THE
BENEVENTAN SCRIPT
A HISTORY OF
THE SOUTH ITALIAN MINUSCULE
BY
LONAJ, .W>.> Fwex-u
(E. A. LOEW, PH.D. ;
RESEARCH ASSOCIATE OF THE CARNEGIE INSTITUTION
OF WASHINGTON
OXFORD
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW NEW YORK
TORONTO MELBOURNE BOMBAY
HUMPHREY MILFORD M.A.
PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY
1443
TO
JAMES LOEB
%
PATRON OF LIBERAL LEARNING
AT HOME AND ABROAD
THIS BOOK IS DEDICATED
IN GRATITUDE AND DEVOTION
Absit tamen ut hac in re magisterii partes mihi arro-
gem. Quippe in republica litteraria omnes liberi sumus.
Leges ac regulas proponere omnibus licet, imponere non
licet. Praevalent istae, si veritate ac recto judicio ful-
ciantur: sin minus, ab eruditis et recte sentientibus
merito reprobantur. J. MABILLON.
PREFACE
THE present work is an essay in regional palaeography.
Its inception goes back to my student days at the University
of Munich. My master, Ludwig Traube, had proposed to me
the thesis ' Monte Cassino as a centre for the transmission of
Latin classics '. After spending some time on this subject it
became clear that adequate treatment of it would be possible
only after acquiring such a knowledge of the peculiar script
used at Monte Cassino as would enable me to make sound
and independent judgements with regard to the dates of Monte
Cassino MSS., that is, MSS. written in the Beneventan or
South Italian minuscule. Thus I conceived the idea of
making a careful study of the script employed throughout the
lower half of the Italian peninsula.
Traube made no objection to my working on a subject of
my own choice ; but with characteristic generosity put at my
disposal his entire library, his very large collection of facsimiles,
and even some of his own notes. Owing to my ill health I
had not the fortune to put into Traube's hands the completed
study. But I had at least the satisfaction of knowing that he
approved of the results reached before his death. All who
knew Traube know that he was like a father to his pupils.
No one can feel more keenly than I the loss my work has
suffered by want of his guidance and criticism ; and the best
verdict I could hope for upon this book would be that it was
at least conceived in Traube's spirit.
The claim the present work may make upon the attention
of scholars is that the results embodied in it are drawn almost
VI
PREFACE
entirely from the original sources, the MSS. themselves. It
is not the merit but the good fortune of the author that he
has been able to investigate nearly all the extant material in
his field ; for through the support both of individuals and of
institutions, he has been privileged in quite extraordinary
measure, in being given the opportunity to visit all the
libraries containing MSS. that concerned him, and to devote
unhindered ample time upon them. But it is none the less
true that this book stands upon the shoulders of its pre-
decessors; and it is thanks to the pioneer labours of those
who preceded me that I could take full advantage of the
opportunity I had. The works of the illustrious Monte
Cassino scholars Caravita, Tosti, Amelli, and Piscicelli Taeggi
have made my own possible.
Caravita wrote before the new era in palaeography ushered
in by Delisle and Traube, and his work is weak on the
palaeographical side. He is at sea when confronted by MSS.
not written in the South Italian hand. And even in the case
of South Italian MSS. his dates are not always reliable. His
classification of the MSS. into strict groups is often arbitrary
and sometimes clearly mistaken. There is also some confusion
in the press-marks. But these defects may be passed over in
view of the great services he rendered in making such rich
stores of material accessible to scholars. What has been said
of Caravita may fairly be said of the great catalogue of Monte
Cassino manuscripts, the Bibliotheca Casinemis, which we owe
to the untiring diligence of Tosti, Amelli, and their coad-
jutors. In giving a facsimile of each MS. described in the
first four volumes of the catalogue its editors put palaeo-
graphers under great obligation. Yet the student who
depends solely upon this catalogue for his knowledge of
Beneventan writing cannot avoid wrong impressions, since
the reproductions, being in lithograph, want that accuracy
PREFACE
vn
which can only be achieved by a mechanical process. But
neither Caravita nor the editors of the Bibliotheca Casinensis
aimed at making contributions to palaeography. The publi-
cation which, on the palaeographical side, is our chief,
indeed our only, source of information regarding the South
Italian script came from the pen of Dom Odorisio Pisci-
celli Taeggi, formerly of Monte Cassino, now of Bari.
His Paleografia artistica di Montecassino is, as the title
suggests, primarily interested in the artistic aspect of the
Monte Cassino MSS. Yet the short and well-written pre-
face to the section entitled Longobardo-Cassinese is the most
important palaeographical contribution we have on the subject,
and all our text-books base on it. But the work is expensive
and not easily accessible; and the chromo-lithograph facsimiles,
although executed with admirable care, and most valuable
for giving an idea of the colours used by the miniaturists,
are open to the same objection as those in the Bibliotheca
Casinensis. They can lay no claim to absolute accuracy.
Another study deserving of mention is Professor Rodolico's
1 Genesi e svolgimento della scrittura Longobardo-Cassinese '.
It marks in several respects an advance upon Piscicelli
Taeggi. It too is limited in its scope to the study of the
MSS. preserved at Monte Cassino ; but it furnishes some
new observations and rectifies some old errors. It contains,
to be sure, some faulty and premature conclusions, but these
would undoubtedly have been revised had the author extended
his researches over a larger field. The short paper entitled
Delia scrittura Longobarda nelle sue diverse fasi (Rome, 1 906),
by A. Morinello, would not have been mentioned here but
for the fact that it appears as an authority in one of the best
text-books on palaeography. It is only fair to the author
to state that the pamphlet, which is simply an account of
six MSS. preserved at Naples, was meant for private circu-
Vlll
PREFACE
lation, and makes no pretension to being a contribution to the
science.
The aim of the present work has been to give a history of
the South Italian minuscule, and to deal with the various
problems it presents. In treating some questions briefly and
others at great length, I have >been guided by the palaeo-
graphical importance of each question discussed. In the his-
torical introduction, Monte Cassino may perhaps appear to
occupy too much space, but this was inevitable in view of
the importance of Monte Cassino both as a seat of learning
and as a scriptorium. It seemed important to treat fully the
subject of the name, to point out the hopeless confusion which
arises from the ambiguous term Lombardic, and to justify the
claims of the name Beneventan. Another question of im-
portance was the demarcation of the Beneventan zone. I have
given a list of all the centres whence Beneventan MSS. are
known to have come, and also a list of the MSS. which are
to be connected with each centre. The use of Beneventan
writing in Dalmatia is of interest both to the palaeographer
and to the student of western culture. The Italian origin of
our script needed no elaborate demonstration, as it is admitted
now on all sides, yet it seemed necessary to discuss in detail
the theory that the Visigothic script influenced the development
of the Beneventan and to show that this view is unsupported
by facts. In the chapter on abbreviations I consciously trans-
gressed the limits of my subject proper and gave a short
sketch of the development of abbreviations in Latin MSS.
I did this partly to render more intelligible the discussion
of the Beneventan abbreviations, and partly to make Traube's
results accessible in English. This chapter may be found to
be the most useful in the book. In dealing with such a mass
of details as that presented by the abbreviations found in
hundreds of MSS., it was necessary to suppress everything
PREFACE ix
which tended to blur the clear outline of the development. It
will be seen that a careful study of the development of several
abbreviations has furnished trustworthy, objective dating
criteria. In the discussion of the Beneventan sign of inter-
rogation an attempt has been made, I believe for the first
time, to touch upon a subject which will in the future receive
more careful attention from palaeographers. The Beneventan
method of punctuating interrogative sentences throws con-
siderable light on the manner in which such sentences were
read. It also provides the palaeographer with a most interest-
ing touchstone for detecting Beneventan influence. In formu-
lating the rules and traditions of the script I have tried to
show what is essentially Beneventan. Given the Beneventan
alphabet and a knowledge of the rules, any one could write
correct Beneventan a fact which I have tested by applying
the rules myself in connexion with a fragment which was
mistaken for Beneventan.
The Appendix demands a few words of explanation. It
contains a list of over 600 Beneventan MSS., if fragments
are included. Its value lies in the fact that it includes
only genuine South Italian products. Nearly all the MSS.
mentioned have been examined by me either in the origi-
nal or in facsimile. In the case of the few MSS. which
I have not seen, I have stated in each case on whose
authority the MS. was included. Owing to the promiscuous
use of the term Lombardic and the rather vague appreciation
of what is and what is not Beneventan, it was impossible to
admit without verification MSS. elsewhere described as Lom-
bardic, Cassinese, or even Beneventan. This will explain the
omission from my list of a number of MSS. which might be
suspected to be South Italian products. The type of minus-
cule closely resembling the Beneventan, which was in use in
North Italy during the ninth century, does not come within
M43
x PREFACE
the scope of the present study, and I have for that reason
excluded such MSS. as Vercelli 99, Milan Ambros. B 31 sup.,
Bamberg B III 30, Rome Sessor. 40 (1258), and many others.
It would have added greatly to the value of the list if
references had been given to published facsimiles and litera-
ture. But a complete and adequate bibliographical study
I was unable to give here, and it must be reserved for a future
occasion, should it be found advisable to publish such a study.
It often happens that an apparently insignificant fact proves
of importance in reconstructing the history of a MS. Hence
it seemed necessary (except, for obvious reasons, in the case
of Monte Cassino) to take account of MSS. which showed
only a line or two of Beneventan, or a Beneventan fly-leaf.
It would perhaps have been more scientific not to assign
dates to the MSS. in the list, especially as some of them were
examined by me several years ago and it is likely I should
now modify my judgement in some cases. But the discre-
pancy, I believe, would never be very material ; so that on
the whole it seemed best to consult the convenience of the
student rather than my own reputation for strictly accurate
dating. Where my dates differ from those of Caravita and
others, this is not due to oversight on my part but to difference
of opinion. The list will doubtless receive many additions,
but that it is as full as it is, is owing to the help I had from
Traube, from the works of the Monte Cassino scholars men-
tioned above, and from those of Bannister, Bethmann, Ebner,
Ehrensberger, Hartel-Loewe, Reifferscheid, and Schenkl.
It has taken me many years to do this work I prefer not
to think how many and it would have taken me much longer
but for the assistance accorded me on all sides. First and
foremost I am indebted to Traube a debt which has reference
not only to the present book but to any future work in
palaeography as well. Next after Traube I owe profound
PREFACE xi
gratitude to Father Ehrle, the Prefect of the Vatican Library,
whom to know is an ethical education. During the years
I was privileged to work in the Vatican Library his interest,
encouragement, and advice never failed me. My work has
likewise profited greatly from the unstinted assistance of the
Vatican Scriptores, to all of whom I here express my thanks :
to Dott. Carusi, Abbe Liebaert, Mgr. Mercati, Prof. Nogara,
Mgr. Stornaiolo, and Mgr. Vattasso. My debt to Monte
Cassino is second only to that I owe to the Vatican. To the
former Librarian of the Abbey, P. Ambrogio Amelli, as well
as to the present Keeper of the Archives, Dom Simplicio de
Sortis, I am deeply obliged, for the liberality with which they
allowed me to make use of their treasures. And I am grate-
ful as well for the hospitality I enjoyed at the hands of Abbot
Kruger and his successor. My sojourns at Monte Cassino,
one of the most beautiful and venerable shrines of western
Christendom, have been experiences not easily forgotten.
I am under obligation for courtesy and assistance to all the
libraries visited ; and in particular to the following librarians :
Dr. H. Fischer of Bamberg, Canonico G. Cangiani of Bene-
vento, Dr. A. Holder of Carlsruhe, Dom Leone Cerasoli of
the Abbey at La Cava, Cav. G. Biagi and Prof. E. Rostagno of
the Laurenziana, Sir Frederick G. Kenyon, Dr. J. P. Gilson,
and Mr. J. A. Herbert of the British Museum, Prof. P. Guidi
of Lucca, Mgr. A. Ratti of the Ambrosiana, Dr. G. Leidinger
and Dr. E. Petzet of Munich, Prof. E. Martini and M. Fava
of Naples, Mr. F. Madan of the Bodleian, MM. H. Omont,
L. Dorez, and P. Lauer of the Bibliotheque Nationale ; at
Rome, Cav. I. Giorgi of the Casanatense, Dott. G. Gabrieli
of the Corsiniana, G. Cordelia of the Vallicelliana, and
Prof. A. Tenneroni of the Vittorio Emanuele; Dott.
A. Spagnolo of Verona, the late Dr. Beer, J. Bick, and
F. Mencik of Vienna. My thanks are also due to Mgr.
Xll
PREFACE
Duchesne, Head of the ficole de Rome, and to the authorities
of the Prussian and Austrian Institutes, and to Prince Chigi,
for permission to use their various libraries.
Of individual scholars who have furthered my work, I have
especial pleasure in mentioning the Rev. H. M. Bannister, to
whom I am grateful for constant kindnesses. His great store
of liturgical knowledge he has always generously put at my
disposal, and his unusual familiarity with the Vatican MSS.
has contributed much to the completeness of my list of
Beneventan MSS. As for Prof. W. M. Lindsay, it is impos-
sible for me to express here the gratitude I feel for all he has
done for me. To him I am indebted for unfailing guidance,
advice, and solicitude extended over a period of many years ;
for all of which I here make hearty, if inadequate, acknowledge-
ment. To Prof. A. Souter I am sincerely grateful for his
having assumed the tedious task of reading my proof-sheets,
and for having saved me by his experience and knowledge
from a number of errors. To Dom A. Wilmart I am grateful
for going over the whole of my book both in MS. and in
proof. His suggestions and corrections have been invaluable.
For many kindnesses I am indebted to my friends and
fellow-pupils with Traube, Prof. C. H. Beeson, Dr. P.
Lehmann, and Dr. S. Tafel. To my old friend and former
teacher, Dr. L. L. Forman, especial gratitude is due. And,
finally, for various kind offices I wish here to express my
thanks to Prof. A. C. Clark, Prof. C. U. Clark, Dom D. De Bruyne,
Prof. P. Fedele, Prof. V. Federici, Prof. G. Gotz, Prof. J. L.
Heiberg, Dr. M. R. James, Prof. E. Monaci, Prof. E. v. Otten-
thal, Prof. O. Plasberg, Dr. H. Pogatscher, R. Poupardin,
C. L. Ricketts, Prof. L. Schiaparelli, Dr. F. Schneider,
Prof. F. Steffens, Prof. Fr. Vollmer, Dr. W. Weinberger,
Dr. H. Zimmermann, V. Butler, F. Hall, and H. T. Porter.
For three years I carried on my studies as Carnegie Research
PREFACE xiii
Associate at the American School of Classical Studies in
Rome. To its Director, Prof. J. B. Carter, and to Professors
J. C. Rolfe and W. Dennison, I here express my thanks. In
191 1 I became directly connected with the Carnegie Institution
of Washington. As one of its Research Associates, I have
been enabled to continue my palaeographical investigations.
I take the liberty of expressing here my sense of gratitude to
President Woodward for his encouragement of my researches.
To the Delegates of the Clarendon Press I wish to express
my appreciation of the honour they did me in accepting this
work for publication. I am also obliged to the Secretary to
the Delegates, and to the Assistant Secretary, for their kind-
ness in many particulars connected with the printing of the
book, in especial for having many new types cut for me.
Acknowledgements are also due to Mr. Horace Hart and
his able staff for the patience and ingenuity with which they
solved the difficult technical problems presented by the book.
But above all I must thank the readers who read the book for
press, and by their vigilance and expert knowledge purged it
of many errors and inconsistencies.
I have reserved for the last the expression of my indebtedness
to the man whose name I am privileged to inscribe in this
book. From the time I left America to begin my studies
abroad, he has never ceased to aid and encourage my work in
every possible way ; and that I have been able to pursue my
investigations uninterruptedly is in very large measure due to
his generosity. No one knows better than the author the
shortcomings of this book; but such as it is, it could never
have been printed had not Traube been my master and
James Loeb my friend.
OXFORD,
February 10, 1914.
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA
p. 17. Madrid 19 (A 1 6) is here included on the authority of P. v. Winterfeld,
Loewe did not describe the MS. as Cassinese, and Prof. B. L. Ullman, who kindly
examined the MS. for me, was not inclined to consider it Beneventan either.
p. 30 and n. 2. For Janelli read Jannelli. The same correction is to be
made on p. 54, n. 2.
p. 52, n. 5. See also De Vita, Antiquiiaies Beneventanae, ii. 408 sqq.
p. 1 08. With regard to the history of the Visigothic MS. Verona LXXXIX
see the interesting conjecture made by Dom G. Morin in Rev. Be'nfd. xxx
(1913) 115, to which Dom Wilmart kindly called my attention.
p. 112. On the vogue of Isidore of Seville see now C. H. Beeson,
Isidor-Studien, in Quellen u. Unters. zur lat. Phil. d. Mittelalters, iv. 2 (Munich,
p. 152. According to H. M. Bannister the fly-leaves of Vatic, lat. 968 are
in the Bari type of writing.
p. 1 8 1, n. i. The form gloa also occurs in the Anglo-Saxon MS. Oxford
Bodl. Laud lat. 108 (fol. 64^), from Wurzburg.
p. 262. The suprascript interrogation-sign is found in Monte Cassino 361
(Petrus Diaconus, &c.), saec. xii.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGES
PREFACE v-xiii
I. INTRODUCTION 1-21
Historical background i
Value of Beneventan transmission . . 16
Classics in Beneventan writing ... 17
Medical MSS 18
Mediaeval texts of importance ... 19
Selected bibliography .... 21
II. NAME 22-40
Use and misuse of the name Lombardic . . 22
The term Gothic or Gotico cordellato ... 29
Revival of the name Beneventan .... 30
Other names now in use 32
Evidence for the ancient use of the name Bene-
ventan 36
III. DURATION 41-46
The earliest extant products in Beneventan writing 41
Traditional view of the duration of the script . 42
The latest extant examples of Beneventan writing 43
Reasons for the decline of the script ... 45
IV. THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 47-83
Demarcation ....... 47
The chief centres 49
Monte Cassino .49
Cava 51
Benevento . 52
Capua . . 53
Naples . . 54
Salerno . 56
Bari 56
xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGES
Minor centres 58
Dalmatian centres . 60
Historical relations with Southern Italy. . 61
List of Beneventan MSS. from Dalmatia . 63
The centres and their known products List of
localized MSS 66
Some historical evidence of literary activity in the
Beneventan zone 77
V. ORDINARY MINUSCULE IN THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 84-93
The use of two scripts in the zone . 84
Beneventan the normal script . . 85
The evidence from extant MSS. .... 86
The palaeographical evidence .... 87
Ordinary minuscule a foreign importation . . 90
VI. THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 93-121
Distinguishing features . ... 93
The use of cursive in early Italian minuscule . 94
The use of cursive in early French minuscule 96
French origin of the Corbie tct type ... 97
Beneventan and Visigothic compared ... 98
Points of similarity . 99
Points of difference
Ligatures and single letters . . . 100
Abbreviations 101
Orthography and punctuation . . 102
Colophons, titles, and ornamentation . . 103
Refutation of arguments in favour of Visigothic
influence .... . 104
Historical and liturgical relations between Spain
and South Italy 104
Visigothic MSS. in Italy ..... 106
Supposed Visigothic features in Beneventan MSS. 109
Beneventan compared with other pre- Caroline
minuscules . . . . . . 114
Possible models 119
The Italian origin of the script . . . . 1 20
TABLE OF CONTENTS xvii
PAGES
VII. THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 122-152
Periods of development 122
Tentative period 123
Formative period . .... 123
Period of maturity 1 24
Period of decline 125
The elements 126
The short upright or /-stroke . . . 127
The bow 129
The upright stems 130
The descending stems . . . . 130
The horizontal connecting-stroke . . . 130
The approach-stroke 131
The letters 132
The ligatures 140
The unions 149
Characteristics of the Bari type . . . . 150
List of MSS. in the Bari type .... 151
VIII. ABBREVIATIONS 153-226
Value and significance 153
General history ....... 156
The abbreviation-signs
General 162
Beneventan . . . . . . . 164
The /^-stroke 171
Beneventan abbreviations
The stages 173
Alphabetical list .."..,.. 174
Abbreviated syllables 197
Detailed discussion of special abbreviations
autem 198
eius ........ 199
est 202
ergo, igitur .... 203
in 204
misericordia 206
noster^ vester^ &c 206
omnis ....... 210
j-symbol 213
tur 217
xviii TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGES
IX. PUNCTUATION 227-279
The first epoch . . 227
The second epoch ... . 228
Illustration of usage . . . . . 229
The two points and comma 232
The point . . . 233
The point and hook 233
Quotation marks 234
Exclamation marks 235
The Beneventan interrogation-sign
Statement of conclusions .... 236
The two kinds of interrogative sentences . 237
Peculiarity of the Beneventan sign . 239
Usage in Beneventan MSS 242
Phases of development . . . . 244
Examples 247
Significance of the sign . . . . 250
Origin of the Beneventan method . . . 251
Theory of Spanish origin disproved . . 252
Analogy between Greek and Beneventan
methods 255
Non-Beneventan M SS. with the suprascript sign 258
The assertion-sign 270
Examples of its use 271
Its significance and origin . . . 273
The accents . 274
Accents over two consecutive vowels . . 276
Accented i 276
The hyphen 277
X. SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY 280-285
Principle of syllabic division in Beneventan MSS* 282
Characteristic spellings . . . . * 283
XI. MATERIAL DISPOSITION 286-299
Parchment, pen, and ink 286
Size of MSS 287
Disposition of page . . . . . 289
Signing of quires . . . . . . 290
Ruling of quires 293
TABLE OF CONTENTS
xix
Corrections
Special types
Numbers
Colophons, titles, rubrics
Ornamentation
XII. RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
The scribe's writing lesson .
Formulation of rules ....
The ^-distinction ....
Rules for assibilation
Beneventan usage ....
The transcription of ^ .
Ligatures with enclitic i . . .
The use of z-longa ....
Practical value of the rules .
XIII. DATING
Difficulties of the problem .
Criteria ......
Paschal tables as an aid in dating .
XIV. SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
APPENDIX
Hand-list of Beneventan MSS. .
INDEX OF MSS.
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
PAGES
294
296
296
297
298
300-313
300
302
33
34
305
305
307
308
309
314
3 i8
3*0-333
334-370
382
LIST OF FACSIMILES
PAGE
Facsimile of the usual Monte Cassino ' Ex libris ' . . . 66
Facsimile of a Beneventan ' Ex libris ' 66
Plate I. MS. Naples VI B 12. A.D. 817-35 ^a
Plate II. MS. Monte Cassino 269. Ante A. D. 949 . . 122
Plate III. MS. Vatic. lat. 1202. A.D. 1058-87 ... 124
Plate IV. MS. Monte Cassino 47. A.D. 1159-73 . . 124
Plate V. MS. Cava 19. A. 0.1280 126
Plate VI. Bari Cathedral Library. 'Exultet Roll.'
Ante A.D. 1067. Initials taken from MS.
Vatic, lat. 3327, saec. xii/xiii . . . 150
Plate VII. MS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. lat. 277, saec. xi ex.
Bibl. lat. 6i,saec. xi ex. 150
Plate VIII. MS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 175, saec.
xii in. Initial taken from MS. Vatic . lat. 332 7,
saec. xii/xiii , . 150
Plate IX. Turin, Archivio di Stato. Libri Pontificalis
fragmentum. Beneventan Transcription . 312
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
THE history of a script which lasted five centuries is indis-
solubly bound up with the history of the region in which it
was used. Such a script would of necessity receive some
impress of the intellectual and political movements of its locality,
and thus act as a register, as well as a medium, of culture.
The study of such a script does well then to take cognizance of
the milieu of its development ; and will become more fruitful by
extending its inquiry to the books written in the script, to the
centres prominent for copying activity, and to the personages,
literary and political, who fostered the culture they inherited.
This is not the place for a history of the culture of southern
Italy. Yet a brief sketch of the main events affecting the I
region in the Middle Ages seems indispensable, and will, I hope,
suffice for an introduction to the chapters following. I shall
content myself with grouping the incidents to be narrated
around the vicissitudes of the mother-house of occidental
monasticism, Monte Cassino. She was for the period the
great centre of light and learning, the leader and model of
all the smaller schools. And owing to her geographical
situation and extensive feudal possessions no event of real
importance in southern Italy left her untouched.
In the history of western culture southern Italy has played
if not a leading certainly a significant part. It has well been
pointed out, that from the beginning her mission was to preserve
and hand on what she got from others. It was a little Greek
colony in southern Italy that brought the alphabet to Rome.
When Rome fell and the German barbarians swept over Italy,
it was a son of the extreme south who did much to save profane
learning from impending destruction. A south Italian abbey
became the mother-house of the order which more than any
1443
2 INTRODUCTION
other institution offered for centuries an asylum to learning
and the arts. It was, again, largely through southern Italy
that the wisdom of the East was made accessible to the West.
Contact with Greek culture southern Italy probably never
lost; and new treasures were opened up by the translation
movement that began under the Normans in Sicily and was
continued by their Suabian and Angevin successors. It was
from a Calabrian that the first humanist learned his Greek ;
and it was a Sicilian who, in the memorable year 1423, brought
back with him from Constantinople classics unread for a
thousand years.
Harassed and exploited by one barbarian foe after another,
Italy lay at the end of the 5th century impoverished and
exhausted. Her art and learning had sunk so low that they
might perhaps have perished in the tumult of the invasions
which followed, had they not found asylum in the monasteries.
The nobler spirits of the time flocked in great numbers into
the religious houses. Civic and political virtue had apparently
died out. The affairs of this world presented a sickening
aspect ; and men and women felt that there was no other path
to the better life than through the gates of the cloister.
It is no wonder then, that the three prominent men with
whose works the annals of the Middle Ages may be said to
begin had each spent a greater or smaller portion of his life
within the walls of a monastery. St. Benedict, Cassiodorus,
and Gregory the Great had all been monks ; and each did
distinct service for the monasticism of the West : the first by
furnishing a Rule suited to the needs of the Occident ; the
second by encouraging the monks to foster liberal learning ;
the last by protecting and championing the cause of the
monastic order.
In 529 St. Benedict founded Monte Cassino, and there he
wrote his famous Regula. Following in the footsteps of
St. Basil he composed a Rule which events have proved to be
precisely suited to the western genius. It is characterized by
mildness and common sense, and differs from its predecessors,
INTRODUCTION 3
which were based on eastern models, in the * elimination of
austerity and in the sinking of the individual in the community*.
In 'founding the Benedictine order St. Benedict builded
better than he knew. He hardly foresaw and it was certainly
not his intention that his monasteries would become the chief
instruments for the transmission of pagan as well as Christian
literature. His interest lay in the cultivation not of learning
but of piety. His aim was salvation, not knowledge. Yet his
Rule left an opening for the seven arts by providing for a library
and by demanding of each monk that he should spend two
hours daily in reading during Lent even three hours, and
on Sundays and holidays all the time not devoted to divine
service. The famous 48th chapter of the Rule says :
Otiositas inimica est animae ; et ideo certis temporibus
'occupari debent fratres in labore manuum, certis iterum horis
in lectione divina. ... In quibus diebus quadragesimae
accipiant omnes singulos codices de bibliotheca, quos per
ordinem ex integro legant.
St. Benedict doubtless referred to the reading of Scripture and
the Fathers; but as each monk was given during Lent a separate
MS. and at times the abbey had no less than 200 monks
a large library was indispensable ; and this necessitated copying
activity.
The impulse to cherish the learning of the past came in the
main from Cassiodorus. Nearly all his life had been spent in
political activity, as minister of Theodoric and his successors.
Towards its close he retired to his own estate in the extreme
south of Italy. In Vivarium near Squillace he founded
a monastery which in a measure was to take the place of the
Christian university he had dreamed of establishing in Rome.
In the seclusion of his monastery he developed remarkable
literary activity. In writing his Institutiones divinamm et
saecularium litter arum, an encyclopaedia of sacred and profane
learning, he did great service to mankind. For he completed
the work of St. Benedict by making the writing of books, the
preservation of authors, a sacred duty and an act of piety.
B 2
4 INTRODUCTION
Hardly had the Goths been expelled from Italy when fresh
hordes of barbarians poured down from the north. This time
a people came who were destined to stay. A little over
a decade after the Lombards entered Italy we find them
besieging Naples. In 581 they plundered and sacked Monte
Cassino. The monks fled to Rome, where Pope Pelagius
gave them a home near the Lateran. Here they remained
for over 1 30 years. Of their doings during this time we know,
however, very little. Under Gregory the Great they certainly
received every possible encouragement. There is a fitness in
the fact that the Patriarch of western monasticism should have
found his biographer in the greatest of the popes. Considering
the popularity of Gregory's Dialogues, it is not easy to over-
estimate the prestige which accrued to the Benedictine order
from the Pope's admiration of its founder. The marvellously
rapid extension of the order may be largely due to this very
circumstance.
Concerning the monks of Monte Cassino during the 7th cen-
tury the annals are silent. All we know is that they remained
in Rome. The tradition was vague even in the nth century.
The catalogues of abbots which we find in nth-century MSS.
lack the precise dates of the abbots of the 7th century. It is
in the beginning of the 8th century that we again touch facts.
In the year 717 or 718 Petronax of Brescia, a strong and
influential man, was asked by Pope Gregory III to take the
monks back to the monastery which had been abandoned for
over a century. With gifts from Rome and generous assistance
from the neighbouring abbey of St. Vincent on the Volturno,
Monte Cassino soon began to prosper, and once more men
from different parts of the world sought peace within its
cloisters. Some of the books presented to the monks by
Pope Gregory's successor, Zacharias, are perhaps still to be
found among the extant palimpsests of Monte Cassino.
During this period of reconstruction, at least at the beginning
of it, conditions were hardly favourable to literary activity.
From one witness of the time, the Anglo-Saxon Willibald, we
INTRODUCTION 5
learn that even the discipline was lax. This wealthy and pious
man, whose religious zeal had led him to make the pilgrimage
to the Holy Land, must have been of influence in the abbey,
for he was given positions of responsibility there. The presence
of this Englishman may have prepared the way for the authors
of his native land, Bede and Alcuin, whose popularity became
great in the abbey, as elsewhere.
At the same time with Willibald there lived in Monte
Cassino a Spanish Presbyter, Diapertus by name. His sojourn
is, as far as I know, the first and only evidence of direct contact
with Spain.
The fame of the abbey had brought to her during the same
century another illustrious stranger, the Bavarian Sturmius,
later first abbot of Fulda. It was St. Boniface who sent him
to the mother-house to learn the true monastic discipline at its
source. Relations of this sort could not have been without
beneficial consequences to the abbey.
The prestige of the abbey is again witnessed in the invitation
sent by Duke Odilo of Bavaria to monks of Monte Cassino to
come and settle at Mondsee near Salzburg. A similar invita-
tion came a little over two centuries later from the King of
Hungary.
Two personages of the 8th century bring southern Italy into
connexion with Gaul. Ambrosius Autpertus, a native of Gaul,
spent the last decades of his life in the Benedictine abbey of
St. Vincent on the Volturno. It is interesting to note that one
of the earliest copies of his Commentary on the Apocalypse is
actually one of the oldest specimens we have of Beneventan
writing (Benevento III 9). Again, at the end of the century
Monte Cassino was visited by Adalhard of Corbie, then one of
the most prominent monasteries in Gaul. This visit may not
have been without its influence on our script ; for Corbie was
then already in possession of a highly developed minuscule,
which was far from being the case in Monte Cassino.
Thus the mother-house prospered and grew in fame, and
6 INTRODUCTION
during the abbacy of Theodemar (778-797) it was accorded
quite unusual honours. It had before received into its fold
Ratchis, King of the Lombards, and Carloman, brother of
Pippin. In 787 Charlemagne himself paid a visit to the shrine
of St. Benedict. Later, at his own request, a copy of the Rule
was sent him, which was a literal reproduction of the autograph
brought back by the monks from Rome. But what gave even
more enduring lustre to the abbacy of Theodemar was the
sojourn at Monte Cassino of Paulus Diaconus. One of the
most learned men of his time, our only source for the early
history of the Lombards, P^uks..IJiacpj^shad for political rea-
sons left his monastery in the north and become a monk at
Monte Cassino before 782. Under his influence the abbey
grew into an important school. Pupils came from far and wide.
Stephen II of Naples had his clerics sent to Monte Cassino to
sit at the feet of the great man. The merit of Paulus did not
escape Charlemagne, in whose court the scholar spent some
time ; but after 787 we find him again at Monte Cassino, where
he remained until his death. The stimulus he gave to learning
lingered on long after he passed away. Practically all our
oldest MSS. in the writing discussed in this book date from the
time when Paulus Diaconus was in Monte Cassino ; and their
contents evince an interest in profane as well as Christian
literature. We have Cassiodorus' Institutiones, Gregory of
Tours' De cursu stellar um, Isidore's Etymologiae, and a large
collection of grammatical treatises, viz. the MSS. Bamberg
HJIV 15, Cava 2, and Paris lat. 7530.
During the Qth century southern Italy felt a reflection of the
renaissance that had taken place in France. Monte Cassino
can boast of the writers Hildericus, Autpertus, and Bertharius.
At the same time Ursus, bishop of Benevento, made an
abridgement of Priscian, a contemporary MS. of which we may
have in Rome Casanat. 1086. Other Qth-century MSS. also
show an interest in grammar. The city of Benevento was re-
puted to have thirty-two teachers of profane learning (philo-
sopki) at the time when Louis 1 1 visited it. We have only the
INTRODUCTION 7
word of the Anonymous Salernitanus for this, but the story
must have some basis of truth.
A new enemy put an end to these peaceful activities. The
Saracens had swept everything before them. Masters of
Palermo by the year 831, Tarentum and Bari fell into their
hands between 840 and 850. In the next two decades every-
thing south of Rome and east of the Abruzzi was in their pos-
session. The Greeks were too weak, the Lombards too much
divided among themselves, to offer adequate resistance. Not
before Louis II came in 871 was Bari relieved of its thirty
years' yoke. No sooner had he left the country than the
Saracens were threatening Benevento and Salerno.
On the 22nd of October, 883, the prosperous rule of Abbot
Bertharius was cut short by the appearance of the enemy
at Monte Cassino. The Saracens sacked and plundered the
abbey. The abbot fell into their hands. The monks who
managed to escape fled to Teano near Capua. One of
their number was ErcJiejnpert, who after Paulus Diaconus
continues the history of the Lombards to the year 889. As
a historian he is superior to his contemporaries ; and he is
our main source for the sad and turbulent events of the
9th century.
Further misfortunes soon overtook the fugitive monks. The
monastery at Teano was burned down, and in it perished their
most precious treasure, the Rule which St. Benedict had written
with his own hand. The monks sought refuge in Capua, where
they lived for over half a century. Their sojourn here marks
a new epoch of the script. For a generation they made good
use of peace and security. They produced a number of MSS.,
the first in fact which evince distinct progress in calligraphy and
ornamentation. But the monks of St. Benedict did not remain
untouched by the moral degeneration of the i oth century. Like
other Italian monasteries, theirs also stood in need of the re-
form which came from Cluny ; and though Cassinese tradition
is silent on the subject there can be little doubt that at least
indirectly they were influenced by Odo's reforms, since we know
8 INTRODUCTION
from another source that the Cassinese abbots Balduin and
Aligern were pupils of Odo.
Owing to troubles which arose with the Capuan princes,
Aligern in 949 led the monks back to Monte Cassino. From
now on, the abbey was destined to enjoy almost two centuries
of ever-increasing prosperity. It was while Aligern was abbot
that St. Nilus visited Monte Cassino and established his monks
in the neighbouring monastery of Vallelucio. His sojourn
here as well as in Capua and Gaeta is of interest because it may
be supposed that the meeting of Greek and Latin monks was
mutually beneficial. We cannot say what specific gain the
Latins had therefrom, but we are certain that the Greeks learnt
from their Latin hosts that peculiar style of initial decoration
which we find in so many south Italian Greek MSS. and which
distinguishes them at qnce from Greek MSS. of the Levant.
When Aligern' s abbacy, which lasted twenty-seven years
(949-986), came to an end he was succeeded by Manso, a re-
lative of the Capuan princes, through whose influence alone he
gained his position. As he was not the choice of the monks,
his election bred dissension. Some of the bravest of them left
the abbey rather than submit, among these being John of
Benevento and Theobald, both destined later to become abbots
of Monte Cassino, and Liutius, the future provost of S. Maria
di Albaneta. These three made a journey to the Holy Land ;
the other seceding monks went to Lombardy and founded
monasteries there.
In the loth century, admittedly the darkest of the Middle
Ages, the flame of learning was still kept alive in southern
Italy. From extant MSS. we can discern the interest felt in
the classics, medicine, history, poetry, and canon law. The
number of interesting books read and copied is by no means
small. Among them I may mention Virgil, Livy, Josephus, the
fables of Hyginus, Solinus ; Dioscorides, Galen, and an extra-
ordinary compendium of the medical knowledge of the period ;
Paulus' commentary on St. Benedict's Rule, the works of St.
INTRODUCTION 9
Gregory, collections of canons, writings of the Fathers, &c. (see
the loth-century MSS. reproduced in Scriptura Beneventana,
plates 31-55).
The works of several writers of the period have come down
to us. At the beginning of the century we encounter two
curious authors, Auxilius, a Gaul by birth, and Eugenius
Vulgarius, probably an Italian grammarian. Their work
which throws lurid light upon a disgraceful episode in papal
history we have in a Beneventan MS. (Bamberg P III 20)
which I venture to regard as contemporaneous. John, deacon
of Naples, continues the Gesta Episcoporum of his city. From
him we have also a life of Bp. Athanasius I and an account of
the transfer of the relics of St. Severinus. In Naples too we
witness the interesting literary activity of Duke John and his
consort. At his request the Presbyter Leo collected and had
copied the works of numerous writers, among whom are men-
tioned Livy, Josephus, and Dionysius. To Leo we also owe a
translation of the Vita Alexandri magni, which he had brought
from Constantinople (see below, p. 82). In secular history the
work of Paulus Diaconus and Erchempert is continued, with
far less skill and acumen, by the anonymous monk of Salerno.
Another historical treatise, of no great significance in itself,
should be mentioned, the Historia miscella of Landolfus
Sagax, which continues the Historia Romana of Paulus
Diaconus to the year 813. The author lived and wrote about
the year 1000, probably in Naples. A contemporaneous MS.
of his work (Vatic. Pal.lat. 909) though not, as has been stated,
an autograph, is in existence.
The year 1000 came and went without bringing the dreaded
end of terrestrial things. On the contrary it ushered in an era
of extraordinary political and intellectual activity. Three
events stand out with especial prominence. The Normans,
that wonderful people from the north, arrive in southern Italy
and soon become its conquerors. The German emperors take
an unusually active part in Italian affairs. Lastly, the tern-
io INTRODUCTION
poral power of the popes sees a remarkable increase. The
Roman pontiff defies the German emperor and takes part in
the struggle for the possession of Italy. In the long contest
the powers are grouped now in this way, now in that; and
Monte Cassino, rich and strong, is an important factor through-
out. From the middle of the century she throws in her lot
with the papacy and becomes one of its main stays. It is not
mere accident that within a generation two Cassinese abbots
become popes, that several abbots and even monks receive
the cardinal's hat, and that the greatest pope of the century
is the close friend of the greatest abbot of Monte Cassino.
Nothing again, as has well been shown, is more indicative of
the relation between the abbey and the Roman See than the
fact that another pope, Nicholas II, made Abbot Desiderius his
apostolic vicar in the entire lower half of the peninsula. That
under these circumstances the monastery should grow in fame
as well as in fortune goes without saying. But it is not these
events alone that made the century memorable in the annals
of Monte Cassino. . Its destinies were guided by men of
remarkable ability and they had the secret of gathering about
them* the best talent of their age.
The century which was to witness the golden era in the
history of Monte Cassino was fittingly begun under the abbots
Atenolf (1011-22) and Theobald (1022-35). Leo Ostiensis
tells us that up to their time the abbey had been but poorly
supplied with books. From now on, the zeal with which
books were copied, the care expended upon the work, and
the imposing size and beauty of the MSS. give earnest of
the perfect products to follow in the Desiderian period.
Even as provost in S. Liberatore, a monastery at the foot
of Mt. Majella in the Abruzzi, Theobald had been instru-
mental in having over thirty books copied, as he tells us in
his will made in 1019 (see below, p. 79 sq.). As abbot of
Monte Cassino his interest did not abate. From a catalogue
entered in two MSS. of the time, probably at his command, we
learn what were the very books which he ordered to be written.
INTRODUCTION n
A number of them are also mentioned by the chronicler
Leo. Besides Augustine and Gregory, we note that history was
read, the Historia Romana, the Historia Langobardorum.
The list includes the encyclopaedia of Hrabanus Maurus, the
Leges Langobardorum, and others (see below, p. 80 sq.).
After the death of Theobald the monastery was once more
harassed by the Capuan princes. This time help came from
without, and the fact is important, for it marks the beginning
of German influence in the abbey. The Emperor Conrad
came to the rescue and brought with him a German abbot
to take charge of the monks. With Richerius (1038-55),
who came to Monte Cassino from the monastery of Leno
near Brescia, where he had been abbot, fresh zeal entered into
the life of Monte Cassino. Some two decades later another
German played a prominent part in the affairs of the monas-
tery Frederick of Lorraine. Having sought refuge there
from the wrath of the emperor he was elected abbot in 1056,
to become pope as Stephen IX two years later. The presence
of Germans in Monte Cassino and the fact that they held
positions of importance must have left its mark on the abbey. /
As a matter of fact, after Frederick's abbacy a style of initial
decoration comes into vogue which is manifestly of German
origin. And it seems a reasonable hypothesis which would
connect the famous MS. of the Annals and Histories of Tacitus
with the two German abbots of Monte Cassino. For Tacitus,
as, we know, was read in Germany during centuries when
apparently no trace of him existed in Italy. The nth-century
MS. of Widukind's Res gestae Saxonicae which we find in
Monte Cassino (MS. 298) may have a similar origin.
The next abbot is the great Desiderius (1058-87).
Dauferius such was his real name was born at Benevento
of noble stock. From his boyhood the religious life strongly
appealed to him. But owing to parental objections he had
to run away to become a monk. A quiet monastic life, how-
ever, was not to be his lot. His character and abilities
placed him in positions of eminence not of his seeking. Thus
12 INTRODUCTION
when Frederick of Lorraine was made pope, the abbacy fell
upon Desiderius. As friend of his predecessor, now become
Stephen IX, and of Hildebrand, later Gregory VII, he was
naturally a staunch supporter of papal policy. But he was
also the political friend of the Normans. Under his rule
Monte Cassino sees its era of true greatness. Gifts and
grants received from popes and emperors had in the past
greatly swelled the revenues of the abbey she had posses-
sions along the Adriatic, in Apulia, in the Abruzzi, even in
Lombardy. Under the leadership of Desiderius her fortunes
became still more imposing. This is not the place to describe
the part he played in the affairs of southern Italy. What
interests us here is the fact that under him learning andjthe
arts received a powerful impulse. Not only did he renew
and embellish the buildings of the abbey, but he erected
a magnificent new basilica, decorated with mosaics by work-
men brought over from Constantinople an event in the history
of Italian art. It is an old observation that the temper of an
age is reflected in its calligraphic products. The MSS. copied
under Desiderius many of which have come down to us
mark the highest achievement in Beneventan penmanship.
And the literary interest of the period may be judged to some
extent by the books then produced. The ancient Chronicle of
Monte Cassino gives a long and interesting list of the books
copied in the abbacy of Desiderius. It contains chiefly theo-
logical and liturgical works, but there are several histories :
Josephus, Gregory of Tours, Paulus Diaconus, Erchempert,
and others ; there are also several classics : De natura deorum
of Cicero, the Institutiones and Novellae of Justinian, the Fasti
of Ovid, Virgil's Eclogues, Terence, Horace, Seneca, the gram-
matical works of Theodorus and Donatus (see below, p. 8 1 sq.).
Himself a learned writer, Desiderius gathered about him
and encouraged literary ability of every sort. Alfanus, later
bishop of Salerno, noted as physician, poet, and theologian,
was an intimate friend of the abbot, and is supposed to have
had great influence with him. Besides Alfanus, Monte Cassino
INTRODUCTION 13
had at that time Pandolf of Capua, the mathematician and astro-
nomer, Guaiferius, the poet of the abbey, and Alberic, author
of a Liber de dictamine and a charming life of S. Scholastica.
Here should also be mentioned Johannes Caietanus (later
Pope Gelasius II) who, as secretary to Pope Urban II, is
known to have revived the cursus. But the three literary
men who have most interest for us are the monks Amatus and
Leo, and the physician Constantinus Africanus. To Amatus
we are indebted for the earliest account of the Normans. The
original of his work is lost ; we have it only in an early French
translation discovered during the last century by Champollion
Figeac. Constantinus Africanus came to Italy as a fugitive
from Carthage, where his enemies had accused him of being
a magician. Versed in the philosophies, sciences, and languages
of the east, Constantinus was a perfect store-house of learning.
He lived in Monte Cassino, where he translated many medical
works into Latin. He also visited Salerno. His sojourn in
southern Italy doubtless added much to the fame of the school
of medicine in Salerno.
Leo Ostiensis stands out as one of the most pleasing figures
of his time. He is known chiefly as the author at least in
large part of one of the best chronicles written during the
Middle Ages, that of Monte Cassino. He entered the abbey
as a boy and while still young had attracted the attention of
Abbot Desiderius. As keeper of the archives he was fully
equipped for the task imposed upon him by Oderisius, the
successor of Desiderius. Despite the fact that the chief aim
of the history was to make good the claims of the abbey to
the multifarious grants and privileges bestowed or presumably
bestowed upon it during its long career, Leo managed to endow
his performance with the dignity and seriousness of objective
history. He relates events simply, faithfully, and well; he
treats of men and affairs with tact and candour. He did not
finish his task, for he was made cardinal, and ecclesiastical affairs
preoccupied him. In the oldest MS. of the Chronicle, which
lies in Munich MS. 4623 the palaeographer may examine
i 4 INTRODUCTION
with delight the writing of Leo himself ; and the historian may
have the pleasure of seeing the work in the making, for the
MS. has in the margin and between the lines the very cor-
rections of the author.
The end .of the nth and the beginning of the I2th century
are times of strife and confusion. To the conflict over the
investitures was added the papal schism. Monte Cassino felt
the effects of these troubles. And there was something more :
its prominence and prosperity in worldly affairs reacted un-
( favourably upon its general tone. The times of Oderisius and
his successors during the early i2th century usher in a new
era, the beginning of the decline. With monastic discipline
relaxed, with abbots taking part in battles, with politics forming
the chief interest, nothing good 'could be expected. Monte
Cassino took the wrong side in the papal schism, and she had to
suffer when Innocent 1 1, by the aid of the emperor, became pope.
The figure which may be said to incorporate the virtues
and vices of this time is Petrus Diaconus. An indefatigable
worker, clever, versatile, and of easy address, his talents won
him position, and he was charged by Abbot Rainaldus to
continue the history of Monte Cassino which Leo had left at
the year 1075. Peter's work was as different from Leo's
as was his whole character. His one aim was to glorify
himself and his abbey ; and to attain this end he did not hesi-
tate to invent documents. His numerous forgeries some of
which had long been recognized as such have recently been
exposed with masterly skill, and Peter stands condemned as
a garbler of facts and inventor of falsehoods. As he is his
own biographer we cannot be altogether sure even of the
events of his life, but this much is quite indisputable : he was
a voluminous writer. Besides continuing the Chronicle of
Monte Cassino to the year 1138, he has left us a work on the
illustrious men of his monastery, one on its saints, and impor-
tant registers of Cassinese documents, not to mention numerous
hagiographic and theological works.
INTRODUCTION 15
With Petrus Diaconus and the monk Alberic, who wrote a
Vision of Heaven and Hell which is in some ways a forerunner
of Dante's, we take leave of the last striking figures in the
literary annals of Monte Cassino excepting perhaps that of
the French atibot Bernard Ayglerius (fi282) who wrote
a commentary of the Rule of St. Benedict, a contemporary
MS. of which has come down (Monte Cassino 440).
Outside of Monte Cassino evidence is not lacking of consider-
able culture. Aversa is praisett by Alfanus as another Athens ;
Benevento, St. Vincent on the Volturno, Cava, Naples, Salerno,
and Bari have their writers, chroniclers, and annalists. But if
we look for the great centre of literary activity in the 1 2th
century we must turn to Sicily. In Palermo, ^t the court of the
Normans, we witness a unique and fascinating spectacle. We
find there men from all parts of the world. The new rulers
were as wise and tolerant as they were brave. Wherever they
saw talent they sought to attract it. And this pblicy, which
served them well in the affairs of government, they carried
over into the domain of letters. Thus at the court Greek and
Arab, Lombard and Hebrew scholars worked in amity and gave
of their best. Under these circumstances Palermo naturally
became a great centre for the exchange of ideas, more es-
pecially for the spread of eastern ideas. The many Latin
translations of Greek and Oriental works that we owe to Sicily
bear witness to this intellectual activity. Even in previous
centuries, as we have seen, translations of hagiographic and
medical works were undertaken in southern Italy. What we
witness now in Palermo is a concentrated movement which
extended its interests into various branches. What King
Roger began Frederick II and his successors continued.
We have come to a new epoch in south Italian history.
A civic sense was gradually wakening in the different com-
munes. The Benedictine houses were plainly losing their
old supremacy as seats of learning. Inner and outer causes
contributed to the decline. They can boast of few writers and
thinkers of eminence. The rise of important lay schools, the
16 INTRODUCTION
new universities of Salerno and Naples, certainly contributed
to the diminution of Benedictine prestige. But this was not
the only cause. Even as a religious order the Benedictines no
longer answered to the needs of the time, as may be seen from
the vast extension of the mendicant orders. With the decline of
the Benedictine monasteries our script also declines. For the
Beneventan script is primarily a Benedictine script.
II
So much for the historical background of our script. We
have tried to touch upon the main events, and have made
brief mention of the chief literary figures and their works,
which constitute the first and most certain test of intellectual
life. We should now apply another measure we should ask
what writers were particularly read and copied, and how faith-
fully their texts were transmitted. It is by applying a test of
this sort upon the centres of southern Italy that we first
appreciate how much we owe to them for the preservation of
ancient and mediaeval writers. But such a task must be left to
a more competent hand. Here only a few of the outstanding
facts can be given.
More than one of our most cherished classics has been saved
from destruction by the hand of a Beneventan scribe. Varro's
De lingua latino, exists only in two Beneventan MSS.,
Flor. Laurent. 5 1 . 10 saec. xi ex. and Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex.,
both written in Monte Cassino. The Cassinese have always
cherished an affection for Varro as one of their own. Tacitus'
Historiae (i v) and Annales (xi xvi) depend upon the single
MS. Flor. Laurent. 68.2 saec.xi med., written in Monte Cassino.
The same MS. is our unique source for Apuleius ' Metamor-
phoses and Florida. The copy of the text which was made in
the 1 3th century (Flor. Laurent. 29. 2) is also in Beneventan
and comes most likely from Monte Cassino. To have handed
on to posterity the works of Varro, Tacitus, and Apuleius is
distinction enough for any centre. But we are indebted to
Beneventan transmission for some other works.
INTRODUCTION 17
The most important MS. for Seneca's Dialogues is Milan
Ambros. C 90 inf. saec. xi ex., from Monte Cassino. Hyginus'
Fabulae existed only in one Beneventan MS. of the early
loth century, a few fragments of which are still to be seen in
Munich (MS. 6437). Our knowledge of the Scholion of Varius'
Thyestes we owe to two Beneventan MSS., Paris lat. 7530 and
Rome Casanat. 1086 saec.ix, written in Benevento. Servius'
De metris Horatianis depends solely upon Paris lat. 7530. The
new thirty-four lines of Juvenal discovered by Winstedt are
found only in the Beneventan MS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class,
lat. 41 saec.xi/xii.
The value of Beneventan transmission is also seen in cases
where different families of a text exist. Vatic, lat. 3342 saec. x
has the best text of Solinus. For the text of Ovid two Bene-
ventan MSS. are of value: Vatic, lat. 3262 saec. xi ex., con-
taining the Fasti, and Eton Bl. 6. 5 saec. xi, the Heroides and
Remedia Amoris. As for Cicero, Vatic, lat. 3227 saec.xii in. has
the best text of the Somnium Scipionis and is the most familiar
representative of the Italian family for the Philippics. For
De legibus, Leyden 1 1 8 is important. The same MS. contains
the De natura deorum and De divinatione. It is doubtless the
very MS. which waj copied in Monte Cassino at the order of
Abbot Desiderius. The MS. Flor. Laurent. 5 1. 10 is, apart from
Poggio's Cluniacensis, our only source for Cicero, Pro Cluentio.
Although the Monte Cassino MS. of Frontinus is not in Bene-
ventan, the original probably was. At any rate it is Monte
Cassino that has saved this unique work.
Altogether the classics found in Beneventan writing are by
no means few. We have Apuleius (Flor. Laurent. 68. 2
saec. xi and 29. 2 saec. xiii), Auctor ad Herennium (Flor.
Laurent. 51.10 saec. xi ex., London Add. MS. 11916 saec. xi ex.),
Caesar (Flor. Laurent. 68. 6 saec. xii/xiii), Cicero (Flor. Lau-
rent. 51. 10, Leyden 1 18 saec. xi ex., Vatic, lat. 3227 saec. xiiin.,
Vatic. Ottob. lat. 1406 saec. xi ex.), Germanicus (Madrid 19
(A 1 6) saec. xi), Hyginus (Munich 6437 saec. x in.), Juvenal
(Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class, lat. 41 saec. xi/xii), Li vy (Prague
i8 INTRODUCTION
Univ. 1 224 fragm. saec. x), Macrobius (Vatic. Ottob. lat. 1939
saec. xi ex.), Ovid (Eton Bl. 6. 5 saec. xi, Vatic, lat. 3262 saec.
xiex., Naples IVF 3 saec. xii), Sallust (Vatic, lat. 3327 saec.
xii/xiii), Seneca (Milan Ambros. C 90 inf. saec. xi ex.), So-
linus (Vatic, lat. 3342 saec. x, Monte Cassino 391 saec. xi),
Statius (Eton Bl. 6. 5 saec. xi, Vatic. lat.328i saec. xii), Taci-
tus (Flor. Laurent. 68. 2 saec. xi med.), Pompeius Trogus,
Justin's Epitome, (Flor. Laurent. 66.21 saec. xiex.), Varro
(Flor. Laurent. 51.10 saec. xiex., Paris lat. 7530 saec. viiiex.), Ve-
getius(Vatic. Pal. lat. 909 saec.x/xi), Virgil (Vienna 5 8, Parislat.
10308, Vatic, lat. 1573 and 3253, Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class,
lat. 50, and Monte Cassino (sinenumero) debris of Aen. iii-xii),
besides the grammarians Servius (Paris lat. 7530, Vienna 27,
Vatic, lat. 33 1 7), Priscian (Vatic, lat. 3313, Rome Casanat. 1086,
both saec.ix), and anonymous treatises in Parislat. 7530.
It goes without saying that the region which contained the
famous school of Salerno did not lack medical MSS. In
Beneventan writing over a dozen have come to my notice, and
it is an interesting fact that some of these are older than the
date usually given to the beginning of the Salernitan school.
Healing the sick was an act of piety. Consequently both
St. Benedict's Rule and Cassiodorus' Institutiones encourage
the study of medicine. And we learn that the Cassinese
abbots Bertharius, Aligern, and Desiderius, and Archbishop
Alfanus of Salerno had each composed or compiled works
in medicine. In his monastery at Vivarium Cassiodorus had,
as he himself explicitly tells us (cap. 31), certain works of
Hippocrates, Galen, and Dioscorides, both in the original and
in Latin translation. It is an instructive fact that the Greek
works mentioned by Cassiodorus are the very ones of which
Latin versions were known in south Italy, as may be seen
from extant Beneventan MSS. These prove conclusively that
the Greek physicians were known in south Italy before
Constantinus Africanus came to live there. The Beneventan
medical MSS. known to me are: Flor. Laurent. 73.41 saec. ix in.
INTRODUCTION 19
pseudo-Apuleius, pseudo-Dioscorides, &c. ; Monte Cassino
69 saec. ix ex. Excerpta varia ; Monte Cassino 97 saec. x in.
ps.-Apuleius, ps.-Dioscorides, &c. ; Glasgow Univ. V 3. 2 saec.
xin. Galen, &c. ; Munich 337 saec.x Dioscorides ; Vienna 68
saec. x ex. Priscianus, Aurelianus, &c. ; Monte Cassino 225
saec. xi ex. Varia ; Monte Cassino 351 saec. xi ex. Paulus of
Aegina, De curatione totius corporis ; Turin K IV 3 saec. xi ex.
Miscellanea Herbaria (destroyed in fire of 1904) ; Rome
Angelican. 1496 ^3.3) saec. xi ex. palimpsest, primary script
Benev.; Paris Nouv.Acq. lat. 16286. 19-26 saec. xi ex.; Copen-
hagen Old Royal Collection 1653 saec. xi ex. Muscio (Soranus),
Oribasius; Vatic. Barb. lat. 1 60 (IX 29) saec xi Herbarium, Pri-
scianus, Galen, Oribasius ; Rome Basilicanus H 44 saee. xii/xiii
Liber de medicina. Of these the Munich and Copenhagen
MSS. are particularly interesting.
If we turn to mediaeval writings we find, as we should expect,
that as regards historical and liturgical works which had their
origin in south Italian soil, the Beneventan tradition is either
our only authority or a very important witness. I refer to
such local histories as the Gesta Episcoporiim Neapolitanorum
or the Chronicle of Monte Cassino, to such works as Paulus
Diaconus' Commentary on St. Benedict's Rule, or the bio-
graphies of local saints. Of works not obviously connected
with southern Italy, a few may be cited in the transmission of
which Beneventan MSS. are important.
One of our chief sources for early Christian liturgy is the
description of a journey to Jerusalem made about A.D. 540
the approximate date assigned to it by recent criticism by
a certain Aetheria of Aquitaine. The Itinerarium Aetheriae,
formerly known in literature as Peregrinatio Silviae, exists
only in a Monte Cassino MS. of the nth century, discovered
by Gamurrini and now preserved in Arezzo. The MS. also
contains another unique work, Hilary's Tractatus de mysteriis,
which is probably the very book ordered by Abbot Desiderius.
The A eta Archelai of Hegemonius, an anti-Manichaean
document of great interest both to the historian and the
c 2
20 INTRODUCTION
theologian, is known to us chiefly in a Latin translation.
The editio princeps (1698) of this work rested solely upon the
Beneventan MS. Monte Cassino 371 saec. xi/xii. For previous
to Traube's discovery, which made Beeson's excellent edition
possible, the Beneventan MS. was the only complete one
known.
A work of Gregory of Tours already mentioned, De cursu
stellarum^ which has become known in the last century in
its complete form, has come down only in a Beneventan MS.
of the 8th century, Bamberg HJIV 15. The same MS. is one
of our oldest witnesses to Cassiodorus' Institutions. The
defence of Pope Formosus, which we have in the curious
writings of Auxilius and Eugenius Vulgarius mentioned above,
has come down through the loth-century Beneventan MS.
Bamberg PHI 20. The oldest papal Register in existence,
that of John VIII, is a copy made by some monk of Monte
Cassino, whence the book came to the Vatican archives. The
Beneventan MS. of Cyprian (Monte Cassino 204 saec. xi) is
important for the text of the Epistles and Testimonia and is
indispensable for reconstructing the archetype. The oldest
MS. of Corippus' lohannis it has been lost since the i6th cen-
tury was one of the books written under Abbot Desiderius.
History was a favourite subject in our region. Besides local
historians like Paulus Diaconus and Erchempert we find
Sallust, Livy, Tacitus, Orosius, Justin's Epitome, Hegesippus,
Victor Vitensis, Bede, and Anastasius. To these must be
added Gregory of Tours' History of the Franks and Widukind's
Res gestae Saxonicae. For the last two the Beneventan texts
are of marked importance. South Italian MSS. are also
valuable for the transmission of Roman law (Epitome luliani),
of canon law (Vatic, lat. 5845 saec. x), of mediaeval glossaries r
of the mediaeval novel (Flor. Laurent. 66. 40 saec.ix ex.).
Of the numerous biblical MSS. in Beneventan writing none
holds a pre-eminent position. But it is interesting to note
that the text of the best Vulgate MSS., the Amiatinus and
Lindisfarnensis, is probably derived from MSS. brought to
INTRODUCTION 21
England from south Italy. The Fuldensis we know was
written in Capua.
This survey, brief and summary as it is, will, I hope, at least
have given some idea of the importance of the south Italian
centres in the transmission of ancient and mediaeval works.
The main works consulted for this chapter are first the sources: 'Leonis
Marsicani et Petri Diaconi chronica monasterii Casinensis ' (ed. Wattenbach in
Mon. Germ. Hist. SS. vii. 551 sqq.) and Petrus Diaconus, Liber illustrium
virorum archisterii Casinensis (edited and annotated by J.B. Marus,Rome 1655);
secondly the books on the history of Monte Cassino : Gattula, Historia abbatiae
Cassinensis (Venice 1733) and Accessiones ad historiam abbatiae Cassinensis
(Venice 1734); Tosti, Storia della badia di Monte Cassino (Naples 1842-3) ; and
Caravita, I codici e le arti a Monte Cassino (Monte Cassino 1869-70); thirdly
the following works of reference and publications treating different phases
of south Italian history and culture : Amari, Storia dei Musulmani di Sicilia
(Florence 1854-72); Balzani, Le Cronache italiane nel media evo, 2nd ed.
(Milan 1900) ; Batiffol, L'abbaye de Rossano (Paris 1891) ; Capasso, Monumenta
ad Neapolitani ducatus historiam pertinentia (Naples 1881-92); Caspar, Petrus
Diaconus und die Monte Cassineser Fdlschungen (Berlin 1909); Chapman,
' La restauration du Mont-Cassin par 1'abbe* Pe*tronax/ in Rev. Bfne'dictine, xxi
(1904) 74 sqq., and Notes on the Early History of the Vulgate Gospels (Oxford
1908); De Renzi, Storia documentata della scuola medica di Salerno, 2nd ed.
(Naples 1857); Franz, M. Aurelius Cassiodorius Senator (Breslau 1872);
Freeman, Historical Essays, 3rd series, 2nd ed. ; Gay, L' Italie me'ridionale et
t Empire fyzanfm(Pa,ns 1904); Giacosa.Jlfagistri Salernitani nondum editi (Turin
1901); Giesebrecht, De litter arum studiis apud Italos primis medii aevi saeculis
(Berlin 1845); Hartwig, 'Die Uebersetzungsliteratur Unteritaliens in der
normannisch-staufischen Epoche,' in Centralblf. Bibliothekswesen, iii (1886) 161
sqq.j 223 sqq. ; 505 sq. ; Haskins and Lockwood, 'The Sicilian Translators of
the 1 2th century/ &c., in Harvard Studies in Class. Philology, xxi (1910) 75 sqq.;
Hirsch, ' Desiderius von Monte Cassino als Papst Victor III,' in Forschungen zur
deutschen Geschichte, vii (1867) 3 sqq. ; Lake, ' The Greek Monasteries in South
Italy/ in Journal of Theol. Studies, iv (1903) nos. 15 and 16 ; Mabillon, Annales
ordinis Sancti Benedicli', Manitius, Geschichte der lat. Liter atur des Mittelalters
(Munich 1911); Montalembert (Count de), The Monks of the West, vol. i
(London 1896), with an introduction by F. A. Gasquet; Ozanam, Documents
intdits pour servir a Fhistoire litte'raire de I' Italie depuis le vi'i'i 6 siecle jusqu'au
xiii e (Paris 1850) ; Rose, 'Die Liicke im Diogenes Laertius und der alte Ueber-
setzer/ in Hermes, i (1866) 367 sqq.; Schipa, Alfano 1 arcivescovo di Salerno
(Salerno 1880); Tiraboschi, Storia della letteratura italiana, 2nd ed.
(Modena 1787-94); Traube, Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti, and ed.
(Munich 1911); Vorlesungen und Abtiandlungen, vol. ii (Munich 1911), and
his notes on Monte Cassino as a centre for the transmission of Roman authors ;
Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen, i (7th ed.), ii (6th ed.).
CHAPTER II
THE NAME
THE peculiar script which grew up and flourished within the
ancient duchy of Benevento, and remained in use for nearly
five centuries in the monasteries and schools throughout
Southern Italy, extending its domain even across the Adriatic
to Dalmatia, we shall consistently call by its most fitting
traditional name of Beneventan. Having in its favour
antiquity as well as precision at least relative precision
this name possesses better claims than any other which has
been applied to the South Italian minuscule.
Before giving data, however, in support of the name
Beneventan, it will be well to clear the field by pointing out
the unsuitability of rival names, and in especial of the name
Lombardic, 1 which has for centuries been used to designate
our script as well as many others, and has thus played an
important though unfortunate role in palaeography.
Though the name Lombardic, as is now generally known,
has no justification in historic fact, it does not lack antiquity.
Its use is attested as early as the nth century. In a docu-
ment of 1008 an official notary, or curialis, of Naples speaks
of a deed made out in Capua as char tula comparationis scripta
langobardisca? And in a Neapolitan document of 1072 we
read that the church of St. Severus, which belonged to the
monastery of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, possessed among other
books unum antiphonarium uonum de nocturne langobardiscum
notatum? This designation was manifestly used to describe
1 Scriptura langobardica, Venture lombardique, &c.
2 B. Capasso, Monumenta ad Neapolitani ducatus historiam pertinentia, ii. i
(1885) 204 = Regesta Neapolitana, no. 333.
3 Capasso, I.e., p. 306 = Reg. Neap. no. 511; also cited by P. Fedele in
Archivio storico per le provincie Napolitane, xxxii (1907) 128.
THE NAME 23
local writing, in contradistinction to the term francisca^ which
had reference to ordinary minuscule. The local hand is even
more precisely described in a document of 1020 in which we
find : uno antefanarium de nocte neapolitanisco. Another item
in the same document reads : liber comite plenarium fran-
ciscum scriptum^ Almost the same words occur in a document
of 985 : liuer commite plenarium unum franciscum scriptum?
In a document of Amalfi dated 1007, in which are enumerated
the books of John, Presbyter of Fontanella, we read : eptaticum
unum mamt, francesca . . . libri duo de regum manu francesca
. . . ysidorum unum manu francesca? It is interesting to note
that other books mentioned in this inventory have no descrip-
tion of the writing, from which fact it may be inferred that
they were in the local or South Italian hand. Again, in
a Neapolitan document of 1094 we reac ^ f a wdicatum lango-
bardiscum.^ In an inventory made in 1336 of the goods of
SS. Philip and James in Veroli, there is a catalogue of the
books belonging to St. Mary Magdalene, which I quote below. 5
In it two MSS. are described as written de liUera langobarda,
eight others, however, as de littera beneuentana, from which
juxtaposition of the two terms it is difficult to say which script
precisely was meant by Lombardic.
As might be expected, the Italian humanists were not slow
to adopt the name Lombardic to describe difficult and compli-
cated scripts. It was the sort of writing which they would
naturally connect with the barbarian conquerors of Italy.
Poggio was one of the first to use it. He thus describes the
1 Capasso, I.e., p. 242 = Reg. Neap. no. 387.
2 Capasso, I.e., p. 154= Reg. Neap. no. 245.
s See M. Camera, Memorie storico-diplomatiche dell'antica citta e ducato di
Amalfi (Salerno 1876) i. 221 ; N. Tamassia, 'Libri di monasteri e di chiese nel-
T Italia meridionale/ in Atti del 7?. Istituto Veneto di sa'enze, letter e ed arti, Ixiv. 2
(1904-5) p. 281 sq.; Fedele, 1. c., p. 129. For other examples see the lecture
by Capasso, Gliarchivi e gli studii paleografici e diplomatici (Naples 1885) p. 9,
n. 3. Another example occurs in Codex Diplomatics Cavensis, vi. 182.
4 Capasso, I.e., p. 345 = Reg. Neap. no. 567.
See p. 38.
24 THE NAME
script of the Laurentian Tacitus, of which he complains that
he can hardly find a scribe capable of copying such an illegible
hand. 1 Many of his enthusiastic contemporaries still show
no idea of script differences. 2 With them and in fact with
many later scholars nearly every MS. is a codex antiquissimus
or vetustus. But the name soon grows more common among
Italian philologists of the Renaissance. 3 Fulvio Orsini
entered in his own hand in the fly-leaves of many MSS. the
words in lettera longobarda. With him, however, the term
covered a variety of scripts beside the South Italian. 4
The MS. Vatic, lat. 5007, containing the Gesta Episcopomm
Neapolitanomm, is written partly in uncial and partly in
Beneventan. At the beginning of the Beneventan portion
a i^th-century hand entered the words scripta in lognobardo
(sic). 5 In the 1 5th-century catalogue of the books of a church of
St. Andrew in Rome, one item reads : Liber iob longobardus*
1 See Poggio's well-known letter to Niccolb Niccoli, dated Rome Oct. 21,
1427: 'Misisti mihi librum Senecae et Cornelium Taciturn, quod est mihi
gratum: at is est litteris longobardis, et majori ex parte caducis, quod si
scissem, liberassem te eo labore.' Epist. iii. 15, ed. Tonelli, i. 213 (Florence
1832). In another letter, dated Rome Sept. 3, 1430, and addressed to the same
Florentine friend Poggio writes : ' Audivi esse in Monasterio Cassinensi volumen
(Hieronymi) litteris longobardis, in quo sint epistolae ccxxv/ Epist. iv. n,
ed. Tonelli, i. 321. In another letter Poggio refers to 'decades Livii litteris
longobardis scriptas', ed. A. Mai, Spicilegium Romanum, x (1844) 316.
