Toulouse, BM, 364: Difference between revisions

From Clavis Canonum
(addition based on Kéry 1999)
mNo edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Toulouse, BM, 364 (I. 63) and [[Paris, BnF, lat. 8901]] are a copy of the [[Collectio Albigensis]] written before 666/667 by a certain Perpetuus at the request of Bishop Dido of Albi.
Toulouse, BM, 364 (''olim'' I. 63; "Cod. Tolos. B 63" in Maassen) and [[Paris, BnF, lat. 8901]] are a copy of the [[Collectio Albigensis]] written before 666/667. According to {{author|Loew}}, [[Albi, BM, 2]] was a faithful copy of this manuscript; hence the subscriptio preserved there (on fol. 17r) actually refers to the making of the Toulouse manuscript: it was written by a certain Perpetuus at the request of Bishop Dido of Albi (CLA VI 836). As Dido is not attested otherwise, the date is disputed. Maassen, based on the reference to King Childeric in the subscriptio, dated it to 673, the year he (wrongly) assumed Childerich II died. Turner tought a date between 626 and 666 most likely while Ourliac assumed the manuscript was written ca. 600.
 
The Toulouse manuscript (incomplete at the beginning and the end) today has 107 folios and contains the Albigensis from the Council of Gangres (fol. 1-2) to a letter of Leo I (JK 318) and "capitula sancti Augustini" apparently ending on fol. 107.
 
The part of the manuscript today in Paris (nine folios) had been stolen by Count Libri (CLA).


== Links ==
== Links ==
* online: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10560139j
* online: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b10560139j
* description: https://archivesetmanuscrits.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cc1116675/cN100781
* CLA VI 836 https://elmss.nuigalway.ie/catalogue/1251


== Literature ==
== Literature ==
CLA 6, no. 836, pp. 39 and 48; CLA Suppl. p. 58, cf. {{Author|Ourliac}}, Manuscrit toulousain p. 54: ca. 600; {{Author|Kéry}}, Collections p. {{Kéry|47}}
{{Author|Maassen}}, Geschichte pp. {{Maassen|592}}; {{Author|Turner}}, A Group of MSS of Canons at Toulouse, Albi and Paris, JTS 2 (1900-1901) 266-267; CLA 6, no. 836, pp. 39 and 48; CLA Suppl. p. 58; {{Author|Ourliac}}, Manuscrit toulousain p. 54; {{Author|Kéry}}, Collections p. {{Kéry|47}}
 
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:Toulouse, BM, 00364}}


== Categories ==
[[Category:Manuscript]]
* Manuscript [[Category:Manuscript]]
[[Category:Codex discissus]]
* saec VII [[Category:Manuscript saec VII]]  
[[Category:Manuscript saec VII]]  
* digitized [[Category:Digitized Manuscript]]
[[Category:Digitized Manuscript]]
* from Southern France [[Category:Manuscript from Southern France]]
[[Category:Manuscript from Southern France]]
* copy of Collectio Albigensis [[Category:Manuscript of Collectio Albigensis]]
[[Category:Manuscript of Collectio Albigensis]]
[[Category:Manuscript in Toulouse, BM]]

Latest revision as of 14:45, 16 November 2024

Toulouse, BM, 364 (olim I. 63; "Cod. Tolos. B 63" in Maassen) and Paris, BnF, lat. 8901 are a copy of the Collectio Albigensis written before 666/667. According to Loew, Albi, BM, 2 was a faithful copy of this manuscript; hence the subscriptio preserved there (on fol. 17r) actually refers to the making of the Toulouse manuscript: it was written by a certain Perpetuus at the request of Bishop Dido of Albi (CLA VI 836). As Dido is not attested otherwise, the date is disputed. Maassen, based on the reference to King Childeric in the subscriptio, dated it to 673, the year he (wrongly) assumed Childerich II died. Turner tought a date between 626 and 666 most likely while Ourliac assumed the manuscript was written ca. 600.

The Toulouse manuscript (incomplete at the beginning and the end) today has 107 folios and contains the Albigensis from the Council of Gangres (fol. 1-2) to a letter of Leo I (JK 318) and "capitula sancti Augustini" apparently ending on fol. 107.

The part of the manuscript today in Paris (nine folios) had been stolen by Count Libri (CLA).

Links

Literature

Maassen, Geschichte pp. 592; Turner, A Group of MSS of Canons at Toulouse, Albi and Paris, JTS 2 (1900-1901) 266-267; CLA 6, no. 836, pp. 39 and 48; CLA Suppl. p. 58; Ourliac, Manuscrit toulousain p. 54; Kéry, Collections p. 47