Collectio Sinemuriensis

The Collectio Sinemuriensis survives in several versions. The original version was compiled at Reims. It has not survived and was apparently not used outside northeastern France. Later augmented versions reached Aquitaine and northern and central Italy. The first version, consisting of about 209 canons, has left traces in later versions. Like all later versions of the collection, the first version was not systematic but consisted of blocks of canons taken from earlier collections. The collection began with the forged papal decretals taken in chronological order from the C version of the pseudoisidorian decretals. Further texts were taken from the Register of pope Gregory I, the Capitula of Martin of Braga, the letter of pope Martin I to Amandus of Tongeren (JE 2059), a letter of pope Gregory II (JE 2174), the Boniface/ Zacharias correspondence, a forged letter attributed to pope Gregory IV (JE † 2579), canons of the eighth council of Toledo, excerpts from letters of pope Nicholas I (including JE 2735, 2697, 2721, 2720 and 2691), the consulta of pope Nicholas to the Bulgarians and the consultation De nuptiis of Hincmar of Reims. The transmission of the letters JE 2059, JE 2174 and the Boniface/Zacharias correspondence are all closely associated with the transmission of the C version of the pseudoisidorian decretals. The forgery JE † 2579 (also found in the copy of the pseudoisidorian decretals in the Ms Paris, BnF, lat. 1557 and in the Ms Reims, BM 672) is transmitted here out of its original 105 context for the first time. It has been thought that it appeared for the first time in the Diversorum patrum sententie (74T).

This core of texts was later enriched with a block of canons from the Liber decretorum of Burchard. The result is represented in the versions of the Sinemuriensis in the Mss Paris, BnF, lat. 18221 (SP) and Schlettstadt, Bibliothèque Humaniste 13, fol. 110r–205v (SS). The recensions in the Mss Schlettstadt and Paris 18221 add blocks of the same texts to the earlier version but insert them at different places in the collection. Some of the blocks of texts came from Reims, others from north and central Italy. There are two blocks of texts taken from letters of pope Gregory I, the second of which is taken from the fourth part of the Quadripartitus. There is one block of texts from the Epitome Aegidii and Epitome Iuliani, another block from a small Italian Florilegium in Reims, BM, 15, another from the second and third quires of the Ms Vat. Barb. lat. 538 (the so-called Collectio Barberiniana) and, finally, the block of texts now called the „Error -series“.

Neither of the two above mentioned copies shows signs of having been divided into books. The copy in the Ms Paris has a capitulatio; the copy in the Ms Schlettstadt does not. The collection has a title in the Ms Paris: Exceptiones ex decretis et dictis sanctorum patrum et auctoritate canonum. In the Ms Paris there are several blocks of texts with excerpts from works of Hincmar (from the Libellus expostulationis against Hincmar of Laon, from the Opusculum Caroli Calvi regis and from the Opusculum LV capitulorum) at the end of the manuscript. The lengthiest of these blocks contains excerpts from the Opusculum LV capitulorum. Some of these excerpts, including texts from the Opusculum, are integrated into the collection in the Ms Schlettstadt and into all later versions of the Sinemuriensis. In the Ms Paris folios are missing between what are now folios 16 and 17 and between folios 17 and 18 so that the canons corresponding to 1. 93– 135 and 1. 151–164 of the version in the Ms Semur (the basis for the present analysis) are missing.

The copy of the Sinemuriensis in the Ms Schlettstadt was made for the reforming circle of Bernold of Constance. Eleven canons from the third book of the Semur version were placed at the front of the collection so that the collection begins with the ordination oath of Hincmar of Reims. The Ms Schlettstadt contains the text of the Pseudo-Ambrosian Libellus de dignitate sacerdotali, which is not in the Ms Paris. Folios are missing between the present folios 146 and 106 147, which means canons 2. 2–47 of the Semur version are missing. The Schlettstadt copy breaks off in the middle of the canon corresponding to 3. 60 (§ 7 of de nuptiis) in the Semur copy. Ian Stuart Robinson described the Schlettstadt manuscript without realizing that it consists of two originally separate manuscripts which are bound together and that the second of these, the folios of which are now numbered 110–205, contain the Sinemuriensis. Bernold did not rely on the correctness of the readings in the collection, but was influenced by the choice of texts. Of particular interest to him was the position of Hincmar on judicial procedure in the Opusculum. Bernold made use of the texts in his own libelli, and copies of his Swabian version of the Diversorum patrum sententie are often accompanied by excerpts from the Sinemuriensis.