2 Through a kind communication from Prof. R. Sabbadini I learn that this
was invariably the case with the earlier humanists.
3 Politian used it often, and his friend Matteo Bosso asked him for a MS. of
Ausonius in Lombardic characters. See Maffei, Verona Illustrata (Verona
1732) i, col. 321.
4 P. de Nolhac, La bibliotheque de Fulvio Orsini (Paris 1887) pp. 2I 7> 2 4j
242, 274, and 275; on pp. 239 and 274 the MSS. Vatic, lat. 3252 and 3339
are wrongly described as Lombardic. The entries signed FuL Vrs. are regarded
as autograph by de Nolhac. See his facsimile specimen, no. 8 in the plate.
5 See facs. in Scrip fur a Beneventana, pi. 41.
6 The catalogue is entered on the fly-leaf of the Beneventan MS. Rome
Vallicell. A 1 5, and has been published by A. Goldmann in Centralblatt fur
Bibliothekswesen, iv (1887) 141. The MS. described as Lombardic must
have been unique in this large collection, since no mention is made of the script
of any other MS. in it. This of itself would suggest that the church of St.
THE NAME 25
And in the inventory of the treasures of Monte Cassino made
in the year 1497, books in the South Italian minuscule are
described : in litter a longobarda.^ One could without diffi-
culty cite other examples.
We see, then, that the name Lombardic had had a long life
before Mabillon used it in his De re diplomatic*. Yet Mabillon,
as he himself says, had little to guide him when he adopted
the name. Its use by a writer here and there, the opinion of
an Italian friend or two, constituted his authorities. 2 Under
such circumstances the term Lombardic formally entered into
palaeographic literature. That it has survived to our own
day is doubtless due to the weight of Mabillon's great name.
It was left to Ludwig Traube to point out, in his lucid and
masterly way, the series of misapprehensions, palaeographical
and historical, which gave rise to the misnomer. 3 Had not
Mabillon committed the error of putting together two distinct
kinds of writing, the early Corbie and the developed Bene-
ventan, under the one name of Scriptura Langobardica ; 4 had
Andrew was situated somewhere north of the Beneventan zone (see below,
p. 48). The mention of S. Maria Rotunda in the catalogue, which must refer
to the Pantheon, makes it quite certain that we are dealing with a church of
St. Andrew in Rome, see Gottlieb, Ueber mittelalterliche Bibliotheken, p. 237, n. 2.
1 Caravita, / codici e le arti a Monte Cassino (Monte Cassino 1869) i. 389,
399 sq. : Wattenbach, Anleitung zur lateinischen Palaeographie*, p. 20.
8 J. Mabillon, De re diplomatica (Paris 1681) p. 49 : ' Jam vero in distinguendis
Langobardicis elementis diu multumque me haesisse fateor, quoniam auctores,
qui de his certa tradiderint, non inveniebam/ Then he names a few writers,
philologists or historians, who had made use of the name : Salmasius, Scioppius,
Ughelli, Cardinal Casanate. From the last he got his facsimile of Vatic, lat.
4939, from the Florentine Magliabecchi the facsimile of the Laurentian Tacitus,
now MS. 68. 2 ; cf. op. cit., p. 353, pi. v, nos. 3 and 5.
8 L. Traube, 'Perrona Scottorum,' in Sitzungsb. d. K. layer. Akad, d. Wiss.
(Munich 1900) pp. 472 sqq. ; Neues Archiv d. Geselhchafi fur alter e deutsche
Geschichtskunde, xxvi (1900) 229 sq. ; Vorlesungen und Abhandlungen, i (1909)
25 sq. and ii (1911) 9 sq. Since Traube the question of the name has been
discussed by W.Weinberger in his 'Bericht iiber Palaographie und Handschriften-
kunde (1903-6)' published in Bursians Jahresbericht, cxxxv (1907) 24, and
by B. Bretholz, ' Lat. Palaeog.' in Meister's Grundriss d. Geschichtswissenschaft
(Leipsic 1906) i. 88 sq. and 2nd ed. (1912) p. 69 sq.
* Mabillon, 1. c., p. 353, pi. v.
26 THE NAME
he not furthermore lent the weight of his authority to the
current belief la vecchia volgar credenza^ as Maffei styled
it that the Lombards had brought a script of their own to
Italy, which supplanted the Roman, palaeography would have
been spared some fruitful sources of confusion. 2 By repeating
the historical misconception, Mabillon gave it a long lease of
life. For despite the vehement protests of Maffei, that all
the so-called national scripts were essentially one, with but
accidental modifications, scholars were slow to give up the
teaching of Mabillon. The doctrine appealed to the historic
sense ; it was so plausible that no proof was asked for.
Scripts which were difficult to decipher because they were full
of ligatures and cursive letters were, by contrast with the
legible, uncombined letters of ordinary minuscule, on the face
of it an un-Roman product, in other words the invention of
barbarians. And the name Lombardic, by which such scripts
were commonly known, constituted the historic sanction for
the theory.
Maffei saw plainly the underlying error of this view and com-
bated it vigorously. 3 But stimulating as his writings are, his
1 See below, n. 3.
2 Mabillon, 1. c., p. 45, thus begins his chapter on the various kinds of writing :
' Alius quippe scribendi modus obtinuit apud Romanes, alius apud alias nationes.
Pro hac nationum diversitate totidem fere scribendi modos enumerari licet, immo
uniuscuiusque nationis varies pro temporum varietate. Quatuor scripturarum
genera enumerari solent: Romana vetus, Gothica, Anglosaxonica, et Lango-
bardica.' On p. 46 he gives us his view of the origin of our script : ' Turn saeculo
VI Langobardis in Italiam effusis, successit Langobardica scriptura ad com-
munem usum.'
3 S. MafFei, Istoria Diplomatica (Mantua 1727) p. 113. Referring to
Mabillon's doctrine he says : * ma nell' aver confermata la vecchia volgar credenza,
anzi ampliatone Tinganno, col fissar cinque generi d' antichi caratteri Latini,
cioe Romano, Gotico, Longobardo, Sassonico, e Francogallico, io non posso
conformarmi alia sua dottrina, mentre son per dimostrar nel proseguimento, come
non ci fu carattere Gotico, non Longobardo, non Sassonico, non Francogallico,
e son per dimostrarlo si chiaramente, che i principi geometrici non saran piii
evident!/ The arguments are given in Verona Illnstrata (Verona 1732) i, cols.
321 sqq., but the use of the term Lombardic was older by several centuries than
THE NAME
27
arguments fell on deaf ears. They were too advanced for the
time. 1 The more passionately he denied the existence of
independent national scripts, the less likely were his contentions
to be understood. However, his ideas were bound to gain
ground sooner or later. All that was necessary was increased
familiarity with MSS. and documents.
The great Benedictines Tassin and Toustain, the authors of
the Nouveau traite 1 de diplomatique, which appeared soon after
Maffei's works, made in the course of their important publica-
tion more and more concessions to Maffei's point of view.
In the third volume of their work, published in 1757, they
rejected the historical fallacy in the clearest terms : Ltcriture
apelde lombarde nest done point de I invention de ces bar bares?
But this was only half the battle. Unfortunately the learned
Benedictines did not free themselves of Mabillon's other error.
They too put the Corbie and the Beneventan types together
in one group, and added thereto a great number of other
scripts, classified under unintelligible divisions and subdivisions,
which only added to the confusion. 3 Thus they encouraged
the loose application of the term Lombardic, and its indis-
criminate use has survived to our own day. How lamentable
this practice is, and what mischief follows in its wake may be
gathered from the fact which would seem incredible that
the name Lombardic has been used to describe MSS. written
Maffei thought. See also Traube, Vorles. und Abhand. i. 45. Maffei's views are
warmly championed by W. Y. Ottley, Archaeologia, xxvi (1836) 91 sqq.
1 This can be seen from the words of Besselius whose work appeared five
years after Maffei's Istoria Diplomatica. He says : ' Gothis Italiae regno exutis
successere Longobardi, qui pariter ad normam victorum praeter linguam et
mores, barbaram simul scripturam provinciis intulere/ Chronicon Gotlwicense
(Tegernsee 1732) i. 16,
2 Tassin and Toustain, Nouveau traite' de diplomatique, iii (1757) 272. ' De
tous les autres noms, celui de lombardique a &6 le plus souvent donne' aux
dentures minuscules et cursives, difficiles a lire, et crues barbares par la plupart
des litterateurs. Plusieurs d'entre eux dtant tombe's sur des caracteres obscurs
et complique's, leur donnerent le nom des Lombards,' &c. (p. 271). See also
iii. 13.
3 See op. cit., plates XLIX and L.
28 TXHE NAME
in hands as distinct as the Visigothic, Insular, Luxeuil type,
Corbie tct type, North Italian pre-Caroline, South Italian
minuscule, the Saint Gall-Reichenau type, the Chur type,
Gothic and even ordinary Caroline minuscule and this in
standard publications. 1 Were there no other reason, this
1 To cite but a few examples : (a) Visigothic. The Danila Bible of Cava is
described as Lombardic in Silvestre, Paleog. untv. iii, pi. 141, in Cod. Diplom.
Cavens. i, appendix, p. i ; in Wattenbach, Anleit. z. lat. Pal?, p. 15 (the error
is rectified in the 4th edition (1886) p. 23, after the appearance of C. Paoli's
article in Archiv. Stor. Ital, iii (1879) 256); in Fumagalli, Paleografia greca
e latina di E.M. Thompson (Milan 1899) p. 85. Here the error is a gratuitous
addition of the translator. The Visigothic MS. of Ausonius, Leyden Voss.
in (cxi), is called Lombardic by Schenkl, Mon. Germ. Hist. Aucit. Antiqq.,
vol. v, pars n, p. xxxii. (b} Insular. The Laurentian MSS. 45. 15 and 78. 19,
both in Insular writing, are called Lombardic in Bandini, Catal. codd.
lat. ii. 350 sq. and iii. 166. (c) Luxeuil type. Ivrea Capitol. I is called
Lombardic in Monum. Pal. Sacra (Turin 189.9) P 1 - Villa, p. 8. Of the
secondary script of St. Paul in Carinthia XXV ^ Chatelain says : ' appel^e quel-
quefois lombarde,' Paleog. des class, lat. ii. 13, pi. 136. The MS. Fulda
Bonifat. 2 went under the same name ; cf. Scherer, Die Codices Bonifatiani
d. Landesbibliothek zu Fulda (Fulda 1905) p. 22. (d) Corbie type. MSS. of the UJfeT
type have since Mabillon been almost universally classified as Lombardic. And the
name gave rise to the erroneous notion of their Italian origin. Cf. Nouv. Traite\
iii. 273 sq. and Delisle, Le cab. des manusc. ii. 122. The editors of the Monum.
Pal. Sacra evidently shared this view. < Longobardo settentrionale ' Lombardic
of the North is their description of Turin D v 3, which is in Corbie script, and
of Novara Capitol. 84 which is in North Italian script ; cf. plates VHIb and IX,
pp. 8 and 9. (e) For North and South Italian MSS. no examples are necessary.
But one instance may be cited in illustration of the hopeless confusion which
is brought about by an ambiguous term. The MS. Cava 5 is unmistakably
Beneventan. But the liturgy in the MS. shows relations with France, and
inasmuch as ' Lombardic ' was written in France as well as in Italy the MS.
must have originated in France. This is the argument in Silvestre, Paleog.
univ. iii, pi. 146. (f) Reichenau and Chur type. See G. Scherrer, Verzeichniss
d. Hss. d. Stiftsbibl. von S/. Gallen (Halle 1875) pp. 65, 240. The following
MSS. in St. Gall are catalogued by Scherrer as Lombardic (p. 639): nos.
108, 109, 125, 126, 185, 227, 235, 242, 348, 350, 567, 731, and 1398.1.
(g) Gothic. The oldest MS. of Erchempert, Vatic, lat. 5001, written in so-called
Gothic letters, is described as Lombardic in Mon. Germ. Hist. SS. iii. 241,
which fact may explain why it is later erroneously called Beneventan in M. G.
H. SS. Rer. Lang, et ItaL, p. 232. (fi) Caroline minuscule. Till Vollmer pointed
out the error (Sitzungsb. d. K. bayer. Akad. d. Wt'ss., Abh. 1 1 (1908) p. 9) the MS.
Vatic, lat. 3252 of the Appendix Vergiliana was commonly considered Lorn-
THE NAME 29
would suffice to condemn the use of the term Lombardic.
When we further remember that it was an historical miscon-
ception which gave rise to the name, its rejection is no less
than imperative.
In the middle of the i8th century we hear the South Italian
script called Gotico cordellato}- Trombelli's term had, how-
ever, as it merited, a short life ; it plainly arose from the
mistaken idea which he got from Bianchini, that the Bene-
ventan MSS. were of Spanish origin 2 a view which only a few
years later was brushed aside as nonsense by the South Italian
scholar De Vita. 3 But a generation later Bianchini's error was
revived. Arevalo, the learned Spanish editor of Isidore, was
deceived into following Trombelli in this as in some other
fundamentally false notions regarding our script. 4 Elsewhere
bardic, cf. Bahrens, Poet. Lat. Mm. ii. 1 1 ; P. de Nolhac, La bibl. de Fulvio
Orsinz, p. 239; a similar error on p. 274 with reference to Vatic, lat. 3339,
a MS. of Orosius. The MS. Vienna 580 in ordinary minuscule is styled
Lombardic, 'calamo langobardico/ in M. G. H. SS. iii. 197. See also Delisle,
BiUiotheque de TEcole des chartes, LXXI (1910) 293.
1 Trombelli, L'arte di conoscere teta de' codici (Bologna 17 56) p. 87, describes
our script thus : ' carattere cordellato, o piu espressamente gotico cordellato.'
2 Trombelli, 1. c., p. 86, referring to the Beneventan MSS. which are now in
the Vallicelliana, says: 'i quali codici (per quanto mi attesto il chiarissimo
P. Bianchini) furono anticamente trasportati dalla Spagna, e donati a que' padri
dauninsigne loro benefattore : dalcheconghietturavaesso P. Bianchini, chefossero
scritti in quell' antico carattere, ch' usarono i Goti, allorche cola dimoravano
Ne' nostri paesi son rarissimi tali scritti.' How little our script was known may
be seen from the following : ' Vi si incontrano delle lettere, che se o dal paragone
con altre scritture di simil genere, o dal contesto non si diano a conoscere,
sono a dl nostri affatto inintelligibili : e tali sono a, e y ri, t ' (here Trombelli
reproduces the Beneventan forms, badly enough, and mistakes the ligature ri
for r). The last citation shows that he utterly lacked the proper sense of the
development of writing, though he lived after Maffei.
3 De Vita, Antiquitates Beneventanae (Rome 1764) ii. 446: 'nam de codici-
bus Hispanicis veteri Gothorum cura, ac charactere exaratis, nugari certe voluit
Blanchinius, qui, si ex nostris regionibus, ac charactere Longobardico conscriptos
dixisset, neque a vera aberasset, neque pretii minus illis fuisset.'
4 Arevalo, Isidoriana, pars iv, cap. xcvi=Migne, Pair. Lat. 81, col. 798:
'charactere Gothico quern cordellato dicunt* this of the Beneventan MS.
Vatic, lat. 3320; op. cit., pars iv, cap. ci=Migne 81, cols. 849-50: 'chara-
30 THE NAME
Arevalo speaks of the script simply as Gothic. 1 It is like-
wise so called by Janelli in his Naples catalogue, though he adds
that experts use the term Lombardic. 2 To him, as to many
others, Gothic merely meant strange, abnormal. To Arevalo,
Trombelli, and Bianchini it meant Spanish.
The revival of the forgotten name of littera Beneventana
seems to have been due to a mere coincidence. In discussing
the script of the little volume of verse on the martyrdom of the
apostles Peter and Paul, composed by the Monte Cassino monk
Amatus a MS. copied in 1070 in the best Beneventan style 3
Cardinal Garampi, 4 then keeper of the Vatican archives,
was struck with the similarity between the writing of the MS.
and that of a no less celebrated Beneventan MS., the Register
of John VIII, preserved in the Vatican archives. 5 As both
MSS. were written by Cassinese monks, at about the same
time, the resemblance is natural. But the Amatus MS., as
Garampi knew, went by the name of Lombardic he calls
it so himself while the Register is described in the inventory
ctere Gothico Hispano quern cordellatum dicunt' said of the Beneventan MS.
Vatic. Regin.lat. 1823. Arevalo repeats the entire myth of the Spanish origin
of the Beneventan MSS. He apparently finds support for Bianchini's view in
the similarity he notes between the writing of the MS. Vatic. Regin.lat. 1267
(which is Beneventan) and Visigothic MSS. in Toledo. See his Prolegomena
in carmina Dracontn='M.igne ) Pair. Lat. 66, col. 640. Here again he refers to
the name ' Gothico cordellato '.
1 Arevalo, op. cit, pars ii, cap. Lxiv=Migne, Pair. Lat. 81, col. 413.
2 Janelli, Catal. bibl. lat. vet. et class, manuscr. quae in regno Neapol. Museo
Borbonico adservatur (Naples 1827) p. 175. Of the Beneventan MS. of Ovid,
Naples iv F 3, he says : ' scripti sunt charactere, quern peritiores Lango-
bardicum, ceteri Gothicum nuncupant, eo nempe, qui inter plures Romanas
literas aliquot habet abnormes et diversas.' To this use of the term ' Gothic '
Maffei calls attention in Verona Illustrata, i, cols. 321-2. See also Lehmann's
note in Traube's Varies, und Abhand. i. 25.
s Now in Bologna, Biblioteca Univ. MS. 2843 (S. Salvatore 486). See
below, p. 70.
4 Garampi, Illustrazione (fun antico sigillo della Garfagnana (Rome 1759)
p. 46, n. 3.
6 See below, p. 73. Facs. in Script. Benev., pi. 69.
THE NAME 31
of 1295, made by order of Pope Boniface VIII, as : * quidam
liber antiquus de lictera Beneuentana.' * It was evident to
Garampi that the two names had reference to the same kind
of writing. 2 This discovery was welcomed and cited by
Borgia 3 and De Vita, 4 more, it would seem, from local pride
than from a real appreciation of the facts involved. It was an
honour to their part of the country to have a script named
after it. But neither Borgia nor De Vita nor even Garampi
himself realized the true significance of the discovery. They
were all still labouring under the_false_ ^npression that the
Lombards had brought a script with them to Italy which the
Beneventans took over and continued to use after the political
extinction of the Lombards. Mabillon's doctrine was still
leading them astray. The lesson to be learned from the
Nouveau Traite, made public about that time, had evidently
not yet reached that part of Italy. Towards the end of the
1 8th century reference is again made to Garampi's conjecture.
In describing a Beneventan MS. Federici calls it Lombardic,
1 See Marini, Ipapiri diplomatic! (Rome 1805) p. 226, col. 2 ; Fr. Ehrle, ' Zur
Gesch. d. Schatzes d. Bibl. und d. Archivs d. Papste im XIV. Jahrhundert/ in
Archivfiir Litter aiur u. Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters, 1(1885)38; De Rossi,
Codici Palatini Latini, p. civ sq.; Fr. Ehrle, Historia Bibliothecae Romanorum
Poniificum (Rome 1890) i. 122.
2 Garampi, 1. c., p. 46, n. 3 : ' e quindi mi sono fatto sospettare che un con-
simile carattere avesse anche anticamente il nome di Beneventano o sia Lango-
bardico; essendo che nell' Inventario de' libri di Bonifazio VIII, compilato
nell' anno 1295, notasi fra gli altri: "quidam liber antiquus de lictera Bene-
ventana."'
3 Borgia, Memorie Istoriche di Benevento (Rome 1763-4) ii. 280, note:
' Seguendo la congettura messa fuori dal Canonico Garampi . . . chiamiamo
lettera beneventana il carattere che vulgarmente si dice Longobardico, con-
ciosiache anche dopo cessato il dominio de' Longobardi in queste parti per lungo
tempo si continue a scrivere in quella forma, la quale percio non si disse piu
Longobardica ma Beneventana/ &c.; cf. also i (1763) p. xxiii, n. i.
4 De Vita, op. cit. ii. 445 sq. : ' Viri eiusdem doctissimi coniectura est,
Licteram Beneventanam earn fuisse, quae vulgo character Longobardicus ap-
pellatur, ideo dictam, quod, Longobardis extinctis, adhuc in Beneventanorum usu
esset/ De Vita here takes the opportunity to attack Maffei's doctrine which does
not recognize distinct national scripts.
32 THE NAME
but mentions the fact that, according to Garampi, Beneventan
may be another name for it. 1
It is to Gaetano Marini, the celebrated author of / Papiri
Diplomatici, that the credit belongs of having been the first
to realize that the name littera Beneventana, was not only
ancient, but had its full justification in the fact that it referred
to the characteristic script used in the entire duchy of Bene-
vento during a number of centuries. 2
After Marini, Dudik refers to the question of the name. 3
He prefers to call the script Cassinese, for the reason that
most MSS. in it known to him came from Monte Cassino
a point of view which naturally found favour in the abbey
and has had its advocate there. 4 The name has grave
defects. To apply the term Cassinese to the South Italian
minuscule would be to encourage the tendency to regard
every MS. in that type of writing as originating in the abbey
itself an impression already current among a number of
scholars, if we may judge from the way in which they deduce
Cassinese origin on no other ground than the writing itself. 5
1 Federici, Degli antichi duchi e consoli e ipati della ciita di Gaeta (Naples
1791) p. 81.
2 Marini, op. cit., p. 226, col. 2 ; also pp. 50 and 255 : cf. Lupi, Manuale di
paleografia delle carte (Florence 1875) p. 90.
8 Dudfk, Iter Romanum (Vienna 1855) i. 61 sq. It is a curious fact that
Dudik described as Cassinese the Lateran MSS. 78, 79, and 80. They are in
reality products of Rome or vicinity and have no resemblance whatever to the
South Italian hand.
4 Caravita, / codici e le arti a Monte Cassino, i. 94. The name is used by
Hartel-Loewe, Bibl. patr. lat. Hispaniensis, pp. 93, 192 ; by Ewald in Neues
Archiv, vi (1881) 283, 288, 289. Also in Arndt-Tangl, Schrifttafeln*, Heft i,
pi. 7, Heft ii, pi. 38, with the word Beneventan in parenthesis.
5 Speaking of the MS. Vatic, lat. 1197, written in Sulmona (see below,
p. 76), Knoll says: 'Casini xi vel xn saeculo litteris langobardicis scriptus.' Cf.
Corp. Scr. Eccl Lat. ix, pars 2 (1886) p. vii; Hartel-Loewe, Biblpatr. lat. Hisp.,
p. 93. According to Caspar (Petrus Diaconus u. die Monte Cassineser Fdlschungen
(Berlin 1909) pp. 87, 133 n. 4) the script of Rome Vallicell. T. XXII and T. VIII
shows that the MSS. came from Monte Cassino. As far as my experience
goes, they could very well have been written in Capua, Benevento, or some other
South Italian school.
THE NAME 33
Though it is true that Monte Cassino was by far the most
important centre of Southern Italy, to call the script Cassinese
would, by suggesting a local limitation, narrow the range too
much ; x it would, moreover, disregard the existence of a type
as distinct from the Cassinese as that employed in the districts
of Bari, Trani, and Dalmatia. Primarily the objection is one
of geographical connotation. Beneventan is the wider term of
the two. 2
Knowledge of the name Beneventan evidently spread after
Marini's work. Early in the iQth century the name is used in
the monumental work of Seroux d'Agincourt. 3 Nearer our
own time it has been employed by some of the collabora-
tors in the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, among whom
may be mentioned Bethmann, Boretius, Waitz, and Arndt. 4
1 Even the term Beneventan has been too narrowly interpreted to refer to
products of that city. Cf. Sabbadini, Le scoperte dei codici latini e greet, &c.,
p. 123, n. 34.
2 The wider connotation of the name Beneventan is seen from mediaeval
martyrologtes and calendars, in which Monte Cassino is sometimes described as
lying in Benevento. In the i ith-cent. Beneventan MS. from Veroli (Vallicell. 632)
I find on fol. 3 V : ' beneuento casino castro dep. sci benedicti abbtis.' For other
examples see Revue Be'ne'dictine, xx (1903) 309 : ' in Benevento Monte Cassino
depositio sancti Benedicti abbatis ' (c. 830) ; ' apud castrum Cassinum Beneven-
tanae civitatis sancti Benedicti abbatis' (Notker, c. 870). Elsewhere we find:
'Capua Castro Casino transitus sancti Benedicti abb.' ibid., p. 367. The fame
of the Beneventan region may be seen from a passage in a grammatical com-
pilation made in France (it is found in the MS. Berne 83 saec. x, fol. 5) which
runs as follows : ' quia nos adverbio huiuscemodi non solemus uti, cum tamen et
Afri et Romani et omnes Itali atque Beneventani tritum id habeant.' Cf. Hagen,
Anecdota Helvetica, p. 176, 1. 30.
3 Seroux d'Agincourt, Histoire de fart par les monuments (Paris 1823) iii. 76,
79, no. 9. Speaking of the Beneventan MS. Vatic, lat. 5949 he says ' on y
remarque les cinq lettres a, c, e, r> /, connues des pateographes sous le nom de
lettres Be'ne'ventines.' On the spelling Beneventine see below, p. 36, n. 4.
4 Cf. Bethmann in Pertz' Archiv, xii (1874) 224, 235, 379, 380, 394, &c.
But he is inconsistent in his usage cf. pp. 223, 245, 247, 259, 264, 345, 357,
379> 518, &c. ; Boretius in M. G. H. Legg. iv, p. Ixi, 19 ; Waitz in M. G. H.
SS. iii. 41 3 and SS. Rer. Lang, et Ital., pp. 398, 555; Arndt in M. G. H. SS. Rer.
Merov. i. 33.
1443 D
34 THE NAME
The great G. B. de Rossi also favoured the name Bene-
ventan. 1
But the best-known text-books on Latin palaeography of
the end of the last century, viz. those of Wattenbach, Paoli,
Thompson, Prou,and Reusens adhered to the name Lombardic. 2
It is surprising, however, and much to be regretted that the
name Beneventan has not been adopted in the latest editions
of Prou and Thompson, considering that Traube has given his
full support to it in a number of his last publications. 3
But the inadequacy of the term Lombardic and the grow-
ing dissatisfaction with it are manifested by the appearance
of such combinations as Langobardo-Cassinese, probably
an invention of the monks of Monte Cassino, 4 Lombardic-
Beneventan, 5 a sort of compromise intended to satisfy both
parties, and worst of all the three-membered name Langobardo-
Cassinese-Beneventan, the clumsiness of which condemns it.
There is little use in multiplying names. 7 The confusing and
1 See description of Vatic, lat. 7606 in vol. x of the written Vatican Inven-
tory (1876-8).
2 Anleitung z. lat. Pal*, p. 18; Programma scolastico di pal. (Florence 1888)
i. 14 sqq. ; An Introduction to Gr. and Lat. Pal. (Oxford 1912) p. 348; Manuel
depal* (Paris 1910) p. 85 ; Elements de paUog. (Louvain 1899) p. 60.
8 See below, p. 35, note 2.
4 Piscicelli Taeggi, Paleografia artistica di Montecassino (Monte Cassino
1877). The nomenclature is defended by I. Carini, Sommario di paleografia e
diplomatica (Rome 1888) p. 56 sq. Carini evidently feels the need of retaining
the first part of the name, since he regards the script as a fusion of Roman and
Germanic elements. The same name is used by N. Rodolico in his article
entitled : ' Genesi e svolgimento della scrittura Longobardo-Cassinese ' published
in the Archiv. Stor. Ital. xxvii (1901) 315-33. Curiously enough Capasso
believed that Langobardo-Cassinese represented a script which differed from
the one called Beneventan. See his lecture, Gli archivi e gli studii paleografici
e diplomatic!, &c., p. 9.
B Steffens, Lateinische Palaeographie^, p. x and plates 68 and 75.
6 M. Ihm, Palaeographia Latina (Leipsic 1910) pi. ix, p. ix.
7 Another name is Cassinese-Beneventan, used by Cipolla in Codici Bobbiesi,
p. 176; by Bretholz, Lat. Palaeog., p. 89 (2nd ed., p. 70.), and others. * Broken
Lombard ' is another name which is often used, but it is manifestly inadequate
since it is applicable only to products of the developed script and even then
not to all its types, for it disregards the Bari type (see below, p. 150),
THE NAME 35
misleading term Lombardic must be given up once for all
and carefully avoided. As the script is distinct, the name
which is to identify it should be sharply distinguished from
others. If no suitable ancient name had come down to us,
that of * South Italian ' would be the most reasonable. 1 But
this is not the case. It is gratifying, therefore, to observe
that the practice of calling the script Beneventan has been
steadily gaining ground. In his later works Traube con-
sistently employed the term Beneventan. 2 In his splendid
publication of facsimiles Anton Chroust employs this nomen-
clature. 3 Fr. Ehrle and Liebaert use it in their Vatican collec-
tion designed for schools. 4 So does the Bollandist Albert
Poncelet in his catalogues of hagiographic MSS. ; 5 so do well-
known liturgiologists like Bannister, Ebner, Ehrensberger,
Morin, Quentin, and Wilmart ; 6 historians like Fedele,
1 The name is urged by H. Bresslau, cf. Schumm-Bresslau, ' Die schriftlichen
Quellen d. roman. Philologie/ p. 215 in Grober's Grundriss d. roman. Philologie,
2nd ed. (Strassburg 1904). In his Handbuch d. Urkundenlehre , i. 908, ist ed.,
Bresslau speaks of the ' South-Italian-Beneventan ' writing.
a Traube, Perrona Scottorum, p. 485 ; Palaeographische Forschungen (Munich
1904) iv. 8 sqq. ; Nomina Sacra, pp. 172, 216, 228, 259 et passim ; Varies, u.
Abhand. i. 25, ii. 24, 28, n. i. In his earlier works Traube used the name
Lombardic ; cf. ' O Roma nobilis' in Abh. d. K. bayer. Akad. d. Wzss. xix (1891)
309 and M. G. H: Poetae Lat* Aevi Carolini, iii. 393.
3 A. Chroust, Monumenta Palaeographica, Denkmaler der Schreibkunst des
Mittelalters, Ser. i, Lief, x, pi. 2, Lief, xxiii, plates ib, 2b, 3.
4 Ehrle-Liebaert, Specimina codicum latinorum Vaticanorum (Bonn 1912) plates
11-17.
5 A. Poncelet, Analeda Bollandiana, Appendices to vol. xxv (1906) 105,
106, no, in; to vol. xxvi (1907) 227, 251, 255, 278, 300, 305, to mention
only a few cases from his earlier catalogues.
6 H. M. Bannister, Miscellanea Ceriani (Milan 1910) p. 130, and in his
just published Paleografia Musicale Vaticana, passim; A. Ebner, Quellen u.
Forschungen zur Gesch. u. Kunstgesch. des Missale Romanum im Miltelalter
(Freiburg 1896) pp. 6, 98, 100, 101, 104, 149, 152, 202, 228, 236, &c. ;
H. Ehrensberger, Libri lilurgici bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae (Freiburg
1897) pp. 96, no, 165, 172, 206, 310, 420, 424, 430, 432, 447, 448, 450;
G. Morin in Rev. Blne'd. xxviii (1911) 237 on the spelling ' Beneventine ' see
p. 36, n. 4) ; H. Quentin, Les martyrologes historiques du moyen dge (Paris 1908)
D 2
36 THE NAME
Poupardin, Raclci, and Schiaparelli, 1 and Latinists like Clark,
Lindsay, and Vollmer. 2 And in one of his last public utterances
Leopold Delisle showed his approval of this denomination. 3
The first English work known to me in which the name
occurs is a British Museum catalogue of the year i882. 4
Reasons which condemn the use of the term Lombardic and
the other names cited are at the same time arguments in
favour of the title Beneventan. It remains to give positive
evidence in proof of the statement that Beneventan is itself
an ancient and traditional name for the script. Accordingly
I cite below a list of seven attestations of its ancient use, taken
from descriptive entries in books and documents.
The two oldest instances occur, oddly enough, not in
products of South Italian centres, but in documents from the
papal chancery. The fact has a double significance. For,
in the first place, it reveals the existence of a current belief
among Roman notaries that the peculiar script of the Curia
Romana was of Beneventan origin a belief which doubtless
arose from the similarity of certain letters and the common
p. 691 ; A. Wilmart in Rev. Be'ne'd. xxv (1908) 465, xxvi (1909) 282; and
Bulletin d'ancienne literature et tf archeologie chretiennes, i (1911) 250.
1 P. Fedele in Melanges tfarcMol. et dhist. xxx (1910) 319 ; Racki in Rad
Jugoslavenske Akademije, cxv (1893) 49; L. Schiaparelli in Archiv. Stor. Ital.
ser. v, vol. xlv (1910) 475; R. Poupardin in Le mqyen dge, ser. ii, vol. xiv
(1910) 21. B. Capasso uses the name Lombardic, but he knows that it used to
be called ' littera Beneventana ', Mon. ad Neap. due. hist. pert. i. 148.
2 A. C. Clark, The Year's Work in Classical Studies (1911) p. 135 sq.;
W. M. Lindsay in Class. Rev. xxv. 59, Class. Quarterly, iii. 136, Zentralbl.
f. Bibliothekswesen, xxvii. 549 ; F. Vollmer in M. G. H. Auctt. Antiq., vol. xiv,
p. xxviii.
3 L. Delisle, Comptes rendus de FAcade'mie des Inscriptions, 1909, pp.
775-8.
4 Cf. A Catalogue of the Additions to the MSS. in the British Museum,
1882-87, P- 70. Here the name is spelled Beneventine, but the adjective
Beneventinus properly refers to Beneventum in Africa, and Beneventanus to the
city in South Italy. See Forcellini-De-Vit, Totius Latinitatis Onomasticon and
the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae.
THE NAME 37
observance of certain script rules ; l as well as from the circum-
stance that the book-hand of Rome and the province did not at
all resemble the script of the Curia, whereas the book-hand of
the Beneventan region did as in fact it could not help doing,
since both sprang from the same soil, the traditional Italian
cursive. In the second place, the mere fact that litter a
Beneventana is employed as a palaeographical term in an early
nth-century document shows that the name is at least as
old as the nth century and probably older. This view is
further confirmed by the usage of the third instance which I cite.
I give the examples in chronological order.
(1) A.D. 1038 . . . exemplaui ... ex ipso exemplo quod apparet
in lictera (ben}euentana.
These words are used by a Roman notary copying in 1038
a papal bull of the year 962, which he describes as written in
Beneventan letters. 2
(2) A.D. 1046 . . . hoc est exemplum exemplatum per me
infrascriptum notarium ex quodam instrument scripto ex littera
ueneuientana (i. e. Beneventana).
This description is made by a Roman notary. The docu-
ment in which the name occurs is dated IO46. 3
(3) ante A.D. 1280 . . . codicillus . . . antiquissimis seu
uetustissimis licteris et quasi beneuentanis descriptus. 4
This description was made by the English scholar Gilbert
(died A.D. 1280) of a MS. of St. Cyril entitled De Oraculo
Angelica, which he chanced to find in a monastery of Colmar.
Here again littera Beneventana stands for a definite type of
1 The resemblance between Beneventan and the curial hand was noted by
Mabillon (De re diplomatica, p. 52). Arevalo apparently saw no difference
between them (Proleg. in carmina Dracontii Migne, P. L. 60, col. 640).
Wattenbach, in his Anlei/ung*, p. 20, suggests that the papal cursive went
by the name of Beneventan, but our authorities in diplomatic do not seem to
share his opinion. The correct view is that given in Thompson's Handbook
of Greek and Latin Palaeography, p. 294, and in his In/rod, to Gr. and Lai. Pal.,
p. 497.
2 Cf. Marini, 1 papiri diplomatici, p. 50. 3 ibid., p. 255.
4 ibid., p. 226, col. 2.
38 THE NAME
writing. The word quasi suggests that the expression had
already considerable age and currency in the 1 3th century.
From the cases thus far cited we can only conclude that the
name Beneventan in a palaeographical sense was ancient.
Of the following examples three have reference to MSS. still
extant.
(4) A.D. 1295 . . . quidam liber antiquus de lictera Beneuentana.
The book referred to is the oldest papal Register in existence,
that of John VIII, written in Beneventan characters of the
nth century, mention of which has been made above. The
volume is still preserved in the Vatican archives. The above
item occurs in the inventory of the papal treasury and archives
made in the year I2Q5. 1
(5) A.D. 1336 . . . Isti sunt libri dicte ecclesie siue hospitalis
sancte marie magdalene. Inprimis, unum missale de littera bene-
uentana. Item una omelia de simili littera. Item una alia
omelia de simili littera. Item unus liber dictus legendarium de
simili littera. Item alius liber uocatus legendarium. Item duo
antiphonaria nocturna de simili littera. Item unum antiphonarium
diurnum. Item unum psalterium de littera beneuentana. Item
quoddam breuiarium sine principio et fine de littera langobarda.
Item una matricula notata de littera gallica. Item alia matricula
cum tabulis et corio rubeo desuper. Item aliud missale antiquum
notatum et sine fine. Item alia matricula de littera beneuentana.
Item aliud missale de littera langobarda cum tabulis et sine
fine. Item unus liber cum lamentationibus ieremie prophete.
Item unus liber dictus orationale cum tabulis de littera beneuentana.
This catalogue is taken from a Veroli document, still un-
published, of November 3, I336. 2 As our script was used in
Veroli there can be little doubt what is meant by littera bene-
uentana. Further interest attaches to the catalogue from the
fact that two books are styled Lombardic de littera lango-
barda. Exactly what script is meant by this it is impossible to
tell. In all probability the Beneventan, since we have seen
1 See above, p. 31, n. i.
2 It was called to my attention through the kindness of Signer Bucci, who
was working upon the documents of Veroli.
THE NAME 39
that it was also called Lombardic. The two MSS. thus
designated may have passed through the hands of some person
who was familiar with the name, and had written it, as was
the custom, at the opening of the MS. It is not impossible,
however, that Lombardic here refers to a more cursive hand,
or even to an entirely foreign script, like the Insular or Visi-
gothic. Littera Gallica can in this connexion be no other
than the ordinary type of minuscule, which by contrast with
the local or Beneventan hand was sometimes called francisca
or gallic a. I do not believe it is necessary to take the words
more literally and explain the books as a Norman importation. 1
(6) saec. xiv ex. . . . liber lictere ben(e)ue(n)tane.
This palaeographical entry, by a hand of the I4th century,
stands in a vacant space of the second column on fol. 2 V of the
i ith-century Beneventan MS. Vatic, lat. 1349, containing a col-
lection of canons.
(7) saec. xv ... Liber de litter a Veneuentana.
This entry is found in the upper margin of the first leaf of
the nth-century MS. Vatic. Barb. lat. 421 (XI 64), containing
a martyrology, the Rule of St. Benedict, &c. The entry is
by a hand of the i5th century, possibly earlier. 2
The name Beneventan, then, rests upon ancient tradition.
Unlike the term Lombardic, it has stood for one distinct type
of writing, namely, that employed in the ancient duchy of
Benevento, once coextensive with almost all of South Italy.
This local designation could only have arisen considerably
after the 9th century, since a period of time had to elapse
before a difference could be felt between the practice which
obtained in the Beneventan zone and that which had come to
prevail north of it. 3 Had the northern scriptoria retained their
1 For a parallel case see Fedele in Archtv. stor. per le prov. NapoL xxxii
(1907) 129, n. 6.
2 Cf. Wilmart in Rev. Be'ne'd. xxvii (1910) 227.
3 See below, p. 95. That this difference was already felt in the loth century
appears from the use of the termfranctsca cited above, p. 23.
40 THE NAME
traditional script, which is the same as saying, had they not
yielded to the force of the Caroline reform, the name Bene-
ventan would never have come into existence, for then most
likely there would have been no distinction to mark. This is
made manifest by the existence in the Qth century of North and
Central Italian MSS. which are practically indistinguishable
from the early South Italian products. 1 Had the Caroline
reform stopped at the Alps, all of Italy must have written
a more or less similar hand, resembling the early Beneventan. 2
Had it, on the other hand, swept over South Italy as well as
North Italy, all Italian schools would have used the ruling
Caroline minuscule. The fact that only the northern half of
Italy took up the French style of book-hand gives the southern
half the distinction of possessing a local script named after
the region in which it flourished.
1 See below, p. 114.
2 This is the idea which underlies Bresslau's suggestion to call our script
Scriptura Italiana. Cf. Handb. d. Urkundenlehre, i. 908 (ist ed.).
CHAPTER III
DURATION
THOUGH it came last to maturity, of all the so-called national
scripts the Beneventan proved the most enduring. 1 It remained
in use no less than five centuries. 2
The oldest dated example of a minuscule MS. written in
Southern Italy falls at the end of the 8th century (A.D. 779-
97), 3 the latest dated example of an entire MS. is of the year
1295.* It is unlikely that the script was used to any extent
before or after the limits furnished by the dated examples.
Judging from the writing and abbreviations, the MS. Monte
Cassino 753 seems of the middle of the 8th century. It is,
as far as w^e know, the oldest example. 5 Whether or not
minuscule was written in Southern Italy much before that time
must remain a matter of conjecture. But the fact that several
Southern as well as Central Italian MSS. of the 8th century
are in uncial makes it improbable that anything like a flourish-
ing minuscule then existed in that part of Italy. 6
1 The Insular script produced examples of beautiful penmanship before the
Beneventan can be said to have begun its course. When the Beneventan had
reached its highest development the Visigothic was at the end of its career.
2 It should be remembered that at first Beneventan is nothing else than the
Italian script, and there is no essential difference between the North and South
Italian products.
3 e. g. Paris lat. 7530 or Cava 2, both from Monte Cassino. Facsimile
specimens of the Paris MS. in Chatelain, PaUog. des class, lat. i, pi. 13 ;
Delisle, Le cabinet des manuscrits, pi. XXIII. 4; Steffens, Lat. Pal.*, pi. 423.
(Suppl. pi. 1 5b) and E. A. Loew, Die dltestenKalendarien aus Monte Cassino, pi. 2 ;
Facs. of the Cava MS. in Cod. Diplom. Cavensis, ii, Appendix ; and Loew, 1. c.,
pi. i. See also Script. Benev., plates 9 and 10.
4 The MS. Cava 24, written in Cava. Facs. in Silvestre, PaUographie
universelle, iii, pi. 150. Script. Benev.^ pi. 99.
5 Script. JBenev., pi. 7.
6 I refer to the MSS. Vatic, lat. 3835 and 3836 written in Rome by Agimund
DURATION
reason of their distance from the main Caroline stream,
the schools of Southern Italy were permitted to develop on
traditional lines a script which was to become characteristic-
ally their own. And this development may be summed up
thus : originating in the 8th century, possessed of all its typical
features by the beginning of the i oth, and reaching its zenith in
the second half of the i ith, the Beneventan script, though still
vigorous, begins in the i2th century to show signs of decline,
and a century later the evidence of disintegration becomes
unmistakable.
The process of decay was a slow one. It coincided, roughly
speaking, with the I3th century. The traditional view that
Beneventan was rarely employed after the i2th century goes
back to Mabillon. 1 This was his opinion before his visit to
Italy. In the monastery of Cava, however, as he tells us in
his Iter Italicum? he had seen a MS. containing De septem
sigillis? a work written by Benedict of Bari, who lived about
1227. He had also seen the MS. of the Vitae Patrum Caven-
sium? which he placed at the end of the I3th century. But
he used vague language in dating the MS. 5 Thus it happens
that the authors of the Nouveau Traite take note only of
the first of those two 13th-century MSS. and allow that the
(facs. in Silvestre, Pale'og. univ., pi. 114 and 116 : also in A. Mai, Nova Pair.
Ubl. i (1852) pi. viii); London Add. MS. 5463 (facs. in Pal. Soc. i, pi. 236,
Catal. of Ancient MSS. &c., part ii, pi. 7, and Script. Benev.^ pi. 4); Vatic, lat.
5007, written in Naples (facs. in Mon. Germ. Hist. SS. Rer. Langob. et Ital.,
pi. 5, Capasso, Monum. ad Neap, ducat, hist, pertinentia, i. (1881) tab. i, Script.
Benev., pi. 5); Vatic, lat. 3321 from South Italy (facs. in Chatelain, Uncial.
Script., pi. XLV. 2).
1 Mabillon, De re diplomatica, p. 46. ' Sic ergo Langobardica obtinuit apud
Italos ad saeculum XII, quo ex tempore in politiorem ilium modum sensim de-
ducta est, quo nunc est Romana recentior'; and again on p. 49 : ' Perseveravit
hoc scripturae genus apud Italos ad saeculum XII,' &c. Needless to say, we
have before and even after Mabillon extravagant guesses concerning the duration
of the script. It is scarcely worth while to repeat them here. See Nouveau
Traitt, iii. 276.
" Mabillon, Museum Italicum,\.\. 118. 3 MS. Cava 18. 4 MS. Cava 24.
5 Mabillon speaks of the MS. as 400 years old that was in 1685.
DURATION 43
script was used occasionally at the beginning of the 13^
century; thereafter, they say, the ordinary minuscule alone
prevailed. 1
But this view is not borne out by the facts. 2 Besides
the dated examples reproduced in Scriptura Beneventana?
which range from the beginning to the end of the 1 3th century
and they represent not a single centre, but the scriptoria of
Monte Cassino, Cava, Naples, Benevento, and Dalmatia 4
there exists a considerable number of undated 13th-century
MSS., too many to be regarded as mere exceptions or stray
survivals of a script utterly out of use. 5 Moreover, dated
obituary entries, as well as marginal additions of an historical
character are so often written in Beneventan that it is fair to
presume a considerable vogue for the script throughout the
1 3th century. 6
1 Nouveau Traite, iii. 439 : ' s'il paroit encore apres le commencement du
xni e siecle dans quelques mss. ; il est constant que des lors 1'Italie 1'abandonna
tout-a-fait, et s'en tint a I'dcnture gallicane courante, qui toit celle de route
1'Europe/
3 It is criticized and corrected, probably for the first time, in the report of
M. Petit de Baroncourt, published in the Journal gtnfral de T instruction publique
(Paris 1845) no IO 4- This very interesting statement is quoted at length
by Caravita, I codid e le arti a Monte Cassino, i. 322, note i ; who got it from
Quantin, Dictionnaire raisonne* dt diplomatique, cols. 409 sqq.
3 Plates 90-100.
4 The Croatian scholar I. Krsnjavi, discussing the Spalato MS. of the Historia
Salonitana, refers to its script, which is Beneventan, as to a phenomenon of
unusual rarity (Zur Historia Salonitana des Thomas Archidiaconus von Spalato,
Agram 1900, p. 3). But we have at least two other 13th-century MSS. from Dal-
matia, viz. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 342, and the de'bris of a necrologium now
preserved in the Muse'e Cond^ in Chantilly, both MSS. written in Ragusa.
5 About fifty have come to my notice.
6 Compare the entries in Vatic, lat. 5949 ; in Monte Cassino 179 see the
entry to the year 1270 ; in the Obituarium of S. Spirito preserved in the chapter
library of Benevento (Armadio mobile II), on fol. 39 V , is an entry of 1 279. In the
fragments of the obituary calendar from Ragusa now in the Muse'e Conde* the
death of Archbishop Bonaventura (1281-93) is entered in Beneventan. In
Cava 3, fol. 129, there is a note on an astrological phenomenon of the year 1315,
which I quote on next page. The obituary and annalistic entries reflect very
plainly the struggle between the Beneventan and the Caroline which must have
44 DURATION
The latest dated MS. is Cava 24, containing Vitae Patrum
Cavensium, written in the celebrated abbey of Cava in the
year 1295.! The script is remarkably fresh, so much so that
it is highly probable that Beneventan writing had continued
in use in Cava even in the i4th century. As a matter of fact
there exists a 14th-century entry in excellent Beneventan in
the Cava MS. of Bede's De Temporibus? On fol. 129 of this
MS., in the right-hand margin, exactly opposite the year 1315
of the paschal table, a Beneventan hand wrote :
hoc anno Stella cometes
apparuit a festo sancti thome apostoli
usque in epiphania. 3
In documents the script apparently lived after the year
1315. In a register of the year 1631 belonging to the Certosa
of Capri, Bethmann saw two documents of the years 1328 and
1329 respectively, written 'charactere Longobardico', that is,
in the Beneventan hand. 4 And Caravita mentions a sub-
scription containing still well-formed Beneventan letters in
a charter of Isernia of the year I363. 5
Although we must be careful how we make deductions for
calligraphy from the usage in documents, the fact remains that
begun in the i2th century. But not every entry in ordinary minuscule is
necessarily by a South Italian. It can easily be by a monk who had learned
writing in the north. See below, p. 90.
1 The most recent example cited in our palaeographical text-books is Monte
Cassino 440, containing Abbot Bernard's (died 1282) commentary on the Rule
of St. Benedict. This MS. is also cited by Caravita (op. cit. i. 322) as the last
manifestation of the script. Abbot Bernard Ayglerius was a Frenchman. The
commentary, as it left his pen, must have been in ordinary minuscule, yet the
copy we have of it, which is most likely contemporary, is in Beneventan, a fact
which argues that the local script still held its own in Monte Cassino. The
initials in this MS. are no longer of the traditional type found in earlier
Cassinese products. See Script. Benev.^ pi. 97.
8 Now Cava 3.
3 i.e. from December 21 to January 6; cf. Mon. Germ. Hist. SS. Hi. 197.
4 News Archiv d. Gesell. fur alt. deut. Geschichtskunde, xxiv. 210 note.
The originals are supposed to be in Naples. My search for them at the Archivio
Maggiore proved unsuccessful.
5 Caravita, 1 codzct, &c., i. 322.
^ DURATION 45
i
the Beneventan script was so deeply rooted in South Italian
culture that neither the Norman invasion nor the repeated
imperial decrees forbidding its use could suffice to wipe it out
of existence summarily. 1 Long after the Insular and Visi-
gothic scripts had been supplanted by the Caroline minuscule,
Beneventan was still strong enough to withstand that influence,
especially in conservative monastic centres like Monte Cassino,
Cava, and Benevento. But in time even it had to yield to
the ordinary minuscule. The struggle may be pictured as
follows. During the 1 2th century the ordinary minuscule began
to enter the field as a rival. 2 Monte Jpassino had lost markedly
in prestige. New foundations, patronized by the Normans
and partly composed of their own people, employed wholly or
in part the script familiar to the Normans. 3 And the Norman
policy of calling to the court scholars from various parts
naturally favoured the spread of the script common to nearly
all Europe. The episcopal schools were most likely the first
to teach the more modern hand. And the professional copyist
who made his appearance about that time 4 must also have pre-
1 The decrees had reference to notarial products. Frederic II issued two
such decrees, one in 1220 and one in 1231. Only the latter exists. It runs as
follows: ' Consuetudinem quam olim in aliquibus regni partibus audiuimus
obtinere, dilucida constitutione cassantes, decernimus instrumenta publica et
quaslibet cautiones per litteraturam communem et legibilem per statutes a nobis
notaries scribi debere, scribendi modo qui in ciuitate Neapolis, ducatu Amalfie
ac Surrenti (atque per eorum pertinentias) hactenus seruabatur, omnino sublato/
&c., Huillard-Bre*holles, Historia diplomatica Friderici //(Paris 1854) vol. iv,
pars i, p. 56. See also vol. ii, p. 91, n. 5. This is quoted by Paoli, Pro-
gramma scolastico di Paleografia e di Diplomatica (Florence 1888) p. 17, and
by Steffens, Lat. Pal?, p. ix.
2 This appears clearly from the numerous obituary entries written in ordinary
minuscule of the i2th century in the Necrologium of St. Matthew of Salerno,
now in the Archivio Capitolare. Facs. in Archivio Paleografico Italiano, vii,
plates 27-35.
8 G. Morin, Regulae S. Benedicti traditio codd. MSS. Casinensium, p. xix.
4 Bretholz, ' Lat. Pal.' in Meister's Grundriss der Geschichtswissenschaft
(Leipsic 1906) i. 48 sq. (2nd ed. p. 28). Some interesting facts about copyists
are given by Huillard-Bre*holles, op. cit., Introduction, p. DXXVI, and by
Amari, La guerra del Vespro, iii. 9 483.
46 DURATION
ferred the ordinary minuscule. Thus the Beneventan supremacy
in Southern Italy was undermined. Books were copied less and
less in Beneventan as time went on ; and the scribes began to
lose the old skill in forming the letters. Somehow they could
no longer join the strokes properly ; the Beneventan MSS. of
the 1 3th century seem to be written by an aged and shaky
hand. The simpler and more practical script supplanted the
traditional one. This happened soonest in the lay and clerical
schools of the larger towns. The monasteries were the last
stronghold of the ' littera Beneventana '.
CHAPTER IV
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
THE far-reaching changes wrought by the Caroline reform did
not affect the transalpine schools alone. Early in the 9th
century the levelling process was at work in North and Central
Italy. 1 It was just south of Rome and west of the Abruzzi that
the reform wave broke and receded.
Broadly speaking, Southern Italy was the region in which
our script was at home. But it is possible to define somewhat
more precisely the northern limit of what we may call the
Beneventan zone.
To the south this zone must have extended along the entire
lower half of the Italian peninsula excluding the Greek settle-
ments. 2 Of all the larger centres of Southern Italy we know
that they used the Beneventan characters and it is impro-
bable that the smaller centres used a script different from the
one in vogue all around them. 3
1 Cf. Traube, VorlesungenundAbhandlungen,i\.2} ample material in support
of this view will be given in a future study of early Italian minuscule.
2 It is interesting to note that some of the Greek MSS. which were written in
Southern Italy (e. g. Monte Cassino gr. 277, 431, and 432, Vatic, gr. 2138, 1633,
and 2020 to mention only a few) show striking resemblance to Beneventan MSS.
in their initial ornamentation. Cf. Batiffol, Melanges darchfol. et d'hist. viii
( 1 888) 307 sq. ; also L'abbqye de Rossano (Paris 1891) pp. 89 sqq. ; and K. Lake,
Journal Theol. Studies, iv (1903) 523. Facs. in Pal. Soc. ii. 87 ; Vitelli-Paoli,
Collezione Fiorentina, plates 33-5, 43; Franchi de' Cavalieri-Lietzmann, Spe-
cimina codicum graecorum Vaticanorum, pi. 1 7.
8 Sicily and Sardinia can hardly be said to form part of our script-zone. The
former early fell into the hands of the Saracens, and the Christian culture that
survived was mainly Greek. The coming of the Normans did not favour the
establishment of the Beneventan hand, owing to the cosmopolitan nature of the
culture which flourished at the Norman court. But when William the Good, in
1174, had one hundred monks from Cava settle in the new monastery of
Montereale with one of their number as abbot, we may suppose that our script
48 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
The demarcation to the north is not a matter of conjecture.
We know from extant MSS. that Beneventan was not used in
Rome, Velletri, Subiaco, Farfa, or Spoleto. 1 On the other hand
we have MS. evidence of its use in Veroli, Sora, Sulmona, and
in the districts of Chieti and Penne near the Adriatic. 2 These
places constitute the northern boundary of the Beneventan
script-zone, which practically corresponds to the ancient duchy
of Benevento, comprising not merely the region south of Rome
but also a good portion of the Abruzzi, where Monte Cassino
had many possessions. 3 Eastward the province of the script
extended beyond the Italian peninsula. We find Beneventan
used on the Tremiti Islands in the Adriatic and all along the
opposite shores of Dalmatia from Ossero to Ragusa.
From data furnished by the MSS. (see below, pp. 67 sqq.), we
know that Beneventan was written in the following places : 4
was used in that monastery (Cod. Diplom. Cavens. i, p. xv.). The same supposition
may be made with regard to Sardinia on the strength of relations with Monte
Cassino in the nth century. Cf. Tosti, Storm della badta di Monte Cassino,
i. 407, ii. 161 and 194; Caravita, 1 codici, &c., i. 92.
1 See the MSS. Rome Basilicanus FIX (St. Peter), Vatic. lat. 378 (S. Maria
in Palladio), Vallicell. F 85 (S. Ciriaco in Thermis) ; Velletri Capitol, no. 6
(Evangel.), Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211 (the entries on foil, i and 6 made in Velletri) ;
Vallicell. B 24 (Sacram. Sublacense) ; Subiaco, Archiv. di S. Scolastica (Register
of Subiaco); Vatic. Barb. lat. 679 (xiv 52) and Vatic, lat. 6808, both from
Farfa ; Rome Basilicanus F 1 5 (Spoleto) ; Spoleto, Archiv. Capitol. (Vitae San-
ctorum) to single out a few of the many examples which might be cited.
2 For the precise MSS. originating in the various centres, see the list of
localized MSS. given below, pp. 67 sqq. In the district of Chieti there was the
monastery of S. Liberatore alia Majella, in that of Penne, the abbey of
S. Bartolomeo di Carpineto.
3 Where Monte Cassino had its monasteries, there the Beneventan script was
sure to be used. Some churches in the Abruzzi still belong to the diocese of
Monte Cassino, e. g. Pescocostanzo in the province of Aquila, Villa Oliveti in the
province of Teramo, Fara Filiorum Petri in the province of Chieti, cf. Annuario
ecclesiastico (Rome 1912) pp. 8745.
4 The script was naturally used in many places not mentioned in my list,
which includes only centres for which there is MS. evidence or else literary
evidence establishing that fact. Places from which there is a very strong pre-
sumption that Beneventan MSS. originated are also included in my list, but
printed in italics.
FARFA * x
SULMON A \
ROMA SUBIAC.O.. ,/ %
VELLETRI
VFPOM -
VEROLI :
j" MONTE
The mosf import-ant centres in
the Beneventan zone ur in bold type
...... '- ...... fhe boundary of the duchy
of Benevenlo
To face p. 48
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
49
BARI
BENEVENTO
Bisceglie
Cajazzo
CAPUA
CAVA
Fondi
Gaeta
Mirabella Eclano
MONTE CASSINO
Monte Vergine
NAPLES
Ossero (Dalmatia)
Ragusa ( )
SALERNO
S. Angelo in Formis
S. Bartolomeo di Carpineto lb
5*. Benedetto di Cesamo lc
la
S. Benedetto di Clia ld
S. Liberatore alia Majella le
S. Lorenzo in Carminiano lf
S. Maria di Albaneta **
S. Michele lh
6*. Nicola delta Cicogna^
S. Vincenzo al Volturno lk
Sora
Sorrento
Spalato (Dalmatia)
Sulmona
Teramo
Trau (Dalmatia)
Tremiti Islands
Troja
Veroli
Zara (Dalmatia)
Monte Cassino ? Within the region just defined the centre
la near Capua; lb near Penne; lc near Presenzano, about 16 miles
south of Cassino on the line to Naples ; ld between Belmonte and S. Elia,
a few miles from Cassino on the way to Atina ; le near Chieti ; lf near Troja ;
lg about a mile north-west of Monte Cassino ; lh a monastery of St. Michael
existed in the Abruzzi, another not far from Cassino (Caravita, / codtci, &c.
i. 108, n. 2); l! about 2 miles to the north of Monte Cassino; it no longer
exists ; lk near a village of S. Vincenzo near Isernia.
2 Besides the works cited here in connexion with the different centres, the
student is referred to U. Chevalier, Repertoire des sources historiques, &c., Topo-
bibliographie, 2nd ed. ; and to Poncelet's catalogues of hagiographical MSS.
in the libraries of Rome and Naples, published in the Analecta Bollandiana.
On the history of Monte Cassino see the literature cited above, p. 21. On
the MSS. see Mabillon, Museum Hal. I. i, pp. 122 sqq. ; Montfaucon,
Diarium ItaL (1702) pp. 322-33 ; Bibl. bibliothecarum, i. 215 sqq. ; Mai, Serf-
ptorum vet. nova coll. iii. 2, pp. 163 sqq. ; Blume, Iter ItaL iv. 69 sqq. ; ReirTer-
scheid, Bibl. patr. lat. ItaL ii. 309-436; Bethmann in Pertz' Archiv^ xii (1874)
495-514; G. Mercati, 'Due supposte spogliazioni della biblioteca di Monte
Cassino/ in Miscellanea di studiin onore di Attilio Hortis (Trieste 1910) pp. 967
H43 E
50 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
of by far the greatest importance was Monte Cassino. Pre-
eminently the leader of the South Italian schools, it surpassed
all others not only in the quality and the amount of its calli-
graphic product, but also in the value of the texts which it has
transmitted. 1 The existing MSS. of Cassinese origin, scattered
throughout Europe or still housed where they were written
some of them a thousand years ago bear eloquent testimony
to the glorious part Monte Cassino has played as a centre of
light and learning.
Whereas in the case of most South Italian schools we must
content ourselves largely with surmises concerning their lite-
rary life, with Monte Cassino we have some precise facts to
go upon. Here and there a subscription definitely connects
a MS. with Monte Cassino. 2 Two MSS. are in existence which
contain a contemporary catalogue of books copied during the
abbacy of Theobald ; 3 likewise in the excellent Chronicle of
Monte Cassino this catalogue appears, together with an enu-
meration of the MSS. which were written under the great Abbot
Desiderius as well as under some earlier abbots. 4 Better still,
some of the MSS. for which we have historical evidence have
come down to us. 5 Although not all of the 232 Beneventan
sqq., and especially the works published in Monte Cassino itself, namely, Cara-
vita, / codtci, &c. ; Piscicelli Taeggi, Pal artist, di Montecassino ; Tosti, Storia
della badia, &c. (Document* e noti), and the valuable and extensive catalogue,
BiUiotheca Casinensis (1873-94), five volumes of which have appeared. The
last MS. catalogued is no. 311, which leaves 437 MSS. still to catalogue (a few
libraries have the volume which goes to no. 358). It is to be hoped that this
useful work will soon be resumed.
1 See above, pp. 16 sqq.
2 e.g. the MSS. Monte Cassino 5, 99, 109, 148. Facs. in Script. Benev.,
plates 57, 58, 64, 67, 68.
8 The MSS. Monte Cassino 28 and 57. See Script. Benev., plates 60 and 61.
For the text see below, p. 80.
4 See below, pp. 78 sqq.
5 Besides the MSS. which have been correctly identified with books in the
Theobaldan catalogue, e. g. Monte Cassino 28, 57, 73 and others, mention may
be made of the MS. of Cicero, now Leyden 118, Hilarius, Liber Mysteriorum,
now in Arezzo, and the Vatican MS. (1202) of the Vita S. Benedict^ &c., which I
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 51
MSS. 1 preserved in Monte Cassino were written in the abbey,
the great majority of them certainly were. And of the Bene-
ventan MSS. dispersed in foreign parts, thirty at least can claim
Monte Cassino as their original home. 2 Thus the abbey can
boast of having produced almost half of the five hundred and
more extant books in Beneventan writing.
Cava? It is not so easy to say which school is next in
importance after Monte Cassino. The abbey of Santissima
Trinita above Cava, near Salerno, enjoys that reputation in our
text-books. However, the palaeographical fame of this centre
is to some extent accidental. In November, 1685, Mabillon
visited the monastery and saw its MSS. With his account in
the Iter Italicum the name of Cava entered into palaeographical
literature. 4
But there is no historical evidence for a lively copying
activity at Cava. 5 No important MSS. lying outside of Cava
can be traced to Cava as their home ; 6 and if we examine the
believe are among the very books known to have been copied under Abbot
Desiderius (105887). I cite only these cases. There are several other MSS.
which may be successfully identified with books named in ancient Cassinese
catalogues. But this subject deserves a separate study.
1 This is the number given by Piscicelli Taeggi, op. cit., introd., p. i.
2 See below, pp. 70 sqq.
3 On the MSS. of Cava see Mabillon, Mus. ItaL I. i, pp. 116 sqq. ; Lettre de
labbe'Rozan sur des livres et des manuscrits precieux de la bibliotfaque de la Cava
(Naples 1822), palaeographically weak; Blume, Iter Ital.iv. 66 sq. (exaggerates
the importance of the library); Bethmann in Pertz' Archiv. xii (1874) 528 sq. ;
and especially Codex Diplomaiicus Cavensis, 8 voll. (1873-93). The preface
to vol. i has the history of the abbey, the appendices (I manoscritti mem-
branacei) contain descriptions and reproductions of the oldest MSS., facsimiles
of which are also given by Silvestre, PalSog. umversel/e, iii, plates 143, 144,
146, 148, 149, 150. A summary catalogue of the MSS. in P. Guillaume, Essat
historique sur tabbqye de Cava (Cava 1877), appendix, pp. cxiii sqq.
4 Mabillon, op. cit., pp. 1 1 6 sqq.
5 How little we know of this activity may be seen from the meagre account of
it in Cod. Diplom. Cavens. i, p. xvii.
6 The MS. Vatic, lat. 3764 (Vitae Summor. Pontificwri) once belonged to
E 2
52 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
MSS. now in Cava, we shall find that the number of them
actually written there is exceedingly small. Founded in the
beginning of the nth century, 1 the abbey cannot lay claim to
some of its oldest and most important treasures. The 8th-
century Isidore was written in Monte Cassino ; 2 the Qth-cen-
tury Bible came from Spain; and the important nth-century
MS. of the Leges Langobardorum must have originated in
Benevento. 3 Yet Cava owns the distinction of having cultiva-
ted our script as late as the I4th century ; 4 and the historical
student justly regards it as a perfect treasure-house for docu-
ments of Southern Italy.
Benevento? In so far as the importance of a centre is made
evident by the number of its extant MSS., Benevento should
precede Cava. Besides a number of MSS. which were written
there and are now in other libraries 6 some of them of consid-
erable age and importance Benevento possesses to this day
Cava, as appears from the entry on fol. 7 V : ' Iste insignis liber per multos annos
deperditus . . . tandem . . . sacro Cavensi Cenobio restitutus fuit . . . anno salutis
1516 die 1 8 Novembris.' There is a similar entry on the last leaf (Montfaucon,
Bibl. bibl. i. 1 10 ; Blume, Iter Ital. iv. 66). But as the entire MS. is in the script
of Rome and vicinity, and as the Beneventan writing on fol. 4 and 4 V is manifestly
an addition, the MS. most likely got to Cava as a gift from Rome. The marginal
notes are also in ordinary minuscule, excepting one on fol. 5 V .
1 The earlier history of the foundation is nebulous. The year i on is the
date accepted in Cod. Dtplom. Cavens. i, p. ix. It is idle to imagine literary
activity in Cava before this date.
2 The MS. has a small catalogue of books which Traube (Textgesch. d.
Regula S. Benedicti, 2nd ed., p. 107) brings into connexion with Paulus Diaconus.
The entry is at earliest of the late loth century. If it is of the early i ith, it may
record the beginnings of the Cava library.
8 Now the MSS. 2, i, and 4 : see E. A. Loew, Die dltesten Kalendarien aus
Monte CasSino, p. 2 ; Stud. Pal., p. 62 ; and below, pp. 67, 70.
4 See above, p. 44.
5 On the library of Benevento see Borgia, Memorie istoriche di Benevento,
i, pp. xiv sqq. ; Bethmann in Pertz' Archtv, xii (1874) 527 ; Ebner, Iter Ital.,
p. 6 ; D. R. Andoyer, I codici liturgici della biblioteca capitolare di Benevento
(Benevento 1909) reprinted from Settimana, no. 46 (anno x).
6 See below, pp. 67 sqq.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 53
over forty of its own products, 1 almost three times the number
preserved at Cava. And among them are some liturgical vol-
umes which are older and completer than similar MSS. from
elsewhere in South Italy. There is also historical evidence for
literary activity in Benevento. In the Qth century it was
reputed an important centre of learning. 2 It had, moreover,
through the monastery of Santa Sophia, continuous relations
with Monte Cassino. In a biographical note entered by a hand
of the 1 2th century in the MS. Vatic, lat.4955 we rea d of a monk
Landulfus of Santa Sophia, who showed a humanist's zeal in his
search for MSS., though his interest was ecclesiastical rather
than classical. 3 Lastly, witness the catalogue of books which
existed in the library of the nuns of St. Peter in Benevento. 4
Capua? Capua as a centre of writing first attracts our
attention when the monks of Monte Cassino settled there. 6
In 883 they had fled from the Saracens to Teano, and when that
refuge was burned down they sought asylum in the neighbouring
town of Capua, where they remained from 896 to 949. The
peace and security which they there enjoyed bore fruit. Many
books were copied, and the first examples of fairly calligraphic
products MSS. which show both in penmanship and decora-
tion a marked advance upon their predecessors actually fall
1 They are nearly all liturgical. See list of MSS. at the end of the book.
2 Anonymus Salernitanus, cap. 32 ; Tiraboschi, Storia letieraria Italtana, iii
(1806) 251 ; Ebert, Geschichte der Litter aiur des Mittelalters, ii (1880) 316 sq.
3 For the text of this entry see below, p. 78. On S. Sophia see Borgia,
op. cit. i. 233, 246 sqq.
4 Published in CentralUattf. Bibliothekswesen, v (1888) 485 sq. The cata-
logue is found on fol. 76 V of London Add. MS. 5463 ; cf. Gottlieb, Vbtr mittel-
alterliche Bibliotheken, p. 182 sq.
5 Of the literary activity of Capua during the Middle Ages we get practically
no information in the older works of O. Rinaldo, Memorie istoriche della fedelis-
sima citta di Capua, 2 voll. (Naples 1753-5), and F. Granata, Storia sacra della
chiesa metropolitana di Capua, 2 voll. (Naples 1766). On its archives and libraries
see Bethmann in Pertz' Archiv, xii (1874) 494.
'' See above, p. 7.
