', for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.		Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The aforementioned ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'', for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.
			{\| class="wikitable"
			\|
			\|'''Contents'''
			\|'''Q'''
			\|'''O'''
			\|'''P'''
			\|-
			\|1
			\|''Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum''
			\|212<sup>v</sup>–213<sup>v</sup>
			\|64<sup>ra</sup>
			\|164<sup>r</sup>–165<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|2
			\|Ps.-Silverius: „Multis te transgressionibus“

			\|213<sup>v</sup>–214<sup>r</sup>
			\|64<sup>ra</sup>–<sup>rb</sup>
			\|165<sup>v</sup>–166<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|3
			\|Leo I: „Remeantibus ad nos“ (J<sup>3</sup> 1030)
			\|214<sup>r</sup>–216<sup>r</sup>
			\|64<sup>rb</sup>–66<sup>ra</sup>
			\|166<sup>r</sup>–168<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|4
			\|Rechtsbuch des ''discipulus Umbrensium''
			\|216<sup>r</sup>–222<sup>v</sup>
			\|66<sup>ra</sup>–71<sup>rb</sup>
			\|168<sup>r</sup>–173<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|5
			\|Troianus von Saintes an Eumerius von Nîmes
			\|222<sup>v</sup>
			\|71<sup>rb</sup>
			\|173<sup>v</sup>–174<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|6
			\|Caesarius of Arles: „Ecce manifestissime“
			\|223<sup>r</sup>–224<sup>r</sup>
			\|71<sup>va</sup>–72<sup>va</sup>
			\|174<sup>r</sup>–175<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|7
			\|Gennadius of Marseille: ''Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum''
			\|224<sup>v</sup>–230<sup>r</sup>
			\|72<sup>vb</sup>–76<sup>va</sup>
			\|175<sup>r</sup>–180<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|8
			\|''Scintillae de canonibus uel ordinationibus episcoporum''
			\|230<sup>r</sup>–<sup>v</sup>
			\|76<sup>va</sup>–77<sup>rb</sup>
			\|180<sup>r</sup>–<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|9
			\|Synod of Tours (461)
			\|230<sup>v</sup>–232<sup>v</sup>
			\|77<sup>rb</sup>–78<sup>rb</sup>
			\|180<sup>v</sup>–182<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|10
			\|Synod of Paris (ca. 561)
			\|232<sup>v</sup>–234<sup>v</sup>
			\|78<sup>rb</sup>–79<sup>vb</sup>
			\|182<sup>r</sup>–183<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|11
			\|Clovis I, Capitulary „Enuntiante fama“
			\|234<sup>v</sup>-235<sup>r</sup>
			\|79<sup>vb</sup>–80<sup>ra</sup>
			\|183<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|12
			\|Synod of Orléans (511)
			\|235<sup>r</sup>–237<sup>r</sup>
			\|80<sup>ra</sup>–81<sup>vb</sup>
			\|183<sup>v</sup>–185<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|13
			\|''Statuta Ecclesiae antiqua''
			\|237<sup>r</sup>–240<sup>v</sup>
			\|81<sup>vb</sup>–83<sup>vb</sup>
			\|185<sup>v</sup>–187<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|14
			\|Gregory I: „Postquam excellentiae“ (J<sup>3</sup> 2859)
			\|240<sup>v</sup>–241<sup>v</sup>
			\|83<sup>vb</sup>–84<sup>rb</sup>
			\|187<sup>v</sup>–188<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|15
			\|''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem''
			\|241<sup>v</sup>–242<sup>r</sup>
			\|84<sup>rb</sup>–<sup>vb</sup>
			\|188<sup>r</sup>–189<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|16
			\|''Epistula quae CCCXVIII episcopi Nicaeni transcripserunt''
			\|242<sup>r</sup>
			\|84<sup>vb</sup>–85<sup>ra</sup>
			\|189<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|17
			\|Letter of Lupus of Troyes and of Eufronius of Autun
			\|242<sup>r</sup>–<sup>v</sup>
			\|85<sup>ra</sup>–<sup>rb</sup>
			\|189<sup>r</sup>–<sup>v</sup>
			\|-
			\|18
			\|Synod of Vannes (461/91)
			\|242<sup>v</sup>–244<sup>r</sup>
			\|85<sup>rb</sup>–86<sup>rb</sup>
			\|189<sup>v</sup>–190<sup>r</sup>
			\|-
			\|19
			\|‚Notitia Galliarum‘ (mit Laterculus des Polemius Silvius)
			\|244<sup>r</sup>–246<sup>r</sup>
			\|86<sup>rb</sup>–87<sup>va</sup>
			\|190<sup>r</sup>–191<sup>r</sup>
			\|}