The copy of the Sinemuriensis chosen as the basis for the present analysis is that in the Ms Semur-en-Auxois, BM M. 13 (SM). It represents the earliest known version which has survived complete. The copy in the Ms Paris has additions found in no other copy and the copy in the Ms Schlettstadt is incomplete at the end. The version in the Ms Semur has a title: Decreta diversorum sanctorum patrum in unum collecta. It also has a capitulatio which differs, however, from that in the Ms Paris. The rubrics of the capitulatio in the Ms Paris can be found in parentheses in the analysis of SM. The Ms Madrid, BN 428 (SN) contains basically the same version as the Ms Semur. Both copies were divided arbitrarily, for the convenience of the user, into three books, each with its own capitulatio. There are two major differences between the two copies, SM and SN. The canons are divided into at different points in the collection and there is a difference in the sequence of the canons in the last part of the collection. The canons of the Ms Madrid are recorded separately in the data bank from the point at which the sequence begins to differ from that of the Semur manuscript (SN 3. 44). Both copies contain the letter from pope Alexander II to all catholic bishops and to the other clergy and people (Vigilantia, JL 4501) and the letter written to him in 1067 from the citizens of Florence. The rubric in the Ms Semur to canon 3. 38 (JE 2720), De primatu Remensis ecclesie, probably reflects the events at the conventus Remensis held in 1059 at which bishop Gervasius of Reims declared himself primate of France. The Ms Semur contains, like the Ms Schlettstadt, the text of the Pseudo-Ambrosian Libellus de dignitate sacerdotali. 107

Franck Roumy identified recently a 12th century copy of the Sinemuriensis, made perhaps near Paris, in an auction catalogue and will be publishing an analysis shortly. The copy has just been purchased by the University of Columbia (NY) Library. In the meanwhile he has allowed me to reproduce some of his findings. The collection is divided into three books in the same way as the Semur copy. It contains the preface and libellus De vita et ordinatione episcoporum attributed to saint Ambrose. It also contains the extensive excerpt from the Opusculum LV capitulorum of Hincmar of Reims not, however, De nuptiis.

There are fragments of the Paris/Schlettstadt version of the Sinemuriensis in the Mss Vat. Ottobon. lat. 811, fol. 112r–114v and Vat. Reg. lat. 453, fol. 50r–55v. These fragments were once part of the same manuscript.

Excerpts from the Sinemuriensis are found in the Collectio Atrebatensis and together with excerpts from the Quadripartitus and the Sangermanensis in the collection in the Ms Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 442. The section containing letters of Gregory I in the Collectio A of the Collectio Tripartita begins with letters attributed to Gregory in the Sinemuriensis. Excerpts from the Sinemuriensis (SM 1. 168, 175, 176, 188, 201, 204 and 209 and SM 2. 177 and SM 3. 88 and 96) are also found in the ten first folios of a French manuscript containing the Collectio IV librorum, Ms Bergamo, Biblioteca Civica Angelo Mai MA 244. The Ms Paris, BnF, lat. 4375, which contains a canon law collection beginning like the Sinemuriensis with a series of excerpts from the pseudoisidorian decretals in chronological order, also has the professio archiepiscoporum and catalogue of popes from saint Peter to pope Johannes XII (955–64). This is the same list of popes found in the copy of the Sinemuriensis in the Ms Semur.

It was apparently a version of the Sinemuriensis similar in form to that in the Ms Madrid which was taken to Italy and used there at the end of the 11th century. Added to the end of the Sinemuriensis in this version is a series of texts associated with Gregory VII, the latest of which date from 1078. One of them is a letter to archbishop Manasses of Reims (Reg. 6. 2, JL 5081). Among these texts are also 10 decrees from the November synod of 1078. John Gilchrist recognized that Roman decrees in the Madrid manuscript are the same as those in the collection in the Mss Vat. lat. 3832/Assisi, BCom 227 (2L/8P). In fact these decrees are only part of a large block of canons in the 2L/8P taken from the Sinemuriensis. The collection in the Ms Rome, Biblioteca 108 Vallicelliana B.89 also contains a block of texts from that collection. The decrees from the November synod of 1078 set before the copy of the Collectio IV librorum in the Ms Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana C. 51 sup. are also related to the transmission in the Sinemuriensis.

The letter Vigilantia (JL 4501) of pope Alexander II is also found in the collection in the Ms Paris, BnF, lat. 3858C, in the collection in the 2L/8P, in the collection in the Ms Rome, Biblioteca Vallicelliana B.89 and in the Collectio VII librorum in the Ms Turin, BNU D. IV. 33 all of which depend directly or indirectly on the Sinemuriensis. The letter is also found in the collection in nine volumina in the Ms Wolfenbüttel, Herzog-August-Bibliothek Gud. Lat. 212, which was compiled in northeast France. The excerpts from De nuptiis in the Collectio Ambrosiana I were taken directly from the Collectio VII librorum in the Ms Turin, BNU D. IV. 33, which had the text from the Sinemuriensis.

Alfons Becker has recently demonstrated that Urban II used the Sinemuriensis. He will have become acquainted with die Sinemuriensis in his early years as archdeacon at Reims. This, says Alfons Becker, explains the attention paid by that pope to problems involving the ordo iudiciarius.