54 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
in the Capuan period ; as, for instance, the Commentary by
Paulus Diaconus on the Rule of St. Benedict (Monte Cassino
175), the collection of Canons in the Vatican MS. 5845, and the
copy of Gregory's Moralia (Monte Cassino 269). The monks
returned to Monte Cassino under Abbot Aligern in 949. But
the Cassinese tradition continued in Capua. The MS. Monte
Cassino 230, written probably between 969 and 987 is proof of
that, not to mention later products like the Exultet Roll and the
Register of S. Angelo in Formis (near Capua), written between
1137 and H66. 1
Naples.' 2 ' That there existed considerable culture in Naples
during the Middle Ages is beyond question. The writers who
flourished there bear witness to it. 3 But besides this testimony
we have some explicit facts regarding the literary life of
the city. In the 8th century Neapolitan clerics were sent to
Monte Cassino to study under the great Paulus Diaconus. 4
Men of education knew Greek as well as Latin. 5 We read
that Duke Sergius presented three volumes of Josephus to the
episcopal library, 6 and that St. Athanasius (1872) established
schools for singing and reciting, and provided instruction in
1 See below, p. 69.
2 On the MSS.of Naples see Mabillon,J^.//0/.,I.i } pp.iiosqq.; Montfaucon,
Bibl. bibl. i. 230 sqq. ; Janelli, Catalogus bibliothecae latinae veteris et dassicae
manuscriptae, &c. (Naples 1827); Blume, Iter ItaL iv. n sqq. ; Bethmann in
Pertz' Archiv, xii (1874) 514 sqq.; Capasso, ' Sulla spogliazione delle biblio-
teche Napolitane/ in Archivio storico per h provincie Napol. iii (1878) 563 sqq.
and 67 1 sqq.; A. Poncelet, 'Catal. codd. hagiog. lat. bibl. Neapolitanarum/ in
Analecta Bollandiana, xxx (1911) 137 sqq.
3 See above, p. 9.
4 See * Gesta Episc. NeapolitanorunT, ed. Waitz, in Mon. Germ. Hist. SS.Rer.
Lang, et //#/., p. 425.
5 In the ' Vita Athanasii ' (ed. Waitz, ibid., p. 441) we read of Duke Sergius I :
' litteris tarn Grecis quam Latinis faborabiliter eruditus est ' ; the same of his
father Gregory: 'in greca latinaque lingua peritissimus.' Stephen III knew
Greek and Latin perfectly (see Capasso, Monum. ad Neap, ducat, hist, perti-
nentia % i. 342). John the Deacon translated Greek works (Waitz, ibid., p. 399).
6 Doubtless a Latin translation. ' Gesta Ep. Neap.', ed. Waitz, p. 434.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 55
letters and in the art of writing ; l and that in the following
century Duke John (945-60) and his consort encouraged
translation from Greek into Latin, and showed interest in
learning by collecting books and having many MSS. copied. 2
Unfortunately the Beneventan MSS. which lie in Naples
have no sign by which they may be ascribed to the local
schools. Yet many of them were probably written there.
The 6th-century MS. of Eugippius (Vatic, lat. 3375) which, to
judge by the script, may well be one of the books of the
ancient Eugippian library, 3 has additions in Beneventan
which I dare say are the work of a Neapolitan. It is fairly
certain that the Vatican MS. of the Gesta Episcoporum
Neapolitanorum (MS. 5007), a portion of which is in Bene-
ventan writing of the icth century, originated in Naples,
since a competent critic like Waitz was ready to regard it as
an autograph of its Neapolitan editor. 4 The 13th-century
MS. Rome Corsinian. 777 containing the A eta Aspreni and
Vita S. Athanasii came from the monastery of S. Severino,
and is in all likelihood a product of Naples, as contents
and provenance suggest. 5 Another 13th-century Neapolitan
product is the liturgical volume written for the nuns of
S. Gregory, now the MS. RomeChigi CIV 113. According
to Traube, the Historia Miscella of Landolfus Sagax (Vatic.
Pal. lat. 909) was written in Naples. 6 The same may be true
of the famous Bamberg MS. P III 20 containing Auxilius and
Eugenius Vulgarius. The imperial library of Vienna possesses
several Beneventan MSS. which came there from Naples, where
they probably originated. 7
1 * Ordinavit autem lectorum et cantorum scolas ; nonnullos instituit gramatica
imbuendos ; alios colligavit ad scribendi officium/ ed. Waitz, ibid., p. 434.
3 See below, p. 82.
5 The MS. is in semi-uncials and has most likely the same origin as the
semi-uncial MS. of the Ambrosiaster in Monte Cassino (MS. 150), which Traube
( Vorles. u. AbhandL i. 202) was inclined to trace back to the Bibliotheca Eugippii.
4 Cf. M. G. H. SS. Rer. Lang, et ItaL, p. 399. 5 ibid., p. 401.
1 Traube, Perrona Scottorum, p. 472.
7 Cf. F. Men&k, ' Die Neapolitaner HSS. der Hofbibliothek,' in Mitteil. d. bster-
56 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
Salerno} The delightful and wealthy city of Salerno was
also a great seat of learning. 2 Like Monte Cassino it saw
its best period in the nth century. A great patron of the
arts and sciences it had in one of its own sons, Alfanus I. 3
He had been called to Salerno from Monte Cassino first to
take charge of the Benedictine abbey and then to become
bishop. A friend of Pope Gregory VII and of Abbot
Desiderius, Alfanus was both a poet and a scholar. It was
during his life that Salerno was visited by the celebrated
physician and linguist Constantinus Africanus, who was
attracted thither partly by Alfanus, partly by the fame of
their school of medicine. 4 For the science of medicine
flourished in Salerno as nowhere else in Italy. 5 Under the
circumstances it is safe to assume that many books were
copied there. In the I2th century Salerno had in Archbishop
Romuald a man who was praised as a great historian and
expert in the physical sciences. 6 A contemporary Beneventan
MS. of his Chronicle (Vatic, lat. 3973) came to the Vatican
direct from Salerno, where it doubtless originated. 7 The
Liber confratruin S. Matthaei, still preserved in its chapter
library, is of great local interest for the hundreds of obits it
contains. 8 Besides the Gospel of Luke, there is only one
other Beneventan MS. now in Salerno.
Bari? The claim of Bari to consideration as a centre rests
reich. Veremsf. Bibliothekswesen, viii(i9O4) 133-48, 170-7 and ix (1905) 31-7;
see also below, p. 74.
1 On the MSS. still in Salerno see Bethmann in Pertz' Archiv, xii (1874)
529 sq., and below, p. 74.
2 See Tiraboschi, Storia della Lett. Ital? (Modena 1787) iii. 399 sqq. ;
Giesebrecht, De litter arum studiis apud Italos, &c., p. 20 ; Denifle, Die
Universitaten des Mittelalters bis 1400, i (1885) 232 sqq.
3 Cf. M. Schipa, Alfano I Arcivescovo di Salerno (Salerno 1880).
4 Schipa, op. cit., p. xxi.
6 On this school see the works cited above, p. 2 1 .
6 See Man. Germ. Hist. SS. xix. 388. 7 See Script. Benev.> pi. 90.
8 See Archivio Paleografico Italiano, vii, plates 27-35.
9 See the Preface to vol. i of Codice Diplomatic Barese (Bari 1897). That
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 57
not so much upon the number of MSS. which are known to
have originated there, as upon the circumstance that these
MSS. present a peculiar variety of the South Italian minuscule.
In the Exultet Rolls lying in the Cathedral of Ban x and in
the Commentary on the Octateuch preserved in the Bodleian
(Canon. Patr. lat. 175), we have authentic Bari products. 2
These two examples, however, would be an inadequate support
upon which to base an argument for the existence of a Bari
type, were it not that their script is so characteristic that
numerous other MSS., which of themselves give no hint of
their origin, must by reason of their resemblance to the known
examples be associated with them. That the two examples
mentioned actually mirror a local type of writing appears from
the fact that the same type is found in documents of Bari. 3
But it was evidently not restricted to Bari. The Bisceglie
Gospels show the same style of writing, 4 as do some docu-
ments of Trani and Montescaglioso, 5 from which it would seem
that the type had considerable vogue throughout the province
of Apulia. It is also important to note that this style rather
than the Cassinese was chiefly employed in the centres of Dal-
matia a fact which is sufficiently explained by geographical
proximity and ecclesiastical relations. 6 Within the region in
Bari had large libraries appears from inventories which still exist. In an inventory
of 1362 containing 202 items, the last seventy are thus described: 'Libri alii
septuaginta cum tabulis et sine tabulis inter magnos et parvos de lictera
longobarda et francigena ' (F. Nitti di Vito, // Tesoro di San Nicola di Bari
(Trani 1903) p. 36). See also Barbier de Montault, ' Les Manuscrits du Tre'sor
de Bari/ Analecla Juris Pontificii, xvi (1877) 226.
1 Cf. Cod. Dipl. Barese, vol. i, appendix. 2 See below, p. 67.
3 Cf. Cod. Dipl. Barese, vol. i, pi. 5, doc. a. 1131 : vol. v, pi. i, doc. a. 1155.
For the Bari type par excellence see Cod. Dipl Cavensis, vi (1884) pi. 3, doc.
a. 1047. Also the Cava document A. 27 of the year 1039.
4 See below, p. 69.
5 See the Trani document of 1126 written by Petrus 'diaconus et biblio-
thecarius ' now preserved in the Archivio di Stato, Naples. A Trani document
of 1177 preserved at Cava has some signatures in the unmistakable Bari type.
For Montescaglioso see facs. in Archiv. Pal. Ital iii. 47.
6 See below, p. 62.
58 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
which this variety flourished, the importance of Bari both as
the seat of an archbishop and as a seaport is such as to entitle
it to give the name to the type. On the characteristics of the
Bari type see below, p. 150.
Minor Centres.' 1 Besides the centres mentioned above, a few
others attract our attention. Considerable copying activity
went on in the abbey of S. Liberatore alia Majella, near
Chieti, while Theobald was in charge, as we know from the
list of books mentioned in the Commemoratorium Theobaldi
of the year loig. 2 In the i8th century this monastery still
possessed a great number of Beneventan MSS. 3 Another
Benedictine house in the Abruzzi, S. Bartolomeo di Carpineto,
near Penne, must have had excellent scribes, to judge from
the handsome Martyrology which originated there. 4 The
ancient abbey of St. Vincent on the Volturno has left us at
least two of its products, the MS. (Vatic. Barb. lat. 2724) of
the Chronicon Vulturnense, and the liturgical MS. Rome
ChigiDVy;. 5 S. Maria di Albaneta was too near Monte
Cassino to become an important centre, yet it had its own
scriptorium, as may be seen from the MS. Monte Cassino 3O5. 6
The monastery of S. Angelo in Formis, near Capua, has been
1 It would be useless to enumerate the various small places which once
possessed books. In ancient documents books are not infrequently mentioned
as forming part of personal or ecclesiastical property. As a rule they are litur-
gical books. See Tamassia, * Libri di monasteri e di chiese nell' Italia Meridio-
nale/ in Atti del R. Istiluto Veneto dt Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, Ixiv. 2 (1904-5)
273 sqq.
2 See below, p. 79 sq.
3 Cf. Collectio bullarum sacrosanctae Basilicae Valicanae, i (Rome 1747)
appendix, ' Dissertatio de abbatia Majellana/ p. iv. : * viget adhuc monachis
frequens et monumentis Langobardorum charactere conscriptis celeberrimum.'
See also Caravita, / codici, i. 321.
* See below, p. 75. 5 See below, p. 75.
6 See the subscription given below, p. 332. See also p. 75. In Monte Cas-
sino 74 mention is made of books presented to the monastery : cf. Caravita,
op. cit. ii. 76; Becker, Catalogi bibliothecarum antiqui, no. 46; Gottlieb, Ueber
mitlelalterliche Bibliotheken, p. 413.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 59
mentioned above. That it had a very respectable library
appears from an extant inventory. 1 The episcopal city of
Troja was not without its scriptorium. Several of the Bene-
ventan MSS. which are now in the National Library of Naples
came thither from Troja. 2 In one of these, Naples VI B 12,
containing Pomerius' De vita contemplative^, we have a small
catalogue of the books presented to the Ecclesia Troiana
by its bishop, William, who was consecrated in no8. 3 An
Exultet Roll is still in Troja. The neighbouring church
of S. Lorenzo in Carminiano, which belonged to Troja, also
possessed books. 4 One of the largest MSS. in our script,
Naples VI B 3 (an anon. Haymo, Comment, in epist. Pauli\ was
written there, as we learn from the scribe Ascarus, who has
left us minute particulars of the circumstances. 5 Beneventan
MSS. also existed in the chapter library of Larino. 6
Of the minor centres in which the Beneventan script was
employed, special mention must be made of those in Dalmatia,
1 A very interesting catalogue of the books of this monastery is entered in
Monte Cassino 49 : cf. Caravita, op. cit.ii. 180 sq. ; Becker, op. cit., no. 120 ;
Gottlieb, op. cit., p. 239.
2 See below, p. 77. Bishop Cavalieri (1694-1739) of Troja was a Neapo-
litan. It was through him that the library of Troja was sold. Cf. Stefanelli,
Memorie storiche dellacitta di Troja (Naples 1879) p. 248.
3 Nine books are enumerated (fol. 26o v ) ; the eighth item reads : ' Nono anno
obtulit me ipsum qui dicor prosper de uita contemplatiua.' The whole catalogue
is published by Gottlieb in Centralblatt f. Bibliothekswesen, v (1888)497. Of
interest for the history of the bronze doors of the Troja Cathedral is the last item :
'Decimo anno (i.e. 1118) obtulit librum . . . et principium portarum enearum
que iam incepte erant a decimo kal. febr.'
1 The church no longer exists, but the name survives, the Bishop of Troja
having the title of Barone di S. Lorenzo in Carminiano ; cf. Stefanelli, op. cit.,
p. 62, n. 2.
5 See the subscription given below, p. 322.
6 Cf. Pertz' Archiv, xii (1874) 534. Bethmann's statement (op. cit., p. 534)
is apparently made on the authority of G. A. Tria, Memorie storiche di Larino
(Rome 1744) p. 634. There seem to be no MSS. left. A Beneventan MS. of
the Gospels used to exist in the cathedral; cf. A. Magliano, Considerazioni storiche
sulla dita di Larino (Campobasso 1895) pp. 56 sqq.
60 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
since a double interest attaches to them : first, because they
lie outside of Italy ; second, because they serve as an excel-
lent illustration of the value of palaeography as an independent
witness to relations between one land and another. It will
not seem amiss, therefore, if the Dalmatian schools are treated
by themselves.
Dalmatian Centres.^ The maritime cities of Dalmatia have
ever formed the natural border-land between different races,
religions, and languages. 2 They witnessed the struggle now
between the Greek and Latin worlds, now between Latin
civilization and barbarism. It is as the outposts of that Latin
'civilization that they interest us here. If we examine their
oldest MSS. and documents we are struck by the curious fact
that their script is the same as that used in Southern Italy
1 On the historical sources of Dalmatia see J. Lucius, De regno Dalmatiae
et Croatiae (Amsterdam 1666); Farlati, Illyricum Sacrum (Venice 1751-1819);
Kukuljevic, Codex diplomaticus regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et Slavoniae (Agram
1874-); Fr. Racki, ' Documenta historiae Chroatiae periodum antiquam illu-
strantia/ published in Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum meridionalium,
vol. vii (Agram 1877). Smiciklas, Codex diplomaticus regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae
et Slavoniae, voll. ii-viii (Agram 1904-10), edidit Academia Slavorum meridio-
nalium. The first volume, which is to replace Radki's Documenta, has not yet
appeared. See also the excellent ethnographical study by C. Jirec'ek, 'Die
Romanen in den Stadten Dalmatiens wahrend des Mittelalters/ in Denkschriften
d. Kais.Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, voll. 48(1902) part 3, and 49(1 904) part i ; and the
standard philological treatise by M. G. Bartoli, 'Das Dalmatische/ in Kais. Akad.
d. Wiss., Schriften der Balkan-Kommission, linguistische Abteilung, voll. iv-v
(Vienna 1906). Palaeographically important is the monograph by M. v. SufBay,
'Die dalmatinische Privaturkunde/ in Sitzungsber. d.Kais.Akadid. Wiss. in Wien,
vol. 147 (1904) part vi. On the culture of Dalmatia there is an article by
Fr. Racki in Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije, cxv (1893) 37 sqq. Most of my
information about Dalmatia I owe to the very generous assistance of Prof.
C. Jirecek of the University of Vienna and of Mgr. Fr. Bulic, Director of the
archaeological museum of Spalato, both eminent authorities on Dalmatia. It
is with pleasure that I make public acknowledgement to them of my profound
sense of gratitude as well as admiration. For information on MSS. in Ragusa
I am indebted to the great kindness of the learned Dominican P. Ant. Zaninovic'.
2 E. A. Freeman, Historical Essays, 3rd series, 2nd ed. (London 1892) pp.
22 sqq.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 61
circumstance which has heretofore practically escaped
attention. 1 The fact can have but one interpretation : it
shows that the Latin culture of Dalmatia flowed chiefly from
Southern Italy. Had no historical evidence concerning
mediaeval Dalmatia reached us, the peculiar script of Dalmatian
documents and MSS. from the loth to the I3th century would
have furnished patent and undeniable proof that the culture
of Dalmatia was derived to a great extent from its Italian
neighbours across the sea. As it is, the conclusion based on
palaeographical considerations is confirmed by historical facts.
In the year 986 when the monastery of S. Chrysogonus
of Zara was rebuilt, the prior and nobles of the city, desiring
to get for the abbey the most competent head possible, invited
Madius, a monk of Monte Cassino, to become its abbot. 2 At
a time when the Benedictines were practically the sole
custodians of learning, the coming to Dalmatia of a monk
schooled in the most enlightened Benedictine centre was
probably not without some importance to the culture of
Dalmatia. Relations between Monte Cassino and Ragusa
are attested by the inscription on the bronze door of Monte
Cassino, which records the patrimony of St. Benedict at the
time of Abbot Desiderius : in Dalmatia prope civitatem
Ragusiam ecclesia sanctae Mariae in loco qid dicitur in
Rabiata? The Benedictine abbey of Lacroma, near Ragusa,
was founded in 1023 by Peter, a monk from the Tremiti
Islands. 4 Between these islands and Monte Cassino there
1 Our text-books nowhere mention the fact. The Croatian scholar Fr. Racki
was probably the first to call attention to it in Rad Jug. Akad. xxvi (1874)
1 66, 1 68. It has been more clearly stated by Prof. v. Sufflay in Szdzadok
(Rev. of the Hungar. Histor. Society) xxxix (1905) 301 sq. Knowledge of this
article I owe to the kindness of Prof. v. Sufflay himself. For the translation
I am indebted to Dr. Scheffler. For the translation of some of Raki's articles
I am obliged to the courtesy of the Rev. P. Zee.
2 Racki, Documenta hist. Chroat., &c., p. 21.
5 Tosti, Storiadella badiadi Monte Casstno, i (Naples 1842) 407 ; Smiciklas,
Cod. dipl) &c., i. 212, 285, 294.
4 Farlati, op. cit. vi. 44. The original charter is missing, but two copies (one
in Beneventan) are preserved in the archives of Ragusa.
62 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
were constant and varied relations in the nth century. We
know from an extant MS. that the Beneventan script was
used on the islands. 1 After the conflagration in Ragusa
three monks of Monte Cassino are supposed to have come
over to restore the Benedictine order in that city. 2 A Bari
architect took a leading part in the construction, about 1 1 99,
of the Ragusa cathedral. 3 In 1081 and again between 1185
and 1192 Ragusa made common cause with the Normans of
South Italy. 4 The town of Cattaro, situated between Ragusa
and Antivari, was subject to the ecclesiastical rule of the Arch-
bishop of Bari. 5 It is a well-known fact that there was con-
tinuous commercial intercourse between the cities of Apulia
and those of Dalmatia. 6
That the Latin culture of the eastern shore of the Adriatic
should be but an extension of that which prevailed on the
western is natural enough. But the remarkable fact is that
the dominant forces in that culture were Apulian rather than
North Italian, as script and dialect show. Until the I5th cen-
tury, when it began to yield to the Venetian, the dialect of
Dalmatia resembled more that of Apulia than any dialect of
North Italy. 7 And the style of Beneventan writing usually
practised in Dalmatia is of the variety represented by the Bari
type, that is to say, by the type which we find throughout
Apulia. 8
As Dalmatian centres of importance may be mentioned
1 The MS. Vatic, lat. 10657, Diplomata abbatiae S. Mariae de Mare. See
below, p. 76.
2 Farlati, op. cit. vi. 45.
3 According to an unpublished chronicle of Gondola to which Prof. Jirectek
kindly called my attention.
4 See Heinemann, Geschichte d. Normannen in Unteritalien u. Sicilien, &c.,
i (1894) 313, and Smiciklas, Cod. dipl.^ &c., ii. 201, 245.
6 Jirecek, op. cit. i. 47.
6 Jirecek, ' Die Bedeutung von Ragusa in der Handelsgeschichte des Mittel-
alters/ in Almanack d. Kais. Akad. d. Wissenschaften in Wien> xlix (1899) 375.
7 Cf. JireSek, Die Romanen^ &c., i. 79 ; Bartoli, op. cit. i. 312-3.
8 See the list of MSS. in the Bari type given below, p. 151 sq.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 63
Spalato, Ragusa, Zara, and Trau, especially Zara, which pos-
sessed the Benedictine houses of S. Chrysogonus and S. Maria,
the latter a nunnery which is still in existence.
The fact that the documents of Dalmatia from the loth to
the 1 2th century were written in Beneventan 1 would naturally
suggest that the same script was employed in the production
of books. 2 The extant Beneventan MSS. which originated in
Dalmatia make this quite certain. The following have come
to my notice :
Agram, Archiep. library. Fragment of Psalter a. 1015-
1030. Written by the deacon Maius for Archbishop Paul
of Spalato. 3 See chapter xiv, p. 331.
Berlin Theol. Quart. 278. Evangeliarium. Saec. xi ex.
'Liber ecclesie sancti Symeonis ' (fol. i). On foil. i v , 191, and
I9i v Beneventan entries in which Zara is mentioned. 4
Cattaro, Pontificalis fragm. Saec. xii . Found in Ragusa by
the Franciscan P. Rode, its present custodian (S. Chiara at
Cattaro). 5
1 Cf. Raki, Doc. hist. Chroal.} the documents numbered 20, 29, 32, 36,
38, 42, 53> 54, 57, 60, 61, 63*, 7ia, 85, 97, 124, 136; Sufflay, Szdzadok,
xxxix. 302, n. 23.
2 Prof. v. Sufflay (op. cit., p. 302) is of opinion that Beneventan was the ruling
script of Dalmatia and ordinary minuscule the exception. I am inclined to agree
with this view for these reasons: (i) the Beneventan script lasted in Dalmatia,
as several MSS. show, to the end of the i3th century, a fact which, to my mind,
presupposes the predominance of Beneventan during the centuries preceding;
(2) in a nota librorum which we find in the nth-century inventory of St. Peter,
a monastery in Selo, over two dozen liturgical books are recorded, the last item
being: psalterium cum litter is francigenis (Racki, op. cit., p. 181, doc. no. 142).
As nothing is said of the script of the other MSS. it is reasonable to suppose that
French letters (i. e. ordinary minuscule) were the exception in this region ; and
if this interpretation is correct, it follows that Beneventan was the normal script.
A parallel case has been cited above, p. 24, n. 6.
3 RaSki in Starine Jugoslavenska Akademtja, vii (1875) 47 sq. and pi. 2 ; and
Sufflay in Szdzadok, xxxix. 302, n. 23. My attention was called to these articles
by Prof. v. Sufflay.
4 For information on this MS. I am indebted to Dr. E. Jacobs of the Berlin
Royal Library and to Dr. L. Bertalot.
6 See A. Zaninovic* in Rassegna Gregoriana^ x (1911) 389 sqq.
64 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
Chantilly, Musee Conde. Necrologium Ragusanum. Saec.
xiii. Four leaves taken out of the cover of an Aldine edition
of Xenophon (1503) Anciens Imprimes, no. I994. 1
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Bibl. lat. 6 1 . E vangeliarium. Saec. xi ex.
Written for the nuns of St. Mary of Zara, as appears from
prayers on fol. 123.*
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277. Monastic Hours. Saec. xi ex.
Written for a Benedictine nunnery of Zara, as Litany shows
(foil. 69-72^.3
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 342. Missal. Saec. xiii. For the
use of Ragusa, as appears from the saints named, fol. 87 sq. 4
Ragusa, Library of Dominicans. Fragments from eight dif-
ferent MSS. 5 :
(a) Homeliar. Saec. xi ex. 4 leaves.
(6) Haymo, Expos, in 2 Corinth. Saec. xi. 2 leaves.
Pure Bari type.
(<:) Vet. Test. 2 Reg. Saec. xii. 2 leaves. Recalls
Bari type.
(d) Expos, in Psal. 118,119. Saec. xi. i leaf. Formerly
in the monastery S. Pietro Martire in Cittavecchia
di Lessina (Starigrad). Discovered by A. Zanino-
vid, its present guardian.
(e) Homeliar. Saec. xi. i leaf. Recalls Bari type.
1 The obit of Archbishop Bonaventura, who died 1293, is entered in Bene-
ventan. I learned of these leaves from the late L. Delisle ; M. G. Macon of
the Muse*e Condd kindly furnished me with photographs.
2 Cf. Madan, A Summary CataL of Western MSS. in the Bodleian Library,
v, p. xv (Nicholson's addition).
3 Cf. Madan, op. cit. iv. 372 and v, p. xiv (Nicholson's addition).
4 Cf. Madan, op. cit. iv. 386 and v, p. xvi, where H. M. Bannister's correct
view is adopted.
5 The Dominican scholar P. A. Zaninovic* kindly furnished me with tracings
and detailed descriptions of these fragments. I am indebted to him for my know-
ledge of them.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 65
(f) Homeliar. Saec. xi. 2 leaves. The writing seems
identical with that of the preceding MS.
(g) Sententiae PP. Saec. xii. 4 leaves. Script recalls
later Bari type.
(k) Expos, in Vet. Test. Saec. xi. i leaf. Bari type.
Rome Vatic. Borgian. lat. 339. Evangeliarium a. 1082.
Written in Ossero in the monastery of St. Nicholas. 1
Spalato, Archiv. Capitol. Evangeliarium. Saec. viii in.
Uncial. A few additions are in Beneventan (foil. 135, 136,
136*, 242^.2
Spalato, Archiv. Capitol. HistoriaSalonitana. Saec. xiii. 3
In all probability the autograph of Thomas, Archdeacon of
Spalato (fi268).
Trau, Archiv. Capitol. Evangeliarium. Saec. xii. 4 Very
interesting miniatures.
Vienna University, Instit. f. oester. Geschichtsforschung.
Fragments of various liturgical MSS. 5 bought of a book-
binder of Trau, where they in all probability originated.
Zara, Archives of the Convent of St. Mary. Codex S. Mariae
ladrensis. Saec. xii. Part i is Beneventan. 6
Zara, Archiep. Archives. Codex monasterii S. Grisogoni.
Saec. xii. 7
1 Cf. Ebner, Iter Italicum, p. 308; Cagin in Rev. des biblio/heques, xii (1902)
41-73. Facs. in Ehrle-Liebaert, Spedmina codd. lat. Vatic .^ pi. 16; H. M.
Bannister, Paleog. musicale Vaticana^ pi. 73!).
a The Rev. Mgr. Fr. Buli kindly furnished me with tracings of these addi-
tions. For a detailed description of the MS. see Ephemeris Spalatensis (1894)
PP- 33 sqq.
3 Cf. I. KrSnjavi, Zur Historia Salonitana des Thomas Archidiaconus von
Spalaio (Agram 1900) p. 3 sq.
4 The script is of the Bari type. The miniatures, according to P. Liebaert,
are Byzantine. The MS. is, I believe, a local product. Of the Trau MS.
I learned from Dr. R. Eisler. Photographs were sent me by Mgr. Fr. Buli.
* Several of the fragments show the Bari type of writing. My attention
was called to them by Dr. Eisler.
6 Cf. RaSki, Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije^ xxvi (1874) 166; Sufflay, Die
ddlmatinischt Privaturkunde, p. 41.
7 Cf. RaSki, ibid, xxxvi (1876) 140 ; Sufflay, op. cit., p. 42, n.i ; p. 153, n. 5.
1445 F
66 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
THE CENTRES AND THEIR KNOWN PRODUCTS
LIST OF LOCALIZED MSS.
The extant Beneventan MSS. of known origin constitute
our surest guide for reconstructing the centres in the Bene-
ventan zone. In the list which follows I have tried to indicate
briefly the reasons which led me to connect a MS. with this
or that centre. The evidence is varied in its nature, but
I have included nothing which did not present either certainty
or strong probability in its favour. In some cases the origin
of a MS. is known, in others only the provenance. Occasion-
ally a subscription gives us unimpeachable evidence for origin.
More often the liturgy of a MS. betrays its home, as for
instance mention of local saints, dedication of local churches,
prayers for a given bishop or abbot, or obituary entries of
various sorts. In some books the contents may at times
furnish a trustworthy hint of the locality which produced
them. The ex libris, being later entries, do not always give
us the original home. Thus the MSS. Paris lat. 7530 and
Rome Casanat. 641, part i, have a 15th-century ex libris which
connects them with Benevento, yet as a matter of fact they origi-
nated in Monte Cassino, as their contents prove.
Facsimile of the usual Monte Cassino ' Ex libris*.
Iste liber est sacri monasterii Casinensis No. 936
Facsimile of a Beneventan * Ex libris '.
UvvC
9
liber ecclesie maioris beneuentane
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE .67
In the following list a star is prefixed to MSS. which are
reproduced and described in Scriptura Beneventana. See the
works there cited. For literature on the different centres see
above, pp. 49 sqq. Where the evidence for the origin of a MS.
is obvious (e. g. a breviary for the use of Monte Cassino, a mar-
tyrology for the use of Benevento, &c.) no authorities are cited.
Bari. See above, pp. 56 sqq. Two *Exultet Rolls 1 and
a Benedictio fontis lie in the cathedral library. 2 The MS.
*Oxford Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 1 75 has an acrostic referring to
Melus of Bari, and the following entry (fol. iO9 v ) which connects
it with Bari : * sciatur liber iste esse accomodatus a cappella beati
Nicolai.' Rome Casanat. noi (A II 3 2) has quire marks like
those of the Oxford MS. The writing is of the pure Bari type.
The MS. Vienna 394 (Leges Langob.), saec. xii/xiii, has on
fol. 96 V an entry relating to a person from Bari : ' iste liber est
abbatisGuillielmi Macciacocte de Baro,' &c. 3 The script shows
the later Bari type.
Benevento. See above, p. 52 sq. There are still forty-
one Beneventan MSS. preserved in the Biblioteca Capitolare
of Benevento. The following MSS. originated in Benevento :
Cava 4 (inner evidence). 4
London Add. MS. 23776 (Martyrol. S. Sophiae Benev.).
Macerata Biblioteca Comunale (Pontificate monasterii
S. Petri Benev.). 5
*Naples VI 43 (Breviarium S. Sophiae Benev.).
Naples San Martino 3 (Hymnar. eccl. Beneventanae).
1 On 'Exultet' rolls see Dom Latil, Le miniature nei rotuli dell' Exultet (Monte
Cassino 1899-1901); . Bertaux, L'art dans t Italic me'ridionale (Paris 1904)
i. 216 sqq., and the accompanying Iconographie compare des rouleaux de
t Exultet \ H. M. Bannister in Jour. Theol. Stud, xi (1909) 43 sqq.
8 On the Bari rolls see Codice Diplomatic Barese (Bari 1897)1. 205 sqq.;
Bertaux, and Bannister, opp. citt.
8 Cf. Cod. Dip. Barese, i. 184, where the name occurs. The document was
pointed out to me by Dr. E. Carusi.
4 Bluhme, Mon. Germ. Hist. Legg. iv, p. xxx and p. 652, n. 27.
5 Cf. Colini-Baldeschi in Atti e Memorie della R. deputazione di storia patria
per le provincie delk Marche, Nuova Serie, i (1904) 441 sqq.
F 2
68 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
Naples San Martino 1 1 (Breviarium monasterii S. Deodati
Benev.).
*Rome Casanat. 1086 (contents and provenance). 1
Rome Casanat. 724, part i (Pontificale signed ' Landolfi
episcopi sum'). 2
Rome Casanat. 724, part ii (Benedictio fontis ; the added
verses :
Egregius presul landolfus sanctior alter
tempore sub cuius dicata est virginis aula,
probably refer to Landolfus II of Benevento). 3
*Vatic. lat. 4928 (Annales Benev.).
*Vatic. lat. 4939 (Chron. S. Sophiae Benev.).
Vatic, lat. 4955 (historical note regarding, Landulfus of
S. Sophia, see p. 78).
Vatic, lat. 5419 (Necrolog. S. Laurent. Benev.).
*Vatic. lat. 5949 (Martyrol. S. Sophiae Benev.).
* Vatic, lat. 98 20 (Exultet Roll S. Petri Benev.).
The following MSS. have a I5jth-century#/*r& connecting
them with Benevento. 4 See facsimile on p. 66.
* Paris lat. 7530 (Monte Cassino) : lib" ecc e ben( n ) e , fol. i.
*Rome Casanat. 641, part i (Monte Cassino) : lib. maioris
ecc e ben n ( e ), fol. i.
*Rome Casanat. 1086 : liber maioris ecc e ben ne , fol. 26 V .
* Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823 : lib maioris ecc e ben ne , fol. i ; lib ecc e
ben ne , fol. 1 1 8.
* Vatic, lat. 3313 : lib prisciani ecc e ben ne , fol. i ; ecclie maioris
ben ne , fol. 28 1 v .
*Vatic. Regin. lat. 1267: lib ecc e maioris ben ne , fol. i5O v .
1 Morelli, Rendiconti della Reale Accademia dei Lincet\ ser. v, vol. xix (1910)
288, n. 2. Mark of ownership by hand of i5th century: ' liber maioris
ecce ben n * (fol. 26 V ).
1 Landolfus I of Benevento (957-83). Script and style and decoration
favour this date. This roll doubtless goes together with the ' Benedictio fontis '
which later belonged to Landolfus II (1108-19). Bertaux, op. cit., p. 214 sq.
3 E. A. Loew, Die altesten Kahndarien aus Monte Cassino, p. 7, n. 3.
4 Loew, op. cit., p. 5, n. 2.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 69
*Vatic. lat. 5007 (Naples) : iste lib" ben, fol. I ; iste lift e
d(omni) Barth(olom)ei condest(abuli) de ben to (last leaf).
Excepting the first two and the last the above MSS. may
very well have originated in Benevento.
Bisceglie. Evangeliarium in the cathedral library, pre-
sumably a local product. Script shows the Bari type. 1
Caiazzo. Vatic. Barb. lat. 603 (XIII 12). Missale. The
liturgy and an exlidrisnvvj lost connect the book with Caiazzo.-
Capua. See above, p. 53. The cathedral library has an
Exultet Roll. 3 The following MSS. of Capuan origin now
lie in Monte Cassino :
*Monte Cassino 175 (written for Abbot John I of Capua).
* Vatic, lat. 5845 (palaeographical grounds). Shows same
characteristics as preceding MS. See Script. Benev., pi . 40.
*Monte Cassino 269 (subscription). See below, p. 325.
*Monte Cassino 23o(obit of 'docibilis abb.'speaks for Capua).
* Register of S. Angelo in Formis (contents).
Cava. See above, p. 51. Only a dozen Beneventan MSS.
are found in Cava, and not all of these originated there.
The MSS. 3, *i8, *IQ, and *24, however, are authentic Cava
products. The MS. Vatic, lat. 3764 once belonged to Cava.
It is very doubtful whether it was written there.
Fondi. Paris Nouv. Acq. lat. 710. Exultet Roll. 4 The
prayers * antistite nostro Benedicto (noo) cum omni congre-
gatione beatissimi Petri/ &c., refer to Fondi.
Gaeta. Three Exultet Rolls. 5 Doubtless local products, to
judge from writing and miniatures.
MirabellaEclano. Exultet Roll. 6 Probablya local product.
1 The Prussian Historical Institute at Rome possesses a photograph. Prof.
Haseloff kindly called my attention to it.
2 See PaUographie musicale, ii, pi. 23.
8 The MS. of the Acts and Epistles in the Seminario Arcivescovile at Capua
is not a local product, as it shows the Bari type. The same is true of the MS. of
Augustine. For tracings of the latter I am obliged to the director of the
Seminary, Cav. Luigi Piccirillo. On the Exultet cf. Mon. Pal. Sacra, pi. 32 ;
see also p. 67, n. i.
4 See above, p. 67, n. i. Facs. in Latil, op. cit. 8 See p. 67, n. i. ' ibid.
, 7 o THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
Monte Cassino. See above, pp. 49 sqq. Of the more than
200 MSS. in Beneventan writing now in Monte Cassino, not
all were written there. Some came from Capua, 1 others from
S. Maria di Albaneta, still others from neighbouring monas-
teries like S. Benedetto di Cesamo, S. Benedetto di Clia, and
S. Nicola della Cicogna. The finest and most important Cassi-
nese products now lie in other libraries : some of the best exam-
ples, from the point of view of calligraphy and decoration, are
in Rome, London, Paris, and Naples. The most valuable
classical texts are now in the Laurentian library at Florence.
The following MSS. come from Monte Cassino :
Arezzo S. Maria della Fraternita MS. VI 3. Itinerarium
Aetheriae (Peregrinatio Silviae) and Hilarii Liber Myste-
riorum, the latter written for Abbot Desiderius, the former
used by Petrus Diaconus, therefore of Cassinese origin. 2
Bologna Univ. 2843 (S. Salvatore 486). The MS. contains
a small dedication copy destined for Pope Gregory VII of
a work by the Cassinese monk Amatus, copied in icyo. 3
*Cava 2. Has calendar of Monte Cassino.
Flor. Laurent. 29. 2. Apuleius. A copy of Flor. Laurent.
68. 2, which comes from Monte Cassino. As the Bene-
ventan classics of the Laurentian form, I believe, one
group, the presumption is that MS. 29. 2 is also of Cassi-
nese origin.
Flor. Laurent. 51. i o. Varro, De lingua latina. Where
Casinum is mentioned in the text there is a Nota in the
margin an entry which has suggested to Spengel the
idea that the MS. came from Monte Cassino. The script
supports this view. 4
1 The list given by Caravita, 1 codici^ &c., i. 101, is to be used with caution.
The list is reprinted in BibL Casin. i, Appendix, p. Ivii.
2 See Gamurrini, Sanctae Silviae Aquitanae Peregrinatio ad sancta loca 2
(1888) ; A. Wilmart in Rev. Ben/d. xxv (1908) 466.
3 L. Frati, Indice dei codici latini conservati nella R. Biblioteca universitaria
di Bologna (1909) p. 548.
4 Traube, Textgeschichte d.Reg. S. Ben?, p. 91.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 71
Flor. Laurent. 66. i. Hegesippus. The script is unmistak-
ably Cassinese of the early nth century. 1
Flor. Laurent. 66. 21. Justin. A 15th-century entry onfol. i :
' Iste liber est ecc e Casinen.' This is not the usual ex
libris of Monte Cassino MSS. 2 reproduced above, p. 66.
Flor. Laurent. 68. 2. Tacitus, Apuleius. The entire history
of the MS., as well as the writing, speaks clearly for
Monte Cassino as its home. 3
London Add. MS. 30337. Exultet Roll. Script, decoration,
and provenance speak for Cassinese origin. The MSS.
Vatic, lat. 3784 and Vatic. Barb. lat. 592 are stylistically
related and come from the same scriptorium. 4
Madrid 19 (A 16). Contents and illustrations are said to
connect the MS. with Monte Cassino. 5
Milan Ambros. C 90 inf. Seneca. On fol. 2 V is the 15th-
century ex libris : ' iste liber est . . . Congregationis Casi-
nensis signatus sub numero . . .' The book may have
been presented by Monte Cassino to a monastery of
its congregation. The script is unmistakably Cassinese
in type. In 1583 the MS. belonged to Antonio Fran-
cesco Caracciolo at Messina. 6
*Munich 4623. Leo Ostiensis, Chron. Casin. with autograph
additions. Manifestly of Cassinese origin.
* Naples VIII C 4. Martyrol. Casinense.
* Paris lat. 7530. Has calendar of Monte Cassino. In the
1 5th century the MS. lay in Benevento, as appears from
the ex libris (see above, p. 68).
1 Not Desiderian, as Mommsen conjectured. Cf. M. G. H. Chron. Min. i. 355.
* G. Mercati in Miscellanea di studi in onore di Attilio Hortis, p. 977, n. i ;
Sabbadini, Le scoperte dei codict, &c., p. 31, n. 40.
8 See Rostagno's preface in the Leyden Series, Codd. Gr. et Lat. photogra-
phice depicti, vol. vii, pars 2.
4 Bertaux, op. cit., p. 226 sqq. ; Pal. Soc. i, pi. 146. See also works cited
above, p. 67, n. i.
5 See P. v. Winterfeld, Festschrift Johannes Vahlen (Berlin 1900) p. 395 sq.,
on whose authority I give the MS. here. I have not myself seen it.
See Gertz, L. Ann. Senecae Dial. lib. xn, p. v.
72 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
* Paris Mazar. 364. Breviarium Casinense. Cf. Vatic. Urbin.
lat. 585, which it closely resembles.
* Rome Casanat. 641, part i. Has calendar of Monte Cas-
sino. After the end of the 9th century it lay in Bene-
vento. It was still there in the 1 5th century, as can be seen
from the ex libris cited above, p. 68.
* Vatic, lat. 1202. Vita S. Benedicti, &c. Written for Abbot
Desiderius, as may be seen from acrostic verses in his
honour on fol. i v .
Vatic, lat. 1203. Desiderius, Miracula S. Benedicti. Script
and contents speak strongly for Monte Cassino. 1
Vatic, lat. 3227. Cicero's Philippics, &c. On fol. 24 in right
margin is the entry CASINUM written vertically. On
the last page is the probatio pennae : * Raynaldi dei gratia '
(sc. abbatis casinensis\ These two items speak for Cassi-
nese origin and the writing supports them.
Vatic, lat. 3262. Ovid. On fol. i v by hand of i6th century
the characteristic ex libris : ' Iste liber est sac* monas.
Casinen. No. 743 '. See facs., p. 66. For other MSS. with
this entry see G. Mercati, op. cit., p. 976 sq.
Vatic, lat. 3784. Exultet Roll. Cf. London Add. MS. 30337.
*Vatic. lat. 4958. Martyrol. Casinense. On fol. i v the usual
ex libris. See facs., p. 66.
Vatic, lat. 5735. Gregor. M. Dial. Cassinese ex libris on
fol. i, partly erased. See facs., p. 66.
Vatic, lat. 6082. Missale Casinense. Ex libris on fol. i, now
hardly visible. See facs., p. 66.
Vatic. Barb. lat. 592 (XIII i). Exultet Roll. Cf. London
Add. MS. 30337.
Vatic. Barb. lat. 631 (XIV 4). Pontificate Casinense. On fol. i
the ex libris of Monte Cassino. See facs., p. 66.
* Vatic. Borgian. lat. 2 1 1 . Cassinese calendar. The MS.
belonged to Leo Ostiensis. Through him it came to
Velletri. The same is doubtless true of the Velletri Exultet.
1 Bethmann in Peitz' Archiv, xii (1874) 224.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 73
Vatic. Ottob. lat. 3. Martyrol. Casinense. On fol. i of the
MS. proper the ex libris is still discernible. See facs., p. 66.
Vatic. Ottob. gr. 250. Pieces of a beautiful martyrology,
used to strengthen the binding of a Greek MS. from
Monte Cassino, as appears from entry on fol. 9, ' Nilus ex
Monte Cassino.' The script is of the best period.
Vatic. Ottob. lat. 1406. Porphyrius, Cicero, Boethius. On
fol. ii the usual Cassinese ex libris. See facs., p. 66. A
different entry on fol. i : ' iste Lit) e Mon Casin ' (man. s.xiv).
Vatic. Ottob. lat. 1939. Macrobius, &c. On fol. ii the Cas-
sinese ex libris : see facs., p. 66. On fol. i (man. s. xiv) :
1 Liber fratrum Casin/ &c.
*Vatic. Urbin. lat. 585. Breviarium Casinense. Cf. *Paris
Mazar. 364.
*Vatican Archives Regesti Vat. i. Register of John VIII.
On fol. i (man. s. xiii ex.) : * liber fratrum casinensium.'
Velletri Exultet Roll. Presumably brought thither by Leo
Ostiensis. See Vatic. Borgian. lat. 21 1. 1
Monte Vergine. Vatic, lat. 5100. Evangeliarium.
(Liturgical evidence. 2 )
Naples. See above, p. 54 sq.
Flor. Laurent. S. Marco 604. (List of Neapolitan bishops.)
Naples VIII B i. Vitae SS. (Local saints.)
Naples VIII B 7. Vitae SS. (Local saints.)
Naples VIII B 8. Vitae SS. (Local saints.)
Rome Chigi C IV 1 13. (Liturgical evidence on fol. 92. For
use of nuns of S. Gregory of Naples. 3 )
*Rome Corsinian. 777. (Contents: Acta Aspreni, Vita S.
Athanasii ; provenance S. Severino of Naples.)
* Vatic, lat. 3375. Eugippius, in semi-uncial. The Bene-
ventan additions are presumably by a Neapolitan scribe.
1 P. Fedele, Melanges cTarchtol et dhist. xxx (1910) 313 sqq.
" H. M. Bannister, Paleografia musicale Vaticana, p. 133, no. 378.
3 A 16th-century hand wrote on the fly-leaf: ' Off. B. Virg. Sanctimonialium
uenerab. et uetust. monast. S. Gregorii epl Magne. Armenie. et Martyris quod
Neapoli olim sub regula S. Basilii graecis ritibus diu floruit, nunc uero obseruant
regulam S. Benedicti.'
74 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
*Vatic. lat. 5007. Gesta Episc. Neapolit. The Beneventan
portion is regarded by Waitz as probably autograph, hence
Neapolitan. 1
* Vatic. Pal. lat. 909. Historia Miscella. Presumably of
Neapolitan origin. 2
The following MSS. lay in Naples. One or more of them
may have originated there :
Monte Cassino 805. August. Sermones. On last p. 'est mon.
SS. Severini et Sosii a Neapoli '. A similar entry on fol. i .
* Vienna 2 7. Servius on Virgil. Belonged to the Augustinian
monastery of S. Giovanni a Carbonara. 3
* Vienna 58. Virgil. Belonged to the same monastery.
Vienna 981. Comment, in Psalmos. 'Liber monachorum
congregationis S. lustine de Padua deputatum Mon.
Sanctorum Severini et Sosii/
Vienna 1188. Bible. ' Ex dono V. Cl mi Michaelis Troysii
V. I. D. Archivio domus SS. Apostolorum clericorum
Regularium de urbe Neapolis/
Ossero (Dalmatia 4 ). Vatic. Borgian. lat. 339. Evange-
liarium. Liturgy used in Monastery of S. Nicola in Os-
sero ; cf. foil. 59, 8 1.
Ragusa (Dalmatia 5 ). *Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 342.
Ragusa missal. Chantilly, Musee Conde. Fragments of a
Ragusa necrology. The Beneventan fragments in Ragusa
mentioned above, p. 64 sq., may in part at least have
originated there.
Salerno. See above, p. 56. The chapter library has two
Beneventan MSS.: (i) Gospel of St. Luke and Liber confratrum
S. Matthaei ; (2) a Lectionarium. The MS. *Vatic. lat. 3973,
Chronicon Romualdi ep. Salernitani, came to the Vatican from
Salerno, doubtless its original home.
S. Angelo in Formis. See Capua. Monte Cassino 49
1 See above, p. 55. 2 ibid.
r> On the Vienna MSS. see above, p. 55, n. 7.
4 See list of Dalmatian MSS. given on pp. 63 sqq.
8 ibid.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 75
has a very interesting catalogue of its books. See above,
p. 59, note i.
S. Bartolomeo di Carpineto. Martyrologium of this
abbey in library of H. Yates Thompson, Esq., in London.
MS. no. 8 in the Catalogue. 1
S. Benedetto di Cesamo. Monte Cassino MSS. 271,
543, 760, as appears from the ex libris. Cf. Caravita, / codici,
&c., i. 112.
S. Benedetto di Clia. Monte Cassino 52, as appears
from the ex libris. Caravita, i. in.
S. Liberatore alia Majella. See above, p. 58. Some
of the Theobaldan MSS. in Monte Cassino probably originated
in this abbey.
S. Lorenzo in Carminiano. *Naples vi B 3 (subscrip-
tion). See below, p. 322.
S. Maria di Albaneta. The MSS. from this monastery
are now in Monte Cassino. We know that * Monte Cassino 305
was written in Albaneta. See above, p. 58. The following MSS.
show the Albaneta ex libris \ Monte Cassino 51, 74, 81, 127,
198, *305, 310, 31 7, 3^, 426, 463, 521, 535. According to
Caravita (i. 107) some others may have come from Albaneta.
S. Michele. Monte Cassino 103. On last leaf the entry
' olim S. Michaeli'. Caravita, i. 108, 112 ; ii. 74 sq.
S. Nicola della Cicogna. The MSS. Monte Cassino 1 79,
191, and 372, as appears from the ex libris. Caravita, i. 109,
112; ii. 44.
S. Vincenzo al Volturno. *London Add. MS. 5463
(subscription). Later it belonged to the convent of
S. Peter in Benevento. For literature see above, p. 41, n. 6.
*Vatic. Barb. lat. 2724 (XXXIV4i). Chron. Vulturnense.
Rome ChigiD V 77, as appears from litany on fol. 45.
The names of SS. Benedict and Vincent are the only ones
1 M. R. James, A descriptive catalogue of fifty MSS. in the collection of
H. Y. Thompson (1898) p. 37. Both D. Quentin (Les martyrologes, p. 691)
and myself (Die dltesten Kalendarien^ $c., p. 83) came independently to the
conclusion that the MS. belonged to the Abbey in the Abruzzi.
7 6 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
specially decorated. On fol. 65 are prayers for the abbot
of St. Vincent.
Rome Vallicell. D 8. Bible. Has a 15th-century entry on
fol. 101 v which connects it with St. Vincent : ' Anno
domini MCCCCLXXX ... in quo tempore regnabat Ferdi-
nandus rex feliciter et Karolus prothonotarius et Vrsinus
perpetuus commendatarius monasterii sancti Vincentii,'&c.
*Vienna 68. Medicine. May come from this abbey. On
fol. i in upper margin is the entry : ' Ego ursus offero
hunc lirum (sic) in ecclesie sancti uincen(tii) . . .'
Sora. Oxford Bodl. Douce 127. The liturgy of the Psalter
speaks for Sora. 1 Vatic. Regin. lat. 334. Benedictine proces-
sional for use of Sora. 2
Sorrento. Exultet Roll. Now preserved at Monte
Cassino. Presumably a local product. 3
Spalato (Dalmatia). Evangeliarium with Beneventan addi-
tions. 4 *Historia Salonitana, probably the autograph of
Thomas, Archdeacon of Spalato. 5 Agram, Fragmentum
Psalterii. 6
Sulmona. Vatic, lat. 1197. Verses on fol. xiii refer to
Bishop Walter and to relics of S. Pelini, a local saint. The
MS. came to the Vatican directly from Sulmona. 7
Teramo. The chartulary of the church of Teramo.
Nine leaves in Beneventan. 8
Trau (Dalmatia). Evangeliarium in the cathedral library.
Probably a local product. 9
Tremiti Islands. Vatic, lat. 10657. Diplomata Abbatiae
S. Mariae de Mare. 10
1 F. Madan, A Summary Catalogue of Western MSS. in the Bodleian Library,
iv. 530.
2 H. M. Bannister, Paleografia tnusicale Vaticana, p. 126, no. 364.
3 See above, p. 67, n. i. Facs. in Latil, op. cit.
4 See above, p. 65. 6 ibid. 6 See above, p. 63.
7 Ehrensberger, Libri lilurgici bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaiicanae, p. 96.
8 Savini, II car Mario della chiesa Teramana (Rome 1910) p. xii sq.
9 See above, p. 65.
30 Gay, in Melanges d'archeol. et Jhist. xvii (1897) 387 sqq.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 77
Troja. See above, p. 59. An Exultet Roll is preserved in
Troja. 1 The following MSS. lay or originated there: Naples
VI B 2 (historical note on fol. i) ; *Naples VI B 12 (being of the
9th century it could not have originated in Troja. It lay there
in the I2th century, as appears from the entry on fol. 26o v ,
see above, p. 59). The following Beneventan MSS. belonged
to Aemilius Jacobus Cavalerius, bishop of Troja (died 1739) :
Naples VI AA 3, VI AA 4, VI B 1 1, VI B 13, VI D I, VI G 34, VIII B 3,
VIII B 4, VIII B 5, VIII B 6. It is at least probable that several of
them were written in Troja.
Veroli. *Rome Vallicell. B 32. * Liber capituli ecclesiae
Verulanae. ' Contains necrology of the monastery of S. Antonio
in Veroli. On the back of several Veroli documents from the
monastery of St. Erasmus I noted that the labelling of contents
was in excellent Beneventan. In the Veroli catalogue of 1336
given above, p. 38, eight MSS. are described as Beneventan.
Zara (Dalmatia 2 ). Berlin Theol. Quart. 278. Evangeliarium.
Notes on foil, i, 191, i9i v connect it with Zara. See p. 63.
*Oxford Bodl. Canon. Bibl. lat. 61. Evangel. See p. 64.
* Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277. Prayer book for the use of
the nunnery of St. Mary in Zara. See p. 64.
SOME HISTORICAL EVIDENCE OF LITERARY
ACTIVITY IN THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
The preceding list of MSS. has furnished some direct evi-
dence of copying and literary activity in the various centres of
the Beneventan zone. As indirect evidence of that activity
the following historical notices will be found of particular
interest. Since reference has been made to them in preceding
pages, no special comment is necessary. The identification
of the books mentioned below with extant MSS. is a subject
which deserves separate and detailed discussion and cannot
be attempted here.
1 See Latil, op. cit. 8 See list of Dalmatian MSS. given an pp. 63 sqq.
78 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
BENEVENTO l
Of Landulfus, monk of S. Sophia
Fuit his temporibus in hoc sacro S. Sophiej monasterio uir ualde
uenerabilis memorie, nomine Landulfus sacerdos et monachus per xvi
fere annos inclusus, cuius cella iuncta fuit e.cclesi muro de foris, quod
adhuc usque apparet in muro ecclesi^.
Vir iste deo fuit plenus uigiliis et orationibus ieiuniis et helemosinis
semper intentus, cuius studium inter cetera sue bonitatis ac pietatis
opera in acquirendis diuinis et ecclesiasticis libris S. Sophie, bibliotheca
hodie testatur. Illos etenim libros quos intra beneuenti menia rep-
perire potuit primitus conscripsit, deinde per legatos, per epistulas
omnes libraries, omniaque plutealia per Italiam ancxie circuibat, et
si opus esset dato pretio ad se uenire, eosque scribere faciebat.
Quid plura ? Totius ueteris testamenti totiusque noui libros cum
suis commentariis ubi opus erat studiosissime scripsit. Passiones
quoque martirum, actus uel obitus confessorum in xi libris ordinare
decreuit, ut unusquisque fere mensis per totum annum suum conue-
nienter haberet passionarium. Omelias denique per circuitum anni et
libros quoque diurni uel nocturni cantus qui scire uoluerit inueniet
quam eleganter composuerit.
Source : MS. Vatic, lat. 4955, fol. 209 verso, col. a (originally left
blank). The entry was added by a Beneventan hand, saec. xii. It
may refer to the Landulfus who is mentioned (as I learn from Dr. W.
Smidt) in Borgia, Memorie istoriche di Benevento^ ii. 299. He is per-
haps wrongly described as abbot in Anal. Holland, xxv. 267, n. i.
MONTE CASsiNO 2
Of Abbot Bertharius (856-84)
Qui etiam apprime litteratus nonnullos tractatus atque sermones
necnon et versus in sanctorum laude composuit. Cuius et Anticimenon
de plurimis tarn veteris quam novi Testamenti questionibus hie habetur ;
aliquot etiam de arte grammatica libri, necnon et duo codices medici-
nales, eius utique industria de innumeris remediorum utilitatibus hinc
inde collect! ; versus quoque perplures ad Angelbergam augustam
aliosque amicos suos, mira conscripti facundia. Chron. Casin. i, cap.
33 (ed. Wattenbach in M. G. H. SS. vii. 603).
1 See above, p. 52 sq. 2 See above, pp. 49 sqq.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 79
Of Abbot Aligern (949-86)
Fecit etiam crucem de argento non modicam, et textum evangelii
undique contextum argento inaurato et smaltis et gemmis . . . necnon
et codices plurimos . . . Apud Capuanum vero monasterium cum
ornamenta ecclesiastica nonnulla, et campanas atque codices aliquot
effecisset . . . Chron. Casin. ii, cap. 3 (ed. Wattenbach, p. 630 sq.).
Of Abbot John III (997-1010)
. . . codices quoque ecclesiasticos renovavit magnos et pulchros.
Chron. Casin. ii, cap. 25 (ed. Wattenbach, p. 643).
Of Abbot Theobald (1022-35)
. . . Feci autem scribere in hac praedicta ecclesia ad honore S.
Liberatoris, et S. Benedict! hos libros. Primis : Textum S. Evangelii
ex integro eius libri Comites, et manualem unum, quas vestivi ex sericis
indumentis, et desuper cruces argenteas, et gemmas, et bullas, et fibulas
similiter argenteas: Passionarium unum a festivitate S. Andreae
usque in S. Petri. Omilia Pascale una usque in Adventum Domini,
divisa in duo volumina, Prophetarum unum, Regum unum, ystoriarum
unum, Vita Patrum maiorem unum, collocutiones Patrum, collationes
Patrum, et instituta eorum in duo volumina. Moralia pars prima, et
secunda, et tertia, et super Eliud, super Marcum unum, Registum
unum : ystoria ecclesiastiea una, super Ezechiele duo. Vita S. Bene-
dict!, et S. Mauri, et S. Scholasticae in uno volumine ; Diadema
Monachorum una. Cesarium unum. Epistolae Pauli unum, Actuum
Apostolorum unum. Ysidorum unum. Librum S. Trinitatis unum,
super epistolae S. lohannis librum unum. Matricula una, Questio-
narium S. Augustini unum. Donatum unum, Hymnarium unum,
Pronostica una, Prosperum unum, Concordia canonum, et alium
librum Canonum, Orationale unum, Omelia de circuitu anni una,
conflictu vitiorum unum, Regula una, super cantica Canticorum,
inchoavimus autem Omel. quadragesimalia, Storia Anglorum, Dia-
logum S. Martini, Epistolae S. Hieronymi, quarterni pro defunctis,
Istoria Pauli Orosii, et Medi.
. . . Scripsimus autem Thimologiam S. Ysidori, et unum quaestio-
narium et alia concordia canonum, et tres antifonaria de die . . .
. ^ Ego Theobaldus abbas pro redemptione animae meae con-
8o THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
stitui in hoc monasterio S. Liberatoris quaterni de Evangelia plenari
cum Epistole S. Pauli insimul se tenentes unum ymnuarium cum
oracionale, et Breviario, et unum psalterium, unum antiphonarium de
die bullatum investitum de rubeo, et quaterni de passionario de compute.
Source: Commemoratorium Theobaldi abbatis a. 1019. Document
supposed to be in the Archives of Monte Cassino. 1 Publ. by Gattula,
Histor. Abbatiae Cassinensis, i (1733) 80 sq.; and BibL Casin. i, pp.
lix, Ixi. In 1019 Theobald was still provost of the abbey of S. Libera-
tore alia Majella.
In nomine domini nostri lesu Christi anno dominice incarnationis
MXXIII indictione VI Anno uidelicet ordinationis sue secundo. Do-
mnus theobaldus reuerentissimus abbas hunc librum de ciuitate dei,
edito a sancto augustino episcopo in hac ecclesia sancti Benedicti ubi
sacratissimum corpus eius humatum est, scribere precepit cum aliis
XX . . . codicibus. Hi sunt. In primis omelia quadraginta, Pars
prima moralium, Liber psalmorum exposito a sancto augustino diuiso
in duo uolumina, Super epistolas sancti pauli edite a claudio episcopo,
Rauanum. Librum sancte trinitatis, que deus est. Ymnaria duo in
choro semper habenda, Chronica sancti eusebii cesariensis episcopi et
hieronimi presbiteri et ysidori episcopi, et prosper! et iohanni Historia
romanorum. Historia Langobardorum. Edictum regum. Pontificale
romanorum pontificum. Liber officiorum sancti ysidori episcopi. Liber
concordie kanonum et librum kanonum. Decretale pontificum. Super
marcum edito a uenerabili Beda presbitero.
Source; MS. Monte Cassino 28^.591 sq.; publ. mi&LCasmA,p.\xi ;
Tosti, Storia della badia^ &c., i. 287 ; Caravita, I codici, &c., ii. 77 sq. ;
Reifferscheid, BibL pair. lat. Ital. ii. 321, 338 ; Becker, Catalogi bib I.
antiqui, No. 47 ; Gottlieb, Ueber mittelalt. Bibliotheken, p. 416. The
same catalogue is in MS. Monte Cassino 57.
. . . Codices quoque nonnullos quorum hie maxima paupertas usque ad
id temporis erat, describi praecepit ; quorum nomina indicamus. Au-
gustini de civitate Dei partem secundam. Eiusdem de Trinitate. Item
eiusdem super psalmos, divisum in 2 volumina. Gregorii omelias 40.
Primam partem moralium. Claudium super epistolas Pauli. Rabanum
ethimologiarum. Historiam Romanorum. Historiam Langobardorum.
1 The librarian was unable to find it when I asked to see it in April, 1912.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 81
Itinerarium totius orbis cum chronica leronimi. Martyrologium lero-
nimi plenarium. Pontificate Romanum. Hisidorum officiorum. Edi-
ctum legis Langobardorum. Concordiam canonum. Alium librum
canonum. Decreta pontificum. Super Marcum Bedae. Duo etiam
hymnaria in choro habenda. Chron. Casin. ii, cap. 52 (ed. Wattenbach,
p. 662).
Of Abbot Desiderius (1058-87)
Non solum autem in aedificiis, verum etiam in libris describendis
operam Desiderius dare permaximam studuit. Codices namque non-
nullos in hoc loco describi praecepit, quorum nomina haec sunt.
Augustinum contra Faustum. De opere monachorum. De Sermone
Domini in monte. Omelias 50. Super epistolam ad Romanos. Ser-
mones. Epistolas Pauli. De Genesi ad litteram. Epistolas eius.
Pastorale eius. De baptismo parvulorum. Ambrosium de rebus
gestis in ecclesia Mediolanensi. De Patriarchis. De fide ad Gratianum
imperatorem. Sermones eius. Registrum Leonis papae. Registrum
Felicis papae. Regulam Basilii. leronimum super Ezechielem. Super
epistolas Pauli. Super duodecim prophetas. Eugepium. Sermones
Severiani. Historiam Anastasii. Historiam Langobardorum, Gotho-
rum, et Wandalorum. Historiam lordanis episcopi de Romanis, et
Gothis. Historiam Gregorii Turonensis. losephum de bello ludaico.
Historiam Cornelii cum Omero. Historiam Erchemperti. Bedam
super Tobiam. De locis sanctis. Evangelium maiorem auro et lapidi-
bus pretiosis ornatum, in quo has reliquias posuit : de ligno Domini,
et de vestimentis sancti lohannis evangelistae. Sermones Leonis papae.
Sermones Gregorii Nazianzeni. Doctrinam patrum. Sacramentorum
cum martyrologio. Sacramentorum aliud. Ordo episcopalis. Gual-
fridum de officiis. Super regulam. Passionaria totius anni, libros
quattuor. Antiphonaria de die duo in choro semper habenda. Anti-
phonarium de nocte. Vitas patrum. Instituta patrum. Actus apo-
stolorum cum epistolis canonicis, et apocalipsin. Epistolas Pauli.
Paralipomenon. Super cantica canticorum Origenis, Gregorii, et
Berengarii. lohannem Crisostomum de reparatione lapsi. Dialogum,
quern ipse cum Alberico diacono edidit de miraculis monachorum loci
istius. Dialogum aliud. Dialogum de vita Sancti Benedicti. Hilarius
mysteriorum, et hymnorum. Sedulium de evangeliis. luvencum de
evangeliis. Medicinalis. Psalterium. Cresconium de bellis Libicis.
Versus Arichis, Pauli, et Caroli. Versus Paulini. Ciceronem de natura
Deorum. Instituta lustiniani. Novellam eius. Terentium. Oratium
82 THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
cum Geometria. Ovidium Fastorum. Senecam. Virgilium cum egloga
Theodori. Donatum. Chron. Casin. iii, cap. 63 (ed. Wattenbach,
p. 746 sq.); Gottlieb, op. cit, p. 416 and works there mentioned.
Ista praeterea ornamenta idem papa Victor ad mortem suam in hoc
monasterio dereliquid
Evangelium ipsius. Evangelium imperatoris. Evangelium papae
Stephani. Evangelium imperatricis. Duo evangelia fratris Firmi.
Evangelium abbatis Aligerni. Duo sacramentaria cum argento. Epi-
stolaria duo, unum cum tabula aurea, aliud cum tabulis argenteis.
Regulam sancti Benedicti cum tabulis argenteis. Chron. Casin. iii,
cap. 74 (ed. Wattenbach, p. 753).
NAPLES l
Of Duke John III (928-968)
Interea regnantibus Constantino et Romano 2 magnificis impera-
toribus christianorum et principatum ducatus totius Campaniae domi-
nantibus lohanne et Marino 3 excellentibus ducibus atque consulibus,
quibus quaedam necessitas accidit transmittendi missum suum usque
Constantinopolim ad eosdem prefatos imperatores. Et tune miserunt
illuc Leonem archipresbiterum valde fidelem ; quo pergente in eandem
Constantinopolitanam urbem, coepit inquirere libros ad legendum, in-
ter quos invenit historiam continentem certamina et victorias Alexan-
dri regis Macedoniae. Et nullam neglegentiam vel pigritiam habendo,
sine mora scripsit et secum usque Neapolim deduxit ad suos predictos
excellentissimos seniores et ad praeclaram et beatissimam coniugem
eius Theodoram, videlicet senatricem Romanorum, quae die noctuque
sacrae scripturae meditabatur. Viduarum namque et orfanorum atque
diversorum advenarum protectrix indeficiens permanebat, quae iuvenili
aetate cursum vitae finiens, infra tricesimum octavum annum migra-
vit ad Dominum. Post cuius transitum praefatus Johannes excellen-
tissimus consul et dux, vir eius, et Deo amabilis, statuit mente sua
ordinem scripturarum inquirere, et praeclare ordinare. Primum vero
1 See above, p. 54 sq.
a According to Capasso this refers to Romanus II who ruled with Con-
stantine VII from 945 to 959. Waitz seems to favour Romanus I who ruled
with the same Constantine between 919 and 944. See works cited below.
8 Joint rulers after 942.
THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 83
libros, quos in sua dominatione invenit, renovavit atque meliores
effectus (sic), deinde anxie inquirens sicut philosophus, quoscumque
audire vel habere potuit sive rogando seu precando multos et diversos
libros accumulavit et diligenter scribere iussit. Maxime aecclesiasticos
libros, vetus scilicet atque novum testamentum funditus renovavit
atque composuit. Inter quos historiographiam videlicet vel chrono-
graphiam, loseppum vero et Titum Livium atque Dyonisium caelestium
virtutum optimum predicatorem atque ceteros quam plurimos et
diversos doctores, quos enumerare nobis longum esse videtur, instituit.
Eodem namque tempore commemorans ille sagacissimus predictus
consul et dux, prefatum Leonem archipresbiterum habere iam dictum
librum, historiam scilicet Alexandri regis, vocavit eum ad se, et de
Greco in Latinum transferri precepit, quod et factum est, sicuti
sequentia decent. Omnibus vero laborantibus, tarn doctoribus quam
scriptoribus bonum retribuens meritum pro salute animae et memoria
nominis sui.
Source: MS. BambergE III 14, fol. 193. Published by Waitz in
Pertz' Archiv, ix (1847) 692 sq.; reprinted in Capasso, Monum. ad
Neapol. dttcatus histor. pertinentia, i. 339 sq. ; see also i. in sqq.
G 2
CHAPTER V
ORDINARY MINUSCULE IN THE BENEVENTAN
ZONE
THERE can be no doubt that ordinary minuscule was written
in Southern Italy. This appears clearly enough from the
existence in Beneventan centres of entire MSS. written in
ordinary minuscule whose contents connect them with Southern
Italy; of MSS. written partly in Beneventan and partly in
ordinary minuscule; and of additions in ordinary minuscule
entered in Beneventan MSS. One way of explaining these
phenomena would be to say, as has been said, that both scripts
were at home in the South Italian centres. 1 According to this
explanation a scribe of Monte Cassino, Benevento, or Bari
could write books, and actually did write books, in either script.
This view I find untenable, on two grounds. One is palaeo-
graphical, and of it I shall speak presently ; the other is the
common-sense reason of inherent improbability.
The learning of two scripts necessarily took more time and
trouble than the learning of one. If, therefore, two scripts
were taught side by side it must have been for some good
reason. There would have been a good reason if the two
1 Caravita, / codici e le arti a Monte Cassino, i. 70 sqq. What Caravita
failed to see was that the MSS. in ordinary minuscule which lie in Monte
Cassino need not necessarily have originated there. E. Caspar makes the
assertion that both scripts had always been in use at Monte Cassino (Petrus
Diaconus und die Monte Cassineser Fahchungen (Berlin 1909) p. 20, n. 2).
The same opinion, it seems, was held by Dudik, for in describing the writing
of the Lateran MSS. 78, 79, and 80, which are in ordinary minuscule, he
suggested the name Cassinese, on the ground that this type of writing flourished
particularly in Monte Cassino a complete reversal of the fact. Cf. Iter
Romanuw, i. 61 sq.
