Manuscripts

Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, MS lat. qu. 690/III

test this
Augustine, Enchiridion
  • Latin
  • Irish language
  • s. ix
  • distinct manuscript
  • Continental manuscripts containing Irish
  • Continental manuscripts containing Irish
  • vellum

9th-century manuscript containing Augustine’s Enchiridion ad Laurentiam (ff. 65r–116r), with some interlinear Latin and Old Irish glosses, and other texts of theological interest. It forms the third part (ff. 65–188) of a composite manuscript probably compiled at St. Maximin's, Trier, and may itself have been written at Mainz.

Identifiers
Shelfmark
lat. qu. 690/III
Classification
Cat. no. Görres 87/III
Type
theological and exegetical literature
Provenance and related aspects
Language
Latin Secondary: Irish
Date
s. ix
9th century, 2nd quarter (Bischoff 1977, Fingernagel); between 2nd quarter and middle of the 9th century (Bischoff 1998); second half of the 9th century, or perhaps early 10th (Stern).
Origin, provenance
Origin: MainzMainz

No description available

See more
ass. with Probus of MainzProbus (Scottus) of Mainz
(d. 859)
Probus Scottus of Mainz
Irish monk, scholar and poet at Mainz; known to have been the owner of a copy of Isidore’s Etymologiae (Laon MS 447). An obit of 859 is recorded in the annals of Fulda.
See more
“vermutlich Mainz” (Fingernagel).(3)n. 3 Andreas Fingernagel, Die illuminierten lateinischen Handschriften deutscher Provenienz der Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz Berlin: 8.-12.Jahrhundert (1991): 88.. Bischoff suggests that the dominant hands are of Mainz, while two are Insular or Anglo-Saxon and others point to the area of Reims and Saint-Armand.(4)n. 4 “unter diesen dominieren die Mainzer, andere weisen etwa auf die Gegend von Reims oder Saint-Armand, zwei schreiben insular, wohl angelsächsisch.” Cf. his Katalog. The explanation he offers is that a likely scriptorium for such a mix of scripts to come together would be Mainz. Bischoff also suggests a connection to the Irish scholar Probus.(5)n. 5 Katalog: “Warscheinlich im Mainz zusammengeschrieben (vermutlich im Kreise des Iren Probus, gest. 859)”
Origin: Schillmann (1919) appears to be alone in suggesting, somewhat tentatively, a Reichenau origin, although his evidence may, in fact, point to Mainz.(6)n. 6 This is principally based on the similarity between the first hand and the hand of another manuscript which he associates with Reichenau (see elsewhere on this page): “Es dürfte also nicht ausgeschlossen sein, dass unsere Handschrift veilleicht in Reichenau enstanden und, nach dem Alter der Besitzvermerke zu schliessen, erst im 12. Jh. nach St. Maximin gelangt ist”. He also suggests that the Irish glosses (which he dates to the 10th century) allow for both a Reichenau and St. Maximin origin.
Provenance: Trier, St. Maximin
Trier, St. Maximin
See more
It is not known when the manuscript arrived at St. Maximin's in Trier, but it must have occurred by the 12th century. On the first leaf, f. 65r, an ownership mark dated to the 12th century reads Codex sancti maximini / quicumque abstulerit anathaema sit; / amaranta amaran, and likewise in majuscule letters on f. 188v, Sancti Maxi mini, Liber.
Hands, scribes
The following classification of hands is based on Schillmann (1919), although it not clear if it will stand the test of time, especially as Bischoff (1977, 1998) seems less certain. His observations are noted where appropriate.
Hands indexed:
Hand 1 (ff. 65r-81v, 81v-114v, 116r)

The hand, or hands, responsible for writing the text of the Enchiridion on ff. 65-114 and the beginning of 116r. Schillmann compares it to the hand of MS theol. lat fol. 283, again from St. Maximin though originally written elsewhere. Minitiarures in the latter, he says, are reminiscent of Reichenau, but later commentators have instead suggested a Mainz origin. Bischoff (1998) envisages two scribes at work instead, suggesting that the hand of ff. 65r-81v is of Mainz and that of ff. 81v-116r probably of Reims (“eine rundliche frühe Reimser”).

Hand 2 (ff. 116r-v)

A distinct hand wrote f. 116r-v. It is described by Schillmann as slightly younger (“etwas jüngeren Nachtrag”). Bischoff (1998) mentions an Anglo-Saxon hand, “eine spitzige ags. Hd. über Rasur” on f. 116r.

Hand 3 (ff. 117r-129v)

A third hand wrote ff. 117r-129v. Bischoff (1998) associates it with Mainz, whereas It is described by Schillmann as Anglo-Saxon in character (“hat einen ganz ausgeprägten angelsächsichen Charakter”).