The Ms Orléans, BM 306 (SO) from Fleury contains a still later version of the collection. A considerable appendix is attached with a number of texts which seem to have been taken from Anselm of Lucca and/or Deusdedit. The person responsible for the appendix probably had access to an Italian collection which used both sources, a collection which no longer exists or has not yet been identified as such. The double attribution in canon 620, Zacharias et Deusdedit papa, is found only in the collection of Anselm (canon 10. 28). Anselm makes a number of such double attributions. A letter from pope Pelagius to Viator and Pancratius (canon 645) is found in the collection of Deusdedit (1. 142. 2). The canons of this appendix are recorded separately in the data-bank (SO). This version of the collection has a capitulatio which is not divided into books. The sequence of canons in this version is closest to that in the Ms Madrid 428. In the text of the collection, however, there is notation at the canon corresponding to SM 2.1: Explicit liber primus, incipit liber secundus. The version of the Sinemuriensis in the Ms Orléans was used for the second version of the Collectio Tarraconensis. 109

Since the Sinemuriensis circulated so widely and has not yet been edited (I hasten to add that I have no intention of doing so myself), every one of the five copies has been examined and at least the sequence of the canons in each of the copies has been recorded in the data bank. The text of SM was compared with that of SP, SS and the fragments. The text of SN was compared with that of SO.

Literature

Gérard Fransen, Manuscrits de collections canoniques, BMCL 6 (1976), pp. 67 f recognized that the Mss Semur and Madrid contain the same collection albeit in different versions, and he named it Collectio Sinemuriensis. In 1983 I renamed the collection Collectio Remensis. A year later I retracted the renaming because of possible confusion with the Carolingian collection in the Ms Berlin, SBPK Phillipps 1743. See Fowler-Magerl, Vier französische und spanische Kanonessammlungen pp. 124–141 (for the manuscripts and sources of the Sinemuriensis) and also my Fine distinctions, pp. 166–172. Martina Stratmann, Zur Rezeption Hinkmars von Reims durch Bernhard von Hildesheim und Bernold von Konstanz, DA 44 (1988), pp. 170– 180 corrected the confusion between Bernold of Constance and Bernhard of Hildesheim in my Vier französische und spanische Kanonessammlungen, p. 139 n. 79. See also Rudolf Schieffer, Hinkmar von Reims, Opusculum LV capitulorum (MGH Conc. 4 Suppl. 2, Hanover 2003), pp. 123–127. – For the circulation of the letter of Martin I (JE 2059) together with the C version of Pseudo-Isidore see Jasper, The Beginning of the Decretal Tradition, pp. 92, 95f and 126. For the circulation of the letter of Gregory II (JE 2174) see pp. 75 n. 322, 79, 98, 99 n. 44, 100, 101 n. 54 and 116 n. 124. For the circulation of the letter attributed to Gregory IV (JE † 2579) see pp. 78 n. 338, 79, 102 f, 126, 171 n. 131.– For the copy in the Ms Paris, BnF, lat. 18221 see Gérard Fransen, La lettre de Hincmar de Reims au sujet du mariage d’Étienne. Une relecture, in: Pascua Mediaevalia . Studies voor Prof. Dr. J.M. De Smet, ed. by R. Lievens (Mediaevalia Lovaniensia 10, Louvain 1983), p. 134. – For the Schlettstadt manuscript see Ian Stuart Robinson, Zur Arbeitsweise Bernolds von Konstanz und seines Kreises: Untersuchungen zum Schlettstädter Codex 13, DA 34 (1978), pp. 51– 122, esp. 51–82. For the information that the present manuscript consists of two originally independent manuscripts and that the one which contained the Sinemuriensis had nothing to do with the other, I am indebted to Detlev Jasper. – For the „Error- series“ see Jörg W. Busch, Der Liber de Honore Ecclesiae des Placidus von Nonantola. Eine kanonistische Problemerörterung aus dem Jahre 1111. Die Arbeitsweise ihres Autors und seine Vorlagen (Quellen und Forschungen zum Mittelalter 5, Sigmaringen 1990), pp. 102–114. – Rudolf Pokorny brought my attention to the fragment in the Ms Vat. Ottobon. lat. 811. – For the collection in the Ms Cambridge Corpus Christi College 442 see Martin Brett, The Collectio Lanfranci and ist Competitors, in: Intellectual Life in the Middle Ages: Essays 110 presented to Margaret Gibson, ed. Leslie Smith and Benedicta Ward, London 1992, p. 169. – For the ten first folios of the Ms Bergamo, Biblioteca Civica MA 244 see Jasper, Das Papstwahldekret, p. 20 n. 71. – For the synodal decrees of Gregory VII and the letter to Manasses in the Ms Madrid see John Gilchrist, The Reception. Part II, p. 197; reprinted in his selected studies Canon Law in the Age of Reform, No. IX. – For the transmission of Vigilantia, see Schieffer, Die Entstehung des päpstlichen Investiturverbots, p. 211. – For the connection between Urban II and the Sinemuriensis see Alfons Becker, Rechtsprinzipien und Verfahrensregeln im päpstlichen Gerichtswesen zur Zeit Urbans II, in: Landesgeschichte und Reichsgeschichte: Festschrift für Alois Gerlich zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Winfried Dotzauer, Stuttgart 1995, pp. 51–66. – Kéry, Canonical Collections, pp. 203–204.

Categories

• lacks categories