MINUSCULE IN THE BENEVENTAN ZONE 85
scripts had been put to different uses : if, for instance, the
traditional and local script, that is, the Beneventan, had been
reserved for copying liturgical books, and the ordinary script
for profane books ; or again, if for economic reasons the
simpler script had been used for ordinary books and the more
elaborate and artificial one for Editions de luxe. But neither of
these is the case. We find the Beneventan hand in books of
every description : it is used for copying classics as well as for
writing missals ; for jotting down the first draft of a book as
well as for sumptuous dedication copies. And the same is true
of the ordinary minuscule. Another reason for teaching the
two scripts might have been for the sake of variety. We have
some Latin MSS. written partly in one script and partly in
another, purely for calligraphic reasons. 1 But this practice is
not found in our MSS. Besides his own minuscule the
Beneventan scribe knows the capital letters and the uncials.
He never indulges in another minuscule for calligraphic
purposes.
If I am right in regarding as untenable the hypothesis that
the two scripts were taught and practised simultaneously in
South Italian centres and the reasons I have given above are
the only ones I can think of to warrant the extra expenditure
of time and energy then we must conclude that the script
regularly taught in the South Italian centres was the Bene-
ventan ; for there is no other way of explaining the long duration
of the Beneventan script, the stylistic uniformity of its scribal
products, the great number of extant Beneventan MSS., and the
disproportion which exists between these and non-Beneventan
MSS. in the South Italian centres.
Perhaps on this point it will be convincing to interpolate
a few figures. In the chapter library of Benevento there are to
1 The pages of the celebrated psalter Vatic. Regin. lat. n alternate between
uncials and rustic capitals. The Cava Bible is written in Visigothic minuscule,
the prefaces, however, in uncials. The pth-century MSS. of the school of
Tours furnish the best examples of the use of various scripts for purely calli-
graphic purposes.
86 ORDINARY MINUSCULE IN THE
my knowledge forty-eight ancient MSS. Forty-one of these
are in Beneventan. The remaining seven, which are not in
Beneventan characters, were practically all written after
Beneventan had gone out of use. 1 According to statistics
furnished by the monks of Monte Cassino, 232 of their MSS.
are in Beneventan letters, 2 42 in ordinary minuscule. 3 The
remaining 521 MSS. do not concern us here as being too recent.
In fact the list of 42 MSS. includes not a few which are of the
1 3th century and even later, although saec. xii is the latest
date assigned to any of them. Although no precise conclusion
can be drawn from these figures, since not all the Beneventan
MSS. were written at Monte Cassino and the same is most
emphatically true of the non-Beneventan 4 still these data may
fairly be taken to have some bearing upon the proportion that
existed between the two scripts ; especially if we consider that
every MS. saving only a few rare exceptions 5 the contents
of which clearly connect it with Monte Cassino, is written in
Beneventan. In a catalogue existing in Monte Cassino of the
Biblical MSS. used for the revision of the Vulgate in the i6th
1 I refer to the MSS. Benev. Capitol, v 24, v 28, vi 32, vi 41, vii 43, vn 45, and
vn 46.
2 Piscicelli Taeggi, Pahografia artistica di Montecassino, Longobardo-
Cassinese, introd., p. i.
3 Caravita, I codici, &c., i. 86 sq. ; also pp. 18, 21, 30.
* An examination of the MSS. mentioned in Caravita's list will convince
any one that they do not originate in one school and least of all in the abbey of
Monte Cassino. This is proved not alone by the different types of writing but
also by the various styles of ornamentation. The MSS. in ordinary minuscule
which actually originated in Monte Cassino, e.g. the MSS. 257, 361, and 557 (the
first two contain works of Petrus Diac., the last is a Bible by the scribe Ferro),
show, as we should expect, the Cassinese style of decoration and the Beneventan
sign of interrogation.
6 I refer to such MSS. as Monte Cassino 257 and 361 just mentioned,
which contain works of Petrus Diaconus, and Monte Cassino 202 containing
the Chronica Casinensis Minor. That the latter MS. was not written by one
schooled in the scriptorium of Monte Cassino is made evident by the errors
which show that the scribe could not decipher the Beneventan script in which
his original was written. Cf. BibL Casin. iv. 147 sq. Script and quality of
parchment suggest that the MS. is not even Italian.
BENEVENTAN ZONE 87
century, forty-three items are mentioned. 1 Of these, thirty-
three are described as Lombardic, which means Beneventan,
ten, as ordinary minuscule. Although the dating of the list is
arbitrary and schematic, it is plain that all the oldest MSS. are
Beneventan and all the more recent ones non-Beneventan. If
we had statistics on the missals, breviaries, lectionaries, Rules,
and other liturgical books of Monte Cassino, I think we should
find, beyond a doubt, that all, or nearly all, antedating the 1 2th
century would be in Beneventan writing. 2 Lastly, in the Veroli
catalogue cited above (p. 38), of eleven items in which the
script is mentioned, eight are described as Beneventan, and two
as Lombardic, which is more likely than not the same as Bene-
ventan.
The statistics just given are to my mind absolutely irrecon-
cilable with the conclusion that the two scripts existed in South
Italy on anything like a footing of equality. Had such been
the case, the Beneventan, far from showing itself so indisputably
the predominating script, would have been driven centuries
earlier from the field, owing to the undeniable practical superi-
ority of its rival. The conclusion we must come to is that the
presence of ordinary minuscule in Beneventan centres has
a different explanation.
The objections on palaeographical grounds can best be set
forth by examining the MS. Monte Cassino 230 the very ex-
1 Caravita, / codici, &c., i. 406 sqq. ; Tosti, BibL Casin. i, p. xciii. On this
catalogue see also G. Mercati, 'Due supposte spogliazioni della biblioteca di
Monte Cassino,' in Miscellanea di studi in onore di Attilio Hortis (Trieste 1910)
p. 971 sq.
* A very instructive illustration of this fact is furnished by Monte Cassino
334 (saec. xii), containing the Rule of St. Benedict. The MS. has a different
recension from that which is considered Cassinese. Inner evidence shows that
it originated in the Norman monastery of Venosa. This is the simple explana-
tion for its not being in Beneventan characters. Cf. Regulae Sancti Benedicts
traditio codicum MSS. Casinensium, &c. (Monte Cassino 1900) G. Morin's
preface, p. xix. MSS. written in Monte Cassino after the year 1300, e.g.
Monte Cassino 445 and 441 (Comment, in Reg. S. Bened.), are naturally not in
Beneventan, because the script had gone out of fashion by that time. Cf.
Morin's preface, ibid., p. xviii.
88 ORDINARY MINUSCULE IN THE
ample which is cited in proof of the simultaneous use of both
scripts in Monte Cassino. 1 I propose, therefore, to analyse the
two scripts of Monte Cassino 230 and show that the differences
are such as to render it quite improbable to me impossible
that both parts were written by one scribe, as has been stated,
or even by two scribes brought up in the same school. These
differences between the two scripts I refer to differences in
abbreviation, in punctuation, in initial decoration, and in certain
scribal rules are regularly found in other MSS. which contain
both hands contemporaneously, so that the conclusions which
I am about to draw will be of general application.
An examination of one page which contains both hands will
be sufficient for our purpose. 2 Putting aside the argument
from the differences in the form of the letters, small and capital,
in the manner of using the pen, and the way in which the
fundamental /-stroke and 0-stroke are made (the expert would
not fail to recognize that these differences are due to two dif-
ferent hands), the following larger considerations must convince
any one that we are confronted by two systems of calligraphy
foreign to each other.
First, the abbreviations. We note the following differences
between the Beneventan and the non-Beneventan portion :
Benev. non-Benev.
autem au aut
-tur a 2 - %
eius fy ei'
-bus b; b'
-mus m; m*
lesus ills ifTc
Christus xps xpc
^-stroke 3
abbreviation-stroke =
1 Cf. E. Caspar, Petrus Dtaconus, &c., p. 20, n. 2.
8 e.g. p. 65. Cf. Piscicelli Taeggi, op. cit, pi. 53, and&rt^/. Bgnev., pi. 51.
BENEVENTAN ZONE 89
Ligatures. In the Beneventan portion ei.fi, gi, li, ri, and ti
are invariably combined ; not so in the ordinary minuscule. On
the other hand, the ordinary minuscule uses the ligature & (11. 3,
32) in the body of a word, which is not permitted in Beneventan.
i-longa. The Beneventan portion has z-longa regularly in m,
huius, cuius (11. 9, 14, 32) in accordance with a rule of the script.
The non-Beneventan portion, however, has in, cuius, iustum
(11. i, 2, 15), all with short/.
ti-distinction. The Beneventan portion distinguishes ti
assibilated and ti unassibilated, e. g. eruditione, sapientiam
(11. 6, 10). No such distinction exists in the non-Beneventan
part, e.g. diligentius (1. 41).
Punctuation. The Beneventan portion makes the full stop
by means of two points and a comma, the non-Beneventan by
means of one point. The Beneventan portion has the charac-
teristic Beneventan sign of interrogation over the interroga-
tive pronoun (ubi, 1. 9) and the ordinary punctuation at the
end, as was the custom at the time when this MS. was written
(see below, chapter ix, p. 244). The non-Beneventan portion,
on the other hand, does not know the suprascript interrogation-
sign, but uses a sign of interrogation after the question, a form
as yet unknown in Beneventan MSS. (11. 13, 15, &c.).
Decoration. The initials in the two parts of the MS. are
absolutely different.
These differences make it clear that the mastery of each
script involved not only the learning of different sets of letters,
but also of different systems of abbreviation, punctuation, and
scribal rules. What possible reason could there have been for
the scribe to abbreviate autem by 'au when he wrote Beneventan,
and by ailt when he wrote ordinary minuscule ? Or for his
making the ^-stroke in one way in Beneventan and in another
in ordinary minuscule ? Why should a scribe use in the non-
Beneventan portion an abbreviation of tur which is not used
in Beneventan MSS. until fully half a century later ? And so
with the rest of the abbreviations. Why should he use
different abbreviation-strokes in the two portions ?
90 ORDINARY MINUSCULE IN THE
Again, why should a Beneventan scribe be taught the rules
for z-longa and ti and then be asked to unlearn them when he
wrote ordinary minuscule ? And lastly, why should the same
Latin sentence containing a question be punctuated on radically
different principles in the two scripts ?
It is evident that without an unusual expenditure of attention
no scribe could have managed to keep the usage of the two
scripts apart with regard to the many points just illustrated.
We should, therefore, expect to find many MSS. betraying con-
tamination of style that is, Beneventan portions with charac-
teristics from the ordinary minuscule, and vice versa. Now as
a matter of fact the two scripts adhere as a rule quite strictly
each to its own tradition. 1 We must, therefore, conclude that
the ordinary minuscule in a Beneventan centre is a foreign
importation, recognized and admitted as such. How did it
get there ?
The explanation is simple enough. Monks who had been
educated in monasteries north of the Beneventan zone, who
accordingly had acquired a style of writing and system of
abbreviations foreign to the South Italian centres, must often
have migrated, as they do now, to Monte Cassino, Cava, or
Benevento, and lived there a longer or shorter period of time.
The copying of books was probably the duty of every monk
who was capable of performing that task. The book produced
by the monk from the north was naturally written in the hand
he could write, namely ordinary minuscule. Thus non-Bene-
ventan books were made in Beneventan centres. Again, when
a monk from the north collaborated with a South Italian monk,
the result had this mixed character of being partly in Beneven-
tan, and partly in ordinary minuscule. This hypothesis explains
how Monte Cassino 5 has the first eighteen pages in ordinary, the
1 Cf. above, p. 86, n. 4. It is not a mere accident that the finely written
additions made by Leo Ostiensis in the MS. Munich 462 3 are all in the Beneventan
script. Nor is it due to mere chance that the signature of Abbot Desiderius is
in Beneventan, that of Hildebrand in ordinary minuscule. Cf. Pertz' Archiv>
v (1824) 14.
BENEVENTAN ZONE 91
rest in Beneventan minuscule. Monte Cassino 2 30 of course
comes under the same head, not to mention many others. 1
What has been said of the northern monk would also be true
of the monk from the south who went north and copied books.
He certainly wrote his local hand. 2 We have Beneventan
entries in several MSS. whose script and content mark them
with certainty as Roman products. To illustrate : the Vatican
MS. 378 was written in Rome in the monastery of S. Maria in
Palladio, on the Palatine, which was under Cassinese juris-
diction. 3 The script is Roman minuscule. On fol. 28, at the
2 2nd of May we find : ' obiit domnus Leo hostiensis episcopus.' 4
It is not mere accident that the entry is in Beneventan. Leo's
life was spent chiefly in Monte Cassino; when his duties as
cardinal called him to Rome he lived in the modest monastery
on the Palatine. 5 The record of his death in the Roman book
was doubtless penned by the affectionate hand of a Cassinese
confrere. Again, on fol. 72 V we read in the margin the profession
of two monks, in Beneventan writing. The monk who wrote
down the profession must have come to Rome from some
southern home. Likewise, owing to relations between Subiaco
and Monte Cassino it is not difficult to explain how certain
1 The MS. Aberdeen King's College C 2 3. 63 is written partly in Beneventan
and partly in ordinary minuscule. That the two kinds of writing are really
contemporary may be seen from the fact that one section written in ordinary
minuscule has a Beneventan rubric (' domino sancto ac uenerabili G. summo
pontifici Berengarius/ &c.).
1 The MS. Munich 15826, to which Traube called my attention, has from
fol. 45 to the end strong resemblance to Beneventan writing, yet none of the
script rules are followed. It is plainly a case of a South Italian trying to write
ordinary minuscule. On fol. $6 V , 1. 9 he suddenly dropped into his native script,
which he continued to the end of the page.
8 Cf. M. Armellini, Le chiese di Roma dal secolo IV al XIX, 2nd ed. (Rome
1891) p. 526.
4 Leo Ostiensis died on May 22 of the year 1115, as we know from an
entry in the Calendar of Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211, fol. 6. Cf. P. Fedele in
Bulletlino delT Istituto Ston'co Italiano, no. 31 (Rome 1910) p. 21.
8 Cf. BibL Casin. iv. 147, and P. Fedele \nArchivio dellaR. Societa Romano.
di Storia Patria, xxvi. 371.
92 MINUSCULE IN THE BENEVENTAN ZONE
entries in the Subiaco Sacramentary, e.g. fol. 101, are in the
South Italian hand, although the body of the MS. is in the
script of Rome. 1
Lastly it need hardly be urged that many of the MSS. in
ordinary minuscule now lying in Southern Italy could easily
hav come there from outside a reasonable hypothesis in view
of the importance of Monte Cassino and the influence wielded
by some of its abbots ; many of whom travelled far and wide,
received gifts, and collected books. 2 What is true of Monte
Cassino must in a lesser degree have been true of smaller
centres.
In the above remarks it is not intended to disregard the fact
that the time came, even in Southern Italy, when ordinary
minuscule was written not merely by those who had learned
their writing outside the Beneventan zone. After the i2th
century, as has been said, and also during that century, the
ordinary minuscule may be said to assume the position of
a rival which, owing to political and other circumstances, was
destined to supplant the Beneventan. That the struggle was
a long one may be seen from the fact that books in Beneventan
letters were executed at Monte Cassino and Cava even at the
very end of the 1 3th century.
1 Facs. in Archiv. Pal. ItaL ii, plates 33-43.
2 Frederic of Lorraine, later Stephen IX, presented Monte Cassino with
some liturgical books (Chron. Casin. ii. 102); Agnes, mother of Henry IV,
presented a volume of the Gospels (Chron. Casin. iii. 32); these MSS. could
easily have been products of German calligraphy. The poem in honour of
Abbot Desiderius which we find on the fly-leaf of Vatic, lat. 1202 has the
lines :
Titulos tulit hie variorum
varia ex regione librorum.
(Neues Archiv, x (1884) 35 6 S Q-) Desiderius was certainly not the only one
who collected books from various quarters. It should also be remembered
that during his abbacy monks came to Monte Cassino from all parts of Italy.
CHAPTER VI
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
AN inquiry into the origin of the Beneventan script will be
rendered more intelligible if we previously determine what
features of the script may be regarded as characteristic of it.
For this purpose we must study both the products of the
developed script and those of the tentative period. To trace
the origin, however, the earlier MSS. alone concern us ; the
later can only show which elements persisted.
Distinguishing features. The Beneventan peculiarities stand
out best when contrasted with the Caroline. We are first
struck by the letters a and t : the former made like two c's
touching each other, the latter with the cross-stroke bent con-
siderably downwards to the left of the stem.
The next great difference is in the use of ligatures with
* enclitic' i I refer to ligatures in which the i loses its normal
form. 1 Whereas in the Caroline practically no ligatures with i
are tolerated, the reverse is a fundamental rule of the Bene-
ventan script ; no independent, uncombined i being permissible
when the preceding letter is e,f, g, /, r, or /. The scribe of
Southern Italy, in so far as he was a genuine product of his
region and he may come from Monte Cassino, Cava, Capua,
Benevento, Naples, or Bari invariably wrote ei,fi,gi, /z, ri, and
ti combined thus, j ^ j t) ^ <xj or ^. To write the i uncombined
after any of these letters, as it appears in Caroline MSS., was
incorrect. When a Beneventan scribe slipped and wrote an
1 I use the term 'enclitic' to designate dependence upon the preceding
letter ; ' proclitic ' to designate a leaning upon the following letter. See also
below, p. 141.
94 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
uncombined i after any of these letters, I have often noticed
it modified into the ligature by the hand of a corrector. In
fact, so integral a part of the Beneventan script are these
ligatures with / that they furnish after the Qth century a fair
test as to whether a MS. is Beneventan or not.
The third distinguishing feature is the use of z-longa both
initially and medially, in accordance with certain broad princi-
ples a practice unknown in Caroline MSS. 1
The fourth distinguishing feature is the use of the 'proclitic'
ligatures with t, in which the , leaning, as it were, upon the
following letter, loses its normal form : e. g. ta, te, ti, tu, of
which only ti (f) remains a permanent feature of the script. 2
The home of these forms of a and /, these ligatures with
i and /, and the z-longa usage, is not far to seek. If we examine
on the one hand the famous Ravenna documents on papyrus
of the 6th century, as well as Italian notarial products of the
two centuries following, and on the other hand calligraphic
products in uncial and semi-uncial of the same period, we shall
be convinced that the peculiarities mentioned above are without
exception all of cursive origin. Thus it is plain that the chief
distinguishing feature of the Beneventan script is
the adaptation of certain cursive elements to calli-
graphic purposes and their retention as essential
parts of the script.
Cursive forms in early minuscule. The idea of using these
elements, however, probably reached Southern Italy from the
outside. This appears from an examination of a number of
North Italian as well as French MSS. of the 7th and 8th
centuries, which contain all these cursive elements at a time
when it is not yet possible to speak of a Beneventan script ; at
a time when, if the hint is trustworthy which may be gathered
from some extant South Italian MSS., uncial and not minuscule
1 See below, chap, xii on Rules of the Script. On z-longa see E. A. Loew ;
Studia Palaeographica, pp. 7 sqq.
2 For the form of these ligatures see below, p. 148. On the function of this
form of ti see Stud. Pal, p. 46, and below, chap, xii, pp. 302 and 305.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 95
writing was in use in Southern Italy. 1 The greater literary
activity of the northern centres had provided the impulse for
the moulding of a minuscule script, whereas such favourable
conditions were still lacking in the south. 2
Lastly two great facts must be borne in mind : first, that
during the second half of the 8th century the minuscule scripts
of the different Italian schools were to a great extent similar
a similarity due precisely to their common possession of cursive
elements; and second, that the existence of a Beneventan
script becomes apparent only by contrast with those scripts
which succumbed to the Caroline reform a reform which
banished from calligraphy the very elements which the Bene-
ventan turned to calligraphic use. Thus the Beneventan
is in reality nothing more than the continuation in
Southern Italy of the traditional Italian school.
Upon this fact modern palaeography is agreed. 3
What the traditions of that school were can best be studied
in such MSS. to begin with the oldest examples 4 as the
Josephus on papyrus, which hardly differs from the Ravenna
documents except that it is somewhat more restrained and
calligraphic ; 5 in the cursive yet beautiful MS. containing the
homilies of Maximus (Milan Ambros. C 98 inf.) ; 6 in the 8th-
century M SS. Vatic, lat. 5763 (Isid.), Wolfenbuttel Weissenb.
64 (Isid.), Turin All 2 (Cyprian), all three from Bobbio ; 7
1 Cf. London Add. MS. 5463 (Gospels), Vatic, lat. 3321 (Glossary), Vatic,
lat. 5007 (Gesta Ep. Neapolit.). See above, p. 41, n. 6.
2 Cf. Introduction, p. 4.
8 Cf. Traube, Varies, u. Abhand. ii. 24, 28, n. i; Steffens, Lat. Pal., 2nd
ed., p. x; Loew, Stud. Pal., pp. 12-13, 5~ I -
4 See the list in Stud. Pal., pp. 39 sqq.
8 Facs. in Steffens, Lat. Pal*, plates 23a, 23b. 6 Steffens, op. cit., pi. 25b.
7 On these three palimpsests see the literature given in Traube, Varies, u.
Abhand. i. 233 sq., 244, and 258. A good facsimile of the secondary script
of the Turin MS. in Chatelain, Pal. des class, lat., pi. XXX ; see also Cipolia,
Codici Bobbiesi, plates 2, 7, 8 ; of the Wolfenbuttel MS. in Heinemann, Die
Hss. d. herzogl. Bibl. zu Wolfenbuttel, part iii (1903) 295, and in Ihm, Pal.
Lat. (Leipsic 1909) pi. VI. The upper script of these three palimpsests seems
to me to point to one scriptorium. A. Holder in Melanges Chatelain, p. 643,
has expressed a different opinion.
9 6 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
in the interesting and excellently written MS. Vercelli 183
(Patristica), probably a local product, which bears the strongest
resemblance to North Italian cursive ; l in the MSS. Milan
Ambros. L 99 sup. (Isid.), 2 Rome Sessor. 55 (2099) (Patristica)
and many others.
To what extent these MSS. borrowed from the cursive may
be seen from the use in some of them of rare and curious
forms which are found not in other MSS. but in documents of
the same region and age. A most instructive example we
have in the form of ss, freely used in North Italian documents
and found in the MSS. Milan Ambros. 98 inf., Carlsruhe
Reich. 57, 3 and others; and a still better one in the form
of z found in Vercelli 183,* Milan Ambros. L 99 sup., and in
North Italian documents. Greater familiarity with the charter
hand of different localities cannot but be of signal service to
palaeography in the matter of localizing MSS.
I am aware that during the 8th century other attempts were
made to form a minuscule script, even in Italy, with spare use
of, or entirely without, cursive elements, by adopting in some
cases the uncial letters, in others the semi-uncial. But in Italy
these attempts were abortive ; at least they have left us too
little to make it probable that they resulted in an actual script.
Outside of Italy a case in point is the Insular script, which is
based upon semi-uncial and practically lacks elements from
Roman cursive. It must, I believe, have exerted considerable
influence in Northern Italy it did in Bobbio yet even in
Bobbio the native Italian element was so strong as to reject
the Insular in favour of its own cursive minuscule.
But it was not in Italy alone that the cursive played a large
part in the formation of an early minuscule script. In the
oldest French examples we are struck by the presence of the
same elements. 5 I refer to such MSS. as the Avitus on papyrus
1 Facs. in Stud. Pal., pi. i, cf. pp. 12, 27, 43; Ehrle-Liebaert, Specimina
codd. lat. Vatic. (Bonn 1912) pi. 9. * Steffens, op. cit., plates 33-4.
8 Steffens, pi. 250 ; and Holder's facs. in Melanges Chatelain.
4 Cf. Stud. Pal., pi. i, line n, and pp. 26 sqq.
6 Many of the earliest examples are enumerated in Stud. Pal, pp. 30 sqq.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 97
(Paris lat. 8913) and the more recent Gregory of Tours
(Paris lat. 1 7655), both of which scarcely differ from documents ;*
to the MSS. Paris lat. 9427 (Lectionarium Luxoviense), Verona
XL (Gregor. Moralia), Ivrea I (Gregor. Pastor. Cura), and other
representatives of the Luxeuil type ; 2 to the early 8th-century
MSS. of the G: type, e.g. Paris lat. 12168 (August), London
Add. MS. 31031 (Gregor. Moralia); 3 to the late 8th-century
MSS. of the uct type, such as Brussels 9850-2 (Caesarius),
Paris lat. 3836 (Canones), Turin D V 3 (Passiones SS.), London
Harley 3063 (In epist. Pauli) 4 to mention only the best known.
Under the circumstances some similarity could not but exist
between the early French and the early Italian minuscule.
Not that the differences are not sufficient to keep them distinct.
It is owing to these similarities, however, that Mabillon, in
comparing the developed Beneventan with the Corbie script,
did not hesitate to put them into one class. 5 The authors of
the Nouveau Traitt stop to consider the possibility that the
Corbie MSS. were written in France ; G but eventually decide
in favour of their Italian origin. Even the greatest French
palaeographer of the last century, in his study of the Corbie
school, acquiesced in this view. 7 But later Delisle gave up
this opinion ; and modern palaeographers are at one as to the
1 Facs. of Paris 89 1 3 in Pal. Society, i, pi. 68 ; Steffens, pi. 24 ; of Paris 1 7655
in Bastard, Peintures et ornements des manuscrits,p\a.tes 15 sq. ; Delisle, Cabinet
des manuscrits, pi. XII, 2 ; and M. G. H. SS. Rer. Merov. i, pars i, pi. 3.
2 Facs. of Paris 9427 in Steffens, pi. 25a; Delisle, Cab. des manusc., pi. XIV. i ;
of Verona XL in Sickel, Monumenta Graphica, iv, pi. 3 ; Chatelain, Pal. des
class. lat., plates 75 and 106 ; of Ivrea i in Monum. Pal. Sacra, pi. VIII. i.
3 Facs. of Paris 12168 in Bastard, Peintures et ornements des manuscrits,
plates 27-9 ; Silvestre, Paltog. univ. iii, pi. 142 ; of London Add. MS. 31031
in Catal. of Ancient MSS. ii, pi. 33.
4 Facs. of the Brussels MS. in New Pal. Society, pi. 29; Steffens, pi. 29a;
of Paris 3836 in Pal. Society, i, plates 8-9 ; of Turin D v 3 in Monum. Pal. Sacra,
pi. VIII. 2 ; of London Harley 3063 in Catal. of Anc. MSS. ii, pi. 35; New
Pal. Soc., pi. 235; H. B. Swete, Theodore of Mopsuestia, vol. i (Cambridge 1880).
1 Mabillon, De re diplomatica, p. 353, pi. V. 6 Nouveau Traitt, iii. 273 sq.
7 Delisle, Cab. des manusc.\\ 122; the study first appeared in Bibliotheque
de t&cole des chartes, xxi (1860) 393-439 and 498-515; see also Me'moires de
F Institut^ xxiv(i86i)266 sqq.
1443 H
98 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
French origin of this interesting and highly developed type
of writing. Although the Corbie script (tcbr type) apparently
survived the year 800 l and was still written when beautiful
Caroline MSS. were being executed in Charlemagne's ' palace
school ' and the scriptorium of Tours, 2 the MSS. of the Corbie
school already exemplify the tendency to rid book-writing
of cursive elements. That process had in fact gone so far
that with the exception of the a and t and certain ligatures,
few elements could properly be called cursive. The type
is very developed. Those MSS. of the tck type which still
show the ligature ti represent in all probability an earlier
stage of the script. And just as it is true that the Corbie
MSS. of the c< type have nearly all the cursive elements
which we meet in Italian MSS. of the same time, it is also
true that they antedate, as a rule, the MSS. of the tcb type,
and are in their turn antedated by not a few French MSS.,
namely, those of the Luxeuil type, which show in their
minuscule still closer relation to the cursive of the time. 3
Thus in France as in Italy the freedom with which cursive
elements are employed in calligraphic writing is symptomatic
of the age of the MS.
Beneventan and Visigothic compared. Of the scripts with
which palaeography has tried to connect the origin of the
Beneventan, the Visigothic takes the most prominent place.
Traube has given the weight of his authority in favour of
a relationship between the two scripts. 4 And in one of the
J e.g. in the MSS. St. Petersburg F.v. I, no. n, and F.v.XIV, no. i, dated
814-21 and 790-814, but the dating is not certain. For these details I am
indebted to P. Liebaert.
2 As can be seen from such MSS. as the Treves Ada-Gospels, the Paris Codex
Aureus (Nouv. Acq. lat. 1203) with the verses of Godesscalc, which are in
minuscule, the Psalter of Charlemagne at Vienna, of which R. Beer has given us
such excellent reproductions, and the Alcuin-bibles of Zurich and Bamberg, to
mention only the most familiar. Facs. in StefFens, plates 45a, 4$b, and 46 ;
R. Beer, Monum. Pal. Vindobonensia (Leipsic 1910) i, plates 17 sqq.
3 Examples of these types have been given above.
4 Traube, op. cit. ii. 21, 131 ; and Nomina Sacra, p. 245.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 99
two studies on the Beneventan writing which exist in palaeo-
graphical literature a serious attempt is made to prove the pre-
ponderance of Spanish influence in the formation of the South
Italian minuscule. 1 The question is of great interest and
deserves detailed discussion.
That there is a strong resemblance between the minuscule
writing of Spain and Southern Italy is a fact with which
palaeographers are familiar. 2 The similarity in appearance is
indeed such as to have proved a stumbling-block to no less an
authority than Wattenbach, who cited the famous Danila
Bible of Cava, written in pure and excellent Visigothic, as an
example of Lombardic, that is to say, of Beneventan penman-
ship. 3 A century earlier Bianchini was responsible for the
false notion, accepted by Trombelli and later by Arevalo, that
the Beneventan MSS. of the Oratorians in Rome (they now
form part of the Biblioteca Vallicelliana) were Visigothic 4
a mistake again caused in all probability by the resemblance
between the two scripts. The resemblance is not a mere
impression. Indeed, upon analysis it will be found that the
Spanish script contains regularly three, often even four, of the
five features which we have set down above as Beneventan
characteristics. These are : the form of the letters a and t ; the
use of z-longa ; and the proclitic ligatures with /, in which that
letter loses its . normal form. And here the resemblance
ceases.
The proper explanation of these similarities lies, doubtless,
in the fact that both scripts base upon cursive writing. That
the similarities are not due to direct dependence of Beneventan
on Visigothic will clearly appear from the differences between
1 N. Rodolico, ' Genesi e svolgimento della scrittura Longobardo-Cassinese/
in Archiv. Stor. IlaL xxvii (1901) 315 sqq.
* For facs. of Visigothic MSS. see Ewald and Loewe, Exempla Scripturat
Visigothicae (Heidelberg 1883). Many others will be found cited in Stud. Pal.,
pp. 56 sqq. For Beneventan MSS. see Piscicelli Taeggi, Paleog. artistica di
Montecassino ; and Script. Benev., plates 7-100.
3 Wattenbach, Ankit. zur lat. Pal (ard ed.)p. 15. See above, p. 28, n. la.
4 See above, p. 29, n. 2.
H 2
ioo THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
the two scripts which I here set down. I begin with the
graphic differences.
Ligatures. The Beneventan, as we have seen, makes in-
variable use of the ligatures with enclitic z, the Visigothic avoids
them a difference of first importance. In Visigothic writing
there are no combined ei,fi,gi, li, ri, and ti in which the Hoses
its normal form (the Spanish use of combined ti, dating as it
does from a time when Beneventan was already formed, does
not come into consideration here). The Beneventan makes
regular use of the ti ligature in which the / is proclitic ; Spanish
calligraphy practically avoids it. On the other hand, the
Spanish scribe employs the proclitic ligature te, which the
Beneventan avoids as a rule. The Beneventan has ligatures
with 5 viz. sp, st, sx not found in the Spanish. On the
other hand, the Visigothic has ligatures which the Beneventan
lacks, e.g. it, in which the stem of the t coincides with the z,
forming a single long shaft with the cross-beam of the t atop,
a feature peculiar to Visigothic ; at, nt, rt y &c., in which the t
is enclitic, losing its normal form and resembling rather small
c ; and os, which is a remnant from the uncial. Finally, the
Spanish makes use of superior a, which connects with the
following letter ; the Beneventan lacks it, on the other hand
making occasional use of subscript i, in which the letter is joined
to the preceding one, a practice unknown to the Spanish.
Single letters. The most striking difference is in the letter
gy the Spanish using the uncial form, the Beneventan the
common minuscule one. The letter e has its upper loop
closed in Beneventan, usually open in Visigothic. It would
be easy to mention other letters, e.g. r and s, which do
not go below the line in Visigothic; m and n, whose final
strokes I refer to the oldest MSS. do not bend and turn
outward, as they do even in the earliest Beneventan, as well
as in pre-Caroline Corbie MSS. Beneventan c has often the
broken form resembling Greek epsilon, not so the Visigothic.
Lastly, the letters a and /, which have been given as points of
similarity, like as they are when contrasted with the Caroline,
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
101
might justly be cited as points of difference between Beneventan
and Visigothic. Spanish a resembles u, differing from it only
in ending with a curved stroke turned outward, whereas the u
has a straight line ending abruptly. Beneventan a resembles
two contiguous cs. As for t, in early Visigothic the left loop
bends so low as to touch the line ; in Beneventan it is very
often open and rarely descends so low.
Abbreviations. In its system of abbreviations the Bene-
ventan is radically unlike the Spanish, but manifestly akin to
the North Italian and French systems. The Spanish method
of forming contractions consists mainly in omitting the vowels,
the Beneventan in omitting some part in the middle. So the
Spanish abbreviates apostoli, misericordia by means of apsfti,
mscdia, the Beneventan by means of apti, mia. The contrast
between the two systems can be seen from the following list
of normalized forms current in the 9th century. 1
Visig.
apostolus -i apsfls -i
autem aum
bis rp
bus and que b ; q ; o 7 q 7
est written out
as a rule
nsr nsi
Benev.
apts -i
au
15
b; q; b* q*
-f and e
N. Ital. and
French
apts -i
au'aut
b-
b; B q q; q,
+ e
noster -ri
per
prae
pro
qui
turn
tur
uester -ri
rarely abbrev.
rarely abbrev.
q, (like Benev. quod)
or
written out
as a rule
usr usi
nr nri
nr nri
P
P
P
P
P
P
q
a
written out
written out
as a rule
as a rule
or or cr
*or
ur uri
ur uri
1 The list could easily be enlarged ; but to avoid confusion the rarer forms
have been omitted.
102 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
None of the Spanish peculiarities has been imitated in Bene-
ventan MSS. Of a few stray instances I shall speak below.
I have never met with the Spanish abbreviation otnoster, uester,
per, bis, bus or que, mum, num, or turn. Qnm is found occasion-
ally in Beneventan, but that need not argue Visigothic influence,
as its use was widespread. Ordinary abbreviation of prae is
found in the earliest South Italian minuscule, likewise of pro.
Neither of these is normally abbreviated in Visigothic.
m-stroke and omitted n. In the earliest Beneventan the
usual ^-stroke is the same as the abbreviation-stroke a hori-
zontal line or flourish, made in various ways (see chapter on
abbreviations, below, p. 171 sq.). In Visigothic it is as a rule
the line surmounted by the point. To mark the omission of
n with a line, or line and point, above the vowel that precedes
it is a standing feature of Visigothic, but the omission is rare
in early Beneventan.
Orthography. Spanish MSS. show frequent use of qu for c ;
such a spelling, however, is rarely found in Beneventan MSS.
The confusion of h and c (e. g. nidi, mici) is typical of Spanish,
and peculiar to it ; I have never encountered this in Bene-
ventan MSS., where on the contrary the spelling nichil, michi
is very frequent. Spanish MSS. very often insert h where it
does not belong, and in other cases omit it, e. g. hab for ab,
abet for habet an irregularity of far less frequent occurrence
in Beneventan.
Punctuation. The two systems are dissimilar. Early Visi-
gothic MSS. have for the main pause the point with a tiny
comma placed obliquely above it (.') ; for shorter stops the
point. In the earliest Beneventan MSS. there is indecision and
vacillation between the point followed by a comma, the semi-
colon, the comma and the full point, all these to indicate the
main pause. Amid all this variety it will be seen that the
Visigothic form does not appear. In the late 9th century we
find the comma between two points (.,.) and the comma below
two points (y), which latter becomes the typical Beneventan full
stop a system in use in a great many Continental MSS. of the
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 103
9th century but not in Visigothic. For shorter stops the
point or comma is usual at first ; toward the end of the 9th
century the point with the hook above it that is, the semi-
colon both inverted and reversed (/).
There is also dissimilarity with regard to the interrogation-
sign. The Visigothic, like all Continental scripts, uses it at
the end of the sentence, the Beneventan, in its first stage, only
at the beginning. Although this dissimilarity does not bear
directly on the question of first influences, it is important as
showing that as early as at the end of the 9th century the
Beneventan was so independent of foreign usage in this respect
as to adopt a system of its own invention. The feature which
for a time at least the Spanish and the Beneventan have in
common, namely that of differentiating nominal and predicate
questions, is hardly due to borrowing of one from the other,
as is shown below (see chapter ix, p. 252 sq.).
Lastly there is this vital difference between the early Bene-
ventan MSS. and contemporary Spanish MSS. : the former
generally make a graphic distinction between ti assibilated and
ti unassibilated, 1 the latter introduce this practice toward the
end of the 9th century. 2
Colophons and titles. Another feature differentiating the
two scripts is the type of letter used for title and colophon.
The Beneventan uses as a rule the unfilled uncial for explicit,
&c.; and in the developed script often simple red minuscule or
a variety of square capitals or uncials ; whereas the Visigothic
employs either rustic capitals or a fanciful, strangely elongated
type found only in its own MSS.
Ornamentation. The ornamentation of the two schools is
strikingly dissimilar. In Visigothic the treatment of the
human figure is awkward, stiff, and schematic, in these respects
recalling rather the Insular type. The Beneventan, on the
other hand, never utterly loses the heritage of its classic soil.
And the foreign influence observable is Byzantine. The con-
1 See below, p. 305. 2 See Stud. Pal., pp. 46 sq., 5? sqq.
104 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
tinuous development of its figure art from the pth to the I2th
century produces results which may justly be considered
harbingers of the Renaissance ; this at a time when in Spain
one still encounters childish conceptions of the human form. 1
More telling is the difference in the initials, since proportion-
ately few MSS. boast of figure decoration. Visigothic initials
show patterns and colour combinations both different from
those of the Beneventan and inferior to them. From my
observation of Visigothic initials, the interlaced patterns and
fantastic animals present none of the grace, intricacy, and
variety of colour and fancy which characterize the Beneventan ;
and they lack one of the essential elements of Beneventan
ornamentation, the pearl motive.
In view of the various and important differences just noted,
we are justified in concluding that the similarities are merely
due to the common origin of the two scripts. For it is a
commonplace of palaeography that the Visigothic and Bene-
ventan systems of calligraphy both base upon the Roman
cursive of the early Middle Ages.
Refutation of argiiments in favour of Visigothic influence
We are now ready to examine the arguments advanced by
N. Rodolico in favour of Spanish influence, in the monograph
referred to above on the 'origin and development of the
Lombard-Cassinese script '.
The author begins 2 by citing a letter written between 6 1 6
and 620 by the Visigothic king Sisebut to Adaloald, son of
Queen Theodolinda, in which reference is made to some books
sent to the Lombard prince to bring about his conversion. 3
It is hard to understand how the books received by the prince
make for any relationship between Spain and Southern Italy.
1 Compare for instance the figures in Visigothic MSS. of Beatus super
Apocal. with those found in Beneventan Exultet rolls. The London Roll
(Add. MS. 30337, facs. in Pal. Soc. i, pi. 146) is a masterpiece of South Italian
art, the like of which Spanish MSS. have nothing to show.
2 See pp. 320 sqq. of the article cited above, p. 99, n. i.
3 Mon. Germ. Hist. Epp. iii. 671.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 105
For in the first place the historical notice tells us only of books
sent to Northern Italy which is far from saying that they ever
reached Southern Italy. And if we grant that they did, how
could they have had any effect upon the formation of a South
Italian minuscule ? What proofs have we of the existence of a
Spanish minuscule in the early yth century ? I fear none. As
the Spanish books were most likely uncial, possibly semi-uncial,
Southern Italy, possessing both, had nothing to learn from
them.
Rodolico next points out that in liturgical MSS. in Bene-
ventan characters of the nth century the Te Deum was known
as Hymnus Sisebuti. This attribution he explains by saying
that the Lombards had received the Te Deum from the
Spanish king and that the Benedictines of Southern Italy had
not questioned the authorship which they found to be a tradi-
tion of the Lombards. If this were the true explanation we
should expect Beneventan liturgical MSS. to agree on this
point. This, however, is far from being the case. There is
disagreement even in MSS. of precisely the same time and place.
The facts are put together by Dom Cagin in his extensive
study of the Te Deum. 1 His examination of 120 titles under
which the Te Deum appears in MSS. shows that the name
Sisebut is found only in seven, of which two occur in extant
Beneventan MSS., 2 the majority occurring in MSS. of the
vicinity of Rome ; so that the tradition if tradition it be
existed rather in the Sabine district than in Southern Italy.
The two Beneventan MSS. which have the name Sisebut in
the title are Paris Mazar. 364 (Breviar.) and Vatic. Urbin. lat.
585 (Diurnale), both written in Monte Cassino between 1099
and 1 105. The title in the Paris MS. reads : Hymnus Sisebuti
mpnachi; in the Vatican MS. : Hymnus Sisebuti regis. The
natural explanation is that we are dealing with a pure con-
1 P. Cagin, Te Deum ou lllatio ? (1906) pp. 177, 183-5. Dom Wilmart
kindly called my attention to this work.
2 I have noted one other case. Monte Cassino 559, fol. 7 i v has * Ym. Sisebuti
Mon(achi)'.
io6 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
jecture. This becomes clear in the light of the circumstantial
note regarding the authorship of the Te Deum which Dom
Cagin discovered in twoMSS.(one from Subiaco, the other from
Farfa ). Part of the passage runs thus : 'non desunt qui huius-
modi laudes a quodam Sisebuto compositas narrant.' If Lombard
tradition connected the Te Deum with the Spanish king, it
would be difficult to account for its attribution in MSS. to an
unknown Sisebut or to a humble monk. If, on the other hand,
a tradition existed attributing the work to an unknown Sisebut,
any learned scribe might easily make the conjecture and attri-
bute the work to a known Sisebut. But the uncertainty of the
South Italian tradition is further seen from the fact that
another liturgical MS. in Beneventan characters I refer to
Vatic, lat. 4928, written at the beginning of the I2th century
(c.a. 1113) for the use of the Benedictine monastery of S.
Sophia of Benevento, which had close relations with Monte
Cassino attributes the Te Deum to quite a different person,
namely to an unknown St. Abundius. Under these circum-
stances the attribution of the Te Deum to King Sisebut, which
occurs in a single, relatively recent Beneventan MS., can
scarcely be regarded as evidence of relations between Spain
and Southern Italy.
More important evidence in support of his contention
Rodolico discovers in the existence of Visigothic MSS. in
Southern Italy, which he compares with the existence of Irish
MSS. in Bobbio. This indeed would be crushing evidence,
if in Monte Cassino and Cava, where the Visigothic MSS. lie,
traces of Spanish influence could be found as patent and
undeniable as those of Irish influence observable in the early
products of Bobbio. Rodolico is of opinion that such traces
exist ; and we shall later examine the MSS. themselves for
evidence in support of his view. Let us, however, first investi-
gate the parallel he has drawn. What are the historical
facts ?
The monastery of Bobbio is known to have been founded
in 612 by the Irishman St. Columban. It preserved MSS. in
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 107
the Irish hand which were either brought thither by the Irish
monks or written by them on the spot. 1 Monks of succeeding
generations, as we can see from extant MSS., now and then
either directly imitate the Irish script or borrow features which
can be traced to it only : a striking example is the system of
abbreviations practised in Bobbio during the 8th century. 2
Lastly and this is of cardinal importance the number of
Irish MSS. which have come down to us from the monastery
of Bobbio itself is not so small as to be negligible. 3
How does the case stand between Spain and Southern
Italy ? In the first place there are no religious settlements by
Spaniards, in fact it is difficult to name any historical per-
sonage who visited Southern Italy from Spain during the
period which concerns us. 4 As for the number of Visigothic
MSS. in Southern Italy, only three are known; two of which
are in Monte Cassino : Monte Cassino 4 (Ambrosius), and
Monte Cassino 19 (Augustine), both of the early 9th century ;
1 See C. Cipolla, Codici Bobbiesi della Biblioteca nazionale universitaria di
Torino (Milan 1907).
2 See W. M. Lindsay, Early Irish Minuscule Script (St. Andrews Univer-
sity Publications, no. vi, Oxford 1910) pp. i, 30 sqq.; also 'The Bobbio
Scriptorium : its early minuscule abbreviations ' in Zentralblatt f. Bibliotheks-
wesen, xxvi (1909) 293 sqq. Steffens in Melanges Chatelam, pp. 244 sqq.
5 e.g. the MSS. Milan Ambros. c 5 inf. (Bangor Antiphonary),F 60 sup.,
c 301 inf., Vienna 16 + Naples iv A 8, Turin a n 2*, F iv i, o iv 20. Some Irish
MSS. were destroyed in the Turin fire of 1904. For facs. see Cipolla, op. cit.
1 There is one exception. In the Vita Willibaldi (Mon. Germ. Hist. SS.
xv, pars i, p. 102) we read of a Spanish presbyter, Diapertus, living at Monte
Cassino, and of his journeying to Rome in 739 in the company of an English
monk Willibald (Mabillon, Annales Ord. S. Bened. ii, lib. xx, 78, and lib.
xxi, 48). Cassinese tradition knows apparently nothing of the Spanish
visitor. If it is fair to urge his presence as evidence of Visigothic influence, we
shall have to bear in mind that during the same century there were visitors from
England (Willibald), from Germany (Sturmius), and from France (Adalhard).
This much, however, is beyond dispute : the Spanish MSS. found in South
Italy are not connected with Diapertus, since they are of the 9th century. And
another significant fact is this : the earliest Monte Cassino MSS. of Isidore's
Etymologies, Paris lat. 7530 and Cava 2, belong to the same class as the
North Italian and not as the Spanish or French MSS. (cf. Lindsay, Isidori
Hisp. ep. Etymol. sive On'g. libri xx (Oxford 1911) p. x).
io8 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
and one in Cava, of the end of the 9th century, the famous
Danila Bible. 1 In fact, in all the rest of Italy disregarding
a few fragments and marginalia 2 only three are known to me,
and I doubt whether many others exist : one in Rome, of the
1 2th century (Rome Corsini 369, Beatus super Apocal.), one in
Florence, of the roth century (Flor. Laurent. Ashburnh. 1 7,
Ildefonsus), and one in Verona, of the 8th or 9th century
(Verona LXXXIX, Orationale Mozarabicum). 3 The Roman and
Florentine MSS. need not detain us, as being too recent. J ust as
we do not know how the Orationale Mozarabicum got to Verona,
we do not know how the other three MSS. got to Southern
Italy. The MS. in Cava, one of the best specimens of Visi-
gothic penmanship and ornamentation, reached that place at
the earliest more than a century after it was written, as Cava
was not founded before the year 101 1. There is not a trace to
show that it was in Italy at an early time. It may have reached
Cava when that monastery was at the height of its power. We
do not know. 4 What is of moment to us is the fact that the
MS., as Amelli has pointed out and as the script shows, was
written in the second half of the 9th century. 5 By that time
the Beneventan script may be said to have been quite decided
upon the course it was to follow.
1 Cf. Bibl. Casin. i. 97, 233; Cod. Dipl. Cavens. i, Manoscritti membranacei,
p*i; A. Amelli, De Ubri Baruch vetustissima latino, versione, &c. (Monte Cassino
1902) pp. 7 and 14; E. A. Loew, Stud. Pal., pp. 58, 59, 62, and pi. 3. Facs.
of Cava Bible in Silvestre, Pal. univ. iii, pi. 141.
2 e.g. Vercelli 158 (marginalia passim and a bigger addition, fol. 208),
Vatic. Regin. lat. 708 (only first four folios), and Regin. lat. 267 (marginalia).
Knowledge of the last two I owe to P. Liebaert. Here one ought perhaps to
add Lucca 4 90, for one of the hands makes a very decided Visigothic
impression.
3 Cf. Stud. Pal., pp. 56, 71, 76, and pi. 7. See also Fe'rotin, Monum. eccl.
liturgica, vi = Le liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum (Paris 1912) plates 1-3.
4 One conjecture is that it was presented to Cava in 1035 by Prince Waimar
of Salerno. Cf. Guillaume, Essai historique sur Tabbaye de Cava t p. 21. It is
a curious fact that Mabillon does not mention the Bible as one of the treasures
of the abbey (Museum Italicum, I, pars i. 116 sqq.).
5 See above, n. i.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 109
As for the two MSS. in Monte Cassino, it is certain that
they were in Southern Italy as early as the nth century.
This appears from the transcription by a Beneventan hand of
the nth century of marginalia written in Visigothic cursive,
and from corrections of letters and punctuation. 1 But we seek
in vain in the pages of the Cassinese chronicles or other South
Italian records for persons or events with which to connect the
arrival of these MSS. in Italy. 2 It may even be argued that
the absence of any Beneventan writing in them, prior to the
end of the nth century, suggests, though the point is far
from proved, that they were not read or used before that
time, and perhaps did not come much before then to Monte
Cassino.
In short, the existence of three Spanish MSS. in Southern
Italy is a circumstance which can in no wise be put on a par
with the existence of Insular MSS. in Bobbio. Considering
their small number and our inability to connect them with
South Italian history of the 8th and 9th centuries, their
presence is by itself insufficient evidence upon which to base
an argument proving vital relations.
Now to return to the palaeographical evidence. Rodolico
adduces in support of his theory two graphic features which
are according to him of Spanish derivation : the Beneventan
sign of interrogation and the abbreviation-stroke formed by a
line surmounted by a point.
The statement referring to the interrogation-sign involves
three misapprehensions. In the discussion of the interrogation-
sign found on pp. 251 sqq. sufficient data are brought forward
to show : (i) that the interrogation-sign at the beginning of
the sentence is peculiar not to the Visigothic but to the Bene-
ventan script which makes it impossible to speak of the
1 Cf. Stud. Pal., pi. 3.
2 It is not at all impossible that the MSS. got to Italy through the Saracens.
The two MSS. in Monte Cassino have Arabic annotations. I believe the Cava
Bible also has them. If they came to Italy in the nth century they may be
gifts made by the Normans, who got them from Saracen scholars of their court.
But these are pure conjectures.
no THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
Beneventan custom as derived from the Visigothic ; (2) that
the statement that in Beneventan the sign precedes and does
not follow the sentence is true of only one stage of the script ;
and (3) that the modern use of the initial interrogation-
sign in Spain, far from being a continuation of a Visigothic
tradition, is merely an academic innovation of the i8th century. 1
The use of the line surmounted by the point to denote
the abbreviation-sign is to be sure a feature of Visigothic
MSS. But if we are to use this fact as an argument in favour
of Visigothic influence, it must first be shown that such an
abbreviation-stroke was confined to Visigothic MSS., and
secondly that it is a common feature of the earliest Beneventan
MSS. What are the facts ? The line surmounted by the
point was used to denote m and later Bother abbreviations in
several Italian and Continental uncial MSS. long before Bene-
ventan was in existence. 2 It is not at all infrequent in early
minuscule of non-Visigothic origin. 3 This form of the stroke
is, therefore, far from surely of Visigothic origin. If its use in
Italian MSS. of the 8th century and earlier can be attested,
there is no need to explain its occurrence in some 9th-
century Beneventan MSS. by having recourse to Visigothic
models.
To imagine Visigothic influence behind every case of this
type of abbreviation-stroke is like explaining every case of
quur or qnm which to be sure are features of Spanish MSS.
1 The Visigothic MS. Monte Cassino 4 has here and there the interroga-
tion-sign at the beginning (pp. 23, 89), but it is invariably the addition of
a Beneventan hand of the nth century, the same probably which transcribed
the Visigothic cursive. Rodolico may have taken the addition for the original
hand.
2 e.g. Vatic. Regin. lat. 316, s. vii/viii; St. Petersburg F. v. I, no. 2, and O.v.I,
no. 2, s. viii ; Paris Nouv. Acq. lat. 1597, s. viii; London Add. MS. 5463, s.
viii ; Rome Vallicell. B 25 2 , s. viii ; Vatic, lat. 5007, s. viii/ix, the last three being
products of Southern Italy, the others of France.
8 e.g. Ivrea i, s. vii/viii (Luxeuil type); London Add. MS. 31031, s. viii
(c< type); Paris Nouv. Acq. lat. 1619, s. viii; Paris lat. 3836, foil. 101-4 (the
Caroline hand); St. Gall 185, s. ix in.; Cheltenham 12261, s. viii (Italian);
Lucca 490, s. viii ex. (probably written in Lucca) to cite only a few cases.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT in
by assuming Visigothic originals. But quur and qnm are by
no means restricted to Spanish MSS., and the same may be
said of the line and dot. But even if we grant that some of
the Beneventan cases are due to copying from a Visigothic
original, 1 it is unreasonable to attach undue importance to
this, in view of the absence of this feature from the earliest
minuscule products of Monte Cassino admittedly the chief
scriptorium of South Italy. How many instances of this
usage can be shown in early Beneventan ? Only a very few.
Here and there the line and dot occur (besides the usual
abbreviation-stroke) in the MSS. Benevento in 9 (Autpertus),
Vatic, lat. 3320 (Glossarium), Vatic, lat. 3313 (Ars Prisciani),
Vatic, lat. 7814 (Gregor. Dial.), and Monte Cassino 187 (luliani
Tolet. Anticimenon). The last is the only MS. mentioned by
Rodolico. According to him this form of the abbreviation-
stroke is here used for m. I have found no instances. And
when he says that by extension it is also used to denote any
abbreviation, he is giving a wrong impression. In the entire
MS. the scribes use the ordinary abbreviation-stroke of the
time. It is decidedly the exception when we find on page 6,
1. 2, dominus, and on page 17, domini nostri iesu christi, abbre-
viated with the line and point. It seems noteworthy that this
form of the stroke occurs only with ' Nomina Sacra', as I have
seen it in uncial MSS., and that too only at the beginning of
the MS. 2 It will be admitted that the force of an argument
based upon a few sporadic instances in a single MS. amounts
to little in comparison with the fact that over twenty of the
earliest Beneventan MSS., most of which, lying outside of
1 This may be the case with Vatic, lat. 3320, for I found aum forautem and
srhl for Israhel. I doubt, however, whether this is also true of Monte Cassino
187, despite the fact that it contains a Spanish author.
2 An nth -century corrector often placed a dot over certain abbreviations in
the text. The dot was his mark of reference to the modern form of the
abbreviation which he put in the margin. See facs. in Script. JBenev., pi. 21.
It is possible that Rodolico took the dot to be by the first hand. There can,
however, be no doubt as to its being an addition, except on pp. 2, 6, and 17
mentioned above.
ii2 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
Monte Cassino, were not examined by Rodolico, have no
examples of such a usage.
Another instance of Visigothic influence Rodolico finds in
the use during the Theobaldan period (1022-35) of the line
surmounted by two points. For this one would like references.
In forty-seven Spanish MSS. and in the facsimiles of over a
hundred I have hardly ever encountered this feature. As for
the usage of the Theobaldan MSS. it corresponds more nearly
to the facts to say that the ordinary abbreviation-stroke is the
rule ; that some scribes affect two parallel lines or even three ;
that occasionally the horizontal line is surmounted by a comma,
or even by two, or by one point. I have rarely met with the
line and two points, my only example being Monte Cassino 5
a. IOII-22.
Quite another matter is the question whether the group of
MSS. of the Bari type (see below, p. 150 sq.) owe their frequent
use of the line and point to Visigothic influence. It seems to
me highly improbable. But, as they all belong to the period
of the developed script, they also fall without the limits of
the present discussion.
Rodolico finds in the fact that the oldest minuscule MS. in
Monte Cassino contains the work of Isidore a further hint that
the monks of Monte Cassino drew largely from the Spanish
during the tentative period of their script. But when we con-
sider that the popularity of Isidore was second to no other
author during the two or three centuries following his death
as can be seen from the large number of Isidore MSS. written
prior to the 9th century it does not surprise us that an 8th-
century copy should be in existence at Monte Cassino. 1 In
Northern Italy, it appears, Isidore was already used at the
beginning of the 7th century. The Continuator Prosperi seems
to have used him before 625. 2 Why, one may ask, should
1 Besides Isidore, Monte Cassino possesses MSS. of lulianus Toletanus and
Ildefonsus.
2 Cf. Wattenbach, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen, i. 92 (yth ed.), and
Bethmann in Pertz' Archiv, x. 380.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 113
Isidore not be copied in Southern Italy one hundred and
twenty-five years later ?
All the above-mentioned points are to Rodolico links in
a chain which connects the Beneventan with the Visigothic
script. To what extent the connexion is established by the
arguments advanced must have appeared from the examina-
tion to which they have just been submitted. But if it were
true that the Beneventan drew largely from the Visigothic
during its tentative period, the fact would appear not so much
from political and ecclesiastical relations ; not from the pres-
ence of three early Spanish MSS. in Southern Italy ; not from
the authorship of Isidore in one of the earliest examples
of South Italian minuscule ; nor again, from a few sporadic
instances of a sign whose Visigothic origin is problematical ;
nor, in fact, so much from all these put together, as from the
graphic features and abbreviations common to the two scripts.
The crucial test must lie therein. If it could be proved that
the points of similarity between Beneventan and Visigothic
which are enumerated above existed only between these two
scripts and no others, then inasmuch as the Spanish minuscule
was formed before the Beneventan there would be no doubt
that the Beneventan derived those features from the Visi-
gothic. If, on the other hand, other scripts, practised in centres
much nearer to Southern Italy, relations with which are fully
established, are shown to have the same points of similarity,
it will be rash to explain those similarities as due to the more
distant centre. If it can further be shown that those other
Italian and transalpine schools wrote a minuscule which has
even more points of similarity with the Beneventan than the
Spanish has, it will be impossible not to grant the conclusion
to which the facts lead. What that conclusion is we have
already summed up by saying that the Beneventan is but the
continuation of earlier Italian traditions. We have also seen
that those traditions consisted chiefly in the adaptation of
cursive features to calligraphic purposes.
9
1443
U4 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
Beneventan more akin to other pre-Caroline types. In order
to demonstrate the Italian origin of our script it would suffice
merely to point out the indisputable resemblance between
notarial and calligraphic products, that is, between documents
and manuscripts, of the same locality. But a comparison with
other early minuscule will be more instructive, as it will call
attention to the fact that closer relations existed between
Beneventan and early North Italian, or even French calligraphy,
than between Beneventan and Visigothic. There are many
North Italian MSS., products of Bobbio, Vercelli, Novara,
and Nonantola, which show all or nearly all the features which
became Beneventan characteristics. 1 Some of these MSS.
have in fact been mistaken for Beneventan 2 such is the
similarity between the North and South Italian products of the
9th century. An examination of a few details will make this
clearer. We shall compare the Beneventan peculiarities with
the corresponding features in North Italian, French, and Visi-
gothic minuscules.
As points of similarity between Beneventan and Visigothic
we have given the letters a and /, the use of z-longa and of
the proclitic ligatures with t. The form of early Beneventan a,
resembling two contiguous r's, is much nearer to the forms
found in Italian cursive, in early Italian minuscule, and in
many French pre-Caroline MSS. than it is to the Visigothic,
whose ^-like form it never imitates.
The form of / in early Beneventan, with its partly open and
only partially descending left loop, bears far more resemblance
to Italian and French pre-Caroline models than to the entirely
closed form of the Visigothic. It is only in later Beneventan,
1 Most of these MSS. are enumerated in Stud. Pal., pp. 39-45.
2 To cite a few examples: the BambergMS. BIII 30, to my mind a true
specimen of the Nonantola school, has been called Beneventan by Traube,
Pal. Forschungen, iv (1904) 8. Again the Nonantola MSS. Rome Sessor. 40
(1258), 41 (1479), a d 63 (2102) have been described as Beneventan by
A. Poncelet, Anal. Holland., Appendix, xxv (1906) 105, 106, in. The North
Italian (Bobbio ?) MS. Milan Ambros. 631 sup. is put in the same class as the
Beneventan by Steffens, Lat. Pal?, pi. 68.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 115
the fully developed script, that the / is closed, and even then
not always (cf. p. 139). But this, being in the later period,
does not concern us here.
Of the proclitic ligatures with t, the form of te in Beneventan
resembles the other scripts more than the Visigothic, owing
to the greater similarity of Beneventan e to the e of those
schools, especially the French. In three respects, therefore,
where similarity exists between Beneventan and Visigothic,
greater similarity exists between Beneventan and the other
schools.
The fourth point of similarity is the usage with regard to
z-longa. A peculiar interest attaches to this feature, owing
to the fact that it is only in the Beneventan and Visigothic
that it continues to be a regular element as long as the two
scripts last. This would certainly seem a significant fact,
arguing close relationship. But, as has been shown elsewhere,
the invariable use of z-longa initially and medially to denote
the semi-vocal sound is of cursive origin, and native to Italy. 1
If its use can be testified for Spain at the beginning of the
8th century, it can be testified for Italy by examples even
older. It is also found in French MSS. of the end of the yth
and beginning of the 8th century (Luxeuil type). As there
can be no question of the part which cursive elements played
in the formation of the various types of pre-Caroline minuscule,
Visigothic included, it is evident that the use of z'-longa in
these scripts is due to one and the same source.
In this connexion it is convenient to treat of another feature,
which like z-longa is peculiar only to Beneventan and Visi-
gothic, and forms a permanent and integral part of their
developed scripts. I refer to the practice of making the dis-
tinction between assibilated and unassibilated ti. Here again
appearances are all for close relationship. But the facts plainly
show the contrary or, if dependence can be suspected, it will
be of the Spanish upon the Italian schools, instead of vice
1 Cf. Stud. Pal., pp. 10 sqq.
T 2
ii6 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
versa. For in the oldest Spanish MSS. of the 8th and 9th
centuries, as has been shown, the //-distinction is not made. 1
It is only the later MSS. that practise the distinction. In the
Beneventan, however, evidence exists proving the conscious
observance of the distinction as early as the end of the 8th
century. It is true that in Spanish cursive the distinction may
be practised even earlier than the close of the 8th century.
Much earlier it cannot be, for the cursive additions of Autun
27, which hardly antedate the middle of the century, make no
distinction. But this is important : the form of assibilated ti
in early Spanish cursive is the form which all Italian notaries
reserve for soft ti. It is plain that the Italians are not imita-
ting the Spanish notaries. The opposite is not only more likely,
but is practically proved by this circumstance : the Beneventan
scribe denotes assibilated ti by the form he took over from
cursive (^). The Visigothic scribe, on the other hand, rejects
the form thus used in his cursive, and invents an absolutely
foreign form, strangely enough the very form which in the
Beneventan is used for unassibilated //. In Spanish calli-
graphy, as has been said, the practice becomes general a full
century later than in Italy. If, in so important a matter, the
South Italian school thus shows a lead of more than a hundred
years, it manifests thereby a self-reliance and independence
which should be taken into account in forming a judgement
upon its origin and possible models.
If a doubt is cast upon the plausibility of direct Spanish
influence by the circumstance that the resemblances existing
between Beneventan and Visigothic have also been established
between Beneventan and other scripts, that doubt inclines to
positive disbelief when it can be shown that points wherein
the Beneventan differs from the Visigothic are points of simi-
larity between the former and those other scripts. A considera-
tion of one single factor is enough to convince us that the
theory of direct influence of Spanish upon Beneventan is
1 Cf. Stud. Pal., pp. 52 sqq.
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 117
untenable. I refer to the usage with regard to the ligatures
with i discussed above. And when we say ligatures with i, it
should be remembered that we are referring not to a single
feature but to a group of them sufficient to give character to
a page of the script. Combined ei>fi,gi, li, ri, and ti (see
above, p. 93) are, as we have seen, the constant and distinguish-
ing trait of developed Beneventan : to them early Beneventan
even adds ci. If we except their occasional use, chiefly at
the end of a line, these ligatures are practically absent from
Spanish calligraphy. In Italian MSS., however, some or all of
them may be found in the early products of minuscule writing.
They are likewise in common use in early French minuscule :
in the 8th-century MSS. of the Luxeuil type and the Corbie
MSS. of the c< type. Their absence from the later Corbie
MSS. of the tcb type is only symptomatic of the tendency
which bore fruit in the Palatine school and in Tours, of ridding
calligraphy of cursive elements, these among them. But not
a few MSS. of Italian, French, and German centres bear wit-
ness to the tenacity with which the ligatures ri and ti clung
to life even after the year 800.
Besides the ligatures there are other smaller differences which
are not without significance in showing which way the stream
of influence ran. The use of subscript i, which originates in
Insular and finds its way into Italian MSS. e.g. those of
Bobbio occasionally appears in earliest Beneventan but is
a practice unknown in Visigothic. In contrast with this it
may be mentioned that the use of superior a in combination
with the following letter, for instance m or n, occurs in Visi-
gothic and not in Beneventan, though it is well known to
North Italian writing, as well as to early French and German
minuscule.
Broken c is very frequent in early Beneventan, it is a feature
of early French, it is absent from Visigothic. The Beneven-
tan e with the closed upper loop extending above the shorter
letters has its parallel in the French pre-Caroline, Visigothic
e being open and rather short. It is needless to repeat that
ii8 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
Beneventan g is more like the g of pre-Caroline French and
North Italian MSS., and utterly unlike the Visigothic. The
arches of m and n in Beneventan and in French and North
Italian pre-Caroline minuscule are relatively high, in early
Visigothic they are notably low and broad, and the last stroke,
as we have seen, turns in, whereas in the other schools men-
tioned it bends at the line and turns outward. The stem of
r and s often extends below the line both in Beneventan and
pre-Caroline especially Corbie MSS. The contrary is true
of Visigothic. The letter t in the earliest Beneventan bears,
as has been said, more resemblance to the t of other schools
than to the Visigothic.
So much for the ligatures and letters. As for the abbrevia-
tions, the typical forms of the Spanish, Beneventan, and French
schools have been tabulated above. It only remains to say
that the differences between Beneventan and Spanish are all
actually points of agreement with the other schools with which
we have compared the Beneventan.
The abbreviation-stroke of early Beneventan MSS. is often
capricious, as is its ^-stroke ; in this respect resembling pre-
Caroline French and Italian usage and differing from the
Visigothic line and point.
Lastly may be mentioned the titles, colophons, and initials.
A type of unfilled uncials of a rather crude form for incipit
and explicit, which is used in early Beneventan, appears in
French pre-Caroline MSS. of the 8th century (e.g. Paris lat.
12598). And the Beneventan initials with their interlaced
patterns and division into compartments have far greater
resemblance to early French initials than to Visigothic.
It is hardly necessary, though it would be possible, to
enumerate other small points of resemblance showing closer
relation between the Beneventan and pre-Caroline Italian or
French than between Beneventan and Spanish. We may say
finally that the general impression made by the scripts when
compared bears out the testimony of the details.
Such, then, is the result of a comparison between early
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 119
Beneventan and Visigothic. All the graphic differences, large
as well as small, all the numerous and signal dissimilarities
in the abbreviations, which next to the letters themselves
constitute the most delicate register of influence, point to the
same conclusion. If, then, there is small support for the
theory of Visigothic influence during the earliest stage of
the Beneventan, there would seem to be logically even less
for any theory based on the similar look of the two scripts in
their developed state, when we give due value to the fact that
there existed perfect continuity of development between the
early and the mature periods of the Beneventan script. The
similarity between developed Beneventan and developed Visi-
gothic two systems of calligraphy which base upon cursive
is fully accounted for by the accident of their distance from
the main Caroline stream, a circumstance which permitted
them both to pursue their course upon lines begun before the
Caroline reform, which had interfered with a similar develop-
ment in France and North Italy. But for the reform, it is not
too much to say, French minuscule as well as Visigothic, North
Italian as well as South Italian, would have continued using
types showing just as great resemblance to each other, for all
their local differences, as exists between developed Spanish
and developed Beneventan. Such a hypothesis is neither
rash nor fanciful in view of the many MSS., both French and
Italian, which illustrate the general tendency before the reform.
Rather, it would seem the only one broad enough to compre-
hend and account for all the phenomena present.
I have gone into such detail to disprove the influence of
the Spanish upon the Beneventan script, not so much because
the fact in itself is instructive as because it illuminates the
history of the whole trend of early minuscule. In establishing
proper relations between Spanish and Beneventan we have
been enabled to study the forces at play in the entire field.
We have seen the first attempts of the North Italian scribe,
the early efforts of the Burgundian copyist, and where they
sought their raw material. We have seen how the character
120 THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT
of their workmanship betrays less and less the marks of its
cursive origin, the nearer it approaches to the Caroline reform ;
and how the reform changed the whole course of the history
of writing. With what school originated the idea of creating
a minuscule from the cursive it is impossible to say. There
can be no doubt that the impulse to create a script which
would be more economical than uncial or semi-uncial was first
felt in centres where copying activity was liveliest. The
vogue which Isidore of Seville had during the very time when
such a minuscule was being shaped, strongly suggests that
the need of such a script may have been first felt by Spain, in
order to supply the demand for his books. Be that as it may,
the earliest products of France and Northern Italy betray not
the slightest symptom of a dependence upon Visigothic models.