Hand 4 (ff. 129v-135v)

A fourth hand wrote ff. 129v-135v.

Hand 5 (ff. 135v-139r) A fifth hand wrote ff. 135v-139r.
Hand 6 (f. 140) A sixth hand wrote f. 140.
Hand 7 (ff. 141r-175r)

A seventh hand wrote ff. 141r-175r, according to Schillmann. Bischoff (1998) describes the hand of f. 141r-v  as “eine wohl ebenfalls ags. geschulte, karol. beeinflußste [Hd.]”.

Hand 8 (ff. 175v-187v)

An eighth hand wrote ff. 175v-187v. Bischoff links certain features on ff. 182v and 183r-v (as well as f. 175r) to St Amand.

Glossing hand (between ff. 66v-87v)

A separate, smaller hand in paler ink has added argumenta in the margins to the beginning of the Enchiridion as well as interlinear glosses in Latin and Irish for the first 51 chapters of this text. It has been dated between the second half of the 9th century and the 10th  (Stern, s. ix or xin; Schillmann, s. x; Bischoff (1998), s. ix2). Stern believes it resembles the first unit of the MS but draws no conclusions.

In spite of the use of Irish glosses, the hand is continental, in Caroline minuscule, not Irish (Stern, “von kontinentaler Hand kopiert, doch von irischer verfasst”). Many spelling errors were made in a way which suggests that the scribe knew no Irish and that the glosses were imperfectly transcribed from an original, most likely the exemplar of the Enchiridion (for spelling errors in the main text, see elsewhere on this page). Stern has argued that the language represents a late stage of Old Irish, aside from a number of early forms.

Hand of f. 115

The text of the Enchiridion breaks off on f. 116. A 10th-century hand writes the remainder of the chapter on an inserted half-leaf. Cf. Bischoff (1998): “115 Pg.zettel s. X1”.

Codicological information
State of existence
largely complete
UnitCodicological unit. Indicates whether the entry describes a single leaf, a distinct or composite manuscript, etc.
distinct manuscript
Material
vellum
“meist Kalbpg.” (Bischoff 1998).
Palaeographical information
Script
Caroline minuscule
Caroline minuscule, Insular-influenced

Caroline minuscule. Despite a good deal of variety, a degree of Insular influence has been suggested for the scripts as a whole.(1)n. 1 Bischoff (1998): “Gemeinschaftsarbeit von Adepten verschiedener karol. Schulstile, m. insulare Einsprengseln”; Schillmann (1919): “Alle diese Schreiber, so unähnlich sie auch einander sind, zeigen einen Schriftcharakter, der zum mindesten stark insular beeinflusst ist. What struck Stern in particular is the shape of the a, resembling two subsequent c's, which he found antiquated and reminiscent of 8th-century practice in Britain. A markedly Insular, more probably Anglo-Saxon style is also in evidence. Schillmann singles out Hand 3 (but see Bischoff), Bischoff part of f. 116 (“eine spitzige ags. Hd. über Rasur”) and f. 141r-v (“eine wohl ebenfalls ags. geschulte, karol. beeinflusste [Hd.]”).

Orthographic errors have been explained by assuming that an exemplar with Insular script was used. Stern gives a list of anomalous spellings which can be attributed to a “Vorlage eines irischen Schreibers”, e.g. writing i for e and b for p. Schillmann offers a different explanation, suggesting that the copyists made errors because they were unfamiliar with the kind of script they encountered.(2)n. 2 Schillmann: “Ebenso sind die Texte durchweg fehlerhaft und lassen insulare Vorlagen vermuten, welche die Abschreiber z. T. nicht richtig lesen konnten.”

Illumination
“mit roten, 2-3zeiligen vollen oder hohlen Zierbuchstaben mit sehr einfacher Ornamentik: Ablaufe mit einander geschachtelten Blättern oder Blüten (81v und 82v), zu Knopfleisten stilisierte Profilblätte (z.B. 85v), Punktrosetten (90v). Ab Bl. 116 mehrzeilige braune Initialen, ohne Schmuck. Aufwendiger nur 2 Initialen zu Beginn zweier Texte” (Fingernagel 1991).
Table of contents
Legend
Texts

Links to texts use a standardised title for the catalogue and so may or may not reflect what is in the manuscript itself, hence the square brackets. Their appearance comes in three basic varieties, which are signalled through colour coding and the use of icons, , and :

  1. - If a catalogue entry is both available and accessible, a direct link will be made. Such links are blue-ish green and marked by a bookmark icon.
  2. - When a catalogue entry does not exist yet, a desert brown link with a different icon will take you to a page on which relevant information is aggregated, such as relevant publications and other manuscript witnesses if available.
  3. - When a text has been ‘captured’, that is, a catalogue entry exists but is still awaiting publication, the same behaviour applies and a crossed eye icon is added.