TStueber: added structure

2026-04-14T18:37:03Z

added structure

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:37, 14 April 2026
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Infobox collection		{{Infobox collection
	\| century = saec. VIII/IX		\| century = saec. VIII/IX
	\|wikidata=Q127692628\|structure=~~chronological~~\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454		\|wikidata=Q127692628\|structure=farrago\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454
	\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]		\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]
	\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}		\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}

TStueber: expanded article

2026-04-14T18:34:01Z

expanded article

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:34, 14 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In two manuscripts of the Collectio Quesnelliana (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1454, saec. IX³/⁴ [= Q] and Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 3842A, saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the canonical miscellany Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1458, saec. IX¹/² [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned Quesnelliana manuscripts, Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium p. 415) already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the Collectio Quesnelliana.
			{{Infobox collection
			\| century = saec. VIII/IX
			\|wikidata=Q127692628\|structure=chronological\|mss=three\| title = Appendix in BnF lat. 1454
			\| author1 = [[User:TStueber\|Till Stüber]]
			\|normregion=Northern France/Ecclesiastical Province of Tours? }}

			In two manuscripts of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1454, saec. IX³/⁴ [= Q] and Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 3842A, saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the canonical miscellany Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1458, saec. IX¹/² [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned ''Quesnelliana'' manuscripts, Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium p. 415) already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana''.

			All three surviving manuscripts originate from northern France and were produced in the ninth century. However, the contents of the appendix open the possibility of an earlier date of composition: the ''terminus post quem'' for its compilation is the beginning of the eighth century, to which Michael D. Elliot dates the most recent text included therein (the penitential of Theodore of Canterbury in the recension of the so-called ''Discipulus Umbrensium'').

			Two items, namely a text entitled ''Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum'' (no. 1) – a late antique treatise on the merits of monastic life – and the ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'' (no. 15), an episcopal letter from Merovingian Gaul written around 560 AD, are transmitted exclusively in the appendix.

			The appendix itself exhibits no discernible organizing principle, whether thematic or chronological. It is therefore unlikely to represent a deliberately pre-conceived compilation of canonistic materials. Its formation is perhaps better understood as follows: to the archetype – a manuscript of the ''Collectio Quesnelliana'' – additional quires were appended, which the owner(s) gradually had filled with texts they considered worth preserving and that were otherwise unavailable in their library.

			Noteworthy is the connection of several items to the ecclesiastical province of Tours. The aforementioned ''Epistula episcoporum missa ad plebem'', for instance, is subscribed by four bishops of that province; the letter of Lupus and Eufronius is addressed to a bishop of Angers; and the same geographical context is suggested by the councils of Tours (461) and Vannes (461/491). The appendix may therefore have been compiled in the region of Tours, or else its compiler drew on sources originating from that area.

TStueber: Created article based on own research

2026-04-14T18:27:44Z

Created article based on own research

New page

In two manuscripts of the Collectio Quesnelliana (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1454, saec. IX³/⁴ [= Q] and Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 3842A, saec. IX [= P]), this collection is followed by an appendix comprising a total of nineteen documents. The same appendix is also preserved in fragmentary form in the canonical miscellany Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1458, saec. IX¹/² [= O], fols. 64ra–87va (the fragment begins with the final words of the first item). On account of the close textual relationship to the two aforementioned Quesnelliana manuscripts, Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium p. 415) already reached the plausible conclusion that the fragment contained in lat. 1458 represents the remnant of a now-lost manuscript of the Collectio Quesnelliana.