This statement is based not only upon the form of the letters
but upon the character of the abbreviations, orthography,
punctuation, and ornamentation. What is more, in the case
of the Spanish we are unfortunately not in a position to speak
of its minuscule prior to the end, or shall we say the middle,
of the 8th century, for its 8th-century MSS. are rare. Over
against this, not a few MSS. still exist which were written
in Italian or French minuscule of the end of the yth or the
beginning of the 8th century. The striking similarity between
these early efforts at minuscule and the notarial products of
the time is such as to make it unnecessary to suppose that
foreign influence played any greater r61e than furnishing the
general idea of the possibility of moulding a book script from
cursive material.
With the Beneventan too, it is impossible to say when
it sprang into existence. Owing to unfavourable political
conditions it is improbable that this occurred prior to the
beginning of the 8th century ; in which case it could profit
by the examples of Insular, French, and especially of North
Italian, possibly even of Spanish minuscules. But as for its
material, it had little or nothing to borrow from foreign
models. In its uncial and semi-uncial MSS., and in the cursive
THE ORIGIN OF THE SCRIPT 121
practised in its own region, 1 it had all the necessary elements.
A script that had the hardiness to endure for five centuries,
to develop consistently in a single direction, and to assert
its independence by the uniqueness of certain of its traits,
must have had from the first its roots deep set in its own
native soil.
1 See facs. in Script. JBenev., plates 1-6 ; a notarial product like the Diploma
of Grimoald (pi. 6) is the best possible refutation of Visigothic influence. The
document is of the year 810 and contains all the essential Beneventan features.
No one would maintain that Beneventan cursive depended upon foreign, trans-
alpine models.
CHAPTER VII
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
PERIODS OF DEVELOPMENT
IN following the development of the script on its formal
side we recognize four periods, which may conveniently be
spoken of as :
(1) the tentative period (saec. viii ex.-ix ex.).
(2) the formative period (saec. ix ex.-x).
(3) the period of maturity (saec. xi in.-xii).
(4) the period of decline (saec. xii ex.-xiii).
Identified with epochs in the history of Monte Cassino, the
first period corresponds, roughly speaking, to the pre-Capuan
epoch, the second to the Capuan, the third to the century
which opens with the abbots Atenolf (1011-22) and Theobald
(1022-35) and closes with Desiderius (1058-87) and Oderisius
(1087-1 105) ; the last period corresponds to the age of Abbot
Bernard I (1264-82) and his immediate predecessors. In the
period of maturity the Desiderian epoch is the most important,
as it marks the highest point of development reached.
In order to guard against misapprehension, it must be stated
at the outset that though for practical purposes dates have
been attached to the four periods they must not be understood
to be strictly defined by them. For example, an expert scribe
of the loth century may produce a MS. which is more
calligraphic than another written by a less practised writer
in the nth. Or a profane book written in the nth century
may seem less calligraphic than a liturgical book of the loth,
because the latter was penned with unusual care. Yet after
giving due weight to these considerations, a careful examination
of the MSS. will convince us that in each case the most
Plate I
TENTATIVE PERIOD
Facsimile No. i.
T Li $ceuMnznukpmi
r 41
inZ.^ltfSc^H
miti*"&K
7 ' ~~ ' T' ft
jBtyteftoim^
umiWtitif
MS. Naples VI B 12. A.D. 817-35. Pomerius, De vita
contemplativa.
(Ibi gaudebunt ubi praemiu;
reportabunt. Ibi recep
luri sunt praemium, ubi
non solum diuictis, sed
etiaw finitis hostibwj tri
umphabunt. Ibi triu;w
phabunt ubi ulterius
aduersariuw non time)
Script. Benev., pi. 14.
To face p. 122
Plate II
FORMATIVE PERIOD
Facsimile No. 2.
K<xbu8ftcnZ S {<.
gjuf & ^6) K<jf<tef cccs^&ct
c^^ ^^
t
MS. Monte Cassino 269. Ante A. D. 949. Gregorius,
Moralia in lob.
(tempore QIUS ciues uidentur.
Non au/^;;/ de omnibus ita desperant,
sed tamen plerumq?/<? contin
git, ut hi de quibus maiorem
fidei fiduciam habuerant,
ipsi eiusde^ fidei hostes atroci
ores fiant, Ut eos tune uide
ant contra sacra eloquia
agere, ex quorum se operatione
crediderant hgc eadew sacra
eloquia ad pre,dicationis gra/faw
restaurare. Qu tamen)
Script. Bencv., pi. 46.
To follow Plate
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 123
trustworthy test is the principle of evolution. It is not with
hard and fast dating criteria that we are concerned here,
but rather with marking out stages of development which
reflect, not the exceptional heights reached by an individual,
but the general level of progress and achievement. It should
be borne in mind too that the development was more rapid
and the decay quicker to set in, in the more active centres,
so that a MS. from a small centre has the appearance of
being older than a contemporary product of a more active
scriptorium.
Tentative period. In the first period the cursive origin of
the script is quite manifest. The script is in a state of
indecision and flux. The insecurity of the scribe is betrayed
in many ways. He uses various forms of the same letter.
He employs ligatures in one instance and in another the
uncombined forms. Now he will observe the //-distinction
and then again neglect it. One scribe, or school it may be,
employs z'-longa in accordance with definite rules, another is
apparently quite ignorant of the usage. And all this vacilla-
tion and uncertainty is fully reflected in the handling of
abbreviations and punctuation, two elements whose develop-
ment always goes parallel with that of the graphic features.
The general look of the script is uncalligraphic, the word-
separation is poor. This period comprises the MSS. of the
8th century and the first three-quarters of the 9th. See Script.
Benev., plates 7-20.
Formative period. The second period seems to set in
toward the end of the Qth century, as a result, unless I err, of
a conscious script-reform. 1 From this time onwards the script is
fully equipped. It is in possession of all its essential features,
1 This would explain how MSS. after the end of the pth century begin to
show uniformity in matters where before diversity of practice existed, as in the
matter of punctuation, in the use of accents, in the observance of certain
rules, &c.
i2 4 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
and decided, so to speak, upon the course it is to follow. The
letters have achieved normalized forms ; the //-distinction is
strictly observed ; certain ligatures with enclitic i have become
obligatory ; * the use of z-longa is as definite as it ever
becomes. Though the letters are still somewhat round and
made with considerable freedom, the general appearance is
more calligraphic, and a distinct step has been made in
regularity of alignment and word-separation. The standard
Beneventan punctuation, including the characteristic interro-
gation-sign, 2 now comes into use. Roughly speaking, this
period closes with the loth century. It should be noted,
however, that till the middle of the loth century the charac-
teristics which I have just enumerated are not so marked as
they become in the latter half. It is difficult to define the
end of the period with exactness, and to do so is not a matter
of consequence. Whether we place it at the close of the
loth century or in the beginning of the nth, what this epoch
represents in the development of the script is the achievement
of all the essential features, coupled with a certain freedom
of form as opposed to later strictness and conventionality.
Period of mahirity. This is the longest of the four periods
and contains the products of greatest excellence and finish.
Scholars have aptly connected the name of Desiderius(io58-87)
with the best period of the Beneventan script ; for the most
beautiful nth-century MSS. owe in fact their existence to the
impetus given by his zeal and love of letters. I have grouped
into one period with the Desiderian both the half-century
preceding and the half-century following it, as they give us
products which on the one side illustrate the gradual ascent
to the height, and on the other the extremely slow, almost
imperceptible falling away from the perfected type.
1 See below, p. 142.
a Compare, for instance, the dated MSS. Monte Cassino 3 (874-92) and
Monte Cassino 218 (a. 909). The latter has the characteristic period and
interrogation-sign not found in the former.
rt
c
.2
*4_>
O
<L)
00
00
10
O
OS
CO
D r- 1
. W g
! "* ^
111
g
w 3 ., .
a g .-1
rt OT h
g S
I 8
I g
o ?
c o
<u o
O ^3
| rt
See
-l ^\ ^>
CO ^>
(3 O
g 3 fl
3 I
To face p. 124
Plate IV.
PERIOD OF MATURITY
Facsimile No. 4.
MS. Monte Cassino 47. A.D. 1159-73. Martyrologium, &c.
(mentew. Quia enim
ille non est tails
substantia qu uide
ri oculis possit, et
mirac&la eius quibus
totuw munduw regit)
Scrip/. Benev., pi. 88.
To follow Plate II I
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 125
To avoid repetition I shall describe the achievements of the
Desiderian period only, it being understood that the MSS.
of the half-century preceding show the same characteristics in
less perfect form, yet with that beauty which belongs to
striving and ascending ; l while the products of the half-century
after display merely some intensification or exaggeration of
the Desiderian characteristics, which finally deteriorates into
mannerism.
In the MSS. of the Desiderian period, then, the first
feature that strikes us is the regularity of the script. So
admirable is the precision with which the letters are executed
as to suggest in this respect mechanical reproduction, without,
however, forfeiting the distinction and beauty which belong to
the best handwriting.
The factors which contribute to this regularity are : the
perfect alignment and measured spacing of letters and words ;
the alternation of thin and thick strokes, the thick strokes
being oblique, lozenge-shaped, and parallel to each other;
characteristics which lend a distinctive appearance to a Bene-
ventan page of the developed period (except in the Bari type) ; 2
the neat ' bevelled ' terminations of the stems projecting below
the base-line ; the position of the horizontal connecting-stroke,
which uniformly coincides with the head-line ; the junction
of bows (see below, p. 149) ; the uniformity of the punctuation.
In a word, the Desiderian scribe shows a consciousness of
skill, a joy in the employment of it, and at the same time
a masterly restraint and fastidiousness, which render his
performance"4he finest flower of the script.
f
Period of Decline. The fourth period may be said, roughly
speaking, to coincide with the i3th century, though signs of
decline are evident in many 12th-century MSS. If the
Desiderian scribe transformed the rounded strokes of his
1 The alignment is less perfect, the letters are rounder, the thin and thick
strokes not so strongly contrasted, the latter lacking the characteristic shape.
2 See below, p. 1 50.
126 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
predecessor into lozenge-shapes, the scribe of the 1 3th century
in his turn abandoned the lozenge-shapes for a still more
angular form. But it is not this angularity alone that marks
the decline. In some curious way scribes lost their skill in
joining the strokes, 1 with the result that the letters are broken
up and a strong sense of disintegration prevails. This angu-
larity and lack of continuity go hand in hand with a loss of
skill in the marshalling of strokes and shafts. In a word,
both vigour and precision are lacking. This does not exclude
the execution of excellent calligraphic MSS. But even these,
though at first blush they bear a resemblance to MSS. of the
nth century, betray on close inspection indubitable marks
of decay. 2 Departure from all previous practice is seen in
the loosening of tradition, the abandoning of old scribal rules,
the admission of features from other schools, and the adoption
of such innovations as the stroke over i y the hyphen, and the
practice of ruling lines with ink or plummet.
THE ELEMENTS
(NOTE. In the following pages I have used the terms base-line
and head-line to indicate the two limits within which the short letters
are made.)
The period in the Beneventan script with which the general
student is chiefly acquainted is that of the perfectly developed
forms of the 1 1 th century. 3 These forms, it must be confessed,
present a picture of which one is at first puzzled to make out
the elements. The uniformity and monotony of the strokes,
the almost artificial regularity of their succession and fusion
seem utterly to disguise the type of writing of which this is
only the crystallized, highly stereotyped development. Nothing
1 In the nature of Beneventan calligraphy each letter had to be formed
of a number of separate pen-strokes, which only the good scribe managed so
to unite as not to show where they joined.
2 Cf. Script. Benev., plates 93 and 99.
3 Known to palaeographers as broken Lombard.
Plate V,
PERIOD OF DECLINE
Facsimile No. 5.
$* <wt aim
ffir ^i
tcfaftun n6^ lfffef Iti
MS. Cava 19. A.D. 1280. Evangelia.
(Erant au/m a;;/bo iusti an/<? d<?wm, iwcedentes in
mandatis et iustificationib^j dommi sine que
rela. Et non erat illis filius, eo quod cwet heli
sabeth sterilis, et ambo pr^cessissent in diebus
suis. Factum est au/em cum sac^rdotio funge
retwr zacharias in ordine uicis sue an/^ deum,
seatndum consuetudinem sac^rdotii, sorte
exiit ut iftcensum poneret iwgressus in
templum d^/;hi. Et om;/is multitude erat)
Script. Benev., pi. 98.
To face p. 126
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 127
would be more incorrect than to suppose that this script is
the result of arbitrary innovation. It must strongly be
emphasized that every form of letter used in the Desiderian
period is in fact nothing else than a more conventionalized,
more calligraphic form of letters and ligatures which we
already find in the 8th century. In other words the letters
of the nth century are the natural and logical development
of those that preceded them, with hardly a single form modified
in any essential degree. We may, in fact, say of the Bene-
ventan script, as perhaps of no other, that from first to last
it pursued one straight, undeviating line of development.
What is it that gives the developed script its characteristic
look ? It cannot be merely the use of those cursive forms
which we have already discussed and which distinguish it
from the Caroline since these are found in other calligraphic
minuscules which certainly present an appearance widely
different from the developed Beneventan. The peculiar look
of a page of developed Beneventan is also, and to a large
extent, due to the manner in which the Beneventan scribe
manages his pen in other words, to his technique. It is
this side of the scribe's activity which will be considered here ;
and to that end we must divide the letters into their constituent
parts or elements and go into detail.
The important elements of which the letters are composed
are the following six : the short upright or /-stroke, the
bow, the tall upright stem, the stem descending below the
base-line, the cross-stroke or horizontal connecting-stroke,
and the approach-stroke.
The short upright or i-stroke. We begin with the /-stroke,
since it is the principal unit or basic stroke of several con-
stantly recurring short letters ; that is to say, the manner in
which short i is formed in the developed script is also the
manner in which are formed the strokes of m, n, u, and part
of h and t.
From the earliest period we note the tendency to avoid
128 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
making the i by means of the simple perpendicular line.
Instead of the blunt beginning and blunt ending there is
a slight approach to the letter in the shape of a tiny beginning-
stroke from left to right ; and a gentle finishing off by means
of a similar tiny ending-stroke. When with a growing sense
of calligraphy shading came to play a bigger role, the two
ends of i became the thick or shaded parts of the letter.
Inasmuch as several other letters were composed of precisely
the same /-stroke, it became important, in order that the
letters might have the uniformity which calligraphy naturally
imposes, to bestow more and more care upon the shaded
stroke and as a matter of fact this stroke grows more
uniform as the script develops. The precise shape of the
shaded stroke and it eventually receives a very definite
shape was, I believe, largely conditioned by the normal
form of i. The upper shaded stroke descends from left to
right in order to give the effect of the tiny approach ; and the
lower shaded stroke also descends from left to right in order
similarly to suggest the end-stroke or slant upward. Only
the middle of the letter remained fine, . The shape of the
shaded stroke is determined by the shape of the pen-point.
The Beneventan scribe wrote with a pen-point cut obliquely,
the longer side being to the right from the point of view of the
scribe. Given the desire to shade, a pen-point properly cut,
and the shape of a letter like short i, the shaded parts must, if
exaggerated and strongly contrasted with the fine part, assume
the shape of an oblique lozenge ; so that the /-stroke in
a Desiderian MS. begins with a thick lozenge, to the lower
end of which is joined another lozenge inclined at precisely
the same angle as the first ; the connexion of the two con-
stituting the only fine part. 1 This lozenge, or shaded portion
of the /-stroke, has such an important function that I believe
it is no exaggeration to say that the shading of the ' bowed '
letters was to some extent developed in conformity with it ;
1 The whole effect is obtained by alternating pressure and release of pressure
without removing the pen.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 129
and that the /-stroke came to form a part of letters with which
it had normally nothing to do as the bowed letter /.
The bow. This brings us to a consideration of the second
element, the bow. There are thirteen letters which have
this element, and of these we shall consider the most typical,
namely, o.
Although such a letter can be formed with one stroke, it is
easier to make it uniform if two strokes are used. When it is
thus made we should expect the shading to fall in the centre
portion of each of the two arcs. A comparison of a Beneventan
o of the developed script with a shaded o of ancient inscriptions
or modern sign-painting will disclose a significant difference.
Whereas in the sign-painter's o the two arcs which have the
shading are perpendicular to the base-line, and enclose a space
forming an ellipse whose main axis is also perpendicular, the
elliptical space enclosed by a Beneventan o of the best period
has its main axis oblique, the inclination being to the left. 1
What causes this is the position of the shaded portion of the
bows. 2 These begin not in what would correspond to the
middle of the right and left arcs of o, but respectively at
the lower end of the left and the upper end of the right arc ;
so that, if exaggerated, the whole letter assumes the shape
of a lozenge standing on one of its corners, with the two long
sides strongly shaded and the short sides very fine, ^.
What is true of the two arcs of o is correspondingly true of
the arcs which go to form the letters a, b, c, d, e,f,g, (/), /, q,
s, and t. In all these letters the shaded parts are of course all
down-strokes, and are formed obliquely, so that one and all
fall parallel with the oblique lozenge of the /-stroke. It is this
fact which explains that extraordinary look of regularity which
strikes us in MSS. of the Desiderian period and later.
1 This is also true of the best uncials and other hands.
2 The position of the shaded portion is naturally determined by the shape of
the pen-point.
1443 K
i 3 o THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
The upright stems. They are longer and slenderer in the
earlier MSS., and shorter and more thick-set in the later ones.
The attempt to club or thicken the top is already noticeable in
the earlier MSS. The top receives the club-shape even in the
second period. In the Desiderian MSS. and later it shows
a tendency to angularity owing to the markedly heavy pen-
pressure with which the letter begins. In the best period the
shafts are more strictly upright than before it or after it. The
letters which have the tall upright stems are 6, d (when not
uncial), h, k, z-longa, and /.
The descending stems. Letters with a stem descending
below the base-line are primarily p and q and the form of
enclitic i (used in the obligatory ligatures ei.gi, li, and //) and,
to a less extent,/, r, and s. All of these in the best period
have the stem made by means of a perpendicular heavy stroke
ending in an oblique hair-line going from right to left and
giving the stem the appearance of being ' bevelled' off. 1 This
effect is gained by the scribe's not removing the pen at the point
where he ceased to shade, but leaving off gradually, as it were.
In the MSS. of the first two periods (i. e. till the i ith century)
the stems of/ and q are made quite simply ; those of prolonged
or enclitic i are made freely and regularly turn in.
The horizontal connecting-stroke. The letters e, f> g, r, and
t may be said to have connecting-strokes by which they are
joined to the next letter. In the case of e and f the
connecting-stroke is in reality the cross-stroke. In the case
of r it is nothing but the extension of the shoulder ; in the case
of / it is merely the right shoulder of the cross-stroke ; in the
case of g it is the final affix at the top.
The element is important for two reasons : first, because it
is a constant feature for, except under certain circumstances
with r, 2 these five letters always make connexion with the
1 In many later MSS. (saec. xii-xiii) the hair-line extends on either side
of the stem. It is a mannerism of the developed Bari type.
2 When the shoulder bends upward.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 131
letter following by means of this connecting-stroke and
secondly, because in the developed script it regularly consists
of a heavy horizontal stroke which is precisely on a line with
the top of short letters ; so that a word like regeret, for instance,
which has connecting-strokes throughout, has one straight
horizontal line from the shoulder of r to the cross-stroke of /,
binding all seven letters together, jOjjCj&r . This is one of the
features which render a page of the developed Beneventan
at once regular in appearance and difficult to decipher. The
tendency to have the connecting-stroke coincide with the
imaginary head-line is already noticeable in the loth century.
The approach-stroke. There are four letters which have
the approach-stroke: they are/",/, r, and s. In the case of
p, it is made at the top of the stem, in the others about the
middle. It consists merely of a point more or less thick. In
the best period the approach-stroke has somewhat more body.
It is a regular feature of the four letters and joins with any of
the five letters mentioned above as having a connecting-stroke.
So much for the principal elements which make up the
Beneventan alphabet. The analysis makes it clear that given
the Beneventan calligraphic method the letters must have been
made in several strokes. For, employing shading as he did,
the Beneventan scribe was compelled to form his letters chiefly
by means of down-strokes (since it is impossible to shade on an
up-stroke) ; and to form letters by down-strokes necessarily
involves lifting the pen oftener than otherwise. An example
will make this clear. If the scribe had been satisfied in the
case of the letter o to shade on the left side and continue his
stroke upward to finish the letter, he might have completed it
in one stroke. But if both bows of the o are to be shaded, two
strokes are inevitable. This principle applies to all the letters.
Thus we recognize a curious anomaly in the Beneventan
script an incongruity between its origin and its development.
While the Beneventan is par excellence the script which pressed
K 2
;i 3 2 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
cursive elements into the service of book- writing, it is at the
same time the one which in its technique departed most
widely from cursive methods. Whereas the cursive forms
were fashioned on the principle of minimum effort, that is by
lifting the pen as little as possible, the Beneventan letters may
truly be said to be formed with the maximum number of
strokes. The scribe had to lift the pen a number of times in
each letter, 1 thus using his instrument more like a brush than
a pen. 2 In the obligatory ligature gi used in the script, no
less than six separate strokes are employed. Its cursive
progenitor was made in two.
THE LETTERS
With respect to their position on the line single letters may
be divided into several groups :
1. The short letters are : a, c, i, m, n } o, r, t, u, x. Of these
ten, a, m, n, o y /, and u are invariably short; but c may rise
above the head-line ; i may descend below the base-line or be
extended above the head-line ; r may extend above and descend
below the usual short letter, and x may descend below the
line.
2. Letters with upright stems are : b, d, h, k, z-longa, and /.
Of these the letter d has two forms ; when uncial it lacks the
upright shaft and is often shorter than the other five letters.
3. Letters descending below the base-line are : f y g,p, q, r,
and y (in certain periods also s and even i 3 ). Of these, / and
1 To be sure the Beneventan calligrapher is not alone in this practice ; but,
while it is reasonable in a Caroline hand, it is curiously inconsistent in a script
based on cursive.
2 In his article ' Notes sur les e*crivains au travail ' (Melanges Chaielain,
p. 541) H. Martin suggests that Beneventan could have been written 'a main
leve'e '. I am told by an expert in such matters, C. L. Ricketts, Esq., that the
uniformity of a Beneventan MS. proves conclusively that the writing was
done with the hand resting and not raised.
3 In some MSS. of the developed type final i descends below the line when
another / precedes. The same is often observed in roman numerals. For
/-ligatures see below, p, 142.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 133
q (and r in the body of a syllable a ) regularly descend below
the line; /, g, and y do not descend so much, occasionally
not at all. All, with the exception of g t descend in a straight
line. In MSS. of the developed period this line is usually
' bevelled ' or finished off in a hair-line.
4. Letters projecting slightly above the head-line are : c (the
broken form), e,f, r, s, and z.
A :
One of the characteristic letters of the script. In its first
stage (saec. viii-ix) it has the open form CC, shaped like two con-
tiguous *s. But the closed form 6C, shaped like contiguous oc t
appears very early. From the beginning of the loth century
and after, the closed form is the rule, the open form the
exception. 2 In the developed script a is distinguishable from
t merely by the last stroke. In t it is horizontal (coinciding
with the imaginary head-line) and joins the following letter ;
in a it curves downward.
The uncial form (a) so typical of the Caroline minuscule is,
like uncial t (see below, p. 139), used only for special reasons,
as at the end of a line where space is lacking for the normal
a, 3 or in marginalia 4 and glosses, where the more economical
form is naturally preferred, or at the beginning of a new sen-
tence, in lieu of a capital letter. 5 When we find it in some 1 2th-
and 13th-century MSS. frequently used in the middle of the
line, it is due to a declining sense of the traditions of the script.
1 The letter r is often short in the middle of a word when it happens to be
at the end of a syllable (per-tinet). It is generally short at the end of a word
in MSS. before the middle of the nth century; in MSS. of the Ban type final
r is short even in 1 2th-century MSS.
2 Monte Cassino434 is of the nth century, yet it has the open a. But this
is doubtless due to scribal idiosyncrasy.
3 This practice is more frequent after the roth century, but it dates from
the 8th, as is seen from Paris lat. 7530.
4 The crowded and finely written notes in the autograph copy of Leo
Ostiensis (Munich 4623) show a preference for the uncial form.
6 Cf. Vatic, lat. 3320, where a corrector changed ordinary a to uncial a
because it followed a period.
6 For example Monte Cassino 640. The Caroline a is also found in the
134 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
B
In the earliest MSS. the stem is relatively thin. In the
developed script it is made shorter and more distinctly club-
shaped. The bow is more often open than closed in MSS. of
the Qth century. After the first third of the nth century only
the closed bow is employed.
There are two forms: the ordinary form, consisting of a single
curve, and the less usual, resembling one c surmounted by
another, . The latter, which we term 'broken c\ is a direct
inheritance from the cursive. It is especially frequent in the
oldest MSS., less so in MSS. of the loth and nth centuries.
It is still found here and there even in the best products of
the late nth and early I2th centuries. It is rare after that.
This does not apply to MSS. of the Bari type, which curiously
enough show such a liking for the broken c as to give it the
preference. Apparently there are no rules for the use of
broken c. Some scribes show a tendency to use it where two
consecutive cs occur, as though for variety. But in MSS. of
the Bari type even two consecutive broken ^'s occur. For
facsimiles in the Bari type see Script. Benev., plates 65, 74, 75,
85. See also below, pp. i5osqq.
D
Two forms are used : the uncial and the Caroline. The latter
has a straight shaft, the former has the shaft bent back upon
itself. The normal form in Beneventan MSS. is the uncial.
In the Desiderian period and later it is practically the only
form. But both this form and the Caroline occur side by side,
occasionally even in the same word, in many MSS. anterior to
the nth century. There is apparently no regularity in the
choice of forms. Some scribes show an exclusive preference
middle of the line in MonteCassino97 saec. xin. This, however, is quite
exceptional.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 135
for the Caroline form. 1 Where the preference is for the uncial
form, there is a tendency to use the straight-shafted d in
abbreviations (qct, itt, sc3m), obviously because the vertical
shaft is more adapted to the horizontal abbreviation-stroke.
The loop or closed upper curve characteristically extends
above the normal height of a short letter. It is somewhat
larger in the developed script, being as tall as/", r, or s. The
stroke which divides the upper and lower curves runs horizon-
tally along the imaginary head-line and forms the transition
to the next letter.
F
Projects above the level of short letters and, except in
the Bari type, 2 descends below the line. Like r and s it has
a small, thick approach-stroke. It joins on to the following
letter by means of a horizontal stroke which in the best period
coincides with the imaginary head-line.
G
The upper bow is indifferently open or closed at all epochs
of the script. The lower is regularly open and descends as
a rule below the line. 3 In the earlier MSS. this part ends in
a curved up-stroke ; in those of the Desiderian period and
later the curve is less marked. In some MSS. it even turns
downward. The horizontal connecting-stroke runs along the
imaginary head-line from the top of the curve to the following
letter.
H
The ordinary form, with shaft relatively thicker and shorter
in the developed script. The stroke forming the arch regularly
turns outward at the base-line.
1 Cf. Vatic, lat. 3317. Scrip/. Benev., pi. 49. 2 See below, p. 150.
1 This is not invariably the case. In Vatic, lat. 3320 it is on the line.
136 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
I
Two forms exist, each with its own usage :
(a) z-longa, the tall form of 2, used initially (unless the next
letter has a shaft below or above the line) and medially when
semi- vocal. It differs from / in that it lacks the little up-stroke
at the foot.
(b) the short form of z, used in all other cases (excepting when
i is preceded by e,f, g, /, r, or /, when enclitic i is used). 1
On the rules of z-longa and enclitic i see chapter xii ; on
/-ligatures see below, p. 142 ; on dotted i see below, p. 276 sq.
K
Formed like an h, with a somewhat broader arch. Where
the curve begins to descend it is surmounted by a stroke
resembling a reversed comma, giving the whole the appearance
of combined he, he.
L
The shaft is shorter and more distinctly club-shaped in the
developed script. It ends in a curved upward stroke which
differentiates it from z-longa.
M
In MSS. after the end of the Qth century the three strokes
which compose the letter resemble three consecutive z's, each
thickening at the bottom and turning to the right. In the
earlier MSS. only the final stroke turns to the right.
N
The same development as that of m ; in the earliest MSS.
only the second stroke turns to the right.
O
The ordinary form. On the joining of bows, see below,
p. 149.
1 When two consecutive ? occur at the end of a word, the second occasion-
ally has the prolonged form which goes below the line. In roman numerals
the last i often extends below the line.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 137
P
The ordinary form. The top of the stem has a small
approach-stroke.
Q
The ordinary form.
R
A letter with a distinct development and, therefore, important
for dating. It is the form of final r which varies in different
periods and constitutes a criterion. Its stem is regularly short
and usually turned outward in MSS. older than the i ith century.
The stem is regularly long (i.e. goes below the line) and
usually straight and tapering off in the MSS. of the best period
(i.e. second half of the nth century) and later. 1 At the
beginning of the 1 1 th century the usage vacillates ; so that in
the same MS. we find one scribe practising the old form of
final r, another the new (see Script. Benev., pi. 57). In MSS.
of the Bari type, however, the short form of final r continues
in use even in the 1 2th century.
At the beginning or in the body of a word r is long unless it
is followed by the letter i, in which case it invariably combines
with the latter and has the short stem. MSS. which have the
short form at the end of a word also show the occasional use of
the short stem at the end of a syllable in the body of a word. 2
The letter in all periods has a small thickening or approach-
1 This rule is more strictly applicable to MS$. of Cassinese origin.
For in MSS. written elsewhere, final r is short even later; so that the use
of the long form is a safer criterion than that of the short. That the form
of final r was carefully distinguished from that of initial or medial r is clearly
illustrated by two corrections in the Laurentian Tacitus (68. 2), to which
G. Andresen has called attention. The scribe wrote pulcherrimam and made the
stem of the first r long. Thinking, however, that the reading was pulcher rimam
he changed the first r to a short one. Again, he wrote curantiquitus in one word,
and made the r accordingly long. Realizing his error he changed the long stem
to a short one, making the reading cur antiquilus (cf. G. Andresen, In Taciti
historias studio, critica et palaeographica (Berlin 1899) i. 7 sqq.). The date of the
Laurentian Tacitus, to judge by this criterion, would hardly be later than 1050.
2 See Script. Benev., plates 39, 55, &c.
138 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
stroke to the left of the stem. By means of its shoulder it
makes connexion with the following letter. In final r the
shoulder ends in an upward curve, made rather freely in MSS.
before the nth century but more restrained in those of the
developed script.
The form , shaped like an arabic number two, is first
used, as in uncial writing, exclusively in the combination or in
the suspension -orum. 1 During the loth century it is found
here and there after o even in the body of a word. It does
not become frequent till the I3th century, and then most
likely as a result of foreign influences. The same form supra-
script comes into use about the end of the 1 1 th century and
gains ground gradually, becoming quite common in this or
a similar form in MSS. of the 1 3th century.
The letter projects above the level of short letters and ends
in a downward curve. The stem usually descends below the
line in MSS. of the developed script, save in those of the Bari
type, 2 which have the stem short and somewhat turned outward,
even in the 1 2th century. Like /, /, and r, s has a small
approach-stroke to the left of the stem.
During the nth century the custom comes in of writing
final s by means of a suprascript uncial form of the letter ; or
by means of a large uncial letter on the line, when s happens
to be the last letter.
T
One of the characteristic letters of the script, and manifestly
of cursive origin. It is usually made in three strokes, in this
order: (i) a curved stroke formed like the letter c, (2)
a vertical stroke formed like short i, and (3) a horizontal stroke
traced along the head-line to the right from the top of the
vertical stroke. The vertical stroke represents the stem of the
1 It is also used occasionally in the combination ar in the suspension -arum.
2 See below, p. 150.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 139
letter, the other two strokes (which in cursive are made without
removing the pen) represent the cross-beam. The curved stroke
regularly descends as far as the line after the middle of
the loth century, occasionally even in earlier MSS. When it
touches the lower portion of the vertical stroke it forms a closed
curve. This is the rule after the best period (saec. xi ex.).
Before then the open curve is more usual.
In the developed script t is differentiated from a by the last
stroke. In t it is horizontal, or slightly turned up when final ;
in a the corresponding part makes a downward curve. 1
The uncial form, proper to ordinary minuscule, occurs here
and there. But like uncial a (see above) it is used only under
certain circumstances, as at the end of a line, 2 where there is
insufficient room for the regular form, or in crowded glosses
and marginal additions, where the less bulky form is more suit-
able. This form, which usually projects above short letters, is
more frequent in the developed script, but cases occur even in
the 9th century. 3
U
Formed like two consecutive z"s, with the difference that the
end of the first stroke turns upward and touches the next.
The V-form is used suprascript here and there for the sake
of saving space. This form is more common in MSS. of the
first period.
W
In MSS. prior to the nth century we find two consecutive
us for ze/. 4 Apparently the letter is not used before the second
half of the i ith century. 5 The two middle strokes of w cross,
so that the letter resembles a monogram of two V's, w.
1 Andresen, 1. c., pp. 1 2 sqq., has noted this difference.
2 Without necessarily being the last letter on the line. Here and there the
uncial form of / is found at the end of a word in the middle of a line.
* See Monte CassinoxxLv. Script. Benev., pi. 19.
4 This is still the case in Vatic. Pal. lat. 909 (a. 977-1026). Script. Benev.,
Pi- 55-
5 My earliest example occurs in Vatic, lat. 4958 (c. a. 1087) fol. 3. Script.
Benev .^ pi. 72.
140 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
X
Usually formed in three strokes. The main stroke is the
somewhat sinuous line inclined to the left. From about the
middle of this (often below the middle) a shorter stroke is made
from right to left downward, turning in or out. The last stroke,
shaped like a reversed comma, is traced upward from left to
right, ending in a downward curve. It joins the first stroke
usually above the middle and forms with the lower half of it
a shape identical with c.
Y
The ordinary form, consisting of a part shaped like V on the
line and a vertical stroke below the line, traced downward from
the angle of V, now vertically, now obliquely. Occasionally the
whole letter is on the line. In some MSS., as in Archiv. Vatic.
Regesti Vat. i, the letter is made thus : the right arm descends
in a straight line and coincides with the stem, the left arm being
a horizontal line at right angles with the stem, H. Dotted y
occurs only here and there ; it is not usual.
Z
Uniformity of shape is lacking owing to the relatively rare
occurrence of the letter; but a certain similarity always exists.
The usual form differs from capital 2 in that the first and last
strokes are curved, the first one up and the second down.
The different shapes of the letter are chiefly caused by varia-
tions in the upper curve, and in part by the greater or lesser
length of the oblique line. The letter often resembles semi-
uncial g except that the horizontal top of z curves upward at
the left.
THE LIGATURES
When two consecutive letters merely join without suffering
any real change of form, we have what we may call united
letters or unions. When on the other hand two consecutive
letters are combined in such a manner that one or both lose their
normal form to a greater or less degree, we have what we call
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 141
ligatures or combinations. It is this sacrifice of one part or
other for the sake of the combination that makes the essential
feature of a ligature.
Ligatures arise either because space is lacking for the single
letters, which happens usually at the end of lines and such are
the ligatures found in inscriptions and in our oldest uncial and
semi-uncial MSS. ; or because time is lacking and such is
the case in notarial products, where the exigencies of rapid
writing interfered with the normal formation of the letters.
Whereas the engraver in cutting the ligature NT to take
a concrete example actually saved the space of one letter, the
notary, on the other hand, as often as not employs as much
space for the ligature as would be taken by the uncombihed
letters. What he gains by the ligature is the time saved
by not removing the pen he economizes in time through
economy of effort. It is this latter kind of ligature which
was bodily taken over from the cursive by the early types of
minuscule that based upon the cursive doubtless through this
same motive of economy. Of these types the Beneventan not
only used the ligatures to a greater extent than the others, but
made them a permanent part of its calligraphy. When the
script became calligraphic the ligatures became fixed in their
form and were handed down, now without the least conscious-
ness on the part of the scribe of the circumstances of their
origin.
As has been said, the essential fact in a ligature is that one
or both of the letters suffer modification. In trying to discover
some principle for grouping the various ligatures, I have
observed that in practically all of them one letter suffers more
than the other. I may, therefore, be allowed to propose
a terminology based upon this principle. Though not entirely
apposite for all cases it will be found convenient for some at
least. I have called a ligature enclitic when the second letter
is changed and depends upon the first ; and proclitic when the
chief modification is undergone by the first letter, which seems
to lean on the second. There are cases, however, in which it
142 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
is hard to decide which of the letters is the parasite, since both
are somewhat modified. In such cases I was guided by the
one which has suffered the greater change, and grouped the
ligature accordingly.
It is more important to make one other classification. There
are ligatures which may or may not be used ; there are ligatures
which must be used by which I mean that whenever certain
letters occur in juxtaposition none but the combined form of
them is permissible. I have called the first kind optional and
the second kind obligatory.
Grouped according as they are enclitic or proclitic, we have
the ligatures :
(1) with enclitic i\ (ct) 1 , ei)fi>gi> li> (mt,nt) 1 , ri, //unassibilated.
(2) enclitic p : rp, sp, xp.
(3) enclitic r : or, ar.
(4) enclitic / : et and nt ; ct and st.
(5) ,, proclitic a : the diphthong ae.
(6) proclitic t : (ta, te, tu) 1 , and ti assibilated.
Obligatory ligatures are : ei, fi> gi, li y ri, ti (two forms). All
others are optional.
Optional. In the earliest MSS. (saec. viii-ix), and occa-
sionally in later ones, we find a combination of a and e in which
the a has the open form like two contiguous ^'s, the second c
being represented by the lower curve of e y which preserves its
normal shape, ^8*. The more usual ligature, however, which
is as ancient as the former, is that in which the a plays a more
subordinate part, being no more than a tail or cedilla attached
to the lower curve of e, *. Structurally this tail, shaped
more or less like c, represents the bow of uncial a, the main
stroke of the latter being represented by the lower curve of e.
In both these ligatures of ae the a is proclitic.
1 The less common forms I enclose in parenthesis.
8 Owing to mediaeval orthography the same ligatures occur for the diphthong
oe. The form of the diphthong found in Bamberg E in 4 is unusual.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 143
Optional. It is the broken form of c that lends itself to the
combination. The end of the upper curve continues vertically
downward as far as the base-line and turns outward. This line,
which represents the stem of /, is intersected by a short
horizontal stroke forming the cross-beam.
$ ci
Found in a few of the oldest MSS. 1 (otherwise very rare 2 ).
From the lower end of c a stroke shaped like a comma descends
below the line and represents the i.
Optional. The two letters seem to form a union rather than
a ligature. Yet there is enough modification to justify the
classification. The sagitta or tongue of e, which is usually
made from left to right horizontally, descends obliquely and
forms the lower half of c.
j ei
Obligatory. From the sagitta or horizontal bar of e a long
stroke descends vertically and turns in. This is the prolonged
form of i. The short form of i after e would be an anomaly 3
(cf. fi, li, ri, ti). But z-longa is very frequent after e, when the
i is semi-vocal, as in eius. It is a case of two rules conflicting,
and the scribe could write el us, or jus, both being correct.
An optional ligature used chiefly in the conjunction and
when et stands at the end of a word. In the body of a word
the combination is avoided. 4 The sagitta which separates the
1 BambergHjiv 15, Paris lat. 7530, Monte Cassino 299, Monte Cassino 187.
2 Owing most likely to the confusion which would arise with the assibilated
// form, in which proclitic / is like broken c.
It is found here and there, but on the whole rarely.
4 In this respect differing strongly from Caroline MSS. and especially
144 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
two curves of e, instead of being horizontal as usual, descends
obliquely to the base-line and is surmounted by a comma-like
stroke. This stroke represents the cross-beam of t, the curve
( below doing duty for the stem (cf. the ligature nt).
Obligatory. 1 The upper end of /"bending inward forms an
open curve, to which a similar curve is attached below, which
represents the letter z, the sagitta of f being represented by the
junction of the two curves. The stem of /and the curve for
i often descend below the line. In the Bari type they often
rest on the base-line. In some MSS. of the early period we
find a form of fi in which the i is represented by a comma-like
stroke suspended from the sagitta, f?. 2
Obligatory. The prolonged form of z, descending below the
line and turning inward, is suspended from the horizontal con-
necting-stroke of g.
\u
Obligatory. The prolonged form of /, descending below the
line and turning inward, is joined to the upward curve at the
base of the /.
Vfyni
The ligature is used only occasionally, instances occurring in
the oldest MSS. as well as in those of the developed script.
From the bottom of the last stroke of m a stroke shaped like
a comma descends below the line and represents the i.
from those written in German schools. Exceptions occur. In Vatic, lat. 3741
saec. xi ex. the ligature et is often used in the body of the word.
1 Uncombined j is to my knowledge hardly ever found after the 9th century
and seldom even before then. That the ligature is a rule of the script is made
plain not only by its regular use but also by the work of correctors.
2 This type otfi is found even as late as the roth century, see Script. Benev.,
pi. 40 a , col. 2. But it is on the whole very rare after the 9th.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 145
n
The ligature is analogous with that of mi, and similarly
formed.
Optional. Its use is confined to the end of the word. 1 Be-
fore the nth century various forms of it are found. One of
these, which is already found in the 8th century, becomes the
normal form in the developed script. It is made thus : from
the bottom of the second stroke of the n a horizontal line is
drawn from left to right, which is surmounted by a stroke
shaped like an elongated comma. It is this stroke which
assumes various shapes in the earlier MSS. Analysing the
form we find that the stem of t is represented by that part
of the horizontal line which is to the right of the elongated
comma ; and that the part to the left of this line, with the
comma, constitutes the cross-stroke. That this is the correct
interpretation of the parts appears clearly from an examination
of the various forms found previous to the nth century, and
from a comparison with the ligature el, in which the / closely
corresponds in shape to that found in nt. In fact, a MS. which
shows an unusual form of t in the combination nt will usually
have the same form in the combination et. There is no founda-
tion whatever for considering the second letter an inverted t.
cn* or*
Optional ; and chiefly (one might almost say exclusively)
used in the abbreviated form of the genitive plural ending orum.
The antiquity of the combination is seen from the fact that it is
not ordinary but uncial r which combines with o. An analysis
1 In Caroline MSS., and especially those of the German school, combined
nt is not rare in the body of the word. The scribe of Monte Cassino 187
saec. ix ex. wrote eloquent with combined nt. A corrector modified this so
that ii formed the combination and not nt.
2 On this ligature see W. Meyer, ' Die Buchstaben-Verbindungen der soge-
nannten gotischen Schrift/ in Abh. der K. Gesell. der Wiss. zu Gottingen N.F.
i (1897) No. 6, pp. ii sqq.
1443 L
i 4 6 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
of the ligature shows that the stem of r is missing and that
its place is supplied by the right half of the o. The upper
bow of uncial r descends to the line and is sometimes open,
sometimes closed ; the lower stroke is represented by a hori-
zontal line. It is this line which is regularly intersected by a
sinuous vertical stroke in the genitive ending orum to indi-
cate omitted um. Thus arises the curious form &p. In post-
Desiderian MSS. this form of or is found also in the body of
a word. Occasionally it occurs in earlier MSS. 1
ri
Obligatory. The stem of r remains invariably on the
line. The shoulder, instead of turning upward, bends down-
ward and descends below the line in a sinuous stroke like re-
versed s. The lower part of the stroke represents the i. 2
rit
This ligature never becomes very common, and is never to
my knowledge found before the nth century. It is formed
like the ligature ri, with an additional short horizontal stroke
intersecting the part which represents i. The tail of the
ligature thus becomes the stem of /, the intersecting line its
cross-stroke.
Optional. The shoulder of r branches off from the stem,
goes up to a point, and then descends obliquely to form the
bow and stem of p, the bow being left open and the stem
turning outward as in the ligature sp.
Optional. The curved upper end of J joins the top of the
loop of p, and continues downward to form the bow which is
1 My oldest example is in Vatic. lat. 5845 saec.x, fol. i57 v : conc0rdiam.
2 The ligature was misunderstood by Trombelli (L'arte di conoscere feia de'
codici, p. 86, cited above, p. 29, n. 2), and by Seroux d'Agincourt (Histoire
de Tart par les monuments, vol. v, pi. 81, 6th alphabet).
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 147
left open. The stem of/ often curves outward. In some
MSS. the curve connecting the two letters is broken so as to
form two arches.
St
Optional. The curved upper end of s is continued verti-
cally downward and turns outward at the bottom, thus forming
the stem of /. The short and sometimes sinuous horizontal
line which intersects the stem constitutes the cross-stroke of /.*
sti
When sti occurs, the ligature st has the form just described,
and to the right end of the cross-stroke of / is joined the
elongated form of /, which descends below the base-line.
ta f te, ti, tu
Just as the normal Beneventan /, with the cross-stroke
descending in a bow to the left of the stem, is manifestly an
adaptation of cursive t, so too the forms of the ligatures ta, te,
tu, and assibilated ti are a direct inheritance from the notarial
script. The form of / in these ligatures ceases to puzzle us
as soon as we analyse its parts. Though it suffers striking
modifications it remains structurally unchanged.
The stem of t, instead of being vertical, is made by means
of a curve like c. The cross-stroke, instead of descending in
a bow to the left of this curve, rises above it, so that the
whole resembles broken c (or Greek epsilon). The upper curve
continues in a downward direction and forms the back to the
two open curves. It is this line which forms part of the
following letter, be it a, e, u, or /.
1 In the nth-century MS. Naples vm B 3, and the Bisceglie Evangeliarium
we find a curious variety of this ligature. The curve connecting the s and / dips
in the middle thus forming two arches.
L 2
148 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
The rarest of these ligatures, occurring only in a few of the
oldest MSS. The continuation of the upper curve or cross-
stroke of / coincides with the first curve of a.
& te
Found frequently in the 9th century, less so in the loth,
and very rarely after that. The continuation of the upper
loop or cross-stroke of t forms the back or main curve of e.
Two ligatures of ti exist, each with a distinct function and
strictly obligatory. One form is reserved to represent assibi-
lated // (ti followed by a vowel and preceded by any letter
except s), 1 the other to represent unassibilated ti. Whenever /
is followed by z, one of these combinations must be used.
The ligature of ti unassibilated is of simple construction. The
t preserves its normal form, and the i descends from the end of
the cross-stroke and goes below the base-line, as in ei, gi, &c.
In assibilated ti the same form of t is used as in the ligatures
ta and te just described ; the upper loop or cross-stroke of /
continues downward below the line and forms the i.
Blfu
Frequent in the earliest MSS., less so in the loth century,
and rare thereafter. The continuation of the upper loop or
cross-stroke of t constitutes the first stroke of u.
Optional. The upper right arm of x connects with the
bow of /, the rest of which is formed without removing the
pen or retracing any portion, thus leaving the bow open.
The stem of/ usually turns outward.
1 Cf. Stud. Pal., p. 1 8, and below, p. 303 sq.
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 149
THE UNIONS
By unions, as has been said, we mean the joining of letters
without modifying their forms to any appreciable extent.
There are certain letters which always connect with the
following letter ; these are e,f,g y r, and / (see above, p. 130).
There is also another kind of union, namely, that caused
by the contact of two bows a widespread palaeographical
feature to which the eminent scholar Wilhelm Meyer of Speyer
was the first to give systematic treatment. 1
bar ^ cc c& px txxr t>cr
ba do oc od pa pot rit
Theoretically, the joining of bows is possible in the Bene-
ventan script when the letters b, d, 0, or /, or the ligature ri is
followed by any of the letters a, c, d, e, g, 0, q, or /. This
I believe makes forty possibilities. But other bow junctions
are also found, as for instance, of bb, pp, &c., in which a bow
comes in contact with a shaft. Although the joining of con-
secutive bows is frequent after the first decades of the 1 1 th
century, it is not an absolute rule even in the most perfect
examples of the end of the century. In post-Desiderian MSS.
it is so frequent as to be practically the rule, though some
MSS. even of the I2th century show many exceptions. At
the beginning of the nth century it is used quite without
regularity ; yet we find it occurring frequently even in some
MSS. of the loth century. In fact after the middle of the
loth century the tendency becomes marked. But distinctions
should be made. When found in MSS. of the early part of
the loth century it is more apt to be due to lack of care ;
when found in those of the fully developed script it is used
intentionally as part of the calligraphic equipment. In the
earliest MSS. its occurrence is sheer accident.
1 Wilhelm Meyer aus Speyer, ' Die Buchstaben-Verbindungen der sogenann-
ten gotischen Schrift ' in Abhandlungen der K. Gesellschaft der Wiss. zu
Gottingen N. F. i (1897) No. 6, pp. 34 sqq. and pi. i, nos. 9-10.
150 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
Characteristics of the Bari type
The variety of Beneventan minuscule which we have called
the Bari type presents an appearance strikingly different from
the type which flourished in Monte Cassino or Benevento.
The main effect is of a roundish script as opposed to the
angular hand of the other Beneventan schools. The effect of
roundness is chiefly due to the absence of strong contrast
between thin and heavy pen-strokes, to the smaller number of
stems descending below the base-line, and to the comparative
shortness of the stems which rise above the head-line. The
type shows traces of Byzantine influence both in script and
figure decoration. The initials, though Beneventan in their
general design, have a character of their own which is un-
mistakable. See plates VI-VIII.
As characteristics of this type may be mentioned :
1 . The frequent occurrence of the broken form of c, shaped
like Greek epsilon () ; the rather large form of e with the two
curves almost equal ; the form of s and f t which do not
descend below the line and are rather top-heavy ; of final r
with short stem, and medial r resembling a cross without the
left branch.
2. The ligature fi, with the stem of /usually resting on the
line, and the part representing the /often forming a broad curve
which rests on or above the base-line and turns inward ; also
other ligatures with enclitic z, noteworthy for the form of the i t
which usually terminates in a more or less pronounced curve,
e.g. ei, K, ti.
3. The form of the abbreviation-sign, frequently a line sur-
mounted by a dot, a form otherwise chiefly found in Visigothic
MSS.
4. The frequent use of the form -=- or 7* to represent est.
5. The use of thin-bodied initials with large-sized pearls
between the spaces of the interlaced pattern and the use of the
human head, generally in profile at the extremity of the initial
letter.
03
u
03
PQ
,8
<U J2 V
$2
c/3 1>
O C
1O
VO
"4
g
*
3 6
If
,- -
S O
.5 ^
"So o
To face p. 150
Plate VII,
Facsimile No. 10.
MS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277 (Zara) saec. xi ex.
Horae B.V.M., &c.
(tibi domzne deus. psalmus. Beati immacula/i. Usq^ Responsorium
T)eus bonoTum omnium oiatio.
proprietas et
origo, da nobis
quaesumus longanimitatem
spei, et roborem fidei, pie)
Scrip/. Benev., pi. 75.
Facsimile No. 1 1.
. Su j-fftrtcr ncneft ktC .
8cc^ lofaf ubt polu
MS. Oxford Canon. Bibl. lat. 61 (Zara) saec. xi ex.
Evangeliarium.
(crucifixum : Surrexit non est hie,
ecce locus ubi posuerunt eum. Sed
ite dicite discipwlis eius et petro,)
Script. Benev,, pi. 74.
To follow Plate VI
Facsimile No. 12.
Plate VIII
Ct^f^
monmif ivJfrfttni C^ml tCam^*
MS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 175 (Bari) saec. xii in.
Comment, in Octateuchum.
patruw Incipit expositio sup^r genesim.
studia maximis adeo sunt praecomis pr^dicanda,
quom'am ad excitanda mortaliutfz corda, multa scru
tati stint uiuaci memoria. Uniuersalis deniq^<?
ecclma congaudet eon/;// mirabili disposition quorum
exercitio ac labore, non modo heresiarcharum infesta
euasit pericula, ueru;;/ etia;;/ et p^rpetuis cultib&.y)
Script. Benev., pi. 85.
Facsimile No. 13.
Initial taken from MS. Vatic, lat. 3327 saec. xii/xiii. Sallust
o fnllnu/ Plntf VII
THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT 151
MSS. OF THE BARI TYPE
Owing to their possession of all or some of the above
characteristics the following MSS. may be regarded as belong-
ing to this group, the geographical extent of which comprises
Dalmatia as well as the south-eastern portion of the Italian
peninsula. 1
Bari Cathedral. Exultet Rolls and Benedictio Fontis.
Berlin Theol. Quart. 278 (Zara). Evangeliarium.
Bisceglie Capitol. Evangeliarium.
Capua Biblioteca del Seminario.
Acts and Epistles.
Augustinus, Homiliarium.
Cattaro, S. Chiara. Fragm. of Pontifical. 2
Cava 6. Gregor. M., Cura Pastoralis.
London Egerton 2889. Vitae SS.
Monte Cassino 343, part n. Origen-Rufinus, Periarchon.
s. n. d6bris of Virgil's Aen. iii-xii.
Naples IV F 3. Ovid, Metam.
VIII B 6. Vitae SS.
S. Martino 14. Hymnarium.
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Patr.lat. 175 (Bari). Commentary on
the Octateuch.
Canon. Bibl. lat. 61 (Zara). Evangeliarium.
Canon. Lit. lat. 277 (Zara). Horae B.V.M., &c.
Canon. Class, lat. 50. Virgil, with scholia.
Ragusa Biblioteca dei PP. Domenicani.
Haymo, Expos, in Ep. Pauli (fragm.).
Expos, in Vet. Test, (fragm.).
Rome Casanat. noi (A II 32). Evangelia. 3
1 See above, p. 56 sq. and pp. 60 sqq.
2 The Franciscan Father B. Rode, the present custodian of the fragments,
kindly furnished me with tracings.
3 Probably from Bari itself. The script is the pure Bari type. The quire
marks are strikingly similar to those found in Oxford Bodl. Canon. Patr.lat. 175,
which comes from Bari. Vatic. Ottob. lat. 1 406 was written in Monte Cassino
but the MS. has Bari characteristics.
152 THE MORPHOLOGY OF THE SCRIPT
Rome Vallicell. 28. Epist. Pauli.
Rome Vatic, lat. 3327. Sallust.
Vatic, lat. 10645, foil. 3~ 6 - Missal.
Barb. lat. 160 (IX 29). Medicine, fol. 248, 1. 12 sq.
Borgian. lat. 339 (Ossero). Evangeliarium.
Ottob. lat. 296. Evangeliarium.
Ottob. lat. 576, foil. 123-195. Missal.
Pal. lat. 1 78. Fly-leaf. Liturgical.
Trau Capitol. Evangeliarium.
Vienna Univ. Inst. f. oster. Geschichtsforschung. Liturgical
fragments from Trau (Dalmatia).
Probably to be affiliated with this group are these MSS. :
Eton College Bl. 6. 5, Maximinianus, Ovid, &c. ; Padua Univ.
878, Eusebius (fragm.); Ragusa Libr. of the Dominican
friars (i) Vetus Testamentum 2 Reg. (fragm.), (2) Homiliar.
(i fol.), (3) Homiliar. (2 foil.), (4) Sentent. PP. (4 foil.);
Vatic, lat. 1468, Glossarium.
CHAPTER VIII
ABBREVIATIONS
1. VALUE AND SIGNIFICANCE.
2. GENERAL HISTORY.
3. ABBREVIATION-SIGNS.
(a) General.
() Beneventan.
4. W-STROKE.
5. BENEVENTAN ABBREVIATIONS.
(a) Stages.
(b) List of abbreviated words and syllables.
(c) Detailed discussion of special abbreviations.
A KNOWLEDGE of the various systems of abbreviations is
indispensable for the mere correct reading of Latin MSS. A
familiarity with their origin and development is eminently
useful not only in detecting sources of corruption in the text,
but at the same time as a check upon extravagance of con-
jecture in textual emendation. 1 Besides these services to
philology, abbreviations may be useful in three ways : namely,
as aids in dating MSS., in placing them, and in throwing light
on the immediate or mediate archetype.
To date a MS. by means of the abbreviations is made
possible by the fact that they undergo changes and differ in
different ages. They are less frequent in the older, more
numerous in the more recent MSS. With time their character
1 Cf. Traube, Nomma Sacra, pp. 208 sqq. ; Vorlesungen und Abhandlungen^
i. n sqq.; Lindsay, Contractions in Early Latin Minuscule MSS. ^St. Andrews
University Publications, no. v, Oxford 1908) pp. i sqq.
154 ABBREVIATIONS
grows more varied, more complex, more differentiated. And
since with the help of dated MSS. we can determine with
some degree of precision the period in which one form or type
of abbreviation was in use and the period marking the arrival
of another form or type, we win important and objective
criteria for ascertaining the age of undated MSS. I illustrate
by some concrete examples from Beneventan MSS. The
system of abbreviation by means of suprascript letters is
practically never used before the nth century, when we first
encounter such forms as p, p, p=prt, pra, pru, c, c = mz, cri,
&c., g, g = igitur, ergo. Abbreviations like ois, 01, oitms, oie,
for omnis, omni, omnibus, omne, represent a type which does
not occur in MSS. of the 9th and loth centuries, when omis,
omi, omlbus, ome are the forms consistently employed. The
presence, therefore, of this type of abbreviation, or of the type
with suprascript letters, furnishes a terminus a quo. An
instructive instance, again, is furnished by abbreviations of
the verb-ending tur. Until the middle of the loth century
the abbreviation of tur is not different from that of ter. To
make the differentiation tur received the form cr 1 (ter being
represented by ) a form which it preserved for three-quarters
of a century, when it was supplanted by or. 1 Thus the three
stages of this abbreviation become valuable criteria for dating.
Although it is true in general that the older MSS. show
fewer abbreviations than the more recent, the number of the
abbreviations is no unfailing test. For it must be remembered
that a liturgical book used in reading aloud or a MS. de luxe
may purposely refrain from abbreviating and yet be very
recent. On the other hand a MS. treating such technical
subjects as law, grammar, or medicine, may be very old and
yet full of abbreviated words.
With his lessons in writing the scribe was taught his stock
of abbreviations. The form of the letters and the style of
the abbreviations went hand in hand; both reflected local
usage, the traditions of the school. And just as we distinguish
1 Cf. below, pp. 217 sqq.
ABBREVIATIONS 155
a number of different scripts we also distinguish diverse
systems of abbreviation. Thus if a MS. has throughout its
pages nsr for noster, aum for autem, or ppf r for propter, we may
be certain that it is of Visigothic origin or the slavish copy
of a Visigothic original. If it abbreviates eius, autem, enim,
con, and per by means of 3, hr, 4f, D, and p, we must conclude
that it was written in England or Ireland or in some Con-
tinental centre where Insular methods were for a time at
home, as in Bobbio, St. Gall, Fulda, or Wiirzburg. So likewise
we think of Beneventan or South Italian schools if we
encounter ft, for eius and 5- for tur in MSS. later than the
. *
9th century.
But a scribe of one centre often copied MSS. written in
another, and thus necessarily met with abbreviations that were
foreign to him. If he copied mechanically or nodded, as he
often did, he allowed foreign abbreviations to creep into his
text, thereby furnishing us a means for detecting the nature of
his original. The Qth-century Beneventan scribe of the MS.
Vatic, lat. 3320, containing a glossary, occasionally uses the
unmistakably Spanish forms aum for autem, sFfil for Israhel.
We are at a loss to account for these * Spanish symptoms ' in
a South Italian MS. till we discover that the glossary has
frequent excerpts from the works of the Spanish writer, Isidore
of Seville. An examination of the abbreviations of Monte
Cassino 205 saec. xi suffices to convince us that many of them
are not of the traditional Beneventan stock. The constant use
of symbols like H=enim, ~j et, ~ = est, h = hoc, -\- = id est,
<% = quod, b = sed, ^.secundum and of the form noe = nomine
speaks for Insular influence. By a fortunate coincidence the
Insular origin of the archetype can be attested by other means.
There is in the MS. the word confitus, where the sense requires
and the original doubtless had consitus. The error must have
arisen from the resemblance between the Insular ligature for si
and the Beneventan ligature fory^. 1 The German copy of the
1 Cf. Traube, Textgeschichte der Regula S. Benedicti, p. 130 (Abhand. d.
K. bayer. Akad. d. Wzss. xxi (1898) 599-731); 2nd edition, p. 124.
i 5 6 ABBREVIATIONS
Chronica Monasterii Casinensis of Leo Ostiensis (MS. Munich
4646) has often qui where the original had eius. This sub-
stitution could be explained by assuming an original having
eius abbreviated by means of fy, which resembles abbreviated
qui 1 in other words a Beneventan original. As a matter of
fact, the MS. from which the German scribe copied was no
other than the autograph of Leo himself, written in Monte
Cassino between 1098 and 1 106, which now forms one of the
treasures of the Munich library (MS. lat. 4623). 2
So much to outline briefly the practical utility of a study of
abbreviations.
THE GENERAL HISTORY OF ABBREVIATIONS
It is advisable to take a rapid survey of the general develop-
ment of Latin abbreviations before discussing those used
in the scriptoria of Southern Italy. The purpose of this
introduction is to make clear the essential and intrinsic
differences between abbreviations by suspension and those by
contraction ; to point out the pagan character of the former
and the Christian character of the latter; to show the vital
relation between the ' Nomina Sacra ' and the spread of con-
tractions ; to emphasize the conservatism displayed in the
forms of the abbreviations for bus and que\ and to indicate
the part played by the abbreviations in legal MSS. (Notae Juris)
and their more general adoption through the wide influence
exercised by Insular writing centres. The main source for
the following remarks is L. Traube, whose Nomina Sacra will
henceforth be the basis as well as the model of every work
on abbreviations.
Latin abbreviations are constructed on the three principles
of suspension, contraction, and special symbols.
By suspension we understand an abbreviation that leaves
1 Cf. below, p. 199. 2 Cf. Man. Germ. Hist. SS. vii. 556.
ABBREVIATIONS 157
out the end of the word. From inscriptions we are acquainted
with the forms :
TI-= TI(BERIUS)
IMP- = IMP (ERA TOR)
Similar forms in MSS. are :
* = a(ut)
au = au(tem)
tam = tam(en)
hominib; = hominib(iis)
deniq; = deniq(ue)
Suspension may be applied to different syllables of the word,
e.g. vm = t(a)-m(en), Q$=p(ro)-p(ter), QC$=p(i'in)-c(i)-p(e).
This corresponds to BN' = B(E)N(EFICIARIUS) and
similar abbreviations of inscriptions. This method, which left
the reader to supply the endings, could have prevailed only
so long as Latin was a living language.
Contractions differ from suspensions in that they leave out
some part in the body of the word, but retain the ending.
Examples of contractions are :
dni = d(omi)ni
aum = au(te)m
miam = mi(sericordi)am
sclm = s(a)c(u)l(u)m
This method, which by indicating the ending eliminated
possible confusion, was more acceptable when the hold upon
Latin had become insecure.
Abbreviations by special symbols are few in number. They
originate in the * Notae Tironianae', 1 or shorthand system of the
ancients.
1 On the Tironian symbols for can, autem, et t eius t and est, see Chatelain,
Introduction h la lecture des notes tironiennes (Paris 1900) pp. 8, 41, 69, and 72.
i 5 8 ABBREVIATIONS
In somewhat modified form some of them appear in the 'Notae
Juris ' or abbreviations used in legal books. The symbols are :
D con
D = contra
7 **et
3 = eius
All the abbreviations which we shall meet illustrate one or
other of these three principles.
The abbreviations in the oldest examples of Latin writing
are, like those in Roman inscriptions, suspensions. If we
except legal books and other technical treatises, contractions
are unknown even in the 5th- and 6th-century MSS. of pagan
authors, as is seen from the celebrated palimpsest of Cicero's
De re publica, or the Parisinus or Vindobonensis of Livy, or
the Palatinus of Virgil, not to mention many others. In fact,
apart from such forms as P-R- = POPULUS ROM AN US
and other abbreviations of names and titles which might occur
in inscriptions, B- = BUS and Q- = QUE are practically the
only abbreviations found in these MSS. and they are sus-
pensions. The entry of contractions into Latin calligraphy as
something distinct from the abbreviations previously used,
dates, as Traube has convincingly shown, from the time of the
translation of the Bible from Greek and Hebrew into Latin.
The words thus abbreviated were few in number and of a re-
ligious character. They were Deus, Dominus, lesus, Christus,
Spiritus. The contracted forms of this small group of ' Nomina
Sacra' were not abbreviations in the proper sense of the
word. It was not to save time or space, but out of a sense
of reverence that the word for God was not written out
in the original Hebrew and Greek. A certain mystery and
reticence attached to the holy words. The Latin translator
tried to reproduce this religious effect. He transcribed
0C = 0OC with DS = DUS ffN^ = nNYM^ with SPS =
ABBREVIATIONS 159
SPIRITUS, 6Y = 0OY with DI =>/. Thus uncon-
sciously the ' Nomina Sacra ' became the exponents and
carriers of the principle of contraction. This is fully testified
by numerous MSS. of the 4th, 5th, and $th centuries, which
besides B- and Q- ( = BUS and QUE) show only one sort of
abbreviations, namely the contractions of the ' Nomina Sacra '.
It maybe said that the history of the * Nomina Sacra ' during
the three centuries after their arrival practically amounts to
a history of abbreviations durkig that period. As the books
then copied were almost exclusively of a religious character,
contraction became a characteristic of Christian calligraphy,
just as suspension had been of pagan inscriptions and MSS.
The small group of ' Nomina Sacra ' was soon extended.
In the 5th century the form SCS = SANCTUS, modelled
upon SPS = SPIRIT US, came into use. A century later,
contractions of the oblique cases of noster followed in the wake
of Dominus, e. g., DNI NI = DOMINI NOSTRI. We even
begin to find the contracted forms of these religious words
where they are used in a profane or non-Christian sense, as
Dominus for Caesar, or deus referring to any pagan deity, and
spiritus meaning breath.
The transition from suspension to contraction probably
came about in connexion with the abbreviation of formal titles :
a form like EP giving way to EPS for Episcopus, or DIAC
becoming DIACS or DLSCI for Diaconus or Diaconi, RB
changing to PBR for Presbiter examples of which are to be
found in Italian MSS. and inscriptions of the 5th and 6th cen-
turies. In the same way we begin to find PPO (praef edits
praetorio] for the ancient suspension P- P- ; and contractions
gradually take the place of suspensions in the abbreviations
used in the legal books. The form s- is supplanted by sa
(sententia) ; pec- by peca (pecunid), off- by offo (pfficio), &c.
Contractions arise for such semi-religious words as omni-
potens, gratia, gloria, ecclesia, saecula, &c. By the 8th century,
when the different minuscule scripts are already established,
contraction has become the prevailing principle on which new
160 ABBREVIATIONS
abbreviations are created, the existing suspensions being
gradually driven from the field.
But long before the rise of minuscule scripts we find in
uncial and semi-uncial MSS. the occasional use of abbrevia-
tions that have their source in a class of MSS. where abbrevia-
tions abounded. The abbreviations of the legal MSS. deserve
particular attention. 1 Although they illustrate no new principle
they form a class by themselves, with a curious history. 2 It
would be impossible to understand the origin of many of the
abbreviations of minuscule MSS. if these legal books and the
Notae Juris had not come down to us. Directly or indirectly
the following abbreviations or types of abbreviation go back
to such MSS. :
(1) the three groups of abbreviations of pronouns, pre-
positions, and particles, as :
p, P> p, P' =per, pro, prae, post (pos, pus)
q, q>, of, q, = quae, quod, quia, quam
IT, h = haec, hoc ;
(2) the common word-endings M = mus, T = tur, $[ =
men, T = ter ;
(3) the system of abbreviation by suprascript letters ;
(4) the special symbols based on Notae Tironianae,3 = con,
3D = contra.
All of these elements play a significant rdle in the abbrevia-
tions found in minuscule MSS.
The transmission of these abbreviations, if we could only
trace it more securely, would throw much light upon the
1 I refer to such MSS. as the Gaius of Verona (Steffens, Lat. Pal?, pi. 18)
and the Vatican Codex Theodosianus (the marginalia). On the abbreviations
found in the marginalia of the latter MS. see E. O. Winstedt in Classical
Philology, i (1906) 399 sqq. and W. M. Lindsay, 'The Notae Juris in Vatic.
Reg. 886,' in Melanges Chatelain, pp. 155 sqq.
2 In them we find the three principles illustrated: ^SED, QQ=QUOQUE,
N=NOSTEK, suspensions; HVES=HEKEZ>ES, OTET = OPOTET,
N with a superior a=Nos/ra, contractions; ^con, ^^contra, Notae Tiro-
nianae.
ABBREVIATIONS 161
relations between the schools. Their history did not run
a smooth course. Their use in legal books, owing to the con-
fusion they caused, was more than once forbidden during the
reigns of the emperors Theodosius (A. D. 438) and Justinian
(A. D. 553). 1 Into literary MSS. they had practically not entered.
Knowledge of them, however, was never lost among Italian
notaries ; here and there even a calligraphic scribe shows his
acquaintance with them. 2 But their influence was on the whole
hardly felt after their proscription, at least in Italy and in most
French schools. It was in centres far from Rome, where dis-
tance practically annulled the force of the decree forbidding
their use, that the Notae Juris and Notae Tironianae continued
to flourish. 3 Those centres, Traube conjectures, were in
south-west Britain, the centres whence the Irish received their
introduction to Latin MSS. This circumstance would explain
how the Irish scribe of the yth and 8th centuries happens to
use abbreviations which are based on Notae Tironianae and
Notae Juris. Wherever the Irish script was used, on the
Islands or on the Continent, there we always find such abbre-
viations. 4 And there can be no doubt whatever that the
revival of this large class of abbreviations is due to centres in
which the Insular script was employed. This view is sup-
ported by the negative evidence of Visigothic MSS. The
1 Cf. Traube, Nomina Sacra, p. 241 sq. ; Varies, und Abhandl. i. 143;
Steffens, Lat. Pal?, p. xxxv.
2 Cf. Verona LIII and Vatic, lat. 1322 in 6th-century semi-uncial of the school
of Verona. A later example is furnished by Vercelli 183 saec. viii. Some of
its abbreviations must go back to such old sources.