The above method of differentiating between links has not been applied yet to texts or citations from texts which are included in the context of other texts, commonly verses.

Locus

While it is not a reality yet, CODECS seeks consistency in formatting references to locations of texts and other items of interest in manuscripts. Our preferences may be best explained with some examples:

  • f. 23ra.34: meaning folio 23 recto, first column, line 34
  • f. 96vb.m: meaning folio 96, verso, second column, middle of the page (s = top, m = middle, i = bottom)
    • Note that marg. = marginalia, while m = middle.
  • p. 67b.23: meaning page 67, second column, line 23
The list below has been collated from the table of contents, if available on this page,Progress in this area is being made piecemeal. Full and partial tables of contents are available for a small number of manuscripts. and incoming annotations for individual texts (again, if available).Whenever catalogue entries about texts are annotated with information about particular manuscript witnesses, these manuscripts can be queried for the texts that are linked to them.

Sources

Notes

Bischoff (1998): “Gemeinschaftsarbeit von Adepten verschiedener karol. Schulstile, m. insulare Einsprengseln”; Schillmann (1919): “Alle diese Schreiber, so unähnlich sie auch einander sind, zeigen einen Schriftcharakter, der zum mindesten stark insular beeinflusst ist.
Schillmann: “Ebenso sind die Texte durchweg fehlerhaft und lassen insulare Vorlagen vermuten, welche die Abschreiber z. T. nicht richtig lesen konnten.”
“unter diesen dominieren die Mainzer, andere weisen etwa auf die Gegend von Reims oder Saint-Armand, zwei schreiben insular, wohl angelsächsisch.” Cf. his Katalog.
Katalog: “Warscheinlich im Mainz zusammengeschrieben (vermutlich im Kreise des Iren Probus, gest. 859)”
This is principally based on the similarity between the first hand and the hand of another manuscript which he associates with Reichenau (see elsewhere on this page): “Es dürfte also nicht ausgeschlossen sein, dass unsere Handschrift veilleicht in Reichenau enstanden und, nach dem Alter der Besitzvermerke zu schliessen, erst im 12. Jh. nach St. Maximin gelangt ist”. He also suggests that the Irish glosses (which he dates to the 10th century) allow for both a Reichenau and St. Maximin origin.

Primary sources This section typically includes references to diplomatic editions, facsimiles and photographic reproductions, notably digital image archives, of at least a major portion of the manuscript. For editions of individual texts, see their separate entries.

Stern, Ludwig Christian, “Altirische Glossen zu dem Trierer Enchiridion Augustins in der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 7 (1910): 475–497.
Internet Archive: <link>
479–485 Edition of the glosses

Secondary sources (select)

Fingernagel, Andreas, Die illuminierten lateinischen Handschriften deutscher Provenienz der Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz Berlin: 8.-12.Jahrhundert, Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Kataloge der Handschriftenabteilung 3.1, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1991.
Manuscripta-mediaevalia.de: <"hsk_0445"&dmode=doc link>
88–89
Bischoff, Bernhard, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts (mit Ausnahme der wisigotischen), vol. 1: Aachen–Lambach, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für die Herausgabe der mittelalterlichen Bibliothekskataloge Deutschlands und der Schweiz, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998.
82 [id. 393.]
Bischoff, Bernhard, “Irische Schreiber im Karolingerreich”, in: Bischoff, Bernhard, Mittelalterliche Studien: ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, 3 vols, vol. 3, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1981. 39–54.
43 Reprint.
Bischoff, Bernhard, “Irische Schreiber im Karolingerreich”, in: Roques, René (ed.), Jean Scot Érigène et l’histoire de la philosophie: Laon 7–12 Juillet 1975, Colloques internationaux du CNRS 561, Paris: CNRS Éditions, 1977. 47–58.
50
Schillmann, Fritz, Verzeichnis der Lateinischen Handschriften der Preussischen Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, vol. 3: Die Görreshandschriften, Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Preussischen Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin 4, Berlin: Behrend, 1919.
Manuscripta-mediaevalia.de: <"hsk_0710"&dmode=doc link>
89–92 Catalogue description
Stern, Ludwig Christian, “Altirische Glossen zu dem Trierer Enchiridion Augustins in der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin”, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie 7 (1910): 475–497.
Internet Archive: <link>
Contributors
C. A.,Dennis Groenewegen