Kraków, Archiwum Krakowskiej Kapituły Katedralnej, 84

Kraków, Archiwum Krakowskiej Kapituły Katedralnej, Ms. 84, in long lines, is a twelfth-century copy of the Collectio Tripartita (siglum P in the Brett/Nowak edition).

The Tripartita begins with the preface on fol. 1 and ends incomplete at the foot of fol. 185v, the last leaf of quire XXIII, at c. 172 of the capitulatio to B 29. It is followed by:

• fol. 186r-231r: Amalarius, Regula canonicorum i (lacks preface), pr. PL 105, col. 815-954.
• fol. 231v-41v: Martirologium Bede.
• fol. 242r-9r: Ordo Romanus VII, liturgical texts as in Monte Cassino 451, fol. 88-94, 73v-7, excerpts from Ordo L (cf Andrieu, Les ordines i 196, 198-9).
• fol. 249r-v: Two inventories of the cathedral treasury and books, one dated 1101, the other 1110 in the time of bishop Maurus (d. 1118), both in the same hand. Further acquisitions in the time of the bishop have been added in another hand. Dr Nowak published a short note, with three plates from the beginning and end of the book, in Źródła kultury duchowej Krakowa, ed. Elżbieta Macioł, Kraków 2007, I/7, and a detailed description with ten plates in ‘The manuscripts of the Collectio Tripartita in Poland’ (2008). What follows is drawn largely from that

account.

It has been argued, esp. by David, that the book is the capitulare listed in the 1110 inventory, which would make it the earliest dated copy of the collection. David further suggested that its archetype was probably brought to Poland by the papal legate Gualo, who had close connections with Ivo, in 1103, and that N was taken from the same exemplar. Neither case is at all cogent. N clearly follows a distinct tradition. The date proposed for both also rests on very weak arguments. There is not yet any good evidence that the revision which issued in the later version was done at Chartres or as early as 1103, and Ivo himself appears to use the earlier version in the Decretum, so any connection with the legate must be precarious. Further, Vetulani rightly objected that capitulare is not a conventional word for a collection of canons, but rather for a set of gospel pericopes (Vetulani 1951, 495-8, also idem, Le plus ancien inventaire d’une bibliothèque polonaise, Krakow 1971, 23-4). Alternatively one might suggest a Liber capitularium. Neither description fits P very well. Nowak identifies at least eleven hands, of which three worked in both the Tripartita and in the later material, and one of these was responsible for the inventories. He suggested earlier that the book was written in the Rhineland, but in 2012 (356 and n. 91) preferred northern France, partly encouraged in this view by Prof. Hartmut Hoffmann. It seems to follow that the book was accompanied to Poland by at least one of the scribes. The evidence of the inventories places the whole book in Poland by 1118 at the latest, since additions were made to the second inventory apparently during the lifetime of Maurus. This confirms that P is indeed the earliest known dated copy, even if that date may be rather later than has been supposed.

The scribes of P are eccentric, and sometimes the forms are hard to interpret; there is frequently no distinction between (e.g) -itur, -iret and -int . In some sections, chiefly but not exclusively whole quires, the inscriptions and rubrics are omitted (as they are in part of Amalarius in the later section). There is a serious dislocation of the text in Tripartita B 20-22, which produces much confusion of numbering and arrangement.

Only a few of the numerous idiosyncracies of the text are recorded in the apparatus of the Brett/Nowak edition. Broadly it represents the same form as in BV, and agrees rather more often with V than B in detail. Particularly, the extracts from Anacletus in Tripartita A1.2 are copied in a single block, with no breaks and no rubrics. However, it agrees with B (and W) against V in lacking the added canons after B 9.2.

Note that the manuscript is cited as "sine numero (84?)" in Kéry, p. 245.