J Traube, Nomina Sacra, p. 243.
4 Cf. Traube in Neues Archtv, xxvi. 238. The theory recently defended by
Steffens which makes Bobbio the home of the Insular abbreviations is, to say
the least, improbable. If Bobbio could leave a permanent mark upon all
Insular MSS. how does it happen that it made no visible impression upon MSS.
from neighbouring centres ? Cf. Lat. Pal?, p. xxxvii and Melanges Chatelain,
pp. 244 sqq. On the Bobbio MSS. see W. M. Lindsay, 'The Bobbio Scriptorium,'
in Zentralblatl f. Bibliothekswesen, xxvi (1909) 293 sqq., and Early Irish
Minuscule Script (St. Andrews University Publications, no. vi, Oxford 1910)
pp. 30 sqq.
1443 M
162 ABBREVIATIONS
Irish founded no schools in Spain ; their script never influenced
the Spanish. It is accordingly no mere coincidence that the
Spanish abbreviations are on the whole free from anything
that recalls The Notae Juris or Tironian signs. To some
extent the same may iTe said of the Beneventan abbreviations.
The ancient stock shows very few traces of Notae Juris. Such
abbreviations as p, ee, qm, &c., were the common property
of French and Italian schools. But the bulk of the abbrevia-
tions used in Irish MSS. are conspicuously absent in the Bene-
ventan, a fact which is sufficiently accounted for by distance and
mutual independence. For, while most other schools soon
came under Insular influence, the Visigothic and Beneventan
remained unaffected. Thus it happens that these two schools
have preserved the Italian or Roman tradition. Of the two,
it is safe to say that the Beneventan retained that tradition in
greater purity.
THE ABBREVIATION-SIGNS
To denote suspension or contraction the abbreviation-sign
is used. There are two essentially distinct kinds of abbrevia-
tion-signs : one made by a point or combination of points ; the
other by a stroke. The stroke is usually over the abbreviated
word, the point after it. The stroke belongs more properly
to contraction, the point to suspension. 1 The points in P- R- =
POPUL US ROMANUS^jn B- = BUS, in Q- = QUE, cor-
respond to the stroke in VS = DEUS, SPS = SPIRITUS.
The contracted forms of the ' Nomina Sacra ', as we have seen,
were not abbreviations in the strict sense of the word ; so the
stroke over these words originally served to make them con-
spicuous and to call attention to them, rather than to indicate
that they were abbreviated. This use of the stroke is not
a novelty. In Greek as well as in Latin MSS. we often find
it placed over letters or unshortened words to distinguish them
from the rest of the text, where we would employ different
1 Cf. Traube, Nomina Sacra, pp. 45 sqq.
ABBREVIATIONS 163
types. With the spread of the principle of contraction, the
sign of a contraction, namely the stroke, came more and more
into use. Moreover, the convenience of the stroke in connexion
with the small-sized letters of minuscule, as opposed to the
point, which was employed with the lar^e letters of capitals and
uncials, doubtless had much to do with its universal acceptance.
It is instructive to find the point, or both the point and the
stroke, used to indicate the contractions of the * Nomina Sacra'
a usage pointing to the transition from suspension to con-
traction. 1 On the other hand, when the principle of suspension
had practically given way to that of contraction, we find sus-
pensions marked with the contraction-stroke. 2
In uncial and semi-uncial MSS. the form of the abbreviation-
sign is generally a horizontal line for a contraction ; 8 and a
point, comma, apostrophe, or line through the final letter or
letters, for a suspension, e.g. EE = SS, T'^TUR, S> =
SED, T^L=TRANS^ Syllabic suspension, however, is
marked in these MSS. by a horizontal line, e. g. AT =
AUTEM.
In early minuscule MSS. contractions and suspensions
(excepting occasionally bus and que) are often denoted by the
same type of wavy stroke. Certain suspensions are denoted
by an oblique line, straight or sinuous, sometimes intricate,
intersecting an extension of the last stroke of certain letters
(especially /, m, n, and r, in /us, lum, mus, nus, mum, num,
rum), or crossing the tall shaft of others.
1 Traube, ibid., pp. 239 sqq.
2 The veteran suspensions bus and que are represented in the old 8th-century
Corbie MSS. of the let type by means of an oblique cross-stroke through the
shafts of b and q a practice which crops up in a few early Beneventan MSS.
3 In the more recent type of uncial MSS. the horizontal stroke is finished off
at either end in some ornamental way. Occasionally a dot is placed above the
stroke.
4 The apostrophe and the oblique line through the letter are found in legal
MSS. Here too we find the suspensions ^PRAE and "Q=QUAE
marked not with a point but with the horizontal stroke. This, however, is
a device adopted to avoid confusion with the signs for per and pro, quod and
quam, &c.
M 2
1 64 ABBREVIATIONS
THE BENEVENTAN ABBREVIATION-SIGNS
In the oldest Beneventan MSS. of the 8th and Qth centuries
contractions and suspensions are indifferently indicated either
by a horizontal line more or less wavy, or by a sinuous vertical
line resembling reversed s, or by a sign like the arabic number
3, or the same number inverted. The vertical flourish is some-
times made obliquely. Besides these an s-like flourish or
a semicolon is used with b and q.
By the end of the Qth century, when the script has become
more regular, there is more care and uniformity in the shape
of the abbreviation-sign. Henceforth most abbreviations are
denoted by a horizontal line. In many MSS. of the loth and
early nth century abbreviations are marked by two or more
horizontal lines parallel to each other. 1 Another form of the
stroke appears in the recurring suspensions, -rum, %. 2 (case-
ending) and -runt, ft (verb-ending). It is a wavy stroke, resem-
bling reversed s, amounting in reality to a calligraphic modifica-
tion of the vertical stroke used to denote suspension. 3 The
apostrophe was introduced about the middle of the loth
century, with t to denote tur, occasionally with other conso-
nants to represent us. Lastly the 2 -shaped symbol was used,
sporadically in the 9th and loth centuries, consistently after the
beginning of the i ith, especially with m and / to signify mur
and tiw. The abbreviation-sign which we chiefly connect with
Visigothic minuscule MSS., namely, the stroke with the dot
above it (which, however, also occurs in many non-Visigothic
MSS.), is used sporadically in a few Qth-century MSS. and
1 Cf. Script. Benev., plates 51, 59, and 62. This is a mere affectation or
mannerism and has no special significance.
2 This is the form of r found in the ligature or. In the abbreviation of eius
and of quod (cf. below, p. 166) the same sign is used, placed obliquely to cut
the letters i and q.
3 Cf. Anglo-Saxon far, and the Spanish manner of abbreviating num, turn,
rum by the vertical stroke through n, /, r.
ABBREVIATIONS 165
regularly in several MSS. of the Bari type of the nth and
1 2th centuries. 1
In form, then, the abbreviation-signs present no great
variety. 2 They are : (i) the horizontal line (or two or more
lines parallel to each other) ; (2) the semicolon ; (3) the re-
versed s ; (4) the apostrophe ; and (5) the 2-shaped symbol.
The line and dot are, on the whole, too rare to be included.
Of these five the horizontal line is the most frequent, the
^-shaped sign the least frequent.
The abbreviation-signs just mentioned are not used indis-
criminately. Only certain of them are interchangeable. From
the point of view of their significance or value they may be
divided into four kinds :
1 . General signs to denote any suspension or contraction.
For this purpose the usual sign was the horizontal
stroke (or parallel strokes) ; but a number of MSS.
(saec. xi-xiii) employ the 2-shaped sign as well, 3 e. g.
au, au = autem ; I, \ in ;
fuer, faet=fuerunt\ sf, s\. = sunt\
sacdos, sacdos = sacerdos ; adusus, adusus = aduersus.
2. General signs used with particular letters to denote
particular abbreviations. Examples are given below.
1 See above, p. in sq. and p. 150.
2 I disregard the forms found in the most recent Benev. MSS. of the i3th
century.
3 The following examples selected from fifteen different MSS. will serve to
illustrate the point. Their number could easily be increased. The 2-shaped sign
is to be supplied in each case over the abbreviated forms. Monte Cassino 446
saec.x/xi, st=sunt: Benevent. vi 3 3 saec. x/xi, uix=ta'.rz'/, irunt\ Monte
Cassino 451 saec. xi in., s=sun/, uuer : Monte Cassino 133 saec. xi, s\c=stcut,
s=sunt: Vatic, lat. 3549 saec.xi ex.,sps=spiritus,z\i=aufem,i=in: Vatic. Ottob.
lat. 1939 saec. xi ex., sict=stcuf, st= sun/, rt = runt : Naples vi E 43 saec. xi/xii,
sic = <:#/, u=r, fr=f rater, i-=.runt\ Naples vi B 1 1 saec. xi/xii, sic=J/r/,
r=r#/: Rome Vallicell. c 9 saec. xii, sic=j/<r/, r=rw/, u=uer: Vienna 1188
saec.xii, r=runt\ Monte Cassino 640 saec.xii/xiii, sic=Vw/: Vatic. Barb. lat. 603
(xm 1 2) saec. xii/xiii, s=sunt: Vatic, lat. 4981 saec. xiii, sic, sict=Vw/, ^isunt :
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 342 saec. xiii, sic= sicut\ Monte Cassino 440 saec. xiii
ex., fa = dicitur, m=noster, ^ cetera, u=uer.
1 66 ABBREVIATIONS
3. Particular signs used only with certain letters to denote
particular abbreviations, e. g.
the reversed s with r, ff (verb-ending) = runt ; with
r, %.= rum ; with q, q, = quod ; with t, in ty = eius. 1
4. Particular signs used with any letter to denote one
and the same abbreviation, e. g.
(a) the semicolon = us with any letter except q, when
it denotes ue. 2
(b) the apostrophe = us with any letter except q?
The following examples illustrate the use of the general
abbreviation-sign with particular letters to denote particular
abbreviations. 4 Some of the letters thus marked represent
entire words, the rest only syllables. The stroke with a, d, e,
h, i, /, n, p, q, and s represents the words aut, de, est, haec, in,
uel, non,prae (per\ quae (gui), and sunt. In the case of the
tall letters d, h, i (longa), and /, the stroke intersects the shaft.
The cross-stroke through the shaft of/ and q gives per and
qui, above them gives prae and quae. Except in aut and
haec, these abbreviations retain their value even if they form
part of a word, e. g. pote =potest, ctinde = deinde, Iterest =
interest, ncupa,re = nuncupare, 5 lpes\.=praeest, pkcit=perfeat,
qrere = q^laerere, inq.t = inquit, poss =poss^mt.
The following list includes the common and typical abbre-
viated syllables. Those indicated by a horizontal stroke are
given first, then those indicated by the 2-shaped sign.
b. A horizontal line through shaft of middle b ber :
litftas, ut>rima = liber t as, uberrima ;
through shaft of final b = ber or bis :
imt) = imber ; not), urt), daft = nobis, urbis, dabis.
1 The wavy line used with some letters for er, &c., comes in late and is
a foreign element, e.g. f=ser.
2 The fact that que retained its old abbreviation is doubtless due to the
impossibility of the combination qus.
3 In some MSS. the apostrophe denotes s as well as us. Cf. p. 213 sq.
4 Cf. division 2, above. 5 The substitution of u for o is not uncommon.
ABBREVIATIONS 167
c. Over initial or middle c = con (cen) :
ctra, inctinens, innoctia = contra, incontinent^ innocentia ;
over final c (verb-ending) = cit :
fac, die, cresc=/#aV, dicit, crescit.
g. Over initial or middle g =gen :
gtes, argtum =gentes, argentum ;
over final g (verb-ending) =git :
1. Through shaft of middle /= ul or el:
saecla, famfo, mttis, angli = saecula, famulo, multis>
angeli ;
through shaft of final /= Us :
expugnabit = expugnabilis.
m. Over initial, middle, or final m = men (mm) :
mtes, monumto, tam = mentes, monumento, tamen ;
noma = nomina.
r. Over final r (verb-ending) = runt (occasionally rint) :
fuer fuerunt (fuerint}.
t. Over initial, middle, or final t = ter\
^tius, in<rna, ma<^ = tertius, interna, mater ;
over final t (saec. viii-x) = tur :
dici^ = dicitur, &c.
u. Over initial or middle u uer :
ubum, adusus = u-erbum, aduersus ;
over final u (verb-ending) = uit :
rogau, iu = rogauit, iuit.
x. Over final x (verb-ending) = xit :
dix, affix = dixit, affixit, &c.
The 2-shaped sign is used with the following letters :
c. Over initial c = cur (in recent MSS.) :
cauerit = curauerit ;
over middle c = cer :
sacdos sacerdos.
1 68 ABBREVIATIONS
m. Over final m = mur :
meream = mereamur.
r. Over final r = runt (in verb-ending) :
fuef =fuerunt (occasionally fuerint).
t. Over t initial, middle, or final (chiefly over final) = tur :
crpe, noccrnos, feac^turpe, nocturnos, detur.
The above examples of abbreviated syllables make it
evident that the abbreviation-sign has a shifting and relative
value, depending first upon the letter with which it is used,
secondly upon the position of that letter, and thirdly, as in
the case of ter and tur, upon the age of the MS. in which it
occurs. Here may be the place to raise a question of ter-
minology. After the beginning of the nth century Bene-
ventan MSS. abbreviate miir and tur by means of the 2-sign
over m and /. In a number of MSS. of the same period
runt, cer, and uer are frequently abbreviated by the same
2-sign over r, c, and u (fuef, sacdos, usus). In some palaeo-
graphical treatises this sign is spoken of as a ^r-sign. 1 If
we accept the expression, we are at a loss to explain the use
of a ^r-sign to denote unt and er. If, on the other hand, we
bear in mind that the MSS. which abbreviated runt, cer, and
uer by means of the 2-sign also use the ordinary horizontal
stroke over c, u, and r to denote the same syllables, we shall
realize that the 2-sign here is a general sign of abbreviation,
performing the same function as the horizontal stroke. In
the loth century the horizontal stroke with t had to do service
for tur, just as with u it did service for uer or uit. When the
2-sign was introduced it was regarded not so much in the light
of a ur-sign as in the light of a new abbreviation-sign. Proof
of this is furnished by Monte Cassino 446 saec.x/xi, in which
sunt is abbreviated by the 2-sign over st, instead of by the
customary horizontal line. In this MS., moreover, mur is
1 Cf. Paoli, Le abbreviature nella paleografia latina del medio evo (Florence
1891); A. Chroust, Monumenta Palaeographica, Serie i, Lieferung x, Taf. 2 :
Lindsay, Contractions, &c., p. 51 ; Steffens, Lat. Pal (2nd edit.) p. xxxix.
ABBREVIATIONS 169
abbreviated by m, but tur regularly by cr 1 still. The new sign
has not yet been applied to t to make the distinction between
tus and tur, but it is already used to mark an ordinary con-
traction. And in a still older MS., Paris lat. 335 (part ii) saec. x,
which abbreviates neither mur nor tur, the 2-sign is used again
and again over / to denote ter, and over rt to denote runt. 1
From these examples, and from those quoted above (p. 165,
note 3), it is plain that in Beneventan at least the sign may not
be called a z/r-sign. To speak of a ^r-sign is to attribute value
to the sign as a sign, whereas the fact is that it had iir value
only with m and / (rarely with any other letter) and that
within a given period just as it had imt value with r, and
er value with c and u. If we are not to divorce elements
which have no separate existence, it seems best to speak of
abbreviations of tur, runt, cer, con, and men, rather than of
er-signs or of on and en syllabic symbols. That the scribe
did not think in terms of iir- or en-signs, but in terms of
the syllable to be abbreviated, is clearly illustrated by the
following. We find rimt abbreviated in the same MS. by
three different signs : r, r, and j^. 2 The signs evidently
were a matter of indifference, as no confusion was possible. 3
On the other hand, where ambiguity could arise, different
forms of the abbreviation-sign were used to make the necessary
differentiation. So in the nth century we find that after
a series of attempts fixed equivalents were attained by the
different signs in connexion with m and t, e. g. m = men, m =
mur, ni = mus ; Sr = ter, or = tur, a* tus.
Here it may also be permissible to draw an illustration
from Spanish calligraphy, as instructive in showing how
misleading the accidental resemblance of an abbreviation-sign
1 The 2-sign over / denotes ter in two nth-century documents mentioned
below, p. 225, n. 3.
2 Cf. Vatic, lat. 3741 saec. xiex.
3 The ending runt could not be confused with rum, since abbreviated runt
used the ordinary form of r, and rum the modified uncial form found in or
and ar. See above, p. 166.
170 ABBREVIATIONS
to a letter may be, and how essential it is to trace the history
of a sign in order to interpret it correctly. Most Visigothic
MSS. abbj^viate bus and que by an s-like flourish placed to
the right above b and q. The earliest Spanish MSS. l use
as a rule the semicolon above the letters a usage which we
meet elsewhere, it being a feature of various schools of
minuscule. Some Qth-century Visigothic MSS. show both
the semicolon and the flourish, used even by the same scribe. 2
In fact there can be little doubt that the ^-like flourish, the
form typical of the more recent MSS., is a graphic development
of the semicolon, being nothing but the point and comma
made in one stroke, without removing the pen. By analogy
with b = 6us, the s-like flourish came to be used with other
letters to denote us. With q, however, it retained its old
value of ue. But the resemblance of the flourish to the letter
5- has proved a stumbling-block. In the best-known text-book
in Spanish palaeography we read a propos of this point : ' La
letra que mas usualmente se sobrepuso fu la s, a la cual se
da el valor de us como en las palabras exercit 5 , quit, iV, 3
que se leen exercitus, quibus, Justus. Cuando esta letra apa-
rece sobre la q, tiene valor de ue como en los siguientes
ejemplos : atq 5 , namq*, deniq', que deben interpretarse atque,
namque, denique! ^
Here the abbreviation-sign is explained as a genuine letter s,
equivalent to us when used with most letters, but to ue with q.
This is the interpretation given also by Wattenbach 5 , Delisle 6 ,
and the editors of the Palaeographical Society' 1 . Indeed,
1 Cf. Monte Cassino 4, Monte Cassino 19, London Egerton 1934.
2 Cf. Madrid Univ. 31, Bibl. Acad. Hist. 20 (Aemil. 22), Bible of San Millan,
and many others.
3 Initial i should be long here.
4 Munoz y Rivera, Paleografia Visigoda (Madrid 1881) p. 93 sq.
5 Anleitung zur lat. Pal. (4th edit., 1886) p. 71 : 'daneben ist haufig auch
das ubergeschriebene s. Westgotisch findet sich m?=fflHW, ^bus, aber auch
qf =?**.'
6 Melanges de pale'ographie et de bibliographie (Paris 1880) p. 57.
7 Pal. Soc. i, pi. 95 (Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 25600): 'A superior s denotes
the terminations us and ue'
ABBREVIATIONS 171
considered by itself, s = us seems a perfectly reasonable
hypothesis ; but the explanation s ue involves us in an
improbability which is removed only when we go back to the
origin of the sign and trace its evolution.
To sum up : each abbreviation-sign had its own development
and history, which was largely conditioned by its environment.
The same form had in some cases different values in different
schools. 1 With increase in the number of abbreviations, new
forms were adopted for the purpose of differentiation. Some-
times the form was only a modification of a less calligraphic
stroke to suit the shape of certain letters or ligatures. 2 The
constant recurrence of the same abbreviated syllables 3 resulted
in certain forms of the abbreviation-sign gaining more or less
permanent value in connexion with certain letters. The
apostrophe and the 2-shaped sign are foreign importations
which come in from the north at the end of the loth century,
after the script is fully developed. The traditional abbre-
1 viation of bus gives rise to the use of the semicolon to denote
omitted us after any letter. As this was impossible after q,
qiie retained its traditional abbreviation and thus kept intact
the old relation between bus and que, the most ancient of
abbreviations.
THE ^-STROKE 4
One of the most characteristic features of the developed
Beneventan script is the form of its w-stroke. Whereas in
ordinary developed minuscule omitted m was indicated by
1 Cf. the abbreviation of Spanish qui and Irish quod ; of Spanish turn and
Anglo-Saxon tur (a vertical stroke cutting the extended top of /) ; of Spanish
turn, mum, num, and Continental lus, mus, nus\ of Spanish per and Continental
pro.
2 e. g. the reversed j-sign.
8 e. g. the verb-endings in c it, m't, xit, mur, tur, &c.
4 For the early history of the w-stroke compare Traube (Nomina Sacra,
p. 241), who shows that the custom of omitting final m could not have come
into Latin MSS. before the time of the translation of the Bible from Greek into
Latin. As the Greek scribe omitted final v, the Latin omitted final m at the
end of a line.
i 7 2 ABBREVIATIONS
a horizontal line above the vowel, the Beneventan used a
symbol resembling arabic number 3. If we trace the evolution
of this symbol we find it to be a development from the
capricious abbreviation-strokes of the 8th and 9th centuries 1
(cf. p. 164), when no distinction was made between the abbre-
viation-stroke and the ^-stroke. 2
As the script grew more uniform and regular, the need seems
to have been felt of keeping the abbreviation-stroke and the
^-stroke distinct, the horizontal line being kept for the
former and the wavy vertical stroke for the latter. Towards
the end of the Qth century the ^-stroke begins to assume its
distinctive Beneventan shape, i.e. the 3-shape. This form
goes through the same graphic development as the letters,
being rather freely made at first, more precisely and gracefully
in the Desiderian period, and angularly and stiffly in the
1 3th century.
Although omitted m was occasionally indicated by a hori-
zontal line, the best Beneventan tradition adheres to the
3-shaped sign. But it is a curious fact that in the word enim
the case is reversed : enim being regularly written eni and
rarely eni 3 . This anomaly may possibly be accounted for by
the supposition that the scribe regarded eni as an abbreviation
for enim. The frequent position of the stroke over n instead
of i supports this view.
In texts containing musical notation the ^-stroke is often
placed not above the vowel but after it like any other letter ;
obviously for the sake of avoiding confusion. 3
There is no special ^-stroke ; on omitted n see below, p. 185.
1 The same kind of m-stroke is to be seen in early Corbie MSS. and in early
North Italian minuscule.
2 In the MSS. of the 8th and pth centuries we find prae, tur, ter, and even
lesu domini abbreviated by the sign which is later reserved for the w-stroke.
3 I have also noted the ^-stroke written on the line after the vowel and not
above it in a marginal note in Paris lat. 335, fol. 138, the reason being that
the abbreviation of per, i. e. p with a stroke through the shaft, happened to be
in the way and made it unsuitable to put the w-stroke in its usual interlineal
place.
ABBREVIATIONS 173
THE BENEVENTAN ABBREVIATIONS
The chief characteristic of Beneventan abbreviations is
their conservatism. They preserved and handed on old forms
which were given up by other Italian schools less able to
withstand the influence of Caroline models. 1 If we cannot
say with certainty which abbreviations were inventions of the
South Italian schools, there is no doubt which were typical of
them. As Beneventan specialities Traube mentioned mla =
miser icordia, $02.= gloria, am3, = amma, $&pts=populus, and
\^>e = tempore. 2 Before any of these I should place ty = eius*
for the other forms are frequently found elsewhere and gtea is
exceptional even in Beneventan. Despite the proximity of
the Beneventan and Roman schools and their close relations,
their methods of abbreviation remained distinct. Nor can it
be said that either the Insular or the Spanish system had any
marked influence upon the Beneventan. 4
THE STAGES
During the different epochs of the script the picture pre-
sented by the abbreviations is as distinct and characteristic as
that presented by the forms of the letters. It is possible to
distinguish four stages :
1. The 8th and Qth centuries.
The period of indecision and insecurity, as evidenced
by the various abbreviations of the same word. Cf. in
the list autem, dicit, populus, propter.
2. The loth century.
The period of greater consistency. Abbreviation by
1 Cf. autem, p. 198 sq. ; omnis^ pp. 210 sqq. ; quoniam, p. 191; tur,
pp. 217 sqq.
2 Nomtna Sacra, p. 248. Cf. these abbreviations in my list. For mia see
below, p. 206.
8 Cf. pp. 199 sqq.
4 It should be noted that abbreviation by suprascript letters was wanting in
early Beneventan MSS. The few Insular symbols used were common property.
Visigothic abbreviations are very rare.
i 7 4 ABBREVIATIONS
superior letters as yet rarely employed. Distinction
made between tur and ter.
3. The nth century.
The period marking the introduction of the following
new forms or types, approximately in this order :
(a) or = tur, cr 7 = tus
(G) \ = in
(c) 01, ols = omni, omnis ; hois = hominis; nols = no minis ;
-ois = -onis (genitive of nouns in -id)
(cf) abbreviation by superior letters : g = ergo ; g = igi-
tur\^ m = miki\ cc^ tibi\ fy=populi\ q, 2 q, q 3 =
quo, qui, qua ; p, p, p *=pri, pra, pru ; c, c, c = cri, era,
cro > g> fe =g ra , g re J t, t, t tri> tra, tro, &c.
4. The 1 2th and I3th centuries.
The period in which abbreviations of the type 01, -ois =
omni, -onis, &c., and those by superior letters as just cited,
are the rule, to which must be added toward the end of
the period such forms as g gni, g gno, u = uir, f = ser,
ipe = ipse, bafus = beatus&toA. other more or less arbitrary
omissions, especially of r.
ALPHABETICAL LIST OF BENEVENTAN ABBREVIATIONS
The following is intended to be not a lexicon of Beneventan
abbreviations but a selected list of those which seemed typical
or in some way worthy of attention. The chief aim has been
to trace the different phases in their development, and to
ascertain where possible the approximate duration of each
phase. A few abbreviations whose evolution seemed par-
ticularly instructive have been discussed at greater length.
No attempt was made to include the numberless abbreviations
1 These abbreviations of ergo and igitur are among the earliest cases of
abbreviations by superior letters.
2 q with superior o for quo is earlier than the nth century.
3 The suprascript a has the open form. Here and in the following pages
I use the ordinary form.
ABBREVIATIONS 175
which occur in technical and liturgical books, nor those which
are found in MSS. of the 1 3th century when the script was
fast losing its Beneventan traditions. The observations noted
are based upon examination of several hundred MSS. But in
such matters there can be no pretension either to exhaustive-
ness or freedom from error.
The date given after an abbreviation refers to the earliest
instance known to me. When no date follows, the form is probably
older than the end of the 8th century.
adeo acfo saec. ix. Based upon <Jo = deo. This abbreviation
came into use after all sense was lost of the reverence
attaching to the contracted forms of the * Nomina Sacra '.
Cf. p. 158, also icto = fcofc0. It is also possible that ct = <&
is the explanation of the form.
amen am. Cf. m = men, p. 184.
angelus angls, angli, &c. Cf. saecidum.
anima, &c. ama saec. xi ; by analogy : arnal = animal.
aa" saec. xi ex. xii.
aia saec. xii-xiii.
The earliest MSS. do not abbreviate it. However, in
MSS. of the nth century the typically Beneventan form
of the contraction is already established. This form is
ama. 1 It is prevalent in the nth century. Toward the
end of the century aa is found by the side of ama. At
about the same time the Insular and Continental form
aia is introduced, but used sparingly. The form aa con-
tinues for a brief time in the 1 2th century, but aia occurs
more frequently. In the i3th century aia alone is the
accepted abbreviation. I have noted ama in MS. Cava 19
a. 1280: but this is the exception.
animus 3Lm\ = animi, amo = ammo, 2Ho = animo saec. xi ex.
The forms are analogous to those of anima and undergo
the same development.
1 Traube (Nomina Sacra, pp. 248, 255), it seems, found ama in a loth-century
MS. I did not find it in the thirty examined by me.
1 76 ABBREVIATIONS
annus an = annos and other cases. Cf. Naples VI B 1 2 saec. ix.
afin = annos. Cf. Vatic, lat. 3 342 saec.x. In both MSS.
the word occurs repeatedly. Usually it is found written out.
ante an saec. xi. The avoidance of this form is doubtless
due, as Lindsay points out, 1 to the possibility of confusing
it with a suspension of annus and with the interrogative
particle an, which according to Beneventan usage has a
2-shaped sign over it, also used as an abbreviation-sign.
The abbreviation is of Insular origin.
apostolus apis, apti, &c. Occasionally the more precise form
aptus is used, cf. Monte Cassino 299 saec. ix, Vatic. lat. 1 202
saec. xi ex. Cf. episcopus.
apud apd saec. ix/x. Not frequent.
ap saec. xi ex. Rare. The form is Insular.
aut a saec. viii ex.-x. Rare. I have noted it in Paris
lat. 7530 saec. viii ex., Cava 2 saec. viii ex., Vatic, lat. 3320
saec. ix, Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix ex. (where an i ith-cen-
tury corrector writes aut in the margin), and Vienna 68
saec. x ex. Chiefly found in glossaries.
aut em au saec. viii-xiv. The customary Beneventan form ;
aut is the exception. See p. 1 98 sq.
beatus bea. This suspension is found in Madrid B 3 saec. x
and Munich 4623 saec. xi/xii. The form t>a occurs in
Monte Cassino 275 saec. xi. The corresponding contrac-
tion bafus is employed in Monte Cassino 440 a. 1264-82.
The suspension b" is found in the liturgical MS. Vatic.
Borgian. lat. 2 1 1 a. 1094-1 105 ; ftp = beati Pauli. Here it
amounts to a technical abbreviation.
bene fen. Rare. Cf. Cava 6 saec. xi/xii.
-ber t>. A very old suspension found as early as the
4th century, e. g. lib- = liber in the papyrus fragments of
Livy in semi-uncial. 2
1 Cf. Lindsay, Contractions, &c., p. 8.
- Cf. Grenfell and Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyri, part iv, pp. 90-116. Facs.
in New Palaeog. Society, pi. 53 ; Steffens, Lat. Pal? 1 , pi. 10.
ABBREVIATIONS 177
-bis b saec. viii, e.g. nob or uob. See p. 166. Beginning
with the pronouns nob, uob, it is extended to nouns, e. g.
uerb = uerbis, urb = urbis ; and then to verbs, e. g. dab =
dabis (Vienna 68 saec. x ex.). In the body of the word bis
is not abbreviated.
-bunt bf saec. x. Cf. ri = -runt.
-b us b; (b followed by semicolon) saec. viii-xiv. Regular
form, cf. o^ = que. In the oldest MSS. the semicolon is
made in a flourish. In MSS. after the beginning of the
nth century b with an apostrophe is also used. In Bam-
berg HJ IV 15 saec. viii ex. and Vatic, lat. 3320 saec. ix the
shaft of the b is intersected by a cross-stroke, as in early
Corbie MSS. (let type).
carissimi See karissimi.
Christus xps, xpi, xpo, xpm. These contractions belong to
the earliest group of ' Nomina Sacra'. See lesus. The
spelling xpc occurs in Vatic, lat. 3741 saec. xi ex. Begin-
ning with the nth century the word is often abbrevia-
' ted by means of x with the final letter written above,
e. g. x, x, x, x = Christus, -i, -0, -urn. My earliest instance,
x, is found in Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi. Usually it
occurs in liturgical books in the phrase domini nostri lesu
Christi. Cf. Oxford Bodl. Douce 127 saec. xi ex., Vatic.
Borgian. lat. 211 saec. xi/xii, Naples VI E 43 a. 1099-1 1 18,
Vatic, lat. 6082 saec. xii, and Monte Cassino 640 saec.
xii/xiii. See similar abbreviations of noster, p. 207. By
analogy Christiani = xpiani. Even antichristus is abbre-
viated : antixps. In Rome Corsini 77 7 saec. xiii I noted
xpistus written out. For other examples see under lesus.
-cit c in verb-ending : dic = dfeV. Cf. -uit, -xit.
con co, c saec. viii ex. c is the more usual symbol after
the 9th century, but co occurs occasionally. The Tiro-
nian sign } is found in a few MSS. which show other Insular
abbreviations. The scribe of Monte Cassino 322 saec. xi
had copied 3 into his text, which a corrector replaced with
1443 N
178 ABBREVIATIONS
c. c is sometimes extended to denote cen, e.g. innoctia
in Vatic, lat. 3227 (Monte Cassino) saec. xii in., or cun, e. g.
iucditas in Vatic, lat. 3 3 20 saec. ix (due to pronunciation).
era, cri, cro, &c. c, c, c, &c. Cf. p. 1 74. Abbreviation by
suprascript letters is typical of MSS. after the middle of
the nth century.
cuius cut saec. x. Cf. e\ = eius, }\\A huius. The more fre-
quent forms cul; and cui 5 constitute no special abbrevia-
tion, the semicolon and the apostrophe being regular us-
symbols.
David ctcL
de ct saec. viii ex. Cf. Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex., Monte
Cassino 97 saec, x in., Madrid B 3 saec. x, Vatic, lat. 3342
saec. x, Vatic, lat. 1468 saec. xi, Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi
(under Insular influence). It is found in the Grimoald
Diploma of 8 10 and other documents. It should be noted
that this abbreviation is often employed by Visigoth ic
scribes.
deus cts, ctl, clo, &c. Of the first group of ' Nomina Sacra '.
In liturgical books (saec. xi ex.) the suspension d is used
for the various cases.
diaconus diacs, diaci. The normalized forms. In collections
of canons various suspensions occur, e.g. diac, diacon, &c.
dicit, dicitur, &c. The usual forms are :
die = dicit ( & is found in Monte Cassino 299 saec. ix).
ctr = dicitur.
dix = dixit.
dixer or dixeff or eft = dixerunt.
dies = dicens.
During the early period of the script a variety of other
forms was used as well, e.g. etc = dicit in Paris lat. 7530
saec. viii ex., <lc and 3f = dicit in Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix
ex., where the nth-century corrector writes die in the
margin. For dicitur we find dlr in Paris lat. 7530 : dfr in
Monte Cassino 299 saec. ix : dlcr in Rome Casanat. 1086
ABBREVIATIONS 179
saec. ix and Vatic, lat. 3320 saec. ix : dicir in Monte Cassino
132 saec. xi in. dicuntur is abbreviated by dicnr in Paris
lat. 7530 and Monte Cassino 402 saec. x ex. Paris Nouv.
Acq. lat. 1628 saec. xi has dncr.
dilectissimi ditmi. Usually in connexion with fratres in
writings of a religious character.
discipulus dis and other suspensions. A recurrent term in
lectionaries, in the phrase discipulis suis.
do minus dns, dni, &c. One of the ancient group of ' Nomina
Sacra '. In a secular sense it occurs in Cava 4 saec. xi in.
ecclesia eccla, -ae, &c. The normalized forms.
e contrario ec saec. ix. A terminus technicus. Not often
employed.
eius ty saec. ix ex. The typically Beneventan form. In docu-
ments it is found earlier. The abbreviations j; el; and
ei 5 make use of the ^-symbol. With et cf. cut, hut. The
Insular symbol 3 is used in the additions of Monte
Cassino 3. See detailed discussion of eius on pp. 199 sqq.
enim. As a rule the word is written out, except that final m is
indicated not by the Beneventan ^-stroke (see above,
p. 1 72), but by the ordinary horizontal line.
In a number of MSS., particularly in those showing Insu-
lar influence, we meet with the Insular symbol 4f . Cf.
Bamberg P III 20 saec. x in., Monte Cassino 230 a. 969-
87, Monte Cassino 86 saec. xi, Monte Cassino 1 25 saec. xi,
Monte Cassino 32 2 saec. xi, and Rome Sessor. 8 1 (2030)
saec. xii/xiii.
An unusual form, h~, is often found in Monte Cassino 187
saec. ix ex. An 1 1 th-century corrector has expanded it
in the margin (pp. 148, 151, 154, 157, &C.). 1
The form e (e with superior ) occurs in some 1 3th-century
MSS., e. g. Flor. Laurent. 29. 2. The curious form n
1 This form is, in all probability, due to misunderstanding. The symbol -H-
may have been regarded as capital letter H* The scribe changed it to a small
letter and added the abbreviation-stroke.
N 2
180 ABBREVIATIONS
(n with horizontal stroke) occurs in Monte Cassino 205
saec. xi, p. 23. It is probably due to misunderstanding of
Insular 4f or -N-.
episcopatus epaf us. Cf. episcopus.
epis copies eps, epi, epo, &c. The more precise form epus
occurs in Vatic, lat. 5845 saec. x.
ergo g saec. xi. Cf. igitur and p. 203 sq.
esse, esset ee, eet saec. viii. The usual forms, even in
MSS. which denote est by means of 7-.
est Two forms are employed : the Insular symbol 7- and
the Continental abbreviation e. The latter is the regular
form in the more recent MSS. (saec. xi ex., xii, and xiii).
The older MSS., on the other hand, with few exceptions,
use the Insular 7-. Very often its form is varied, the
line between the dot and comma being made wavy and
slanting. In some MSS. of the early nth century both
forms occur. It is a curious fact that MSS. of the south-
eastern school (Bari type) show a preference for -j- even
in the nth and i2th centuries. See p. 202 sq.
et The Insular symbol, which resembles arabic number 7, is
found in a few MSS., particularly in those which show other
Insular traits. The earliest instance known to me is in
Bamberg P III 20 saec. x in. The MS. also has 4+ for enim.
euangelista eug, eugteta, or the more precise euangtista.
euangelium eug, eugtium.
facit fac facit, fee fecit, analogous with die = dicit, saec. ix.
filius fit saec. ix ; / (with a line through it) or ^ saec. xii.
Used only in recurrent phrases in chronicles, &c.
f rater, &c. The abbreviation of this word originates in
Christian literature, whence its use was extended to any
context. The normal forms are :
fr frater ff s fratres
fris =fratris ffum =fratrum
fri =fratri friftus =fratribus
frm or frem =fratrem
ABBREVIATIONS 181
For f retires we have ff in Bamberg HJ IV 1 5 saec. viii ex.
An interesting abbreviation for the nominative singular
is ffer, found in the MSS. Benevento VI 33 saec. x/xi
and Vatic, lat. 4928 saec. xii in. It corresponds to ner for
noster. Another variation, frr (fra&r), I noted in Monte
Cassino 759 saec. xi in., Naples VIII B 6 saec. xi, and
Flor. Laurent. 68. 2 (Tacitus) saec. xi.
gentes gs (saec. xi) is the normal form. Especially common
in liturgical books as a recurrent term. Other forms
are : gens saec. ix : gen saec. xi in. : gfes in Vatic, lat.
3262 saec. xiex.
gloria gta. Originally in a religious sense, as gloria dei, &C. 1
gloriosus glosus.
gni g saec. xii, e.g. r^ regni in Monte Cassino 440
saec. xiii. Cf. p. 1 74.
gno g saec. xiii, e.g. cogscitur in Rome Sessor. 32 (2093)
saec. xiii. Cf. also Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 saec. xiii ; see p. 1 74.
gra, gre, &c. g, g, &c. saec. xi ex. On abbreviations by
suprascript letters see p. 1 74.
graece gee saec. xi. Cf. Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi (under
Insular influence).
gratia gra. Chiefly in a religious sense, gra cfr = gratia dei.
habeo.habet hab" saec. ix. Cf. similar suspensions of the
third person singular of verbs, e.g. die, fac, &c. In Monte
Cassino 205 saec. xi (Insular influence) I noted the con-
tractions frf , hat = habet : hns = habens. h~f is likewise
found in Vatic, lat. 5419 saec. xii.
hie deest 2 M saec. ix. Often in text where an omission
has occurred. The corresponding sign is h"p.
1 The form gloa mentioned by Traube (Nomina Sacra, p. 256) is found, as
I learn from Prof. Lindsay, in Bamberg HJ iv 15 saec. viii, fol. 89. It is a most
unusual form.
2 According to Th. v. Sickel (' Prolegomena zum Liber Diurnus ', in Sitzungs-
ber. d. K. Akad. d. Wi'ss. in Wien, cxvii (1889) part vii, p. 26, n. 2) hie deest and
hie ponas are the only correct expansions of M and hp.
182 ABBREVIATIONS
hie ponas h~p saec. ix. Answers M, hie deest ; often in
marginalia, preceding corrections or additions.
haec scribas (? super] h~s. Answers M. Usually placed
after the addition in the margin.
hie, haec, hoc, &c. Abbreviations of this pronoun are, on
the whole, rare.
h = hoc saec. ix.
ft haec saecix. Both h and h" are Insular symbols.
\i\A-huius saec. ix. Cf. c\A = cuius. The forms hul;
and hui 5 make use of the ^-symbol. Monte Cassino 276
saec. xiiex. and the 13th-century MS. RomeSessor. 32
(2093) have H for huius, i.e. h and the #-symbol. In
Paris lat. 7 5 30 saec. viiiex. we have hoc often represented
by h", the normal form for haec. 1
Hierusalem hierlm is perhaps the most usual form. I have
also met hrslm (Monte Cassino 753 saec. viii) and hlfm.
homo, &c. fro, &c. Manifestly not an Italian abbreviation,
for the older MSS. (saec. viii, ix, x) do not employ it.
My first instances date from the beginning of the nth
century. The more frequent forms are :
fro = homo in Naples VIII B 3 saec. xi. Remains the normal
abbreviation.
hoem = hominem in Vatic, lat. 3741 saec. xi ex.
hoe = homine in Vatic, lat. 7810 saec. xi.
hoes = homines in Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi.
A somewhat later system shows these variations :
hols, hoi, hoiem in Leyden 1 1 8 saec. xi ex.
holes = homines in Naples VI E 43 saec. xi/xii and later
MSS.
hois = hominis in the same MSS.
hole = homine in Monte Cassino 792 and Cava 1 8 saec. xiii.
horum = hominum in the same MSS. as show holes.
holb"us = hominibus in Vatic. Barb. lat. 603 (XIII 1 2) and
Monte Cassino 640 saec. xii/xiii.
1 Cf. Wattenbach, Anhtinng zur lat. Palaographie (4th edit.) pp. 73-4.
ABBREVIATIONS 183
In two MSS. which show Insular influence the word is
frequently abbreviated in a peculiar way :
honem = hominem in Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi.
hones homines in Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi.
honum = hominum in Monte Cassino 205.
In Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 saec. xiii I have noted houm for
hominum. The form homum is found in Leyden 1 1 8
saec. xi ex. Cf. nomen.
idem ict saec. ix. Rare ; it ordinarily signified id est.
id est ict saec. ix. Besides this normal form, Monte Cassino
205 saec. xi has the Insular symbol !-, which also occurs
in Leyden 1 18 saec. xi ex. It is more common in mar-
ginalia or interlineal glosses. Frequently only the second
word of the phrase is abbreviated, id -f- or id e.
ideo icto. Cf. adeo.
lesus ih~s, ih~u, ih"m. From the original group of the ' Nomina
Sacra'. The nominative ilic occurs in Vatic, lat. 3741
saec. xi ex. During the nth century the following supra-
script forms come into use: i, T =/$&, lesum, chiefly
in the phrase jdomini nostri lesu Christi. Cf. similar
abbreviations of Christus and noster, pp. 177, 207. The
uncontracted form is very rare (Traube, Nomina Sacra,
pp. 151, 152). In the Exultet Roll Vatic. Barb. lat. 592
(XIII i) I found lesum xpistum ; lesus (meaning Christ)
occurs in Bologna Univ. 2843 (San Salvatore 486). The
MS. Vatic, lat. 4958 saec. xi ex. has on foil. i4 v , g^ lesu
xpisti. Another Beneventan Exultet Roll, Vatic, lat. 3784
saec. xi, has IHesum xpistum. The psalter from Sora,
Oxford Bodl. Douce 127 saec. xi ex., has on fol. i Hiesum
xpistum.
igitur saec. xi. The normal form. Occasionally igr and
ig are found. Cf. ergo and detailed discussion, p. 203 sq.
imperator impr saec. ix. The form imp occurs in Flor.
Laurent. 68. 2 saec. xi, impatorum in Munich 462 3 saec.
xi/xii.
i84 ABBREVIATIONS
in \ in saec. ix/x in MSS. 1 (In documents saec. ixin.)
This form is not used after saec. xi in.
I = in. Displaces t. Is used saec. xi in. to saec. xiv.
Typical of recent MSS. Both t and I are found in MSS.
saec. xi in. A curious form T occurs in some MSS. saec.
xi in. See discussion on pp. 204 sqq.
inde inct. Cf. de. %
in illo temp ore iniftt saec. x. The standing abbreviation
of the opening words of the lesson. More precise forms
also occur, e.g. inillofp, Flor. Laurent. S. Marco 604
saec. xi in. and Naples VI B 2 saec. xii in.
interrogatio IN or INT and other suspensions, saec. viii.
As rubric or recurrent term. Cf. R or RS = responsio.
ipse \^^ ipse, v^\ ipsi, \^& = ipsa, &c. Only in recent
MSS. saec. xiii.
Israel in"l, the normal form. Variants occur, especially in
the earliest MSS., e.g. isrl in Benevento III 9 saec. ix and
isrhl in Rome Casanat. 641 (part i) saec. ix. sFfrl in Vatic.
lat. 3320 saec. ix is probably due to a Visigothic archetype.
item IT saec. ix.
karissimi kmi saec. viii. In religious literature, usually
in connexion with fratres. I noted kami as well as kmi
in Bamberg HJ IV 1 5 saec. viii.
m Omitted m is usually denoted by a 3-shaped sign ; occa-
sionally by a horizontal stroke. See above, p. 171 sq.
men m saec. viii. See p. 167.
saec. ix.
saec. x.
ma = mea saec. xi. (e. g. aa ma = anima mea).
mam = meam saec. xi ex.
These abbreviations are analogous with those of cJs
deus, 3m = deum, &c. In Naples VI D i saec. xi ex.
I noted m for meo, a form which ordinarily denotes modo.
1 The same form is used for inter in Insular MSS.
ABBREVIATIONS 185
mi hi m saec. xi in. Cf. tibi.
nm~ and mih" saec. xi, but not frequent.
misericordia, -ae y -am, &c. mla, mie, miam, &c. saec. viii.
For more data see p. 206.
mo do m saec. xi in. The standing form.
-mus m; saec. viii. Chiefly as verb-ending.
m' saec. xi, used far less often than m;. On omitted
us see p. 197.
mur The passive verb-ending in mur has the form m saec.
x/xi even in MSS. employing a 1 for tur ; cf. Monte Cas-
sino 446 saec. x/xi, Monte Cassino 132 ante a. 1023. l In
two MSS. saec. xi in. which have a 2 for tur m' is used for
mur, e.g. Monte Cassino 372 (p. 246) and Monte Cassino
324 (p. 183). Cf. the discussion of tur on pp. 217 sqq.
n Omitted n, e. g. no, co, saec. viii : bat = bant saec. ix (rare).
The omission of n in the ending of nouns in io, e. g. ioTs,
ioi, ioem = ionis, ioni, ionem, is typical of recent MSS. ; it
is not usual before the end of the nth century. In Monte
Cassino 440 saec. xiii, fol. 25 omitted n is marked by the
3-shaped w-stroke.
nisi m saec. x. Cf. Vatic, lat. 3317. Rare,
n saec. xi. Cf. m = mihi ; see p. 1 74.
nobis not) saec. viii. See under bis.
nomen, &c. Abbreviations of the oblique cases of nomen, like
those of homo, are, as a rule, not found in the older MSS.
An exception is furnished by Monte Cassino 187 saec.
ix ex., with Tm for nomine, which, however, a corrector
expanded in the margin. It is probably through the direct
or indirect influence of Insular exemplars that abbrevia-
tions of homo and nomen found their way into Beneventan
MSS. in the nth century. My earliest instance is pre-
1 An earlier example of m with the 2 -sign for mur is found in Monte
Cassino 269 ante a. 949. I noted only one case (p. 270).
1 86 ABBREVIATIONS
cisely from a MS. which has distinct relation with an
Insular original, namely, Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi. I
noted there, as in some later MSS., v^^ nomine, noa =
nomina. The characteristic forms of the more recent
MSS. (saec. xi ex., xii, xiii) are :
noTe = nomine
nols = nominis.
The nominative nom is an old suspension which makes
use of the common abbreviation m = men. That it occurs
in the 8th century, whereas the other cases appear much
later, is due to the fact that nom is not a distinct abbre-
viation of the word as such.
non n saec. viii. The usual form.
no saec. viii. Occurs much less frequently.
noster, nostri, &c. See detailed account on pp. 206 sqq.
nr, nri, nro, &c. saec. viii. Normal forms.
hs* nostri, n = nostro, n. = nostrum, h = nostra, &c. saec.
xi ex., especially in liturgical books.
tier = noster is found in a few Beneventan MSS. Cf.
p. 208 sq.
numerus. Its use as a terminus technicus is here disregarded.
In ordinary texts I noted :
= numero in Vatic, lat. 3281 saec. xii in.
numero in Vatic, lat. 3327 saec. xii/xiii.
nunc nc saec. ix.
obitus <e- saec. x. In calendars and martyrologies contain-
ing obituary entries. Various other suspensions of obiit
and obitiis are used.
omnino follows the fortune of omnis.
omlno saec. ix.
omo saec. xi.
010 saec. xii.
omnipotent, &c. Abbreviations of omnipotens reflect the
development noted in the forms of omnis, and like omnis
ABBREVIATIONS 187
have an older and a younger system. Of the former the
usual forms are :
omps = omnipotens saec. viii.
ornips = omnipotens saec. x.
ornpe = omnipotente saec. ix.
The typical forms of the more recent system are :
olps = omnipotens saec. xi.
oipf is = omnipotentis saec. xii.
Some variations exist in the oldest MSS., e.g. ompns in
Monte Cassino T XLV (part vi) saec. ix and Monte Cassino
575 saec. ix ; ompts, ompfis in Vatic, lat. 3320 saec. ix.
omnis, &c. See discussion on pp. 210 sqq. Two systems may
be distinguished. The first, which is found in the older
MSS., has forms like omls, omem, omi, ome, oms, oma or
oTma, omium, omitnis. The second system, which dates
from the nth century, is typical of the recent MSS. and
has forms like ols, oem, 01, oe, os (pmnes), ola or oa,
omm, and oib"us. The two systems are used contempora-
neously.
per p saec. viii. The other very common /-symbols are :
prae p saec. viii. pro p saec. viii.
In MSS. of the 8th and Qth centuries p is found less often
than p or p, and the abbreviation-stroke instead of being
horizontal is often vertical and sinuous. Cf. p. 104.
populus, -z, -o, &c. There are three ways of abbreviating these
words, of which the commonest is to indicate omitted u
by a stroke through the /, thus :
(a) popts =populus
popti =populi
f Odd. 1A.
poplo populo
poptm = popuhtm
Cf. saectm, saecti, octi, &c. Occasionally the o is written
above the first/.
1 88 ABBREVIATIONS
(6) In a considerable number of MSS. the final letter is
written above, usually between, the two /'s, e. g.
p s p =populus saec. xi ex.
pp populi saec. xi in.
pp populo saec. xi in.
As variations may be mentioned pps =populus in Vatic.
Urbin. lat. 585 saec. xi/xii, pprum populorum in Paris
Mazar. 364 saec. xi/xii. In Flor. Laurent. 68. 6 saec. xii/xiii
we encounter besides pp, pp such forms as pp R populi
Romani, ^>&= populo Romano, ^^=populus Romanus,
P R -=populum Romanum.
(c) The third system, which is found in relatively few MSS.,
recalls the Spanish method of abbreviating by omitting
the vowels, e. g.
ppts =populus
polo = populo
*I V , \ saec. ix.
pplm =populum
pptrum = populorum, &c.
Such forms are found in Vatic, lat. 3 3 20 saec. ix, Monte
Cassino 187 saec. ix ex., Flor. Laurent. 68. 2 saec. xi, Ox-
ford Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 175 (Bari) saec. xii in., Vatic,
lat. 3327 saec. xii/xiii.
post p' saec. x/xi. The ordinary form.
p saec. x/xi. In Naples VI B 1 2 saec. ix, a MS. full of
abbreviations, I noted the frequent use of pf for post.
In Rome Casanat 641 (part i) saec. ix in. I found p ami
=post annos.
pro, p saec. xi. Seep. 174.
prae (pre) p. Cf. per. Owing to mediaeval orthography p
is the standing symbol for the syllable pre\ it is
occasionally used for proe, as plium in Cava 2 saec. viii ex.
and other MSS.
praeter pf. Formed by p=prae and f = ter.
pre p. See prae.
ABBREVIATIONS 189
presbiter, &c. pftr, pl5ri, pt)Fo, &c., the normal forms. Their
use is very old.
pri p saec. xi. Seep. 174. In Monte Cassino 322 saec. xi
(first half) a corrector changes the superior i to the liga-
ture ri (^) a sign that it was not yet an established
abbreviation.
pro p. Cf. per.
propheta, &c. proptia or ppfra, &c.
proprium, &c. p>um, ppo, &c. saec. xi. Not common.
Composed of the usual /r<?-symbol and the abbreviation
of pri by means of suprascript z. In Naples VI B 3
saec. xii I noted the Insular form ^propria.
propter ppt saec. viii. Becomes the accepted form. How-
ever, during the 8th and 9th centuries a number of rivals
% are in the field, e. g.
pp in Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex.
pp in Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex., Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823
saec. ix, Naples VI B 12 saec. ix, and Monte Cassino 187
saec. ix ex.
fp or prop in Cava 2 saec. viii ex., Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823,
Naples VI B 1 2, Vatic, lat. 3320 saec. ix, and the glosses
of Vienna 903 saec. x ; also in the recent MS. Rome Ses-
sor. 8 1 (2030) saec. xii/xiii.
ppt in Bamberg HJ IV 1 5 saec. viii.
ppr in Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix ex.
pr in Flor. Laurent. 66. 40 saec. ix ex.
In Monte Cassino 148 a. i oio I noted propr (fol. 22i v ).
The variety of forms found in the early MSS, reflects the
unsettled condition of the script during that period.
propter ea ppa in Naples VI B 12 saec. ix.
ppea in Cava 2 saec. viii ex. and Naples VI B 12.
ppra in Flor. Laurent. 68. 6 saec. xii/xiii.
pru p. See p. 174.
psalmus ps saec. ix. Also other suspensions.
1 90 ABBREVIATIONS
qua q saec. xi. Cf. p. 174.
quae q; saec. viii. The usual abbreviation for que, which is
Beneventan, or in fact mediaeval, orthography for quae.
I noted q in Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex. This form occurs
less frequently in texts than in marginalia.
qnaesumus qs saec. x. As a recurrent term in liturgical
books.
qiiam The word has no distinctive abbreviation. I have
noted one exception. The symbol q, which elsewhere
in Beneventan MSS. denotes quod, represents quam in
Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex. This form is probably taken
over from the exemplar.
q^iando qcto saec. x. Not common.
A still less common form is qn, which I noted in
Monte Cassino 86 saec. xi, Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class, lat.
41 saec. xi/xii and Vatic, lat. 3281 saec. xii in.
quare qr. This syllabic suspension occurs in Monte Cas-
sino 276 saec. xii ex.
q^tas^ qsi saec. x. Not common.
que q; The usual form. Together with b; it is one of
the oldest suspensions in Latin MSS. The semicolon
after q is occasionally made in one flourish. In Rome
Casanat. 641 (parti) saec. ix in. it cuts the lower shaft of
the q. I have met the abbreviation in the body of the
word in Vatic. Regin. lat 1823 saec. ix, e.g. eloq;ntiam
(fol. 1 08). Owing to mediaeval spelling the form q; often
represents quae.
qui, &c. q saec. viii. In like manner qa, qbus, qd, qppe,
qs, &c.
q = qui saec. xi. See abbreviations by suprascript let-
ters, p. 1 74.
qui a qa saec. ix.
qa saec. xi. Cf. qui. The a is found suprascript in
Paris Mazar. 364 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi/xii. I have
ABBREVIATIONS 191
found the Nota Juris q^ in Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi
and Rome Sessor. 32 (2093) saec - xm "- Both MSS. show
a number of abbreviations foreign to the Beneventan
system.
quid qd saec. ix. Cf. qui. The curious monogram abbrevia-
tion ^ I noted in Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 and Rome Sessor.
8 1 (2030) saec. xii/xiii.
quis qs saec. ix. Cf. qui.
quo q saec. x. Abbreviation by suprascript letter, see p. 1 74.
quod qct saec. viii. The normal form.
q, saec. ix. Occurs often enough to be regarded as
a feature of the script; yet that it was a foreign element
is shown by the fact that the scribe of Monte Cassino 322
saec. xi mistook the symbol for qui.
quomodo qm saec. xi. See under quo and modo.
quoniam qm saec. viii. The regular form. Exceptions
are Monte Cassino 753 saec. viii and Benevento III 9 saec.
ix, which often use qnm besides qm. Both MSS. show
Prankish characteristics.
quoque qq saec. ix.
qq; saec. x ex. See under quo and que.
quot qf. Rare, e.g. ^^. quotquot, in Monte Cassino 187
saec. ix ex. the instance referred to by Traube (Nomina
Sacra, p. 264) and Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi.
r omitted r denoted by a wavy stroke over the vowel,
saec. xii. A feature of the more recent MSS.
reliqua reliq saec. ix. Cf. Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix ex.
and Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii) saec. x. In the former
MS. I also noted rell and rt as a recurrent word in the
expression et reliqua.
respondit *ty saec. xi in. Cf.&=dixit.
In Monte Cassino 759 (Bible) saec. xi in. (p. 32) I noted
qui $. ei. This symbol is frequently used in the questions
i 9 2 ABBREVIATIONS
and answers in the Vitae Sanctorum. Cf. Naples VIII B 3
saec. xi. A curious form is I^det = responded, found in
Monte Cassino 440 saec. xiii.
responsio RSP, RS, or R saec. ix. As rubric marking the
answer, just as IN or INT (inter rogatio] marks the ques-
tion.
-rint r with a stroke above the letter or intersecting the
shoulder. Not usual. The form is regularly employed
to signify -runt.
-rum % Chiefly used in the case-endings -orum and -arum.
This abbreviation is formed of the two curved strokes of
uncial R, with the abbreviation-stroke intersecting the
lower curve. See p. 1 38. It is one of the old suspensions.
runt r saec. viii, e.g. fuer, dixef, &c.
rf saec. ix, e.g. fueff, dixeff, &c.
Both the suspension and the contraction are in regular
use, often occurring in the same MS. The former repre-
sents the old Italian tradition. In MSS. of the late loth
and early nth centuries the stroke, instead of being above
the r, cuts the shoulder of the letter obliquely, as shown
above, p. 164. Cf. Monte Cassino 77, 269, and 123, Vatic,
lat. 3317, Flor. Laurent Ashburnh. 55 (all saec. x), Monte
Cassino 148, 132, 124 (saec. xiin.), and many others.
s 9 saec. xi. The same symbol is employed for us. See
detailed discussion on pp. 213 sqq.
saeculum sectum, -i, -o, &c. saec. ix. The normal forms.
Less precise are scli = saeculi and sctm = saeculum, which
I noted in several 8th- and Qth-century MSS. The old
and frequent abbreviation of saecula, in which omitted u
before / is indicated by a stroke through the shaft of
/, was most likely the prototype of such forms as popli, -o,
octi, -o, famli, -o, siml, and mtti, -o, &c.
sanctus scs, sci, sco, &c. Of the ancient stock of the 'Nomina
Sacra' . See p. 1 5 8 sq . S or s = sanctus (and cases) saec. x.
ABBREVIATIONS 193
scilicet -s- saec. x. Found in interlineal glosses but not in
text.
secundum secdm saec. ix. The usual form. It gives
rise to:
seccts, -a, &c. saec. ix. The less precise form scchn is
found in MSS. of the 8th and 9th centuries. In liturgical
books various suspensions are employed in the frequent
phrases secundum Mar cum, secundum Lucam, &c., also the
symbol f (s, with sinuous cross-stroke). Cf. Vatic. Urbin.
lat. 585 saec.xi/xii and Vatic. Ottob. lat. 576 saec. xiiex.
This form is found in the more recent MSS. Rome Sessor.
32 (2093) saec. xiii and Sessor. 105 (1377) saec. xiii. The
scribe of MonteCassino322saec. xi mistook the symbol
for si. In Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi the cross-stroke
cuts the s at right angles, f . sm also occurs, with
an oblique stroke through the s, in Rome Vallicell. B 66
saec. xi ex.
sed Rarely abbreviated, s followed by a comma occurs
in Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi, Monte Cassino 86 saec. xi,
Monte Cassino 1 1 1 saec. xi, Flor. Laurent. 68. 2 saec. xi,and
Vatic. Ottob. lat 1939 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi ex. ; we find
s followed by a semicolon in Vatic, lat. 33 2 7 saec. xii/xlii,
Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 saec. xiii, and Rome Sessor. 3 2 (2093)
saec. xiii.
ser s with oblique stroke intersecting the vertical shaft,
saec. xiii. See p. 1 74.
si cut sic saec. ix.
sicf saec. x. Less common than sic. The Insular form
s is found in Monte Cassino 302 saec. xi ex.
spirit alts. Sue. spalis, &c. saec. ix. &$x&\\X = spiritaliter.
spualis = spiritualis in Glasgow Univ. V 3. 2 saec. x in.
spiritus, &c. sps, spm, spu, &c. Among the oldest of the
' Nomina Sacra'. Cf. p. 158 sq.
suis ss saec. xi. Only in liturgical books as recurrent term :
i 9 4 ABBREVIATIONS
'discipulis ss' in Vatic, lat. 3741 (Evangeliarium) saec.xi ex.
and Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211 saec. xi/xii.
sunt sf saec. viii.
s saec. viii. The contraction is more usual. But both
forms are frequently to be found in the same MS.
super sf saec. xi. Not common. I have noted it in Monte
Cassino 205 and 35 1, both saec. xi, and RomeVallicell. A 15
saec. xiii. It is an Insular form. I found s with sinuous
intersecting stroke in Flor. Laurent. 68.2 saec. xi.
supra sup saec. xi. Not frequent.
suprascriptus, -a, -um ss. This ancient suspension and the
contraction ssa are often found in Munich 337 (medicine)
saec. x.
tamen tarn saec. ix. Cf. m = men. In Vatic, lat. 3281
(S tatius) saec. xii in. , O xford Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 175 (Bari)
saec. xiiin., and Monte Cassino 276 saec. xii ex. I found
the Nota Juris fm. The contraction fn occurs in Flor.
Laurent. 29. 2 saec. xiii.
tempus The word is chiefly abbreviated in liturgical books ;
see under in illo tempore, where t represents tempore.
Other abbreviations are : the suspension
temp = tempore, in Flor. Laurent. San Marco 604 saec.
xi in., which is the basis of the contraction
tem$a. = tempora, in Munich 4623 (Monte Cassino)
saec. xi/xii. The syllabic suspension
xp = tempore, in Flor. Laurent. San Marco 604 and
Naples VI B 2 saec. xi in., is the basis of the contrac-
tions :
^t^tempore, in Monte Cassino 143 saec.xi, Vatic,
lat. 3741 saec.xi ex., Munich 4623, Vienna 1188 saec. xii,
and Flor. Laurent. 68. 6 saec. xii/xiii ;
tpa = tempora, in Monte Cassino 86 saec. xi ; and
tpifrus = temporibus in Munich 462 3 and Benevento
V 26 saec. xii in. Lastly, the syllabic suspension
tpr = tempore, in Benevento III 8 saec. xi in., Flor.
ABBREVIATIONS 195
Laurent.5i.io saec. xiex., and Vatic, lat. 3281 saec.xiiin.,
is the basis of the contractions :
tpre = tempore, in Vatic, lat. 4958 (Monte Cassino) saec.
xiex. and Munich 46 2 3 and
tpris = temporis in Vatic, lat. 3227 saec. xii in.
ter cr saec. viii. Occasionally the abbreviation-stroke is
a vertical flourish, e.g. in Vatic, lat. 3320 saec. ix. In
Paris 335 (part ii) saec.x and in a few documents cr de-
notes ter. Cf. p. 225.
tibi oj saec. xi in. The normal form. But cV (which ordi-
narily denotes trt) is found in several MSS., e.g. Oxford
Bodl. Canon. Class, lat. 41 saec. xi/xii, Vatic, lat. 4955(Bene-
vento) saec. xi, and occasionally in Leyden 1 18 saec. xi ex.,
Naples VI G 31 saec. xi ex., Monte Cassino 276 saec. xii ex.
tra cir saec. xi, e.g. incr. See p. 1 74.
tri or saec. xi. Cf. tra. In Monte Cassino 69 (medicine)
saec. ix ex. this abbreviation occurs in the recurrent
word trita. Its use here may be due to the technical
character of the text, however, or to the archetype, as no
other instances anterior to the nth century are known
to me.
tro cr saec. xi, e.g. ulcr. Cf. p. 174.
tune tnc saec. x in.
fc in Flor. Laurent. S. Marco 604 saec. xi in., Monte Cassino
86 saec. xi, Vatic, lat. 3281 saec. xii in., and Flor. Laurent.
29. 2 saec. xiii.
tur See discussion on pp. 2 1 7sqq. Important dating criterion.
cr or cr or cr saec. viii-x.
a* saec. x (second half)-xi in.
cr saec. xi in.-xiv.
In Monte Cassino 269 ante a. 949 it occurs in the body of
the word noccr^nos. At the beginning of a word I noted
it in Munich 4623 a. 1098-1106, crpibus.
In Monte Cassino 384 saec. x in. tur is denoted by a ver-
tical stroke intersecting the right branch of the cross-
o 2
i 9 6 ABBREVIATIONS
stroke of /, as in Anglo-Saxon MSS. and in several
French MSS. of the Corbie tot type.
ubi u saec. xii/xiii. Found in Monte Cassino 2 76 saec. xii ex. ,
Flor. Laurent. 29. 2, and Spalato Capitol. Historia Saloni-
tana, both saec. xiii.
uel ut saec. viii.
\ saec. ix. Both forms are found in the same MSS. In
the body of a word I found it in Monte Cassino 123
saec. x ex., e.g. utle = uelle.
uer u saec. x. 1
u saec. xi. Cf. p. 165, n. 3.
Both forms are found in the same MSS.
uero uo saec. ix.
u saec. x. Cf. Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii) fol. 163. Not
common before saec. xi. 2
uester ur, ufi, &c. Cf. noster.
uer = uester. A form found in a few Beneventan MSS.
It corresponds to the form ner for noster. See above,
p. 1 86. As part of a word it is also abbreviated, e.g.
silur = Siluester in Rome Vallicell. D 5 saec. xi.
uir u saec. xii ex.
-uit u. The verb-ending -zV, e.g. amavi==amaMit. Standing
abbreviation, cf. p. 167.
unde untt. Cf. de.
ufi saec. xi. Cf. Monte Cassino 125 saec.xi, Oxford Bodl.
Canon. Patr. lat. 175 (Bari) saec. xii in., Monte Cassino 276
saec. xii ex., Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 saec. xiii. It is an Insular
form.
-xit x. The verb-ending -odt, e.g. rx. = rexit, dix==dmV.
Common abbreviation, cf. p. 167.
1 The abbreviation must be very old. It occurs in the North Italian MS.
Vercelli 183 saec. viii; and many centuries before that in the Formula Fabiana.
a In Vatic, lat. 3 34 2 saec. x; according to Mommsen, u with a tiny curved
stroke is used for uero. See Preface to his 2nd ed. of Solinus^ p. cv (Berlin
1895).
ABBREVIATIONS 197
ABBREVIATED SYLLABLES
In the above list it seemed advisable to include not only
abbreviated words but also abbreviated syllables, especially
those which are used frequently and regularly. They are :
ber, bis, bunt, bus, cit, con, men, mur, mus,
runt, ter, tur, uer, uit, and xit. See above, pp. 1 66 sqq.
It is instructive to see these abbreviations also from the
point of view of the part omitted. Thus regarded we get
this list :
Omitted en in m(en) ; by extension c(en), g(en), n(en).
er b(er), t(er) ; by extension c(er), u(er).
The very frequent omission of er (or re) is
typical of the recent MSS. (saec. xi ex.-
xiii), e. g. d(er), g(er), n(er), e.g. gena, s(er).
is b(is) at end of words ; by extension d(is),
l(is).
it c(it), u(it), x(it), in verb-endings.
on ,, c(on), n(on).
re see er.
,, um in or(um), ar(um), usually in case-endings.
un b(un)t, r(un)t, s(un)t.
ur ,, m(ur), t(ur) ; by extension c(ur), g(ur).
us ,, b(us), m(us) ; by extension used with any
other consonant except q. This is the most frequent of the
omissions. The normal way of indicating omitted us is by
the semicolon. The apostrophe is not infrequent in the
nth century, but the semicolon still remains the more usual
sign.
In later MSS. they divide honours. Early examples of the
apostrophe are found in Lyons 788 saec. x (Gram.) and in two
9th-century MSS. Benev. Ill 9 and Monte Cassino 299. These
are exceptions to the rule. The semicolon is occasionally
made without lifting the pen, so that the point and comma are
joined and resemble a shallow 3 or a slender s.
TQ8 ABBREVIATIONS
DETAILED DISCUSSION OF SPECIAL ABBREVIATIONS
autem misericordia
eius noster, uester
est omnis
ergo, igitur ' =s
in tur
AUTEM
The form au is found in all the oldest Beneventan MSS.
save one (Monte Cassino 753 saec. viii med.), which uses aut.
In some of them, however, other forms are to be noted as well,
e.g. af in Paris lat. 7 5 30 saec. viii ex., aut in Rome Casanat.
641 (parti) saec. ix in., Rome Casanat. 1086 saec. ix, and in
Vatic, lat. 3 3 20 saec. ix, which also has the peculiarly Spanish
contraction aum.
The indecision in usage ceased as soon as the script became
more fixed and calligraphic. This is evidenced by later MSS.
Thirty-five MSS. of the loth century examined by me agree
in the exclusive use of au. It is practically the only form em-
ployed in the MSS. of the next three centuries. That aut
should creep in here and there l and contest the field with au
was only natural considering the almost universal use of aut by
the schools immediately north of the Beneventan zone. The
traditional character of au in Beneventan centres is emphasized
in a number of MSS. in which Beneventan and non-Bene-
ventan scribes collaborated. The Beneventan has invariably
au, the non-Beneventan aut, the difference in the abbreviation
being plainly the result of differences in local tradition. The
two contemporaneous hands are seen in the following
MSS. : Bamberg E III 4 saec. ix/x, Monte Cassino 230 a. 969-87,
1 I noted aut and au in the following MSS. : Monte Cassino 5 a. 1011-22,
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Bib. lat. 61 saec. xi ex., Rome Vallicell. A 16 saec. xi, Milan
Ambros. c 90 inf. saec. xi ex., and Naples vi B 3 (i 145-65). In Naples vi B 1 1
saec. xi/xii only aut occurs. When we find aut in Monte Cassino 466 saec. xiii
it is due to the breaking down of the old Beneventan traditions.
ABBREVIATIONS 199
Vatic, lat. 4770 (Roman school) saec. xex., Monte Cassino 5
a. 101 1-22, London Add. MS. 11916 saec. xi ex., Vatic, lat. 378
(Roman school) saec. xi ex., Vatic. Barb. lat. 560 (XII 3) (Roman
school) saec. xi/xii.
Eius
The peculiar abbreviation fy for dus is a standing feature of
Beneventan MSS. from the end of the 9th to the beginning
of the 1 4th century. It is, as far as I know, exclusively Bene-
ventan if we disregard a few MSS. of pre- Caroline type 1
so that its presence in a non-Beneventan MS. after the 9th
century warrants the presumption that the archetype of that
MS. was Beneventan. 2 Further evidence of its exclusively
Beneventan character is furnished by MSS. of the Roman
school. These writing centres, nearest neighbours of the
Beneventan, are in some cases historically known to have been
under Beneventan (more precisely, Cassinese) influence ; in
other cases dependence on Beneventan models can be demon-
strated on palaeographical grounds. Yet despite these close
relations MSS. containing contemporaneous hands in Bene-
ventan and Roman minuscule show fy only in the Beneventan
portion. 3 How very foreign it was to scribes of other schools is
seen from the fact that they mistook it for g, i. e. abbreviated qui^
1 See below, p. 202.
2 A case in point is the MS. Stuttgart Landesbibl. 4 12 saec.xii. The MS.
has here and there the peculiarly Beneventan interrogation-sign. Cf. p. 263. The
MS. Vatic, lat. 6081 in ordinary minuscule (saec. xii) also has this form of ems.
That it is a copy from a Beneventan original is suggested by the fact that the
MS. contains Luculentius, which is found, as Prof. Souter kindly informs me,
only in another Beneventan MS. Rome Vallicell. T. XX saec. xi.
3 An example of this we have in Vatic, lat. 47 70 saec. x. In the thirty-two
lines in Beneventan found in the body of the MS. (fol. 216) it occurs several
times. The hand immediately preceding and following these lines, which is
contemporaneous Roman minuscule, uses consistently ei' the regular Caroline
form. The same is the case in Monte Cassino 230 saec. x ex. and many
other MSS.
4 Cf. Wattenbach, Anleitung z. lat. Pal, 4th ed., p. 48, and W. M. Lindsay,
Contractions, p. 53. See also above, p. 156. The MS. < of Apuleius which
200 ABBREVIATIONS
The form fy made its way gradually into Beneventan calli-
graphy. None of the oldest MSS. know it. They chiefly
write out the word, or else make use of the familiar its-symbol
(;). In the oldest MSS. in which fy is found, Monte Cassino
187 saec. ix ex. (p. 148) and Monte Cassino 3 ^874-92 (p. 114),
it occurs, as far as my examination of them shows, but
once. However, the scribes whose activity falls about the
year 900 begin to use it more frequently, as is seen from
the MSS. Monte Cassino 332, Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii),
and Monte Cassino 97. The corrector of Vatic, lat. 3313
who knows fy (the writer of the MS. did not) belongs to this
period.
In the early loth century we note other forms beside fy
e.g. ei in Vatic, lat. 5845, et in Bamberg P III 20 and j;
in Vatic, lat. 5007. After the arrival of the new ^-symbol
(') in the early nth century we encounter )', e.g. Monte
Cassino 205 (under Insular influence) and Rome Vallicell. 032.
But neither this form nor j; constitutes a distinct abbreviation
of eius. They merely make use of the us-symbol. The chief and
typical abbreviation is fy, whose use lasts as long as the script. 1
As for the origin of fy it is not too bold to say it is hardly
a development of j;. If it were we should expect to find traces
of the ^-symbol (;) in the earlier examples of ^. These,
however, do not exist. In Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix ex.,
Monte Cassino 97 saec. x in., Vatic, lat. 5845 saec. x in., and
Bamberg P III 20 saec. x in., and in many later MSS. we meet
with a form of eius which is similar to that found in a Bene-
ventan document of 8io. 2 Here the abbreviation-stroke which
cuts the letter i below the line is made slanting. The method
is a copy of F (both Beneventan) has manu que for manu eius in Metam. lib. ii,
cap. vi (ed. Van der Vliet (1897) p. 26, 1. 22 and Preface, p. ix). The
abbreviation of eius had become illegible in F and was mistaken for abbreviated
qui which was corrupted into que. This explains how a Beneventan scribe fell
into the error.
1 Cf. Script. Benev., plates 97-100.
2 Cf. Piscicelli Taeggi, Paleografia artistica di Montecassino, Longobardo-
Cassinese, pi. 34, and Script. Benev., pi. 6.
ABBREVIATIONS 201
of indicating suspension by a slanting line cutting a prolonged
letter or part of a letter is ancient. 1 It may be in cursive,
then, that we are to look for the origin of ^. The caution
with which it appears at first, as though feeling its way, would
support this supposition. The form j with a diagonal cross-
stroke is found in some non-Beneventan MSS., which, how-
ever, it is important to note, had not yet succumbed to the Caro-
line reform, which cleared the minuscule writing then in use of
its cursive elements : e. g. tc, , ^, &c. The admission of this
form into Beneventan book-hand furnishes an excellent illustra-
tion of one of the characteristics which distinguish the Bene-
ventan school from the Caroline. 2
Mention has been made of the forms j; and j', which
call for no further comment. Another form occasionally
encountered is et, in which the long form of i is crossed by
a horizontal stroke. It is analogous with hut, cut (cf. abbrevia-
tions of hums and emus) and somewhat similar to the Visigothic
symbol, in which to be sure the stroke often resembles the
letter s. The similarity with the Visigothic is easily accounted
for. It arises from the fact that both schools observe the
z-longa rule, 3 which requires a long i in eius if the word is
written out. If, on the other hand, it was to be abbreviated,
nothing was more natural than to indicate the suspension by
a stroke intersecting the long shaft of i. In Beneventan,
however, where a traditional symbol for eius already existed,
this form seldom occurs.
The form K found in Vatic, lat. 5845 saec. xin., where it is
most probably due to the archetype, is so rare that it need not
detain us.
Before and during the 9th century the form ^ is found out-
side of the Beneventan zone, as may be seen from the
following MSS. and documents which have come to my notice.
1 I have noted it in the interesting semi-uncial MS. from Verona (Vatic, lat.
1 32 2 saec. vi). The slanting cross-stroke from right to left downward is
typical of early Corbie MSS. (tct type).
2 Cf. pp. 95 and 205. 3 Cf. pp. 115, 302, and 308.
202 ABBREVIATIONS
The documents are :
St. Gall 113 a. 757 (where the comma-like stroke cutting
the i resembles the later ^-symbol). 1
Lucca Archiv. Capitol. *G 46 a. 807 (the cross-stroke is
slanting).
Veroli documents of the nth century (as yet unpub-
lished).
The MSS. are :
Cassel Theol. Q. 10 (which has various forms besides.
The cross-stroke is slanting). 2
London Cotton Nero All saec. ixin. (cross-stroke slant-
ing).
Carlsruhe (Reich.) 57 saec. ix in. (stroke not slanting).
Milan Ambros. 631 sup. saec. ixin. (stroke not slanting).
Rome Sessor. 96 (1565) saec. ix. (They have the
63(2102) slanting cross-
23(1254) stroke.)
Stuttgart Landesbibl. 4 1 2 saec. xii, mentioned above.
(Here this form of eius, which occurs sporadically,
is due to a Beneventan archetype, which, so far as
I know, is not the case in the preceding MSS.)
EST
An examination of the abbreviations of est found in Bene-
ventan MSS. shows that the symbol -f- was commonly used
in the 8th, Qth, and early loth centuries. The MSS. Bamberg
HJIVi5, MonteCassino575, and Monte Cassino 332, which
furnish the exceptions to the rule, have, it should be observed,
other characteristics which do not quite accord with Beneventan
traditions; and the form e which they employ may be due
to a non-Beneventan original. The most recent MSS., i.e.
of the 1 2th and i3th centuries, are strikingly at one in their
preference for e. The dated MSS. of about the year 1 100 con-
1 Facs. in Steffens, Lat. Pal.*, pi. 38.
2 Knowledge of this MS. I owe to Prof. W. M. Lindsay.
ABBREVIATIONS 203
sistently employ e, e.g. Munich 462 3, Naples VIII C 4, Naples
VI E 43, Paris Mazar. 364, Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211. Both -j- and
e are found in the early i ith-century MS. Flor. Laurent. 66. i.
Whereas e is already present in several MSS. of the latter
half of the loth century, the form -j- is still used in the
Theobaldan MSS. (1022-35) Monte Cassino 57 and 104. How-
ever, after that period it becomes the exception and e the
rule.
A curious and interesting fact is the use of both e and -j- ,
perhaps more often the latter than the former, in the group of
MSS. which are written in the Bari type. I mention : Eton
Bl. 6. 5 saec. xi, Naples IV F 3 saec. xii, Naples VI B 2 saec. xi in.,
Naples VIII B 6 saec. xi, Naples San Martino 14 saec. xi, Oxford
Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 175 (Bari) saec. xii in., Vatic, lat. 1468
saec. xi, and Vatic, lat. 3327 saec. xii/xiii.
ERGO, IGITUR
Ergo and igitur are closely related. It is supposed that
the Insular scribes who invented the form for igitur (g) made
one for ergo by analogy with it. It is advisable here to treat
the two side by side.
Neither word, so far as my observation goes, is abbreviated
in Beneventan MSS. prior to the nth century. 1 Curiously
enough, abbreviated ergo is found in many MSS. which do
not abbreviate igitur after its use is already certified. The
first dated instance of ^ ergo known to me is in the MS.
Monte Cassino 28, written before the year 1023. After that it
remains the permanent property of the script, g is the normal
1 It is true that g=ergo is found in the MS. Monte Cassino 451, which,
according to Caravita (/ codici e le arti a Monte Cassino, i. 168), must have been
written between 983 and 1002. But the verses referring to Otto III which
furnish this date must be regarded, for palaeographical reasons, as copied.
The same must be said of Rome Vallicell. D 5 containing the same verses (cf.
Archivio Paleogr. Italiano, ii, plates 73-5). If the two leaves (foil. 39-40) of
Rome Vallicell. R 32 are of the loth century, they would furnish the only
instance noted by me of ^ergo in a product of that time.
204 ABBREVIATIONS
form. Traube (Nomina Sacra, p. 259) notes the use of eg
in Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class, lat. 50 saec. xi.
Examples of abbreviated igitur are already observable in
the nth century. Yet the early i ith-century MSS. show the
word written out as a rule, except for the syllable tur, which
is abbreviated. The usual way of abbreviating igitur is g.
In Vatic, lat. 3549 the form occurs ; on fol. 68, however, igr is
used. The latter is, according to Traube, of Insular origin.
It is also to be found in Monte Cassino 124 saec. xi (first half)
p. 542, Monte Cassino 2 84 saec. xi (second half), Monte Cas-
sino 275 saec. xi ex., and in the early nth-century MS. Rome
Vallicell. T. XXII (part i) a MS. which has g for ergo.
Other departures from the usual g are : ig on fol. 1 7 of
Vatic, lat. 3375 (written in nth-century Beneventan over
erased 6th-century semi-uncial), ig in Monte Cassino 450
saec. xii ex., ig and ig in Vatic, lat. 3327 saec. xii/xiii, and ig in
Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 saec. xiii.
From the above it follows that the abbreviations of ergo
and igitur may be of use in dating a MS., since their presence
in it is a fair sign that the MS. is not older than the nth
century.
IN
Beneventan MSS. indicate the omission of the n in two
ways. In one the long form of / is cut by a horizontal stroke
(t). This is the older way. In the other the horizontal
stroke is placed over the short form of i (i). The latter
supplants the former.
The MSS. of the 8th and 9th centuries do not abbreviate
the word. The first instances known to me of t = in occur in
the MSS. Monte Cassino 332 (pp. 221-36) saec. ix/x, Monte
Cassino 3 84 (pp. 113-58) saec. x in., and Monte Cassino 439
saec. x. In the first two MSS. the scribes whose hand-
writing is calligraphic do not use t, whereas the pages in
which this abbreviation occurs are in a very hurried and
cursive hand. The script of the third MS. is also careless.
The presumption is that the less calligraphic hands reflect
ABBREVIATIONS 205
cursive methods of abbreviation. That this abbreviation for
in was known to notarial scribes is attested by a Beneventan
document of Sio, 1 not to mention later ones. 2 In Monte
Cassino 295 saec. x/xi the same observation is to be made.
The form t occurs only in the more cursively written portion
of the book. In fact, its use furnishes another illustration of
the tendency we recognized in the study of the typically
Beneventan abbreviation for dus namely that of introducing
cursive elements into the book-hand.
Slow to win its way into book-writing, t is found in MSS. of
the loth and early nth centuries. 3 The form, however, was
unfortunate. It could be mistaken for abbreviated uel. This
explains why it gave way to T, which form we occasionally find
in Monte Cassino 303 c. a. 1019, Monte Cassino 1 1 1 c. a. 1023,
and other Theobaldan MSS. From about the middle of
the nth century I is practically the only form used. 4 Its
frequent presence in a MS. is a fair sign that the MS. does
not antedate the beginning of the nth century, just as the
constant recurrence of t argues that it does.
As was to be expected, both forms of in occur in some
MSS. : e.g. Monte Cassino 57 ante a. 1023, Monte Cassino 322
saec. xi, Monte Cassino 205 saec. xi, Flor. Laurent. 66. i saec.
xi in., and Monte Cassino 372 saec. xi in. These may be con-
sidered to represent the transition period. The MSS. Monte
Cassino 322 and 205 show numerous abbreviations which are
peculiar to the Insular school. As I is, moreover, typical of
Insular MSS., it is not improbable that it came into Bene-
ventan MSS. directly or indirectly through Insular models.
There is nothing remarkable about such a form as I, found in
the i ith-century MSS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class, lat. 50 (Vir-
1 See above, p. 200, note 2.
2 Cf. Benevento Capitol, doc. 2 (a. 949).
8 When we find it in Munich 15826 we must remember that here a Bene-
ventan scribe is writing Caroline minuscule. Cf. chapter v, p. 91, n. 2.
4 Its frequent use in a Beneventan document of the year 1039 (Benevento,
Archivio di S. Filippo Neri, vol. 12, doc. 14) is a sign that it was quite at home
in MSS. before then.
2o6 ABBREVIATIONS
gil), Monte Cassino 90, Naples VI AA 4, Rome Vallicell. T. XIII
(foil. 229-42), and Vatic. Barb. lat. 160 (IX 29). The habit of
writing z-longa in the word in was second nature to the
Beneventan scribe ; this, combined with the desire to avoid t
because of its similarity to the abbreviation of uel, may explain
the above form. Its clumsiness prevented its spread.
MISERICORDIA
The regular and only form in Beneventan MSS. after the
end of the 8th century is mla. Here in all probability
the Beneventan preserves the old Italian tradition. For
mla is found in other Italian MSS. of the 8th~9th century,
e.g. Novara Capitol. 84, Rome Sessor. 66 (2098), 41(1479),
and 38 (part i) (2095), Milan Ambros. I 2 sup. (Rome ?), Verona
LXXXVI (Verona school). It is the form adopted in time by all
but the Visigothic schools, which use, according to Traube
(Nomina Sacra, p. 259), forms like msrcdia, msrcda, saec. ix,
mscda, mstta, saec. x. I found mscttia in Paris Nouv. Acq. lat.
2 1 80 a. 992. The form ma, characteristic of the Veronese
school, is, to my knowledge, not found in Beneventan MSS.
NOSTER, VESTER, &c.
What is true of the abbreviation of noster and its cases
holds for uester and its cases. The abbreviations of the latter
were formed by analogy with those of the former.
The oldest known MSS. in South Italian minuscule are
already in full possession of the normal forms which we are
accustomed to find in MSS. after the Carolingian period.
These forms are as follows (I enclose the rarer ones in
parenthesis) :
Singular Plural
nr (ner) nra nri nre (nrae)
nri nre (nrae) nrorum nrarum
nro nns nns
nrm nram nros nras.
ABBREVIATIONS 207
Of the earlier m-type of nosier (m = nostri, no = nostro, &c.)
mere vestiges remain. We find m for nostri in Paris lat.
753O 1 saec. viiiex., fol. 59. The same MS. has TTf for nostro,
which is given by Traube as an instance of ' nr-indeclinable '. 2
Then we have no = nostro in a Beneventan document of the
year 84O. 3 But that this system was no longer comprehended
towards the end of the 9th century is seen from the expansion
of na to nam instead of nostra by the scribe of Flor. Laurent.
66.40.* And when we find non for nostro in the nth-
century MS. of Seneca, Milan Ambros. C 90 inf. 5 the wrong
expansion of no does not surprise us. The mistake, moreover,
may have existed in the archetype. The occasional occurrence
of no = nostro (saluatore no in"u xpo, p. 269), u&m = uestram
(p. 232) in Monte Cassino 372 saec.xi in., is rather a hint of
the age of the original than of the actual usage of the scribe.
It may be noted in passing that nosn^noster, found in
Cava 2 saec. viii ex. (Isidore's Etymologies), is not a new abbre-
viation of the word. The scribe merely took advantage of the
familiar abbreviation f = ter.
In some MSS. of the end of the nth century as well as in
later ones we encounter forms of noster which appear like an
unconscious revival of an older system employed in legal
books and Notae Juris. The forms n = nostri, n = nostra, and
n = nostrum noted in Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211 (Monte Cassino)
saec. xi/xii ; and n = nostri in Vatic, lat. 4958 (Monte Cassino)
saec. xi ex., Vatic, lat. 6082 (Monte Cassino) saec. xii, and Monte
Cassino 640 saec. xii/xiii are not isolated phenomena. They
are symptomatic of the custom then in vogue of abbreviating
by means of superior letters, as is strikingly illustrated by the
very phrase in which n chiefly occurs : domini nostri lesu
Christi is abbreviated thus : dni n I x a bold departure from
the traditional way of abbreviating the * Nomina Sacra '.
Of the forms given in the above table ner demands special
1 Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 9. 2 Traube, Nomina Sacra, p. 229.
3 Cod. Diplom. Cavensi's, vol. i, doc. xix.
4 Traube, op. cit., p. 227. 6 Traube, op. cit., p. 211.
208 ABBREVIATIONS
attention. Traube has shown that the logical nominative to
a genitive nri (n<w/ri) is ner (noster) and not nr, which we
invariably find. 1 For nr (nosfer) corresponds to m (nostri).
That this was not a mere hypothesis he proved by citing the
four MSS. known to him in which ner actually occurs. The
rarity of this abbreviation justifies a mention of all cases
known to me. I give the MSS. in chronological order,
enclosing in brackets those not in Beneventan script. In
citing the passages with ner I expand the other abbreviated
words.
[Paris lat. 653 saec. viii/ix (Verona ?) foil. 66, 109.] 2
Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823 saec.ix, fol. 68, dominus et saluator
ner; fol. 173, redemptor ner ; also uer = uester.
Rome Vallicell. C 9 (lower script of the palimpsest portion)
saec. ixin., fol. 153, col. i, last line.
[Einsiedeln27saec. ixin., foil. n v , 12, pater ner; fol. i6 v ,
dominus ner.]
[Vatic. Regin. lat. 1997 (Chieti) saec. ix, foil. 17, 136. The
script resembles Beneventan.]
[Carlsruhe (Reich.) 3 saec. ix, fol. 1 5 V , redemptor ner ; fol.
i99 v , creator autem ner.]
Monte Cassino 575 saec. ix, p. 98, deus autem ner.
Monte Cassino T XLV (part vi) saec. ix, fol. i, aduersarius ner.
Monte Cassino 3 saec. ix ex., p. 74, ipse dominus ner.
[Vatic, lat. 4938 saec. viii, uncial : corrector who used ner
probably saec. ix, fol. 10, deus adiuuator ner.]
Monte Cassino 374 saec. ix/x, p. 19, deus iam ner; p. 329,
hoc patriarcha ner.
Monte Cassino 384 saec. x in., p. 38, quia rex ner dilexit nos.
Several more instances occur.
Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii)saec. x, fol. 1 08, dominus ner lesus
Christus ; fol. 1 21, lesus Christus dominus ner ; fol. 183,
dominus hedus ner.
Paris lat. 335 (part ii) saec.x, fol. 145, dominus ner (Christus).
Madrid B 3 saec. x, fol. 98, beatus ner apostolus Paulus ; fol.
1 Traube, op. cit., p. 228. a As I learn from Prof. Souter.
ABBREVIATIONS 209
212, dominus et saluator ner lesus Chris tus; fol. 229 V ,
dominus ner uoluit; fol. 301, dominus ner lesus Christus. 1
Troja, Rotulus (uer in the loth-century portions which
strengthen the back of the roll).
Bari, Archivio del Duomo, Document a. 962 (has uer). 2
Benevento Capitol. IV 15 saec. x/xi, foil. 32 V , 42.
Monte Cassino 226 saec. xi in. (unpaged), qui sit habitator ner.
Benevento, S. Filippo Neri, Document a. 1016, vol. 36, doc. 2.
Naples VI B 2 saec. xi in., fol. 211, dominus ner ; fol. 212, deus
ner; fol. 218, oculus ner.
Naples VIII B 6 saec. xi.
Naples VIII B 7 saec. xi, fol. 47, dominus ner.
Naples VIII B 8 saec. xi, fol. g\
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277 (Zara) saec. xi ex., fol. 90, Chri-
stus deus ner.
Vienna 1 188 (Naples) saec. xi, fol. 154, dominus deus uer ;
fol. 225, frater ner.
To these must be added the examples found by Spagnolo
and Lindsay in MSS. of Verona. 3 They are : Verona XVI, XX,
XXIX, XXX, XXXI, XXXVI, XLIII, XLIV (foil. H8 V , I49 V , 1 59), XLV
(only once), LIV (foil. 28 V , 33), LXXXII (foil. 40, 74), LXXXVI
(fol. i6i v ), XCI (fol. I5i v ), and XCII (foil. 28 V , 33 V ). Lindsay
also found ner in four MSS. of the Corbie tfib type : Dtissel-
dorf B 3, London Harley 3063 (has also uer), Montpellier Univ.
69, and Paris lat. n68i. 4
An examination of the above instances shows that, with one
or two exceptions, they all come from Italian MSS. and that
many of them are furnished by Beneventan scribes. These
statistics point strongly to Italy as the home of ner. This is
1 Cf. Hartel-Loewe, Bibliotheca pairum latinorum Hispaniensis, i. 369, 372,
373, 374-
2 Cod. Diplom. Barese, vol. i, doc. 4, facs. ii.
3 A. Spagnolo, 'Abbreviature nel minuscolo Veronese/ in Zentralblatt f.
Bibliothekswestn, xxvii (1910) 533, 536. This article cannot be used without
the corrections published in the same journal, xxviii. 259 sqq.
4 W. M. Lindsay, ' The Old Script of Corbie/ in Revue des bibliotheques, xxii
(1912)405-29.
210 ABBREVIATIONS
borne out by the negative fact that Traube knew no cases
outside of Italy, and Professor Lindsay in his extensive re-
searches in early minuscule MSS. has found but a few examples
in non-Italian MSS. The occurrence of the abbreviation in
Beneventan MSS. and documents belonging to the developed
period suggests that it was deeply rooted in South Italian
tradition. The unusual abbreviation frer for f rater (instead of
Ir or frr), found in BeneventoVI 33 saec. x/xi and Vatic, lat. 4928
(Benevento) saec. xii in., is manifestly formed on the same
principle as r&Y = noster and adds to the plausibility of our
hypothesis. When we meet ner in the Dalmatian MS. Oxford
Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277 it is simply a sign that the Dalmatian
scribes took over not only the Beneventan letters of their
models but also their abbreviations.
As for the age of ner this much is certain : it must be older
than the 9th century, as it is found in Beneventan MSS. of the
beginning of that century. Moreover, we may be justified in
regarding the company in which it is mostly found the ' No-
mina Sacra ' as further guarantee of antiquity.
OMNIS
The abbreviation of omnis and its cases is one of those
which can assist in determining the approximate age of
a Beneventan MS. For there is an older and a younger
system of abbreviating these words. Roughly speaking, the
principle of the first system is the omission of n, that of the
second the omission of mn.
I. From the middle of the 8th to about the middle of the
nth century the forms generally used by Beneventan
scribes are :
onTTs ome oms (omes) 1 oma, ornTa
omem omlum (omuni) 2
omi omi^us
1 Monte Cassino 187 saec. ixex. has the suspension om for omnes.
2 Cf. Monte Cassino 124 saec. xi in.
ABBREVIATIONS 211
Of the two forms for omnia, the oldest MSS. have only
oma. Both oma and omia are found after the middle of
the Qth century ; cf. Naples VI B 1 2 a. 8 1 7-35, Vatic. Regin. lat.
1823, Flor. Laurent. 66.40. In the loth century ornia gains
ground, but oma is still preferred. During the nth century,
however, oma occurs less frequently, and ornla becomes the
more usual form, until the field is disputed by ola. Although
MSS. of the late nth century show a preference for ola, the
older form ornla is found even in MSS. of the i3th century.
The form omes occurring in Vatic, lat. 5845 saec. x in., Monte
Cassino 38 saec. xi in., Monte Cassino 303 c. a. 1019 (p. 133),
and Monte Cassino 133 saec. xi med. is relatively rare. The
usual abbreviation of omnes is oms. No competing forms
arise till about the middle of the nth century.
II. The more recent system shows the following forms :
oTs oe os ola (oa)
oem (oiem) oium
01 l oitnis
These forms did not utterly drive out the earlier ones.
There are numerous MSS. in which both are represented.
But the second system is preferred by the more recent MSS.
and is characteristic of them.
For the nominative plural we should expect oes. This
Insular form, however, is hardly used. Instead, we encounter
os, 2 which occurs side by side with oms. Perhaps the earliest
instances of os in Beneventan MSS. are found in Monte
Cassino 86 saec. xi, Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi, both considered
Theobaldan but I think posterior, 3 and the famous Tacitus
Flor. Laurent. 68. 2 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi. Other MSS. show-
ing this form are: Flor. Laurent. 51.10 (Monte Cassino) saec.
xi ex., Flor. Laurent. 66. 2 1 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi ex., Oxford
1 010 for omnino belongs here, omo, the more precise form, is commoner.
2 Lindsay (Contractions, p. 39) found os in Lucca Capitol. 490 and Cologne
210 ; the latter has some typically Insular forms.
3 Both MSS. show Insular influence, which may also explain their preference
for the second system.
P 2
212 ABBREVIATIONS
Bodl. Douce 127 (Sora) saec. xi ex., Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class,
lat. 41 saec. xi/xii, Rome Vallicell. A 16 saec. xi, Vatic, lat. 4939
saec. xii in., and Monte Cassino 792 saec. xiii.
The insular form oa for omnia is relatively rare. It occurs
in Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi and Vatic, lat. 3741 saec. xi ex.
Although it is impossible to fix upon the exact time in which
the second system was introduced such innovations occur
gradually we can determine approximately the limits within
which the change of system must fall. Dated MSS. make
this possible. It is safe to say that MSS. anterior to the nth
century do not use forms represented in the second system.
This is probably true also of MSS. of the early part of the
nth century. Thus the scribes of Monte Cassino 148 a. 1010
and of Monte Cassino 5 a. 1011-22 still use forms of the
first system. A few forms of the second system I have noted
in Monte Cassino 552 (part i), which doubtless belongs to the
beginning of the nth century yet several dated MSS. ante
a. 1023 (Monte Cassino 28, 57, 132, and 303) do not as yet have
it. In MSS. of the Desiderian period some of the forms are
present, e.g. Monte Cassino I27. 1 All the forms of the new
system are quite frequently used in MSS. of about the year
1 100, not to say later ones, e. g. MSS. Naples VI E 43 a. 1099-
1 1 1 8, Munich 462 3 3.1098-1 106, Paris Mazar.364 3.1099-1 105,
and Vatic. Urbin. lat. 585 a. 1099-1 105.
From the above we may be justified in placing the begin-
ning of the more general use of the second system in the
latter half of the nth century. That Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211
3.1094-1105 uses all the forms freely is a sign that they
flourished considerably before the year iioo ; while the fact
that the dated MSS. of the beginning of the nth century
do not use them gives us the other limit of the system.
Here it should be noted that such forms as ols, 01, oem, &c.,
appear in MSS. that employ abbreviations like hois, hole,
1 In some of the beautiful liturgical books of the Desiderian period these
forms are used with reluctance; in other Desiderian MSS. they are more
frequent.
ABBREVIATIONS 213
holes = hominis, homine, homines, and nois, noie, &c. = nominis,
nomine ; to which may be added ala for anima.
THE ^-SYMBOL (')
I. The presence of this symbol in Beneventan MSS. fur-
nishes a terminus ante quern non, since it is not found before
the 1 1 th century. 1 I noted it first in Monte Cassino 303 c. a.
1019. Here, however, it is used but rarely and apparently
by one hand. It is also found in Monte Cassino 125, which is
considered as one of the MSS. executed at the order of Abbot
Theobald (iO22~35). 2 Here the symbol is already freely
employed. It occurs in a few other MSS. of the first half of
the nth century, but the great majority belong to the second
half or are later still.
At first the symbol is found at the end of a word occurring
at the end of a line. Its use extends to the end of any
word in the line, and gradually it is used in the body of
the word. Found after one or two vowels at first, it soon
occurs after all the vowels, and in time is employed after con-
sonants also. To cite a few examples : in MS. Oxford Bodl.
Douce 127 (Sora)saec. xi ex., I noted inanimcf , dente 9 , cordi',
inimico* , eqmt ; in Vatic, lat I349 3 saec. xi (fol. 67) dignitcf,
or dine* , iubenti* , ecclesiastico 9 , huiu* ; likewise after a consonant
(fol. 170) no ten', in body of word (fol. 46) potuf 'set, pd 'sibili.
It should be noted that this form of s is found in MSS.
which use the same symbol for us. One must, therefore, be
on one's guard against errors arising out of this double use.
The possible ambiguity of the symbol may account for its
relatively limited use. 4
1 It occurs to be sure in Monte Cassino 123 saec.xex., but only in the nth-
century additions. The original scribe does not use it.
2 The MS. may be more recent. It shows a system of abbreviations which
is more typical of the end of the century. Yet script and style of interrogation-
sign speak for the first half of the century.
3 In this MS. ' also denotes us.
4 For instance, ei' may be et's and eius; nimi' may be nimts and nimius]
214 ABBREVIATIONS
It may be that the shortened form of the word post, which
is frequently used in liturgical books, was the means of intro-
ducing this form of s. In Beneventan MSS. post is often
abbreviated by an uncial s written above the p. It is also
abbreviated by the apostrophe. Many MSS. have the uncial
j suprascript at the end of words. 1 Instead of this s, scribes
began to use the shorter form found in the abbreviation of
post. Be that as it may, the uncial s is found in MSS. which
also use the apostrophe to denote s.' 2
I have found this symbol for s in nearly 100 MSS. written
wholly or in part by Beneventan scribes. 3 It doubtless occurs
in many other MSS. posterior to the nth century. As this
palaeographical feature is comparatively little known, to judge
from the fact that Wattenbach and Delisle had each met it in *
but a single MS., 4 I cite most of the Beneventan MSS. in
which I have found it. These are :
Bologna Univ. 2843 (San Salvatore 486) (Monte Cassino)
a. 1070 ; Cheltenham 3069 saec. xii; Escorial L III 19 saec. xii ;
Flor. Laurent. 51.10 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi ; Laurent. 66. 2 1
(Monte Cassino) saec. xi ex. ; Monte Cassino i saec. xi ; M. C.
Regesto No. 4; M. C. 20 saec. xi ; M.C. 47 a. 1159-73 ; M. C.
86 saec. xi ; M. C. 99 saec. xi ; M. C. 1 1 1 saec. xi ; M. C. 1 23
(in addit. saec. xi in.) ; M. C. 1 25 saec. xi ; M. C. 1 27 (part i)
saec. xi ex.; M. C. 127 (part ii) saec. xii (p. 541); M. C. 133 saec.
xi med. ; M. C. 179 saec. xi ; M. C. 191 (part i) saec. xi med. ;
M. C. 195 saec. xi ex. ; M. C. 205 saec. xi ; M. C. 21 7 saec. xi ;
M. C. 226 saec. xi in. (p. 1 73) ; M. C. 275 saec. xi ex. ; M. C. 292
leui' may be leuis and leutus, &c. The same symbol for s and us will be found
in MSS. Monte Cassino 125 and 205, Vatic, lat. 1349, 3549, 374 1, and Archivio
Vaticano Regesti Vat. i ; not to mention a great many others.
1 The list is a long one. I mention only Monte Cassino 5 a. 1011-22,
Monte Cassino 298 saec. xi, Flor. Laurent. 68. 2 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi.
2 To instance but a few cases: Monte Cassino 125 saec. xi, Flor. Laurent.
51. 10 saec. xi ex., Vatic, lat. 595 saec. xi ex., Archivio Vaticano Regesti Vat. i
saec. xi ex., Munich 4623 saec. xi/xii.
3 In some of the MSS. it occurs occasionally, in others very frequently.
4 See below, p. 215 sq.
ABBREVIATIONS 215
saec. xi ; M. C. 302 saec. xi ex. ; M. C. 303 c. a. 1019 (pp. 122,
1 29, &c.) ; M. C. 434 saec. xi ; M. C. 462 saec. xi med. ; M. C,
506 saec. xi (palimpsest); M. C. 543 saec. xi; M. C. 552 (part ii)
saec. xi (pp. 207 sqq.) ; M. C. 640 saec. xii/xiii ; M. C. 760 saec.
xi; Munich 4623 (Monte Cassino) a. 1098-1106; Naples VIAA3
saec. xi ex. ; Nap. VI F 2 saec. xi/xii ; Nap. VI G 3 1 saec. xi ex. ;
Nap. VIII B 3 saec. xi ; Nap. VIII B 4 saec. xi ; Oxford Bodl.
Douce 127 (Sora) saec. xi ex. ; Paris lat. 10308 (marginalia) saec.
xi ; Paris Nouv. Acq. lat. 1628 (foil. 19-26) saec. xi ; Salerno
Archiv. Capitol., Gospel of Luke, &c.,s.n.; Rome Vallicell. A 16
saec. xi ; Vail. B 24 (Subiaco) addit. post a. 1075 '> Vail. B 32
(Veroli) c. a. 1060 ; Vail. 32 saec. xi ; Vail. D 5 saec. xi ; Vail.
T. XIII (foil. 229-42) saec. xi ; Vail. T. XXII saec. xi/xii ; Vatic,
lat. 595 saec. xi ex. ; Vat. 1 202 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi ex. ; Vat.
1349 saec. xi ; Vat. 3227 (Monte Cassino) saec. xii in.; Vat.
3281 saec. xii in. ; Vat. 3340 saec. xi ; Vat. 3539 saec. xi ex. ;
Vat. 3741 saec. xi ex. ; Vat. 5735 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi post
.ned. ; Vat. Barb. 160 (IX 29) saec. xi. ; Vat. Barb. 631 (XIV 4)
(Monte Cassino) saec. xi ex. ; Vat. Barb. 2724 (XXXIV 41) saec.
xii in. ; Vat. Ottob. 1939 (Monte Cassino) saec. xi ex. ; Archi-
vio Vaticano Regesti Vat. i saec. xi ex. ; Rome Vittor. Eman.
2030 = Sessor. 81 saec. xii/xiii. 1
It will be noted that the majority of the examples are from
MSS. written in Monte Cassino.
II. This symbol is not limited to Beneventan MSS. R. Pou-
pardin 2 noted it in a document of Saint-Germain-des-Pr6s
dated September 3, 79O. 3 Attention to its use in a single
MS. was called by Wattenbach ; 4 also by fi. Chatelain in his
description of St. Gall 864 saec. xi. 5 Slight mention of it is
1 This form of s is used even in the abbreviation x = Christus. The apostrophe
can hardly be equivalent to us here since the oblique cases, Christ i, -o, -urn, are
denoted by x with suprascript /, o, m, that is, by the first and the last letter.
8 R. P(oupardin), Bibliotheque de fJ&cole des chartes, Ixviii (1907) 436.
3 Paris Archives Nationales (K 7, no. n 2 ).
4 Anhitung zur lat. Pal.*, pp. 70-1 : 'In einer Hs. saec, x/xi steht ' haufig
fur us, aber auch fur s : a0'=annos.'
6 Chatelain, PaUogr. des class, lat. i. 1 5 : description of plate LI V.
216 ABBREVIATIONS
made by M. Prou. 1 However, our chief source of information is
an article by Delisle reporting the observations of De Vries and
Traube. 2 As the majority of the thirteen MSS. cited by these
scholars were from the north of France, it seemed fair to con-
clude, as Delisle did, that it was especially at home there.
The supposition, however, will hardly seem tenable any longer
in view of the numerous Italian MSS. in which this curious
form of s is found. In the sixty odd Beneventan MSS. just
enumerated the symbol occurs both in the middle of the word
and at the end ; and it is most likely that it exists in many
other Beneventan MSS. The twenty odd non-Beneventan
MSS. with ' which have come to my notice 3 are for the most
part in the script of Rome and vicinity. Many of these MSS.
show unmistakable dependence upon Beneventan archetypes.
These facts go to show that this symbol flourished in the
scriptoria of southern and central Italy, particularly in Monte
Cassino. Till more facts are forthcoming, the home of the sign '
cannot be decided. It was most likely Italy. 4 I give a list of
Italian MSS. written in ordinary minuscule which employ this
symbol :
Bamberg B II 9 (chiefly after u, avaru' ipsiu') ; Bamb. M V 10 ;
Bologna Univ. 1 576 saec. xi (after vowels, consonants, and even
in the word) ; Cava 7 saec. xi/xii (part of the MS. is by a con-
temporaneous Beneventan scribe) ; Monte Cassino 3 (the draft
of a letter from Abbot Desiderius) ; M. C. 191 (part ii) pp. 129-
41 (the rest of the MS. is in Beneventan writing); Rome
Basilicanus F 1 1 (Roman school) ; Rome Lateran. 80 (Roman
1 Manuel de paUographie (2nd ed., p. 67) cited by Poupardin.
2 Delisle (De Vries-Traube), ' De 1'emploi du signe abreViatif ' a la fin des
mots/ in Bibl. de tEcole des chartes, Ixvii (1906) 591 sq. Reference to this is
made by Steffens (Lat. Pal., 2nd ed., p. xxxix) who further cites the presence
of this symbol in a Miinchenwiler MS.
3 Since writing this I have met with a number of other instances in Italian
MSS. It is hardly necessary to give a list of them.
4 This hypothesis gains in probability from the fact that the documents of
Ravenna of the nth century, as Signer Buzzi kindly informs me, make frequent
use of this form of s. I have also noted it in a Florentine document of 1076.
Cf. Collezione Fiorentina^ pi. 21.
ABBREVIATIONS 217
school) t ; Rome Vallicell. B 24 (Roman school) J ; Vail. E 16
(Roman school) t; Vatic, lat. 378 (Roman school) j; Vat. 1406;
Vat. 325I 1 ; Vat. 3764 (Roman school)!; Vat. 3833 (Roman
school) a. 1099-1118; Vat. 4418; Vat. 4920; Vat. 6808 (Ro
man school); Vat. Barb. 646 (XIV 19) (Roman school) J ; Rome
Vittor. Eman. 1364 = Sessor. 45 a. 1002-35 ; Vitt. Em. 1568 =
Sessor. 3 1 ; Subiaco Archiv. di S. Scholastica, Regestum Sub-
lacense (Roman school) a. 1068-1120.
TUR
No other Beneventan abbreviation has had so interesting
a development as tur. During the five centuries in which the
script was used, the tiir- symbol went through a variety of
forms and certain distinct phases. If we can determine the
order of those phases and the approximate duration of each,
we shall have obtained an important criterion for dating Bene-
ventan MSS. Such a determination, which is possible by
means of dated MSS., is here attempted. I give the results
first ; the evidence follows.
1. The earliest method of denoting tur was by a sinuous
vertical line, or by a horizontal line, both of which are
the general abbreviation-strokes of the period : cr, cr.
2. The second method was by a curved, comma-like stroke
j ust touching the cross-stroke of the / : cr 1 .
3. The last method was by a symbol resembling arabic
number 2, placed above the t so that the base of the 2
was parallel with the top of the / : or. In some MSS. the
2 -sign is placed obliquely over the /: cr.
i. The first method (cr, cr) is found in MSS. dating from
the 8th to the first half of the loth century.
t Either the original of the MS. was in Beneventan or the scriptorium which
produced it had close relations with South Italian centres. This I conclude
from the presence of the typically Beneventan interrogation-sign, cf. pp. 258 sqq.
J Some additions are in Beneventan.
1 Knowledge of this MS. I owe to the courtesy of Mgr. Vattasso, who considers
it of North Italian origin; cf. Studt Medievali, i. 123, notes to lines 13 and 19.
218 ABBREVIATIONS
2. The second method (cr 1 ) is found in MSS. of the second
half of the loth and first third of the i ith century.
3. All later MSS. show the third method (or).
The evidence supporting the above statements is given in
the following order : first, the usage of the dated MSS. ; then
that of the undated; thirdly, of transition MSS.; fourthly, of
corrections and additions ; and lastly, of certain documents.
(a) Dated MSS. An examination of several hundred Bene-
ventan MSS. shows that, as regards the order in which the
various /^r-symbols came into use, the evidence of the dated
MSS. is practically consistent. The latest form was cr. All
the dated MSS. reproduced in Scriptura Beneventana and those
not included there prove that. That the form which preceded cr
was cr 1 is attested by the dated MSS. Monte Cassino 269 ante
a. 949 and Monte Cassino 230 a. 969-87. The eight dated
MSS. between the end of the 8th and the middle of the loth
century 1 all show either / with the horizontal or t with the
vertical sinuous stroke or similar forms, but neither a*- nor cr.
(d) Undated MSS. If the usage noted in the dated MSS.
was not due to accident, it should be confirmed by the usage
of the MSS. which can only be approximately dated. And
as a matter of fact, the evidence of the undated MSS., as
illustrated by our plates, corroborates that of the dated. In
over 200 MSS. which, judged by their script, belong to the
period between 1050 and 1300, tur is always abbreviated by
cr and never by or 1 or 3:. In 50 MSS. which antedate the
middle of the loth century many forms are used, but of- never
occurs. On the other hand cr 1 is the form found in MSS.
which palaeographers would agree in placing somewhere
between 950 and 1050. The order, then, of the three stages
seems fairly clear. But the matter is placed beyond question
by a consideration of the transition MSS. and corrections.
(c) Transition MSS. If one form of tur gave way to the
next in the order just established, it follows that MSS. con-
1 See Script. Benev., plates 9, 10, 13, 14, 24, 33, 39, 40.
ABBREVIATIONS 219
taining both the losing and the winning form ought to belong
to a period between that marking the exclusive use of the
one and that marking the exclusive use of the other. This is
actually the case. We find cr 1 and cr used by contemporaneous
scribes in the dated MSS. Vatic. Pal. lat. 909 1 a. 9 7 7- 102 6,
Monte Cassino i48 2 a. 1010, Monte Cassino 303 3 circa a. 1019,
Monte Cassino 5 4 a. 1011-22, and Monte Cassino 57 5 and 132,
both ante a. 1023. According to the evidence of the dated
MSS. this is precisely the period between the exclusive use of a 2
and the exclusive use of cr. I give some details :
Vatic. Pal. lat. 909. tur rarely abbreviated, cr 1 is found on
foil. 347, 347 v , 350 V . And cr (with 2-sign placed obliquely)
occurs on foil. i6o v , 257. A somewhat later corrector uses
cr regularly.
Monte Cassino 148. The roundish hand used the form cr 1
(foil. 108, 236, 239, 250-1, 263, &c.). The more calligraphic
hand used cr (foil. 2 V , i7 v , 25, 231, &c.).
Monte Cassino 303. The first hand writes to p. 6, col. i , using
cr*. On p. i, col. i, a or slipped in. The following hands use
cr. On p. 164, col. i (middle), a new hand begins which con-
sistently employs the cr 2 . On p. 21, col. 2, a cr 1 was used by
a scribe who commonly uses the cr. It is the period of tran-
sition and indecision.
Monte Cassino 5. Pp. i-viii have cr* ; the rest of the MS.
cr ; both parts contemporaneous.
Monte Cassino 57. Between pp. 1-90 I found the cr 1 form.
The cr is found between pp. 159-92, 243-319. The last hand
uses the cr 1 . Both forms are to be seen on pp. 90, 100, 192,
and 319. Plainly a transition MS.
1 Cf. Traube, Perrona Scottorum, p. 472.
2 Cf. Caravita, I codiciele artia Monte Cassino, i. 178 ; Bibliotheca Casinensis,
ill 306.
3 Cf. Gattula, Historia abbatiae Cassinenst's, i. 81 ; Bibl. Casin. v. 77.
4 Caravita, op. cit., p. 178; Bibl. Castn. i. 109.
8 Cf. Caravita, op. cit., p. 180 ; Bibl. Castn. ii. 124.
6 Caravita, op. cit., p. 1 80 ; Bibl. Casin. iii. 1 90 sqq. and Amelli, Miniature
sacre e profane dell' anno 1023 (Monte Cassino 1896).
220 ABBREVIATIONS
Monte Cassino 132. Both forms occur on pp. 50, 51, 144,
145. But cr 1 is the rule.
To test this evidence let us examine the following undated
MSS. :
Flor. Laurent. 66. i l saec. xi in. Many hands wrote this MS.
The scribe who uses t for in employs cr*. Others use cr.
The MS. has unmistakable ear-marks of the Codices Theo-
baldini (1022-35) and is doubtless of Cassinese origin.
Monte Cassino 102 2 saec. xi in. The hand between pp. 286-
332 used a 2 -, the hand preceding used cr (the 2-sign at an angle).
This form also occurs on pp. 68, no, 283. On p. 282 cr 1 is
used by the same hand that on p. 283 wrote or.
Monte Cassino 103 3 saec. xi in. A number of scribes
worked on the MS. The form cr 1 is found on pp. 40, 1 78, 184,
267, et passim. The hand beginning with p. 333 used cr.
Monte Cassino 1 24 4 saec. xi in. As a rule cr is used. Cf.
pp. 116, 163, 188, 192, 287, 344, 431, et passim. The hand
between p. 418, col. 2, and p. 425 writes cr 1 . Both forms occur
on pp. 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, &c.
Monte Cassino 295 5 saec. x/xi. One scribe (pp. 98-1 1 2) used
cr, the others cr 2 . The careful hand on pp. 65-92 used cr 1 . But
on p. 69 both forms occur.
Monte Cassino 297 (part ii) 6 pp. 137-264 saec. xi in. The
scribe begins with cr 1 but soon goes over to cr.
Monte Cassino 324 7 saec. xi in. The hands between pp. 1-74
1 Bandini (Catal. Codd. Lat. Bibliothecae Laurentianae, ii. 782) dates it saec. xi.
2 Caravita (op. cit. i. 179) includes the MS. among those written under the
abbots of the beginning of the nth century, precisely where it belongs. Bibl.
Casin. (ii. 418) puts it saec. xi.
3 Caravita (op. cit., p. 167) dates it saec. xi, the Bibl. Casin. (ii. 430)
saec. x/xi.
4 Caravita (op. cit., p. 180) and Bibl. Casin. (iii. 117) date the MS. saec. xiin.
I do not think it older than the period of Theobald (1022-35).
5 Caravita (op. cit., p. 102) puts it in the list of Capuan MSS. The Bibl.
Casin. (v. 63) dates it saec. x in. The occasional use of the final interrogation-
sign (pp. 212, 213, 214) incline me to place it rather saec. xi in. than saec. x ex.
6 Bibl. Casin. (v. 70) dates this part of the MS. saec. x ex.
7 Caravita (op. cit., p. 167) dates the MS. saec. xi.
ABBREVIATIONS 221
used or. However, on p. 16 a 2 - slipped in. Between pp. 75-
251 the original scribes used cr 1 , the rewritten leaves have or.
Monte Cassino 349 l saec. xi in. The hand between pp. 70-
86 used or 1 , the other scribes have cr.
Monte Cassino 372 * saec. xi in. Between pp. 1-148 cr 1 was
used ; between pp. 149-217, cr. The rest of the MS. has the
form cr 1 .
Monte Cassino 552 3 (part i) saec. xi in. The scribe of pp. i-
160 used cr 1 as a rule. On p. 122, besides six instances of
cr 1 , there are three cases of cr. He continues to use the cr 1 to
p. 1 60. There he breaks off in the middle of a sentence, and
is followed by a contemporaneous, more expert hand which
finishes the book. This hand uses cr only. 4
That these MSS. are transition ones is sufficiently clear from
the indecision evinced by scribes using both forms. It is,
furthermore, hardly a mere coincidence that ten MSS. which
belong by common consent to about the end of the loth or
the beginning of the nth century that is, to the period
between the exclusive use of cr 1 and the exclusive use of cr
have both these forms. Their simultaneous use and the
visible struggle between them can have meaning only in tran-
sition MSS. We understand why cr won the field when we
presently meet cr 1 for tus. That this new value of cr 1 is found, as
a rule, in MSS. written after the beginning of the i ith century
is precisely in conformity with what has been said of the period
marking the use of cr 1 for tur.
I have noted only two MSS. which abbreviate tur by both
cc and a 2 . Flor. Laurent. Ashburnh. 55 belongs without the
least doubt to the second half of the roth century. 5 It furnishes
1 Caravita' s date is saec. xi (op. cit., p. 167); the same date in BibL Casin.
(v, pars i, p. 149).
2 Caravita (op. cit., p. 112) puts the MS. in the loth century.
3 Caravita (op. cit., p. 179) classes this MS. with those written under the
abbots of the beginning of the nth century. I should say under Theobald
(1022-35).
4 To the MSS. cited above may be added Monte Cassino 23 and 100.
5 The more recent date given by Paoli can hardly be right. See / codici
222 ABBREVIATIONS
an example of the transition from <r to a 2 -. In Monte Cassino
38 we also find these two forms, but the MS. is hardly a transi-
tion one, unless indeed its writing, which is like that of Monte
Cassino 42 saec. xiin., is no criterion of its age. It seems to
belong to saec. xi in., and the occasional use of 5- may be due
to slavish copying from an exemplar which thus abbreviated tur.
Of the MSS. with the two forms - and cr I shall speak below.
(d) The evidence of corrections and additions. Monte
Cassino 187 saec. ix ex. 1 The nth-century corrector who
expanded in the margin obsolete or ambiguous abbreviations
(cf. Script. Benev., pi. 21) wrote cr for tur. On pp. no and
147 we can see original 5- transformed by him into cr.
Monte Cassino 439 saec. x. 2 The different scribes of the
MS. wrote ^ (the right end of the stroke occasionally curves
up). The addition on p. 144, to judge from script and ink, is
plainly posterior. It has only a 1 and not ^.
Monte Cassino 78 saec. x. 3 On p. n8an nth-century cor-
rector changed original or to cr.
Vatic, lat. 3317 saec. x ex. has regularly cr*. On fol. 67 a cor-
rector changed cr 1 to cr.
Vatic. Pal. lat. 909 a. 977-1026 (see above, p. 219). The
posterior additions (passim), which are of the nth century
(first half), have regularly cr. The text has cr 1 and cr.
Monte Cassino 57 ante a. 1023 (see above, p. 219). Written
by order of Abbot Theobald (1022-35). The MS. has both
cr 1 and cr. On p. 8 (et passim) we can plainly see cr 1 trans-
formed to cr.
Ashburnhamiani della R. Biblioteca Medic eo-Laurenziana di Firenze, p. 17
(= Minister della Pubblica Istruzione. Indici e Cataloghi viii, vol. i, Roma
1887-96) and Delisle, Notice sur les mss. du fonds Libri conserves a la
Laurentienne de Florence, p. 32.
1 Caravita (op. cit., p. 42) dates it saec. ix ; Bibl. Casin. (iv. 75) has the
same date.
2 Caravita (op. cit., p. 180) gives no reason for his date (saec. xi in.), which
is untenable. Cf. Amelli, Spicileg. Casin. i (1893) pp. Ixxxv, 363 ; facs., pi. 5.
8 Caravita (op. cit., p. 146) has the same date. The Bibl. Casin. (ii. 294)
dates it saec. xi in., ' tempore Theobaldi ab.', which can hardly be right.
ABBREVIATIONS 223
Monte Cassino 303 circa a. 1019 (see above, p. 219). Also
Theobaldan. Both or 1 and cr are used. From p. 1 64, col. i , to
end cr 1 is the regular form. The addition on p. 224 has cr.
Monte Cassino 25 (part i) saec. xi in. 1 Original a 2 is often
changed to cr, as may easily be seen on pp. 20 and 62.
Monte Cassino 324 saec. xi in. 2 Between pp. 1-74 of was
used. Between pp. 75-251 we regularly find a 2 . In this
part a corrector often erased the end of the stroke over or and'
made cr out of the original cr 1 . A good example is seen
on p. 91. It need hardly be stated that the form cancelled or
erased by a corrector was the form that had grown obsolete ;
and that the additions by later hands showed forms which
naturally corresponded to the usage of the time.
(e) The evidence of documents. Though of importance this
evidence must be used with caution, as the exigencies of
cursive and of calligraphic writing are different. Moreover,
I am aware that my data for the cursive are by no means
exhaustive. As far as my observation goes, notaries of the
9th and loth centuries seem to avoid the abbreviation of tur?
I find it still written out in a Capuan document of 993,* and in
a Bari document as late as iO2i, 6 in which cr = ter. The form
cr for tur, which we rarely find in MSS. after 950, is still to
be seen in nth-century documents a proof of the conservatism
of notarial writing. I noted it in two documents from Benevento,
1 The same date in Caravita (op. cit., p. 179) and Bibl. Casin. i. 260.
2 Caravita (op. cit., p. 167) dates it saec. xi.
3 Cf. Cava, doc. a. 791 (facs. Silvestre, PaUog. univers. iii, pi. 137); Diploma
Grimoaldi a. 810 (facs. Piscicelli Taeggi, Paleog. artistica di Montecassino,
pi. 34 and Script. Benev.,^\. 6); Cava, doc. a. 817 (facs. Silvestre, ibid, iii, pi. i4o a );
Benevento, Capitol, doc. a. 839, doc. a. 840 (facs. Cod. Diplom. Cavens., vol. i,
charta 19); Cava, doc. a. 840-51 (facs. Silvestre, ibid, iii, pi. i4O b ); Benevento,
S. Filippo Neri, doc. 6, vol. xii, a. 872, doc. a. 899 (facs. Cod. Diplom. Cavens.,
vol. i, charta in); Benevento, Capitol, doc. 2, a. 949, doc. a. 952 (facs. Cod.
Diplom. Barese, vol. i, pi. i); Monte Cassino, capsule 14, no. 27 = Capuan
doc. a. 961; doc. a. 962 (facs. Cod. Diplom. Barese, vol. i, pi. 2=doc. no. 4).
4 Monte Cassino, capsule 14, no. 18.
r> Facs. in Cod. Diplom. Bar esc, vol. i, pi. 3= doc. no. 10
224 ABBREVIATIONS
of the years 1015 and IO23, 1 and in one from Avellino near
Naples, of the year IO54. 2 In a document of 1039 from
Benevento, 3 however, tur and ter are perfectly distinguished :
cr = ter, or = tur. This is the rule in later documents. The
documents tend to confirm our order in its broad outlines.
So much for the evidence.
From what has been said we should not expect to find
MSS. showing the contemporaneous use of cc and cr. Yet at
least three such MSS. exist. 4 Monte Cassino 97 saec. xin.
has the form cc between pp. 22-170. Elsewhere cr is found,
sometimes on the same page with cr. Monte Cassino 332
(part i) saec. ix/x has cr in the text, the somewhat posterior
glosses have cc. Glasgow Univ. Hunter. MS. V 3. 2 saec. x in.
has cc in most cases, but cr was also used. The usage in these
three MSS. cannot counterbalance the evidence of several
hundred. The apparent anomaly can be accounted for in
this way : consciously or unconsciously the form of the
original, which had cr, was imitated. There is nothing strange
about this. When we consider that during the 9th century,
and certainly after it, most MSS. written north of the Bene-
ventan zone I except the Insular MSS. used the 2-sign
over t to express tur, and that such MSS. must often have
been the exemplars from which the Beneventan scribes
copied, it does not seem improbable either that a scribe
through carelessness let the foreign form slip in, or that con-
scious though premature attempts were made to introduce
it, in order to make the distinction found in the exemplars
between abbreviated tur and ter. This would also explain
the consistent use of cr in Munich 33 7 saec. x, my only other
exception. The important facts remain : the form cr did
1 Benevento, S. Filippo Neri, documents 8 and 9 of vol. xii.
2 Facs. in Cod. Diplom. Cavens., vol. vii, pi. 2=charta 1190.
3 Benevento, S. Filippo Neri, doc. 14 of vol. xii.
4 It is possible that others may exist, yet it is not likely that their number
will be so large as to raise them above being exceptions. My list contains,
I believe, very nearly all the old Beneventan MSS. extant, and later ones do not
come into consideration.
ABBREVIATIONS 225
not come into general use before the year 1030, and
the form or remained in constant use till the middle
of the loth century 1 ; and cr* is found in MSS. which
fall between these two periods. MSS. with both or
and cr, or the presence of or in an i ith-century MS., or
vice versa the presence of cr in a 9th- or loth-century
MS., can only be regarded as exceptions.
It is interesting to observe that the abbreviation of mur by
means of m antedates the form cr for tur. In Monte Cassino
446 saec. x/xi tur is expressed by cr 1 but mur by m. This is
also the case in Monte Cassino 132 ante a. 1023.
The 2-sign with t did not always signify omitted ur in
Beneventan MSS. 2 Curiously enough, it represents er in
Paris lat. 335 (part ii) saec. x and in some Beneventan docu-
ments. 3
If it be objected that most of our evidence is based upon
Monte Cassino MSS., it should be remembered that the great
majority of Beneventan MSS. do actually come from Monte
Cassino. But this fact does not mean that the results ob-
tained reflect merely the local usage of Monte Cassino. The
products of the other South Italian schools as well as the
documents examined furnish evidence in no way at variance
with the Cassinese.
The history of the /^-abbreviation in Beneventan MSS.
is as simple as it is instructive. It shows gradual evolution
from the less to the more differentiated form and readjustment
of values to suit new conditions. At first the same form
1 Of course the form did not die out at once. The MSS. Monte Cassino 77
and 402 belong to the end of the loth century, yet they show the first phase of
the /Mr-abbreviation. These MSS. may have been written by old and expert
scribes who had continued to use the form they had learnt in the first half of
the century.
2 For itsjuse as a general abbreviation-sign cf. p. 165.
8 Cf. facs. of Charta DCXLIX (a. 1012) in Cod. Diplom. Cavens., vol. iv;
Benevento, S. Filippo Neri, doc. 2, vol. xxxvi (a. 1016); and the document from
Vietri near Potenza of the year 1019 now in Cava, Archivio della badia, area vi,
no. 92, facs. in Archivio Pal. Ital. vii, pi. 21.
1443 Q
226 ABBREVIATIONS
represented tur and ter. To avoid possible confusion tur
began to be abbreviated by cr 1 . 1 For at least two generations
scribes used this form. Then the competition began between
a* and cr, the form which was used almost everywhere out-
side the Beneventan zone, 2 and had in fact been tentatively
admitted and rejected at the end of the 9th century. 3 The
field was completely won by cr before the year 1030. When
tur could be abbreviated only by means of cr, the old tur-
form, cr 1 , began to signify tus? as in most Continental MSS.
The history of tur admirably illustrates the slowness with
which Beneventan schools progressed. In the loth century
they introduced the form a* which had elsewhere been dis-
carded more than a century before. The form finally adopted
in the nth century, cr, had been used in Caroline MSS. as early
as the 9th century. 5
1 The form often found in early Continental minuscule MSS. and regularly
in Irish MSS.
2 Excepting Insular and Spanish schools.
3 Cf. the four MSS. mentioned above, p. 224.
4 To be sure this abbreviation of tus occurs in a few MSS. which antedate
the nth century (see above, p. 197), but they are clearly the exceptions. The
frequent use of cr* for tus I first noted in the MSS. Vatic, lat. 4948 saec. xiin.
and Vatic, lat. 1349 saec. xi med.
5 Cf. Steffens, Lat. Pal., 2nd ed., pi. 46, facs. of the Zurich Alcuin-bible.
CHAPTER IX
PUNCTUATION 1
IN the history of Beneventan punctuation two epochs are
to be noted. The first comprises the MSS. of the 8th and 9th
centuries, the second the later MSS.
I. MSS. of the first epoch show no uniform system of
punctuation, and at times it is impossible to discern any system
whatever. Any formulation of the scribal usage must, there-
fore, take certain reservations for granted. Without, however,
adding to the confusion by frequent qualification and enumera-
tion of exceptions, attention may be called to the following
facts.
The most common method of punctuation during the first
epoch is the mere point (.), used alike for the large and the
small pause. It sometimes resembles our comma in form.
When the point is equivalent to a period the following letter
is usually a capital ; but there are also cases where the period is
followed by a small letter and, conversely, where a capital letter
occasionally follows a pause which is less than a period.
Next in frequency after the mere point for the period is the
combination of point followed by comma (.,) for the main pause
and the mere point for the lesser pauses. This punctuation
is found in MSS. which also employ the simple point as
period.
In a few MSS. we find the point above the comma (;) for the
main pause and the mere point for the briefer pauses. In
some other MSS. again, an angular sort of comma (7), not
1 On punctuation in general see Nouveau Trait^ iii. 464 sqq. and Watten-
bach, Anleitung*, pp. 89 sqq. Our text-books base chiefly upon Wattenbach.
Q 2
228 PUNCTUATION
unlike arable number 7, is used for the period. However, in
a few of these MSS. the period is denoted by the mere point
as well as by the 7-like comma.
Here it is important to note that the presence, in MSS. of
this epoch, of the punctuation which became typical of the
developed script (% > /), including the characteristic sign of
interrogation (see below, p. 239), is invariably due to additions
by later correctors.
II. Toward the end of the 9th century, apparently as the
result of a conscious reform, a new system was introduced
which rapidly came into general use. Although a foreign
importation (since it is used a full century earlier in MSS.
written in Charlemagne's court) l it remained in steady use
among Beneventan scribes for fully four centuries, that is, from
the end of the 9th to the end of the 1 3th century. Owing to
its constant use in Beneventan centres and its gradual disuse
elsewhere, this system became a characteristic of the South
Italian minuscule. The history of this punctuation recalls the
history of certain letters and ligatures (a, /, z-longa, and q)
which, though non- Beneventan in origin, eventually became
Beneventan features by dint of their long and constant employ-
ment in South Italian schools after their abandonment by the
centres which first adopted them.
The signs comprised in this system, 2 with their ancient
designations 3 and approximate modern equivalents, are as
follows :
V or .,. or = distinctio finalis = finitiva = period.
. = distinctio media = constans = colon or semicolon.
/ or / = subdistinctio = suspensiva = comma. 4
1 e.g. in the lectionary written by Godesscalc in 781 (facs. in SteffenSjZfl/./^/. 2 ,
pi. 45), and in one part of the Treves Ada-Gospels.
3 On the interrogation-sign which formed part of the Beneventan system see
the full discussion given below, pp. 236 sqq.
5 Wattenbach, op. cit., pp. 89, 91.
4 The Latin grammarians merely translate the Greek terms (Wattenbach,
p. 89). The method described by Isidore (Etymol. i. 20) is practicable only in
PUNCTUATION 229
A clearer idea of the practice of Beneventan scribes may
be obtained from an examination of a few representative
passages which I subjoin. They are taken from both liturgical
and non-liturgical MSS. that is, from books used for chanting
and reading aloud as well as from MSS. used for private
perusal. Naturally no attempt can be made to reproduce the
many varieties of these signs.
1. Monte Cassino 175 ^915-934, Paulus Diac., Expos. Reg. S.
Benedicti. 1
This MS., written by laquinto for Abbot Johannes of
Capua, doubtless gives us the best penmanship and punctua-
tion of the time.
p. 255. In conuentu tamen omnino breuietur oratio. et facto signo
a priore / omnes pariter surgant y
2. Vatic. Pal. lat. 909 a. 977-1026, Vegetius, Epitoma rei mili-
taris. 2
fol. 338. Ordinaturus acie / tria debet ante prospicere. solem. pul-
uerem. uentum. Nam sol ante faciem / eripit uisum. uentus contrarius
/ tua inflectit ac deprimit. hostium / adiuuat tela. &c.
the case of square and rustic capitals and uncials, for the distinction of high,
low, and middle points would hardly be noticeable in minuscule scripts. The
systems described by later mediaeval writers correspond more closely to the
usage found in our MSS. Thus Thomas Capuanus (1-1243) writes: 'tres
distinctiones considerantur existere, quarum prima comma, secunda colon, tertia
periodos appellatur. Comma est punctum cum virgula superius ducta, scil. quum
adhuc sensus suspensus remanet auditori. Colon est punctum planum cum
animus auditoris necesse non habet aliud expectare, et tamen aliquid addi
potest. Periodos est punctum cum virgula inferius ducta, quum animus
auditoris amplius non expectat nee amplius querit discere intentionem pro-
ponentis/ &c. (ed. Hahn in Collectio monumentorum veterum et recentium
(Braunschweig 1724) i. 293). The same system is taught by a Roman notary
of the 1 3th century, cited by Ch. Thurot in his excellent treatise entitled ' Notices
et extraits de divers manuscrits latins pour servir a 1'histoire des doctrines
grammaticales au moyen Sge ', published in Notices et extraits des mss. de la
Biblioiheque Imp^riale^ xxii (1868) part 2, p. 414.
1 Script. Benev., pi. 39. 2 ibid., pi. 55.
2 3 o PUNCTUATION
The point performs a threefold duty here : as colon after
prospicere, as comma after so lent, puluerem, &c., and as period
after uentum. Wherever it is used, however, the voice goes
down, there being no suspense, no sense as of something
unfinished.
3. Monte Cassino 148 a. 1010, Vitae Sanctorum. 1
A splendid volume written in part by the scribe Martinus.
fol. iao v . Nocturno scilicet tempore ./ angelice uoces in crypta
audiebantur / et psalmodie ymni dicantium. tantusque splendor illam
illustrabat ./ ut nullus ibi auderet nocturne tempore accedere y
4. Vatic, lat. 1202 a. 1058-87, Vita S. Benedicti, &c. 2
A liturgical MS. of rare beauty and perfection, written in
Monte Cassino for Abbot Desiderius.
for. Ivi. Cumque eos uenerabilis pater contristatos cerneret / eorum
pusillanimitatem studuit modesta increpatione corrigere. et rursum
promissione subleuare / dicens. Quare de panis inopia uester animus
contristatur /? Hodie quidem minus est / sed die crastina abundanter
habebitis y _
After subleuare we have the simple oblique stroke, which
indicates a smaller pause than does the stroke with the point
below.
5. Vatic, lat. 3973 post a. 1 1 78, Romualdus Salern., Chronicon,
&c. 3
Ideo dicitur uaticanum / quia uates id est sacerdotes / canebant ibi
sua officia / ante templum apillonis . et idcirco / tota ilia pars ecclesie
sancti petri ./ uaticanum uocatur.
6. Cavai9 a. 1280, Evangeliarium. 4
Et zacharias turbatus est uidens / et timor irruit super eum y Ait
autem ad ilium angelus y Ne timeas zacharia. quoniam exaudita est
1 Script. Benev.) pi. 57. 2 ibid., plates 70-1.
3 ibid., pi. 90. 4 ibid., pi. 98.
PUNCTUATION 231
deprecatio tua. et uxor tua helisabeth pariet tibi filium / et uocabis
nomen eius iohannem y
The punctuation of this sentence differs from that of the
preceding examples. We should have expected a mere point
after uidens, angelus,
7. Cava 24 a. 1295, Vitae Patrum Cavensium. 1
Quia item noua scribendi tempora contempni sclent, fidem dictorum
relatoribus / rion scriptis lector ascribat / quia et si isto tempore scri-
bimus / ea que ab antiquis monasterii senibus sunt nobis dicta narra-
mus y
It will be seen from the above examples that it is impossible
to give the exact values of the mediaeval points in terms of
modern punctuation. The reason for this is that the two
systems are different in principle. Our modern system is
chiefly concerned with marking logical pauses. The ancient
system was also concerned with indicating inflexion of the voice,
so that a person reading aloud could see where the voice was to
be raised and where it was to be allowed to drop. Helps of this
nature were, of course, especially important in the case of litur-
gical books. 2 And the introduction of systematic punctuation
in France 3 as well as in Italy doubtless arose from the desire
1 Script. Benev., pi. 99.
2 This is clearly seen from the following verses of Alcuin in which the
question of punctuation is treated entirely from the point of view of its im-
portance to the lector in ecclesia :
' Per cola distinguant proprios et commata sensus,
Et punctos ponant ordine quosque suo,
Ne vel falsa legat, taceat vel forte repente
Ante pios fratres lector in ecclesia.'
Cf. Mon. Germ. Hist. Poetae Latini Aevi Carolini, i. 320, carmen xciv, ed.
Diimmler.
3 The emperor Charlemagne and the English scholar Alcuin were instrumental
in bringing this about. See Alcuin's letter to the emperor, written in 799, in
which he complains of the neglect of punctuation and begs the emperor to
intercede : ' Punctorum vero distinctiones vel subdistinctiones licet ornatum
faciant pulcherrimum in sententiis, tamen usus illorum propter rusticitatem pene
recessit a scriptoribus. Sed sicut totius sapientiae decus et salutaris eruditionis
232 PUNCTUATION
to facilitate correct reading at divine service and in the
refectory. 1
THE TWO POINTS AND COMMA. The comma surmounted by
two points (%*) and the comma placed between two points (.,.) -
the latter is only a variation of the former, and both were
simultaneously used after the end of the Qth century stand
quite regularly in Beneventan MSS. for the final pause. Even
in MSS. which use the point for the period the group of two
points and comma is found at the end of larger sections. It is
true that the period is usually indicated by means of the
comma surmounted by two points, yet the mere point may be
found serving the same purpose in a great number of MSS.,
even in those of the best period (saec. xi ex.). An excellent
illustration of the latitude allowed to scribes in this matter is
furnished by Vatic. Borgian. lat. 2 1 1 , a liturgical MS. written at
Monte Cassino between 1094 an d no5. 2 In this book the
period is indicated in three ways. As a rule we have (y), but
from fol. 37 V on we usually meet with (.,.), and from fol. 44
we have () for the period. This diversity may be due to
three different scribes collaborating on the MS. The script is
uniform and regular throughout the MS., so that we may
suppose that each of the three methods of indicating the period
was correct.
Even for one and the same sign a variety of forms existed
side by side. For instance, the comma surmounted by two
points had various positions with respect to them during the
same epoch. But these variations must not be confused with
ornatus per vestrae nobilitatis industriam renovari incipit, ita et horum usus in
manibus scribentium redintegrandus esse optime videtur ' (Mon. Germ. Hist. Epp.
iv, 285, ep. 172, ed. Diimmler).
1 The great interest of this subject may be seen from Hildemar's letter, of
the year 831, to Urso, Bishop of Benevento (Mon. Germ. Hist. Epp. v. 320 and
Migne, Pair. Lat. 106, col. 395) and from his long lecture on reading and
punctuation interpolated in Paul the Deacon's commentary on St. Benedict's
Rule (see below, p. 256, n. 2).
3 Script. Benev., pi. 77.
PUNCTUATION 233
the genuine changes due to gradual development and modifi-
cation in the whole character of the script. These modifica-
tions which correspond to those undergone by the letters
it is impossible to overlook. They are as trustworthy criteria
for dating as the letters themselves. In MSS. of the loth
century the comma in the sign (V) is made by a somewhat
freely drawn sinuous flourish more or less long. During the
best period (saec. xi ex.) the comma is very even and ends
in a hair-line drawn to the left. In MSS. of the I3th cen-
tury the whole sign is curiously debased. The two points
are joined so as to form a sort of zigzag line, and the
comma, placed between or below them, often merges with
them (T) (T).
THE POINT (.). The main function of the point seems to be
to mark a pause which allows the voice to descend. We have
seen that it is often used for the period. Where the period
is otherwise marked the mere point will often be seen at the
end of any portion of a sentence which in itself makes com-
plete sense and thus permits the voice to fall. Thus we
frequently find it after the verb and before et, that is, between
the two parts of a compound sentence. It is employed as we
employ the colon (cf. above, example 2, after prospicere).
When a number of objects are named, the point is usually
employed to separate the things enumerated (cf. example 2).
The point cannot be said to have a definite position. At
times it is on the line, more often, however, it is in the middle
space. Its form is rather roundish in MSS. of the loth
century. In later MSS. it is usually diamond-shaped.
THE POINT AND HOOK (/). The point surmounted by the
oblique line (the line does not always have the hook at the
bottom) l is chiefly used after parts of the sentence incomplete
in themselves, which end with the voice somewhat raised, thus
1 This is usually the case in MSS. written after the second half of the nth
century.
234 PUNCTUATION
indicating the suspense in the sense and the unfinished char-
acter of the sentence. It is the sign used between the subordi-
nate and main clauses of a complex sentence. We regularly
find it after the participial construction, e. g. his ita peractis /
ecclesia, &c. (Vatic, lat. 5007) ; Fessis nimium Romanis / nee
ualentibus moenia tueri / Totila a porta ingressus est
(Vatic. Pal. lat. 909).
It is used likewise after relative, conditional, and other sub-
ordinate clauses, e.g. Quando enim ista omnia sunt / uinum
accipiant (Vienna 68) ; Si fuerit ligatum corpus uinculis / re-
soluatur (Monte Cassino 402) ; Tantusque splendor illam illu-
strabat / ut nullus ibi, &c. (Monte Cassino 148). It is the sign
commonly placed after the verb of saying, introducing a quota-
tion, e. g. Vrbamis ad eadem respondens ait / una nocte, &c.
(Vatic, lat. 5845). The point and hook, like the preceding
signs, is differently made in different periods of the script. In
connexion with it mention should be made of the simple,
oblique line (/) without the point underneath. After the i i.th
century it is often employed along with the point and hook.
As a pause it is weaker than the latter, e. g. Pater noster qui
es in celis / sanctificetur nomen tuum (Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211); et
ostendo uobis / in quo loco oratorium / in quo loco refectorium,
&c. (Vatic, lat. 1202).
Quotation Marks
As far as my observation goes, quotation marks are employed
only in the case of citations from Scripture. 1 Small j-like
1 Perhaps a more careful examination of Beneventan MSS. with regard to
this point will show that some non-scriptural passages are also thus marked.
But I believe that such cases will form the exception to the rule. In the 6th-
century papyrus MS. of Hilary (Vienna 2160*), which comes from South Italy,
we find the diple (>) used to mark Scripture citations (see R. Beer, Man. Pal.
Vindobon. i. 6 and pi. i ; Script. Benev., pi. i. The diple is mistaken for a d in
Pal. Soc. ii, pi. 31, 1. 26). Of this sign Isidore (Etymol. i. 21. 13, ed. Lindsay)
says : ' Hanc scriptores nostri adponunt in libris ecclesiasticorum virorum ad se-
paranda vel [ad] demonstranda testimonia sanctarum Scripturarum.' The signs
PUNCTUATION 235
flourishes, or signs resembling arabic number 3 or the same
number reversed, are placed, sometimes singly, more often in
pairs, in the margin to the left of the line or lines cited. 1
Exclamation Marks
There is no consistent and uniform method for marking an
exclamation. In MSS. of the developed period we find an
oblique hook (/), or the mere oblique line, over 0, but this is
probably nothing more than the ordinary acute accent used
over other stressed syllables and especially over monosyllabic
words. The dot which is found in the middle of the o is not
confined to exclamatory o. In glosses we find o with the acute
accent placed over words in the vocative case, e. g.
Incipe parue puer risu cognoscere matrem.
The sign which is commonly used to mark interrogative
sentences is occasionally placed over proper names in the
vocative case to call attention to the intonation proper to
direct address. But this sign is not a conventional exclama-
tion mark like our own, but an inflexion sign indicating
a certain rise and fall of the voice. 2
used in Beneventan MSS. are merely modified forms of the dtple, and in restrict-
ing its use to quotations from Scripture the Beneventan scribe was doubtless
following an ancient tradition, which reflected the reverence felt towards the Bible.
But evidently the use of the quotation marks was early extended to non-
scriptural passages. They are found opposite a citation from Persius, as I learn
from Prof. W. M. Lindsay, in the eighth-century Visigothic MS. of Isidore's
Etymologiae (Madrid Tolet. 15. 8). See Codices Graeci et Latini photographice
depicti, xiii (Leyden 1909) fol. 3 V , and R. Beer's preface, p. xxii, col. 2.
1 See Script. Benev.^ plates 7, 46, 52, 60, and 64. Occasionally the quotation
marks are placed to the right of the cited passage.
2 See the discussion on the interrogation-sign which follows. Wattenbach
(Anletiung*, p. 91) mentions two late 15th-century MSS. which use an exclama-
tion mark resembling in form the interrogation-sign. The signs in question
are not merely similar ; they are in reality the same signs. The use of the
same sign to mark both question and exclamation is not recent, as Wattenbach's
examples seem to suggest. The custom was known in the loth century and
probably earlier.
236 PUNCTUATION
THE BENEVENTAN INTERROGATION-SIGN
The most interesting feature of the punctuation in Bene-
ventan MSS. is the interrogation-sign. To the palaeographer
this feature is important because it is a distinguishing charac-
teristic of the script, though its interest extends, as we shall see,
beyond the limits of palaeography. A study of the Bene-
ventan manner of punctuating interrogative sentences leads
to the following conclusions :
(1) that the Beneventan manner is peculiar to the South
Italian schools;
(2) that in different periods of the script the usage differed
with regard to both forms and position of the interrogation-
signs, and this difference constitutes an aid in dating ;
(3) that the suprascript signs used in interrogative sen-
tences are in reality recitation or reading signs indicating
inflexion of the voice ;
(4) that these signs have no fixed position in the sentence,
but shift according to the inflexion ;
(5) that the recitation sign has reference to the inflexions
of the phrase or sentence and not merely to the intonation of
the word over which it stands.
A history of the interrogation-signs used in Latin MSS.
still remains to be written. 1 The treatment of the subject in
palaeographical literature is not only scant but also mechanical.
Our text-books do no more than mention when the sign came
into use and give some specimens. To get an idea of the
meaning and history of the signs the student must wander far
1 In the winter of 1906-7 Traube intended to read a paper on this subject
before the Bavarian Academy of Sciences, in which my account of the Beneventan
usage was to be included. But his health unfortunately did not permit him to
prepare the paper, and he left only some stray notes, which at my request were
sent to me by Prof. Boll and Dr. Lehmann, for which kindness I wish to thank
them here. Wherever I have used Traube's data, due acknowledgement is made.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 237
from palaeography proper into the domain of mediaeval
musical notation. 1 As the whole problem of the interrogation-
signs is new and unfamiliar, it will perhaps not seem amiss if,
before entering upon a detailed discussion of the Beneventan
usage, a few remarks are premised on the nature of the inter-
rogative sentence as such. 2
An interrogative sentence differs from a declarative sentence
in being incomplete. The answer completes it. The incom-
pleteness in the sense is expressed by the rising inflexion of
the voice. Any unusual emotion or surprise naturally expresses
itself in a rising inflexion. It is by the difference in the tone
of the voice that we differentiate a question from a statement.
But not all questions are read alike. The inflexion differs
with the kind of question. For, as is well known, there are
two main kinds of questions, formally and psychologically dis-
tinct. One is always introduced by the interrogative pronoun
or adverb we shall speak of it as the * nominal ' question.
The other lacks the interrogative pronoun and has for its
1 See the article by P. Bohn, ' Das liturgische Recitativ und dessen Bezeich-
nung in den liturgischen Buchern des Mittelalters/ in Monatshefte fur Musik-
geschichte, xix (1887) 29-36, 45-52, 61-8, 78-80. It is the only attempt
known to me in which the typical interrogation-signs found in Latin MSS. (not
the Beneventan) are historically considered and interpreted. Knowledge of this
interesting study I owe to the learned Benedictine Dom Anselm Manser. Accord-
ing to P. Bohn (1. c., p. 50) accent-neums and punctuation signs have the same
origin and significance, and are in fact the same signs. The interrogation-
signs encountered by him in Latin MSS. from the pth to the i5th century he
traces back to two neums, the porrectus signifying **J and the pes quassus signi-
fying j ^. The explanation of the sign as a neum must have been acceptable
to Traube, to judge from one of his notes : ' V ist wie eine Note zu singen,
ein urspriinglich musikalisches Zeichen.' The theory propounded by J. B.
Thibaut (Monuments de la notation ekphonttique et neumatique de tRglise latine,
St. Petersburg 1912), which derives western neums from punctuation, may
or may not be correct it seems improbable to me but the theory rests on
erroneous dates assigned to two St. Petersburg MSS. Q. v. I, no. u and
Q. v. I, no. 2.
2 On the psychology of interrogative sentences see the interesting paper by
Th. Imme, Die Fragesatze nach psychologischen Gesichtspunkten eingeteilt und
erlftutert, published as a Gymnasium-Programm, Cleve 1879 and 1881.
238 PUNCTUATION
answer either 'yes' or 'no', that is, the predicate of the
question affirmed or not. This we shall call the * predicate '
question. 1 'Who is there?' is an example of the nominal
question, * Is that you ?' an example of the predicate question.
The difference in the character of these two questions becomes
manifest when we consider them from the point of view of the
answer. To the ' nominal ' question ' Who is there ? ' an
infinite variety of answers is possible. To the 'predicate*
question ' Is that you ? ' only one of two answers is possible,
' yes ' or ' no '. 2 Emotionally the two types of question are
different. And this difference is expressed in the manner of
reading them. In the case of a ' nominal ' question, the rising
inflexion comes near the beginning of the sentence ; whereas
in the case of the predicate question, no matter where else in
the sentence the rising inflexion conies, it always appears
toward the end of the sentence. 3 If we bear this in mind we shall
understand why it is that in many Beneventan MSS. the same
form of interrogation-sign is placed now over some word at the
beginning, now over some word at the end of the interrogative
sentence, according as the sentence is nominal or predicate.
1 I prefer this terminology, which I find in Gildersleeve-Lodge, Lat. Grammar*
(1908) p. 290, to the more familiar 'word' and 'sentence' question. The
ancient names are percontatio and interrogatio (see next note). Imme (op. cit.
i. 15) speaks of f Bestatigungs- und Bestimmungsfragen '.
2 This distinction must have been taught by the ancient grammarians, for
St. Augustine says (Dedoctrina Christiana, iii, cap. 3, 6=Migne, P. L. 34, col.
67): 'Inter percontationem autem et interrogationem hoc veteres interesse
dixerunt, quod ad percontationem multa responderi possunt, ad interrogationem
vero aut Non aut Etiam,' and examples follow.
8 Though different people inflect the same sentence differently and the differ-
ence is even more marked between different races, yet certain laws are observed
in all human speech because they rest on common psychology. See the interesting
chart showing curves of inflexion in D. Jones, Phonetic Transcription of English
(Oxford 1907) pp. 43 sqq., where it will be seen that the voice makes an
upward curve at the end of a predicate question, and a downward curve at the
end of a nominal question. The highest point at the end of a predicate question
is on the last accented word, not necessarily the last word. Thus, for example,
in uoliscum uita est et de morte solliciti estis the inflexion sign occurs over
solliciti. See below, p. 240.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 239
The peculiarity of the Beneventan sign. If we were to take
the interrogation-sign as the basis of a classification of Latin
MSS., we should find, I believe, that they fall into two main
groups, a non-Beneventan and a Beneventan. The MSS. of
the first or non-Beneventan group agree in having the inter-
rogation-sign invariably placed at the end of the question. 1
In MSS. of the second group, namely, the Beneventan, the
sign of interrogation may or may not be used at the end that
depends upon the epoch. What distinguishes it from the
first group is the use of a suprascript inflexion sign
shaped like the arabic numeral 2, which is placed over
the accented syllable 2 of the interrogative pronoun
or adverb introducing a nominal question; or over
some word or words which receive the raised inflexion
in a predicate question.
So, for example, in non-Beneventan MSS. the questions :
qui sunt et unde uenerunt ?
hoc sum terraque marique secuta ?
are punctuated with the interrogation-sign at the end, as we
do to-day. In Beneventan, on the other hand, the same
questions would be punctuated thus :
qin sunt et unde uenerunt.
hoc sum terraque marique secuta.
with a suprascript sign over qui, unde, hoc, and secuta, the
punctuation at the end differing according to the date of the
MS. (see below, p. 244 sq.).
The Beneventan method is usually described as consisting
in the use of two interrogation-signs, one at the beginning and
1 It is, of course, possible that fresh evidence may disprove this statement, but
it seems highly improbable. There is no evidence adduced for the statement
made by Professors Rodolico and Roslagno which implies that Spanish MSS.
have the sign at the beginning (see below, p. 251, n. 5).
2 There is a decided tendency on the part of scribes to put the sign over the
accented syllable. They do not always do so, but that they mean to do so is to
be seen from a scribe's placing the sign over the first syllable of numquid and
shifting it to the second syllable on discovering that the word was numquidnam
(Vatic, lat. 5007).
240 PUNCTUATION
another at the end. 1 The statement is inaccurate in several
respects : (i) because it implies that the two signs, final and
initial, were invariably used together, which is not the case
before the nth century; (2) because it implies that no more
than these two signs were used, which is not always the case ;
(3) because it implies that the position of the signs was fixed,
one being placed at the beginning, the other at the end of the
sentence (as, for instance, in modern Spanish, with which
unfortunately it has been compared). 2 That this is not the
case may be seen from such examples as :
et a facie tua quo fugiam.
mulierem fortem qins inueniet.
harenam maris qms denumerauit. 3
which have the interrogation-sign neither at the beginning
nor at the end of the sentence, but over the word with which the
interrogative inflexion begins, i.e. over the interrogative pro-
nouns. The case is even clearer when we examine predicate
questions like
uobiscum uita est et de morte solficiti estis. 4
gestas in cogitatione adulterium, et integra est anima. 5
where, again, the sign stands neither at the beginning nor at
the end of the sentence, but over the first word of the sentence
(the penultimate and ultimate in the examples) which requires
the interrogative inflexion. If the statement in our text-
books is inaccurate, it is also defective, in so far as it fails
to call attention to what is after all the distinguishing feature
of the Beneventan method, already mentioned, namely, the
1 See Piscicelli Taeggi, Pal. arttsttca, &c., p. 10; Carini, Sommario di pal. e
dip!., p. 63; Paoli, Programma scolasttco, &c., i. 14; Traube, Textgeschichte d.
Regula, &c. (2nd ed.) p. 102; Bretholz, Lat. Pal., p. 129 (2nd ed., p. in).
There is no mention of the Beneventan method in the older literature. Watten-
bach's Anleitung (ist ed. 1869) is probably the first text-book to call attention
to it. It is not mentioned in the recent manuals by Prou, Reusens, and Thompson
cited above, p. 34, n. 2.
2 See below, p. 253.
* The first two are taken from Rome Casanat. 64 1 2 (saec. x) foil. 86, 108 ; the
third from Benevento iv 14 saec. x/xi.
4 MS. Benevento iv 13 saec. x/xi. 5 MS. Rome Casanat. 64 1 2 , fol. i34 v .
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 441
use of a suprascript sign which, unlike the sign in non-Bene-
ventan MSS., is not confined to the end of the sentence, but
may be placed over any word in the sentence (interrogative
or not) which receives special emphasis and introduces the
inflexion which differs from the normal. 1
A careful examination of the punctuation in a large number
of Latin MSS. representing the various schools of minuscule
goes to show that the suprascript 2-shaped sign is a Beneventan
feature par excellence. So much so that its presence in a non-
Beneventan MS. may at once be regarded as an index of
some connexion, direct or indirect, with Beneventan centres.
Just as the use of nsr for noster or aum for autem in a non-
Visigothic MS. leads us to suspect Visigothic influence, so
we may safely surmise Beneventan influence whenever we
meet with the 2-shaped suprascript sign in a non- Beneventan
MS. The Codex Beneventanus of the Gospels (London Add.
MS. 5463), in 8th-century uncials, has the suprascript interro-
gation-sign added here and there. This makes us suspect
Beneventan influence. On foil. 222, 229 we actually find
several words added in pure Beneventan minuscule. 2 Simi-
larly in the Gospel book of Henry II (Vatic. Ottob. lat. 74),
written in German minuscule of the 1 1 th century, the Bene-
ventan interrogation-sign has been added passim. This
puzzles us until we discover on fol. 1 76 V an addition of several
lines in Beneventan minuscule of the i ith century. The book
was doubtless a present to Monte Cassino. The addition of
the Beneventan interrogation-sign shows that the book had
been in actual use there. And a number of other examples,
enumerated below (pp. 259 sqq.), go to prove that the 2-shaped
suprascript sign is, in Traube's phrase, a Beneventan 'symptom'.
1 I give a few examples (printing in italics the words which have the suprascript
2-shaped sign) : Domtne, tu mihi lauas pedes ; Quid ad nos tu Egea ; Die sancte
Danihel ; Die cui seruient ? ; Vale ; En hec promissa fides est. These instances
of direct address, command, or exclamation require a different inflexion from
that of a normal declarative sentence, and the suprascript sign calls attention
to the unusual intonation.
2 See Script. Benev. y pi. 4.
1445 R
242 PUNCTUATION
Usage in Beneventan MSS. It may seem self-evident, but
it is worth stating, that an investigation into matters of punc-
tuation cannot be made on facsimiles. Only the original MSS.
can disclose, and often only after careful scrutiny, what is the
work of the scribe and what is by a later hand. And the
distinction is here of primary importance. 1
A study of the different forms found in Beneventan MSS.
makes it clear that the interrogation-sign passed through
several stages of development, which correspond, on the whole,
to epochs of the script. The transition from phase to phase
was gradual, and the forms of an earlier phase are not infre-
quently found alongside of forms proper to a later phase.
Though calligraphy was subject to rules it allowed the scribe
considerable latitude, which renders mathematical precision out
of the question in reckoning with him. So in the matter of
the interrogation-sign we find scribes omitting the suprascript
sign long after its use had been established, 2 or placing it
where it did not belong, or again, employing a form which had
grown obsolete. Notwithstanding, however, occasional irre-
gularities, the best scribes were sufficiently regular in their
practice to allow us to distinguish certain definite stages.
The oldest Beneventan MSS. make no distinction between
a declarative and an interrogative sentence. They have no
special interrogation-sign. Where found it is added, the
form of the sign often betraying the age of the corrector.
Among the twenty-three MSS. which may be considered the
oldest, two exceptions have come to my notice. In Paris lat.
753 (Grammatica) saec. viii ex., from Monte Cassino, there
occurs a sign composed of three points arranged in a triangle
a form of interrogation-sign which we shall meet in several
loth- and i ith-century MSS. Apparently the use of this sign
1 Piscicelli Taeggi (op. cit., p. 10) refers the student to the examples in his
plate XXXVIII taken from Monte Cassino 187 of the pth century. But the signs
are nth-century additions.
2 e.g. in Monte Cassino in saec. xi, M. C. 443 saec. xi, M. C. 298 2 saec. xi,
Rome Sessor. 81 (2030) saec. xii/xiii, Vatic, lat. 591 saec. xii/xiii.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 243
is limited to two examples used on one page. 1 But on fol.
231 of the same MS. there are three instances of the 2-shaped
suprascript sign. 2 Although many other interrogative sen-
tences occur in the MS., they are, as far as my observation
goes, invariably punctuated like declarative sentences.
The second exception is furnished by the MS. Monte Cas-
sino 299 (Grammatica) saec. ix. One of the scribes makes
frequent use of the three points arranged in a triangle. 3 And
an early corrector has added flasstm a sign like arabic number
2, placing it, not over the interrogative pronoun, but at the
end of the question, now over the final punctuation, now after
it, now over the final word. These instances doubtless repre-
sent the groping on the part of Beneventan scribes after a
method of their own. But it is a curious fact, which brings
out the aloofness and backwardness of Beneventan centres,
that nearly all the South Italian MSS. of the 8th and 9th
centuries of which we have knowledge lack the interrogation-
sign, although it had been in use in the Prankish schools at
least since the year 781, and in the monastery of Corbie since
the time of Abbot Maurdramnus (772-80).*
The regular use of the suprascript interrogation-sign in
Beneventan MSS. may be said to begin approximately toward
the end of the 9th century. It is found in a number of MSS.
which were written about the year 9<DO. 5 The scribe of Monte
Cassino 3 (a. 874-92) does not use it, but a corrector, who seems
contemporary, does so. The first dated example known to
me is furnished by Monte Cassino 218 of the year 909. Here
1 They occur on fol. 228 V : Quid est rhetorica v bene dicendi scientia. quid
est orator -. uir bonus et dicendi peritus. Other questions on the same page
lack the interrogation-sign.
2 Coniunctum rationale quot modis fit ... coniunctum legale quemadmodum
fit ... comparatiuum legale quemadmodum fit. The words in italics have the
2-shaped sign.
8 See Script. Benev., pi. 20*.
4 As may be seen from Charlemagne's lectionary (Paris Nouv. Acq. lat. 1203)
and the Maurdramnus Bible preserved in Amiens (MSS. 6, 7, 9, u, 12).
5 Monte Cassino 384, Vatic. Regin. lat 1267, and others.
R 2
244 PUNCTUATION
the custom seems already firmly established. Henceforth the
suprascript sign remains a characteristic feature of Beneventan
punctuation, falling into disuse only with the script's decay.
In fact the habit of employing the suprascript sign over words
like cur, qualis, &c., becomes so much second nature with some
scribes that they are found using it where it is obviously out
of place. Scribes did not hesitate to use it over abbreviated
quo (q), although this involved placing the sign over supra-
script o.
Three phases may be observed in the development of the
Beneventan interrogation-sign.
1. The first phase nearly coincides with the Capuan epoch
of the script (saec. ixex.-x ex.). Its distinguishing feature is
the absence of any special sign after the question, the punctua-
tion at the end being the same as that of a declarative
sentence, e. g.
cur odio deorum laborat. 1
melioris meriti sunt aues quarum uita est deo uicmior ',' 2
2. The second phase is marked by the addition of an inter-
rogation-sign at the end of the question. The sign consists
either of three points placed in a triangle ('.'), 3 or of two points
surmounted by a hook inclined to the right or (less often) by
a wavy line shaped like a rounded w or the Greek letter
omega.
quid ergo de te digne dicam '/quid referam v 4
qius potest saluus fieri .? 5
These forms of the final interrogation-sign are usually found
from about the end of the icth to the first third of the nth
1 Vatic, lat. 3317 saec. x. 2 Rome Casanat. 641 2 saec. x in.
8 The three points do not always have the same position.
4 Monte Cassino 305 saec. xi in. ; see Script. Benev., pi. 63, col. 2. Other
examples of the three points used at the end of a question occur in Monte
Cassino 73, 102, 148, and 303, all saec. xi in.
5 Monte Cassino 40 saec. xi in. Other instances are found in Monte Cassino
25, 37, and 169, part 2, all of the beginning of the i ith century. The sign has
the same form as the neum pes quassus or quilisma.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 245
century. 1 But it should be noted that during the same time
the final sign is often omitted as in the first phase. The three
points placed triangularly occur, as has been seen, here and
there, never regularly, in some earlier examples. 2
3. The next phase is the most familiar of the three. It
may be said to begin in the first quarter of the 1 1 th century
and lasts well into the 1 3th. It is best illustrated in MSS. of
the Desiderian epoch (iO58-87). 3 The sign after the question
assumes a well-defined and fixed form, resembling the interro-
gation-sign found in most Latin MSS., 4 which rests obliquely
over two points, thus : 6
quare ista dicitis .<**
ms audire cui .^
It should be noted that the suprascript sign found in MSS.
1 The two points and hook occur in the following MSS. written about the
year 1000: Monte Cassino 38, 42, 48, 57, 73, 102, 103, 104, 148, 303, 349, 553,
583, and 759.
2 Besides the cases mentioned a few examples also occur in the loth-
century MSS. Monte Cassino 175, Vatic, lat. 5845, and Monte Cassino 402.
Ordinarily no interrogation-sign is used in these MSS. after the question. To
the earlier use of v (in Paris lat. 7530 and Monte Cassino 299) reference
was made above. I learned from Traube's notes that the late 8th-century
corrector of the codex Rehdigeranus (Breslau R 169) of the Gospels uses the
three dots at the end of questions. This work of the corrector is carefully
indicated in Haase's edition (it is omitted in the new edition by H. Vogels).
A collation of all the instances shows that it is not an interrogation-sign pure
and simple, but a sign indicating a given inflexion, as may be seen from its use
in these cases : lesus autem iterum clamans uoce magna emisit spiritum v
(Matt, xxvii. 50); scio qui sis, sanctus dei v (Mark i. 24); et tune ieiunabunt
in ilia die v (Mark ii. 20). Cf. Jour. Theol. Stud, xiv (1913) 570. The three
dots at the end of a question occur in another North Italian MS., Vercelli 183
saec. viii. The corrector who added the punctuation in the uncial portion of
this MS. (foil. 107-111, Gregor. Homil.) uses (;) to mark the end of an ordinary
sentence, and (v) to mark a question, e. g. Quid est quod nascituro domino
mundus describitur v (fol. 108); Quid est quod . . . fugiunt v (fol. in).
3 See Script. Benev., plates 68 and 7o a , col. 2.
4 The sign seems to be identical in form with the neum called porrectus or
flex a resupina.
5 The examples are taken from the Desiderian MSS. Vatic, lat. 1202 and
Monte Cassino 99. The sign does not always rest over two points. Some
PUNCTUATION
showing this form of final interrogation sign is shaped more like
an inverted circumflex accent (/) than like arabic number 2.
Yet the 2-shaped sign is found in many MSS. posterior to the
nth century.
The development of these three phases appears not only
from an examination of dated MSS., but also from a study of
corrections. I have noted many cases where a loth-century
hand inserted in a 9th-century MS. the missing suprascript
sign ; or where an i ith-century hand modified the loth-century
punctuation by adding the final sign ; or where the final sign of
the second phase, the three dots, was modified by transforming
the upper dot into the inclined sign shaped like the neum por-
rectus, thus showing that the change was made by a reader or
corrector not much earlier than the middle of the nth century.
In MSS. of the I3th century the suprascript sign, which, as
has been seen, was an essential part of the system of punctua-
tion during the three preceding centuries, is often omitted.
It is symptomatic of the general breaking down of old Bene-
ventan traditions. Though we find the suprascript sign in the
MS. Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 342 (a missal from Ragusa), 1
it is lacking in Cava 1 8 of about the year 1227, Rome
Corsinian. 777 written between 1226 and 1252, Cava 19 of
the year 1280, and Cava 24 written in I295. 2 These MSS.
have the interrogation-sign only after the question, as do most
Latin MSS.
MSS. have only one point, others have the group y beneath the interrogation-
sign. In a question composed of several clauses the best scribes show
a distinct tendency to place the sign over two points at the conclusion of the
sentence, and over one point at intermediary pauses, e.g. Et si casu, ubi
prouidentia /^ si iudicio, ubi iustitia dei /T (Monte Cassino 284); quis nouit
sensum domini J& aut quis consiliarius eius fuit /? (Vatic, lat. 1202).
1 The suprascript sign as well as the final interrogation-sign is distinguished
in this MS. (also in Vatic, lat. 1197 saec. xi ex.) by a daub of red, manifestly with
the object of catching the reader's eye to warn him of the change of inflexion.
While this practice is exceptional in Beneventan MSS., it is apparently quite
the rule in Greek liturgical MSS. to mark all the inflexion signs in red. See
the works by Praetorius cited below, p. 255, n. 2.
a Facsimiles in Script. Benev., plates 92-4, 98-9.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 247
If the above observations are correct it follows that the form
of the interrogation-sign may be an aid in determining the age
of undated Beneventan MSS. The mere presence of certain
forms furnishes a terminus a quo. No conclusion, however,
can be drawn from the absence of the suprascript interrogation-
sign, since it is omitted in a number of MSS. even after its
use is well established.
In order to bring out as clearly as possible the essential
character of the Beneventan practice, I give below a number of
examples chosen from MSS. of varied contents. Although the
Beneventan system of using the 2-shaped inflexion sign doubt-
less had its origin in liturgical books and other religious books
which were read aloud at divine service or in the refectory,
the advantage of such a sign was so manifest that its use was
soon extended to any book regardless of its character. 1 That
the 2-shaped sign is in reality an inflexion sign becomes
evident as soon as we try to account for its different position
in nominal and predicate questions. Hundreds of other illus-
trations might have been chosen. But the examples of nomi-
nal and predicate questions which follow will suffice to show
that we are not dealing with a sporadic phenomenon. The
punctuation after the question, unless it is otherwise stated, is
the mere point, or point and hook, or else the two points and
comma, in other words, the ordinary punctuation of a declarative
sentence. For all these I use the mere point. An asterisk
is prefixed to MSS. reproduced in Scriptura Beneventana.
* Monte Cassino 3 (Patristica) a. 8 74-92. Corrector saec. ix ex.
(a) qmd sum ego, nisi anima et caro. (p. 90)
(b) numquid aliud lumen est pater, et aliud ftlius. (p. 87)
Monte Cassino 384 (Patristica) saec. ix/x.
(a) qmd de te noui referam. (p. 96)
(b) ins orationem tuam uolare ad deum. (p. 39)
1 That the earliest examples of the 2-shaped sign happen to be found in non-
liturgical books need not surprise us, since liturgical books were apt to become
obsolete, and once out of use had little chance of surviving.
248 PUNCTUATION
numquid uisibiliter eis oportet, aut quasi corporeis locis
accedit ad eos.
* Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii) (Patristica) saec. x in. 1
(a) quo ibo ab spiritu tuo et a facie tua quo fugiam. (fol. 86)
quid est maius, orare, an corpus Christi accipere. (fol. 174)
(b) stcine putamus orasse lonam, sic tres pueros, sic Danielem
inter leones, sic certe latronem in cruce. (fol. 1 79 V )
numquid uia mea non est equa, et non magis uie; uestre^ prau$
sunt. (fol. 96)
-* Bamberg P III 20 (Auxilius, Eugenius Vulg.) saec. x in.
(a) quare ergo subiit. (fol. 105)
(t>) uls autem non timere potestatem, bonum fac. (fol. 94')
in accipiendo spiritum sanctum non poterat dare id quod
acceperat. (fol. 94 V )
* Vienna 27 (Servius) saec. x in.
(a) quid consulit numen. (fol. n6 T )
(b) hoc sum terraque marique secuta. 2 (fol. 184)
* Monte Cassino 175 (Paul. Diac.) a. 915-34.
(a) quare cum timore et honore et uoce summissa loquitur. 3 (p. 255)
(b) et nunc uenisti ad monasterium, et te decipere et alium.
(P- 432)
Monte Cassino 295 (Patristica) saec. x/xi (foil. 1-64).
(a) quid tibi inquam faciam. (p. 5)
(b) et tu putas aliquid deinceps esse dicturum. (p. 23)
hoc matrona nobilis faciet et experietur alterum inrum etc.
(P- 33)
Benevento VI 33 (Missale) saec. x/xi.
(a) qind est hoc quod dicit nobis etc.
(b) ms sanus fieri.
numquid colligunt de spinis uuas aut de tribulis rtcus. (fol. I32 T )
1 This MS. has a very large number of interrogative sentences. The inflexion
is marked with great care. On the use of the assertion-sign in this MS. see
below, p. 271.
2 The same sentence, with precisely the same position of the interrogation-
sign, is found on fol. 139 of Vienna 58 saec. x.
8 The final interrogation-sign consisting of three points seems a later addition.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 249
Monte Cassino 82 (Patristica) saec. x/xi.
(a) quur dei latrones dicantur aperietur.
(b) numquid deo comparari potest homo.
Benevento IV 1 5 (Greg, in lob) saec. x/xi.
(a) dixit usque quo loqueris talia. (fol. 222)
(b) numquid frustra lob timet deum. (fol. 28 V )
Benevento IV 14 (Liber Regum, Vitae SS.) saec. x/xi.
(a) qind uis ut faciam tibi. (fol. 78 V )
(b) numquid habes negotium et ins ut loquar regi siue principi
mifitiae. (fol. ;8 V )
Benevento IV 13 (Homil. sup. Evang.) saec. x/xi.
(a) qind mihi et tibi est mulier.
(b) ins non esse otiosus. (fol. 118)
qui panem cotidianum petit pauper est, aut diues. (fol. 73)
Naples VIII B 7 (Vitae SS.) saec. xi.
(a) qind ad nos tu Egea. 1 (fol. 5 V )
(b) hactenus enim lugubrem tuum uultum, nunc te hilarem cerno.
^ (fol. 14)
numquid soluere me uemsti aut forte paenitentia ductus
credere destderas. (fol. 5 V )
Vienna 1 188 (part iii) (Vet. Test.) saec. xi in. (foil. 223-9).
(a) qms hoc fecit.
(b) numquid possum deserere dulcedinem meam.
Naples VI B 2 (Homil.) saec. xi in.
(a) quare hoc.
(b) numquid et nos caeci sumus.
The above examples all lacked an interrogation-sign after
the question. But after the beginning of the i ith century, as
1 The 2-shaped sign over Egea is meant to call attention to the intonation
demanded by the vocative of direct address. See above, pp. 235 and 241, n. i.
250 PUNCTUATION
has been said, the custom comes in of using an interrogation-
sign after the question, besides the suprascript sign over cur,
quid, &c. Now it is an instructive fact that the appearance of
an interrogation-sign after the question marks the disappear-
ance in predicate questions of the suprascript sign, which, as
we have seen, was used at the end of such questions, either
over the final word or some word near it. So that the first
two examples given above are thus punctuated in MSS. which
have the final interrogation-sign :
qufd sum ego, nisi anima et caro ? l
numquid aliud lumen est pater, et aliud filius ? l
The question which naturally arises is this : Is there any
relation between the two phenomena ? Have the two signs
the same significance ? Is the disappearance of the final supra-
script sign 2 explained by the arrival of the sign used after the
question ? And if these phenomena are causally related, does
not the fact throw some light on the inflexional value of
these signs ? The final sign used in Beneventan MSS. is
virtually the same as that found in the majority of Latin MSS.,
and this sign is, according to P. Bohn, merely a form of the
neum porrectus (orftexa resupina)? Now one of the forms of
the porrectus is precisely like the suprascript sign found in
Beneventan MSS. 4 This would naturally suggest that the
suprascript sign and the final sign used after a question are
forms of the same sign. The one other form of interrogation-
sign (besides the /0rra:/?/s-shaped one) which is common in
1 I use our modern sign for the various forms of the interrogation-sign after
the question found in the MSS.
2 i.e. the sign used over the last word, or some word near the end of the
predicate question.
3 See above, p. 237, n. i.
4 Cf. PaUographie musicale, i (1889) 121, 128; P. Wagner, Neumenkundc
(Freiburg, Switzerland, 1905) p. 13. See also J. B. Thibaut, Origine byzantine de
la notation neumatique de ffiglise latine (Paris i9O7)*pp. 90, 95 and the tables in
H. M. Bannister's Paleografia Musicale Vaticana.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 251
Latin MSS. 1 Bohn identifies with the neum pes quassus (or
quilisma). This form, too, is found in some Beneventan MSS.
There is manifestly a common bond which unites the various
interrogation -signs found in our MSS.
Even the use of the three points in a triangle for the final
sign of interrogation is not confined to Beneventan MSS,,
since it is used in North Italy at the end of the 8th century. 2
Nor is there anything remarkable in the use of three points
after a question, since the modulation indicated by them (up-
down-up) is the same as that indicated by the form resembling
the porrectus. Our oldest MSS. with neums are not older
than the end of the 9th century. 3 Our oldest interrogation-
signs are a whole century older, 4 Did the neums come from
these signs, or did these signs come from neums, or which
seems more likely -did they both come from a common
source, the Greek prosodic accents ? These are questions
which further researches will have to clear up.
The origin of the Beneventan method. In two recent publi-
cations the statement is made, unsupported by evidence or
authority, that the Beneventan method of marking an inter-
rogation is borrowed from the Spanish. 5 One of these publi-
1 The earliest examples known to me occur in Paris Nouv. Acq. lat. 1203 of
the year 781. The Beneventan MSS. with such a sign are mentioned above,
p. 244, n. 5.
2 See above, p. 245, n. 2.
3 Bannister, op. cit., p. xviii.
4 See above, p. 243, n. 4.
5 Prof. N. Rodolico (Archiv. Stor. Italiano, xxvii (1901) 321) discussing the
origin of the Beneventan script says as follows : * . . . il segno dell' interrogative,
cosi proprio dei codici visigotici, il quale e rimasto- fino ad ora in uso nella
Spagna, si ripete nei codici longobardo-cassinesi, anche in essi il segno
precede e non segue la proposizione interrogativa.' (See above, p. 109 sq.) In
describing the punctuation used in Flor. Laurent. 68. 2, the celebrated MS.
of Tacitus' Histories and Annals, Prof. Rostagno says: 'Eiusmodi autem
morem, ut interrogatio significaretur per punctum interrogativum ineunti (et
exeunti) sententiae praepositum vel superpositum, e Visigothica scriptura pro-
252 PUNCTUATION
cations is particularly important for us since it is a study of
Beneventan writing, and in it the interrogation -sign is used as
an argument proving the dependence of the Beneventan upon
the Visigothic script. Before proposing a different view we
must examine what foundation there is for deriving the Bene-
ventan method from the Spanish.
Rodolico holds that the Beneventan method is peculiar to
Visigothic MSS. ('cosi proprio dei codici visigotici'), and that
the modern Spanish method is a continuation (' e rimasto fino
ad ora') of an ancient Spanish practice. Do the MSS. bear this
out ? From an examination of forty- five MSS., covering the
whole range of Visigothic writing, and of twice that number
of facsimiles, 1 it appears that the Beneventan 2-shaped supra-
script sign, far from being a peculiarity of Visigothic MSS.,
is, as a matter of fact, never found in them unless added
by a Beneventan hand. 2 A peculiar manner of punctuating
interrogative sentences is, to be sure, found in a number of
Visigothic MSS. I refer to the Visigothic practice of care-
fully distinguishing nominal and predicate questions (see above,
p. 238), the sign A being used over the last word of a nominal
question, and the sign V after a predicate question. 3 The
two kinds of questions, as has been said, require different
inflexions, and wherever punctuation is a faithful guide to
inflexion there the nominal and predicate questions are differ-
ently punctuated. We have found this to be the case in
a large number of Beneventan MSS. But the manner of
calling attention to the different inflexion is quite different in
Visigothic and Beneventan MSS., as may be seen from a few
fectum, solemnem habuisse Casinenses libraries res est nota et pervulgata/
Codd. Gr. et Lat.photogr. depicti (Leyden 1902) vii, pars 2, p. x. Traube also
refers to these two views and rejects them summarily. He adduces the state-
ment by Arevalo which I cite below.
1 The MSS. are enumerated in Stud. Pal., pp. 56 sqq.
- See above, p. no, n. i.
' This practice has, I believe, so far escaped notice. I hope to give details
in a separate article.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 253
examples taken at random from Beneventan and Visigothic
MSS.
Visigothic
(a) quafe .*
quid hoc fecisti.'
unde estis.,
(b) sic respondes pontifici-/
numquid reppulit dominus
populum suum.X
Beiteventan
(a) quare v
qutd hoc fecisti ,
unde estis ,
(b) sic respondes ponttfici y
numquid reppulit dominus
populum suum y
If there is no foundation for the assertion that the Bene-
ventan method was borrowed from the Visigothic, it follows
that there is none for the statement that the modern Spanish
custom of using the double sign is an inheritance from Visi-
gothic punctuation. There is no point of resemblance between
the Visigothic method just illustrated and the modern Spanish
which punctuates questions thus :
i Cuando se hizo la traslacion ?
with an inverted interrogation-sign before the question and an
upright sign after it. Far from being descended in a direct
line from the MSS., this method is not even found in the early
printed books. 1 It is doubtful if it came into use at all before
the middle of the i8th century. 2 And we have the explicit
1 I have examined a number of Spanish incunabula in Roman libraries.
(Prof. Boll did the same for Traube.) When used at all, the interrogation-sign
always comes after the question. Even to this day a Latin interrogative sen-
tence has the interrogation-sign only after the question.
2 From an examination of about fifty books printed in Spain and South
America during the 1 8th century I am convinced that the custom cannot be much
older than the year 1750. It may even be a few years more recent. In the
early volumes of Florez' Espana Sagrada (Madrid 1747- ) the inverted sign
does not occur. I find it first in vol. xiii, published in 1756. The letter of
' approbacion ' dated 1755, which precedes the text, lacks the inverted sign. In
the well-known treatise by Terreros, Pakografia Espanola^ though published
in Madrid in 1758, only the sign at the end is used. That the new custom
found ready acceptance in the Spanish world may be seen from a book (Juan
Lope de Rodo's Idea sucinta delProbabilismo) published in 1772 in Lima, Peru.
254 PUNCTUATION
testimony of the Spanish scholar Arevalo, who, writing at the
end of the i8th century, speaks of the double sign as of
a custom new in his day. 1
The singular view which connects the Beneventan and the
Spanish practice doubtless originated in some misunderstand-
ing. Wattenbach, in the early editions of his Anleitung, com-
pared the Beneventan method with the modern Spanish.
Presumably because it was inexact, the comparison is omitted
in the later editions. 2 Piscicelli Taeggi, in his preface (p. 10)
to the Paleografia artistica di Montecassino, our chief source
of information concerning Beneventan writing, discusses the
interrogation-sign and reproduces the suprascript sign by
means of our modern sign, placed before the question thus :
? Quis consolabitur te ? ? Cui servient ? ? Unde tibi hoc ?
This may explain how Rodolico and Rostagno come to speak
of the sign as preceding 3 the question in Beneventan MSS.,
and this mistaken idea may have been the starting-point of
their theory.
If the Beneventan practice of using a suprascript sign is
independent of the Visigothic, it is also independent of other
systems used in Latin MSS., since it differs from them quite
as radically. For the outstanding feature of the Beneventan
1 Arevalo describing the punctuation of the Beneventan MS. of Dracontius
(Vatic. Regin. lat. 1267 ; see Script. Benev., pi. 29) remarks: 'Interpungendi ratio
valde singularis est in hoc Draconti codice . . . Illud vero magis observandum
interrogationis notam quamdam verbo ubi incipit interrogatio semper affigi.
Hispani nunc hunc morem invehere conantur, ut interrogationis consuetam notam
relinquant quidem post ultimum interrogationis verbum, sed eandem notam
inversam verbo unde incipit interrogatio praefigant, quo legentium commodo
consulant ' (Proleg. in carmina Dracontii (Rome 1791) p. 59=Migne, P. L.
60, col. 640).
2 The description of the Beneventan usage given in the first and second edi-
tions contained in parenthesis the words ' wie jetzt im Spanischen ', which word-
are omitted in the third and fourth editions. Cf. Ankitung z. lat. Pal., ist ed
(1869) p. 38, 2nd ed. (1872) p. 38, 3rd ed. (1878) p. 80, 4th ed. (1886) p. 91.
3 * il segno precede ' (Rodolico) ; ' punctum interrogativum . . . praepositum '
(Rostagno).
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 255
system is that the sign which is used in interrogative sen-
tences is nothing else than a reading sign to indicate a certain
inflexion of the voice ; as is proved by the fact that it is also
used in sentences which are not interrogative. 1
But if the use of suprascript signs to indicate inflexion
of the voice is practically unknown in Latin MSS., it is
a thoroughly established and highly systematized practice in
Greek liturgical MSS. as well as in Oriental MSS. 2 And
these reading signs, it is important to note, are used indepen-
dently of other punctuation. It need hardly be said that the
Greek system does not depend upon the Beneventan. Con-
sidering that the one reading sign common in Beneventan MSS.
is also found in similar form among the Greek inflexional signs,
even occurring here and there over the interrogative pro-
noun ; and considering, furthermore, that that sign is used in
Beneventan MSS., as in the Greek, regardless of the punctua-
tion at the end of the sentence, it seems at least possible that
the Beneventan borrowed it from the Greek. For Greek was
a very conspicuous element in the Beneventan zone. Greek
monasteries on the one hand, Byzantine rule on the other,
had made Greek familiar throughout Southern Italy. In fact
Greek monks found their way into the very heart of the Bene-
ventan zone. 3 With Greek and Latin monks at such close
quarters it may be supposed that each learned something from
the other. We know that the Greek monks borrowed from
1 See above, p. 241, n. i.
2 See O. Fleischer, Neumen-Studten, part i (Leipsic 1895) 'Uber Ursprung
und Entziffemng der Neumen ' ; F. Praetorius, Uber die Herkunft der hebraischen
Accente (Berlin 1901); J. B. Thibaut, Origine byzantine de la notation neumatique
de ffiglise latine (Paris 1907). Of the very interesting study by Praetorius
I learned from Traube's notes. Although it has been subjected to adverse
criticism, its thesis is heartily endorsed by Gesenius, Hebraische Grammatik
(28th ed., Leipsic 1909) p. 60, 15. For Praetorius' reply to his critic see his
pamphlet entitled Die Ubernahme der frtihmittelgriechischen Neumen durch
die Juden (Berlin 1902).
8 In the roth century the monks of St. Nilus had monasteries in Capua and in
Vallelucio near Monte Cassino.
256 PUNCTUATION
the Latins some ideas for initial decoration. 1 Is it too bold
to conjecture that it was from the Greek monk that the Bene-
ventan learned the device of using reading signs ? 2 Or is
it simply a mere coincidence that a reading sign which we
find in Greek liturgical MSS. should appear, in virtually the
same form 3 and with analogous if not identical value, in Latin
MSS. written in centres which are known to have been in close
contact with Greek culture ?
The solution of these intricate problems, however, must be
left to the expert in such matters. It is of interest to us here
to call attention to what seems an analogy between Greek and
Beneventan methods of indicating the inflexion of certain kinds
of sentences.
1 See above, p. 47, n. 2.
2 The art of reading aloud, we know, received much attention in antiquity
(Norden, Antike Kunstprosa, i (i 909) 6, Nachtrage, p. i). In the Middle Ages the
ancient traditions were carried on by the Church (see the quotation from
St. Augustine cited above, p. 238, n. 2). As such lessons were mostly taught
orally, we know almost nothing of the actual practice. We get a sense of the
importance of the subject from Hildemar. In the beginning of the 9th century
Hildemar dictated to his monks in some monastery in north Italy Paul the
Deacon's commentary on St. Benedict's Rule. In connexion with the 38th
chapter, which opens with the words * Mensis fratrum lectio deesse non debet ' ,
Hildemar reviews the doctrines taught by modern teachers and those taught by
ancient grammarians and the Fathers, and illustrates his lectures with numerous
citations (these have been omitted in the only edition of Hildemar which we
have, R. Mittermuller, Expos. Regulae ab Hildemaro tradita (Ratisbon 1880)
p. 443, n. 2). MSS. of Hildemar repeat at this point a letter of his on the same
subject, written in 831 to Urso, Bishop of Benevento (Traube, Textgesch. d. Reg.
S. Benedicti (2nd ed.) p. 41). The passage which interests us runs as follows:
'In interrogationibus autem atque percontationibus vox legentis necesse est
acuatur sed paulo vehementius quam in acuto accentu. Hec nota est interro-
gandi ? hec percontandi ^ hec negandi TJ' (Mon. Germ. Hist. Epp. v. 320).
The letter is given by Mabillon, Annales O. S. B. ii. 743 ; De Vita (Antiquit.
Bmeventanae,\\. 445) and Thurot (Notices et Extraits, &c., xxii, part 2, p. 415,
n. i) refer to it. The citation is instructive because it shows that different signs
existed for predicate and nominal questions (interrogation*! and percontationes).
According to Traube's notes the MS. tradition of the signs is faulty. As
a matter of fact the signs used in the letter are not the same as those used in
the commentary (ed. Mittermiiller, pp. 430 sqq.).
3 See the comparative table given by Thibaut, op. cit., p. 71.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 257
From the analysis of the Greek method made by Praetorius
it appears that the Greek commonly used the 6eia (/) to
denote the inflexion of nominal questions. The same sign was
used in exclamation, command, and direct address. In all these
cases the Beneventan scribe, if he indicated the inflexion at
all, used the 2-shaped sign. There is no similarity in form
between the ogtia and the Beneventan inflexion sign. There
is, however, an unmistakable family likeness between the
Beneventan sign and the Greek sign <rvpfj.aTiKri (-*), which, it
appears, must have had an inflexional value not unlike the oeta,
since it is occasionally used in sentences which normally take
the oeta, as the following examples go to show. I give the
Greek examples on one side and the same or similar Latin
examples on the other. 1
Ti e/mol xal crot, yvvai + loh. 2. 4 quid mihi et tibi est, mulier y
rts bvvarai avrov CLKOVCIV + loh. 6. 60 qins potest eum audire y
rt yap irofi?<rcz; KCLKOV + Mk. 15. 14 quid enim mali fecit y
Kal ibT + loh. I. 39 die mihi Stratonice.
lyet/oc Kal Trc/otTrcfret + Lk. 5. 23 die sancte Danihel.
(ft-avpcoo-oy avrov + Mk. 15. 14 die cui seruient?
& yevea fortoro? + Mk. 9. 19 Domine, tu mihi lauas pedes y
">* %
facravva roivtw baveib + Mt. 2,1. 9 Vale.
irXrjv oval v^lv rots TiXovo-iots 2 Lk. 6. 24 en hec promissa rtdes est.
1 The Greek examples are taken from Praetorius (Uber d. Herkunft d. hebr.
Accente\ and from two MSS. which I examined (London Harley gr. 5598 and
Oxford Bodl. Misc. gr. 313= Auct. inf. ii. 2, both saec. x; facsimiles in Pal.
Soc. i. 26-7 and ii. 7). The examples from the Gospel of John are given by
Praetorius on pp. 41, 38-9, 38; those from Mark 15. 14, Luke 5. 23, and 6.
24 are taken from the Harley MS. ; the rest from the Bodleian MS. The
first three Latin examples require no references, as they represent Beneventan
usage up to the nth century. The 4th example is from Naples vm B 3 ; the
5th and 6th from a Monte Cassino MS. (p. 271) the press-mark of which I have
unfortunately lost ; the 7th occurs in London Add. MS. 5463 (corrector saec. x);
the 8th in Vatic. Barb. lat. 583 (XH 26) (fol. 13^); the last in Vienna 58 (fol.
I0 3 v).
2 That the two Greek signs (/* and ^) occasionally interchanged may be seen
from one or two examples. The Bodleian MS. (fol. 146) has the oeia over
258 PUNCTUATION
Since predicate questions are read differently from nominal
questions, the Greek, with its nicely developed system of
inflexional signs, has different signs to indicate the intonation
of predicate questions. 1 The Beneventan too, in some MSS.,
carefully calls attention to the different inflexion, 2 but the
Latin monks, it seems, were unwilling to borrow many signs, so
the 2 -shaped sign does double duty in Beneventan. Whether
we are correct in connecting the Beneventan sign with the
Greek is ultimately immaterial. More important is the con-
clusion which is amply justified by the facts at our command,
namely, that the 2-shaped sign is a reading sign.
NON-BENEVENTAN MSS. WITH THE SUPRASCRIPT
I NTERROGATION-SlGN
There is no reason whatever why the practice of using
a suprascript interrogation-sign should not have extended
beyond Beneventan centres. As a matter of fact we find the
suprascript sign in a number of non-Beneventan MSS. These
non-Beneventan MSS., however, come chiefly from centres
which lie close to the Beneventan zone, a circumstance
which at once suggests that relation with Beneventan centres
rts in TI'S Bvvarai avrov aKovctv ; this very sentence has the (rvp/xariAoJ in the
example given above. The Harley MS. has ^ over eype in Lk. 5. 23. In
Lk. 5. 24 it has f over Tropevov. In Mt. 21. 9 the Bodleian MS. has the avp-
/xari/o} over the first uxravra (fol. 14), but the oeta over the second. Many
other examples might be cited.
1 See Praetorius, op. cit., pp. 28-31. The two MSS. examined by me bear
out Praetorius' observation. The sign v-n-oKpia-is is quite the rule for marking
predicate questions. The article by C. B. Randolph, ' The sign of interrogation
in Greek minuscule MSS./ in Class. Philol. v (1910) 309 sqq., does not go to
the heart of the matter, as was pointed out in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xx
(1911) 295 sq.
2 I refer to such MSS. as Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii), Naples vm B 7, and
others mentioned above, p. 248 sq.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 259
may account for the use of the sign. Indeed, an analysis
of the cases of non-Beneventan MSS. with the suprascript
sign only confirms the conviction that the practice of using
the sign was a Beneventan speciality. For these non-Bene-
ventan MSS. which use the sign nearly all show clear traces
of relations, of one sort or another, direct or indirect, with some
Beneventan scriptorium or Beneventan archetype. I give
below a number of such MSS., and add (where I can) such
details as may help to account for the use in them of the
suprascript sign of interrogation.
I. AfSS. having some portion written in Beneventan
Vatic, lat. 3375 (Eugippius) saec. vi. Semi-uncial.
Probably one of the books of the Bibliotheca Eugippi. 1
A Beneventan hand of the nth century made corrections and
additions. The same hand inserted the suprascript interroga-
tion-sign over words like cur, an, quid, &c., and added the
Beneventan period (/) Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 3.
London Add. MS. 5463 (Evangelia) saec. viii. Uncial.
Written by order of Atto, Abbot of St. Vincent on the
Volturno. The hands of three correctors are distinguishable.
The last, which is of the loth century, made marginal notes
and interlineal corrections in Beneventan. This hand added the
suprascript interrogation-sign over quur on fol. 5 and elsewhere,
likewise the Beneventan period (y). Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 4.
The suprascript sign is also found (added) on fol. 240, which
is in Caroline minuscule.
Monte Cassino 4 (Ambros.) saec. ix. Visigothic.
The MS. is of Spanish origin. The Beneventan hand
which made corrections and transcribed marginal notes written
in Visigothic cursive, added the suprascript interrogation-sign
passim. Cf. particularly pp. 23, 89.*
1 See above, p. 55, n. 3. z Facs, in Stud. Pal., pi. 3.
s 2
2 6o PUNCTUATION
Vatic, lat. 4770 (Liturg.) saec. x. Script of the province of
Rome.
In the middle of the MS., from fol. 216, col. 2, to fol. 2i6 v ,
col. i, a Beneventan hand continues the text for thirty-two conse-
cutive lines. The suprascript interrogation-sign and the Bene-
ventan period (y) are often employed, e. g. foil. 77, iO3 v , 1647,
165, &c.
Monte Cassino 5 (Ambros. in Lucam) saec. xi in.
Most of the MS. is in Beneventan, but the first eighteen
pages are in ordinary minuscule. Here a corrector inserted
the suprascript interrogation-sign as well as the Beneventan
period (y). Cf. facs. in Script. Benev., pi. 58, which shows both
hands.
Vatic. Ottob. lat. 74 (Evangelia) saec. xi. German minuscule.
The gospel book of Henry II (973-1024) with beautiful
full-page miniatures of the Ratisbon school. 1 Probably one
of the royal gifts to Monte Cassino. 2 Some of the initials in
this MS. are imitated in the Beneventan MS. Vatic, lat. 1202
(&rtyt.Benev.,yAates 70-1). On fol. 1 76 V an omission is supplied
in the margin in Beneventan characters ; the same hand added
passim the suprascript interrogation-sign.
Monte Cassino 123 (Sermones) pp. 271-320, saec.xi ex.
The MS. is composed of four distinct parts. Parts i, ii,
and iii are in Beneventan of different epochs. Part iv
(pp. 271-320) is in ordinary minuscule, with contemporary
chapter headings in Beneventan. The suprascript interroga-
tion-sign and the Beneventan period (y ) are used passim.
1 Swarzenski, Die Regensburger Buchmakrei, &c. (Leipsic 1901) pp. 1 23 sqq. ;
Beissel, Vatikanische Miniaturen, pp. 35 sqq., pi. XVIII; Gaudenzi, Melanges
Fitting, ii (1908) 702 sqq. and Archwio Pal. Italiano, iv, plates 32-8. Gaudenzi
believes the MS. originated in Ravenna to me an untenable view.
2 Chron. Casin. iii. 74 ; iii. 90 (Mon. Germ. Hist. SS. vii. 753 and 808).
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 261
Vatic, lat. 378 (Liturg.) saec. xi ex. Script of the province of
Rome.
This liturgical MS. was written for the Benedictine abbey
of S. Maria in Palladio in Rome, as appears from internal
evidence. 1 This monastery was under Cassinese jurisdiction.
On fol. 28 is an entry recording the death of Leo Ostiensis, 2
written in Beneventan. Other additions in Beneventan are
found on foil. 53 and 72^. Monte Cassino, the mother-house,
probably supplied the original for such a book as this, con-
taining the Martyrology, the Rule of St. Benedict, homilies, &c.
The suprascript interrogation-sign occurs passim.
Vatic. Barb. lat. 560 (XII 3) (Missale) saec. xi/xii. Script of the
province of Rome.
On fol. i6 y a Beneventan hand added one line. The supra-
script interrogation-sign occurs on foil. i9 v , 37, 41, 4i v ,
46 V , &c.
Vatic. Barb. lat. 646 (XIV 19) (Liturg.) saec. xi/xii. Script of
the province of Rome.
This MS., like the preceding two, is of liturgical character.
It contains the Martyrology and the Rule of St. Benedict, and
may have been written, to judge from obituary entries, for
a Benedictine house in Rome. The fact that many of these
obituary notices are recorded by monks using the Beneventan
hand, 3 suggests, as in the case of Vatic, lat. 378, that the Roman
abbey was under Cassinese jurisdiction, which would account
for the presence of Cassinese monks there. The suprascript
interrogation-sign is to be seen on foil. 46, 46 V , and 47. The
initial on fol. 46, a foliated design on a field resembling mosaic
work, is manifestly copied from a Monte Cassino model of the
end of the nth century.
1 Cf. fol. 33 V , ' dedicatio huius ecclesie sancte marie in palladio.'
2 See above, p. 91.
3 I noted over forty Beneventan entries between foil. 9 V and 43 V .
2 62 PUNCTUATION
Munich 15826 (Salzburg 26) (Cassiodorus) saec. xi. Ordinary
minuscule.
From fol. 45 to the end this MS. furnishes the curious
example of a Beneventan scribe trying to write ordinary
minuscule. 1 He betrays his Beneventan schooling not only
by his manner of using the pen, but by particular points, as
the occasional use of the ligatures ri, sp ; of uncial d, of the
closed t\ of the abbreviations t for in, -f- for est, ama for
anima ; of z-longa in iam, huius ; and of the Beneventan period
(%). The scribe has left us more positive evidence still.
On fol. 96 V in the middle of the ninth line he suddenly dropped
into his native writing and finished the page in pure Bene-
ventan. The hand that wrote the first forty-four leaves also
shows signs of Beneventan influence. Here the suprascript
interrogation-sign occurs passim. Cf. foil. 5, io v , i2 v , 13, I7 V ,
25, 26, 27^, 28, &c.
Monte Cassino 257 (Petrus Diac.) saec. xii. O rdinary minuscule.
The MS. is supposed to be an autograph of Petrus Dia-
conus. 2 At least two different hands, however, can be dis-
tinguished. One of them, the less Gothic, uses the suprascript
interrogation-sign, the other but rarely. The numerals on
pp. 1 8 sqq. are in Beneventan ; likewise the words duodecim and
on p. 20 sq.
Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277 (Liturg.) foil. 147-54, saec. xii ex.
Ordinary minuscule.
The MS. is in Beneventan excepting the last few leaves
(foil. 147-54). But even in this portion a Beneventan hand
filled part of fol. 1 5O V which had been left blank, suggesting that
the non-Beneventan writing took place in the same centre as
the Beneventan. The MS. was written for a nunnery in Zara,
which was a Beneventan centre. On fol. 151 occurs : quid
ploras ?
1 Knowledge of this MS. I owe to Traube.
2 Cf. Caspar, Petrus Diaconus, &c., pp. 19 sqq.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 263
II. MSS. copied from Beneventan originals
Munich 14765 (Hildemar) saec. x. Ordinary minuscule.
The MS. contains Hildemar's expansion of Paul the
Deacon's commentary on St. Benedict's Rule. The text of the
Rule is the one which was current at Monte Cassino. 1 The
scribe's manner of marking interrogative sentences makes it
evident, as Traube noted, that he was copying from an original
which used the suprascript sign. Unaccustomed to that system
of punctuation, he compromised by placing the interrogation-
sign with which he was familiar either after or before the word
instead of above it. In the following examples the interroga-
tion-sign used in this MS. is rendered by our own, and the
word which, according to Beneventan usage, would have the
suprascript sign is given in italics.
fol. 4 V uis ? scire o fili . . . praecipiam ?
5 nunc autem querendum est quarel iuncxit inob^dientiae
desidiam ?
43 T quereret aliquis ? quare debet . . . ipsum ?
43 T quasi interrogasset aliquis dicens ? cut proficit . . . abne-
gauerit ?
It is also important to note that many interrogative sentences
have simply the final sign which is the rule in non-Beneventan
MSS.
Stuttgart Landesbibl. 4 12 (Cassiodor.) saec. xii. Ordinary
minuscule.
This MS., according to Traube, was copied from a Bene-
ventan exemplar. The occasional use of j with a stroke
through enclitic i for eius (ty) strongly supports this view. The
suprascript interrogation-sign occurs on fol. 5 over quid, on
fol. 49 over quare?
1 Cf. Traube, Textgcsch. d. Reg. S. Benedicti, p. 1 08 (2nd ed., p. 102).
2 For knowledge of this MS. I am indebted to Traube' s notes. My friend
Dr. Tafel kindly examined the MS. for me.
264 PUNCTUATION
III. MSS. which originated or lay in Beneventan centres
Monte Cassino 150, pp. 1-64 (Origen) saec. ix. Uncial.
The MS. is composed of two separate parts. Part ii,
in semi-uncial, contains the celebrated Ambrosiaster with the
famous subscription of ' Donatus presbyter ' which connects it
with Naples. Part i, the first 64 pages, shows an awkward,
ill-formed uncial. Here the suprascript interrogation-sign,
along with the Beneventan period, is used by the original
hand, e.g. p. 38, quo fugiam ; p. 54, cur tamen uia et dignatio.
The fly-leaves are in Beneventan of the best period.
Monte Cassino 29 (Auxilius) saec. x/xi. Script of the province
of Rome.
Besides the Beneventan period (y) the suprascript inter-
rogation-sign is here regularly used ; e. g. quota qualitate
distinguitur ? or quid ergo utrique se distruunt ? absit (p. 107).
The use of the point of assertion over absit makes it very
probable that the MS. was copied from a Beneventan original
(see below, p. 273, n. i).
Monte Cassino 30 (Hieron., &c.) saec. x/xi. Script of the
province of Rome.
The suprascript interrogation-sign is found on p. 61, et
passim.
IV. MSS. written in neighbouring centres of Rome and vicinity
Vatic, lat. 3835 and 3836 (Homil., &c.) saec. viii. Uncial.
The two MSS. written by Agimund, presbyter in Rome,
are among the few authenticated examples of early writing in
that city. 1 In Vatic, lat. 3835 (foil. 29^47) an nth-century
hand added the suprascript and final interrogation-signs and
the Beneventan period (y). The few letters inserted or
1 Cf. Traube, Textgesch. d. Reg. S. Benedicti*, p. 101 ; Nomina Sacra, p. 216.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 265
changed by this hand show non-Beneventan writing which
seems of the nth century. After fol. 47 the punctuation added
is ( ; ) and not ( V ) Examples of the suprascript sign occur
on fol. 36 over quomodo, quid, numquid, on fol. 47 over ubi.
In Vatic, lat. 3836 the additions and punctuation are likewise
by a non-Beneventan hand of the nth century. The added
period is (;). On fol. 7i v the suprascript interrogation-sign
is used : ubi est que saluat deitas ?
Bamberg D II 3 (Institutiones) saec. x/xi. Script of the province
of Rome. 1
The suprascript sign occurs on fol. 30 over utrum and an.
Vatic, lat. 1189 (Vitae SS.) saec. xi. Script of Rome and vicinity.
The suprascript sign occurs passim, e.g. on fol. 26 V over
quare, on fol. 52 over an, on fol. 101 over numquid. In the
1 4th century the MS. belonged to the monastery of St.
Gregory, Rome. 2
Velletri Capitol. No. 6 (Liber Evangeliorum) saec. xi ex.
Same school.
The suprascript interrogation-sign is very frequently
employed in this MS. (e.g. foil. 14, 19 V , 23, 23 V , 24, 34,
et passim). The form of the interrogation-sign at the end
of the sentence is identical with that used in Beneventan MSS.
of the time it differs from the form usually found in MSS. of
this region by having two points instead of one under the sign.
The presence of Beneventan MSS. in Velletri need not be
merely assumed. For Leo, the chronicler of Monte Cassino,
on becoming Cardinal of Ostia and leaving his abbey, must
have taken with him Cassinese liturgical books. This appears
from the fact that Vatic. Borgian. lat. 211, written in Monte
Cassino, and in part at least by Leo himself, was in Velletri
during the i2th century. 3 And the Exultet Roll, fragments
1 See below, p. 268, n. 2.
2 A. Poncelet, CataL codd. hagiogr. lat.bibliothecae Vaticanae (Brussels 1910)
P- 34-
Cf. P. Fedele in Bullettino detf Istituto Stor. Ital, No. 31 (1910) n sqq.
266 PUNCTUATION
of which still exist in Velletri to this day, was brought thither
probably by no other than Leo. 1
Vatic, lat. 653 (Haymo in Ep. Pauli) saec. xi. Written at
Subiaco. 2 Same school.
The suprascript sign occurs passim. Cf. foil, ix, xxxiii, &c.
The Beneventan period (y) occurs on foil. i v and ii. The
assertion-sign, which seems a Beneventan peculiarity, is used
on fol. cclxi. See below, p. 273, n. i.
Vatic, lat. 1274 (Lectionar.) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
The suprascript sign is occasionally used by first hand,
e. g. fol. I55 y over quo ; fol. 156 over quare. Here and there
a corrector has added it (foil. 6 V , 7, n). But as a rule only
the final interrogation-sign is used.
Vatic, lat. 1339 (Canones) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
The suprascript interrogation-sign occurs passim. Text-
ually the MS. is related to two Beneventan MSS. 3
Rome Lateran. 79 (Vitae SS.) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
The suprascript interrogation-sign is a regular feature of
the MS. ; likewise the Beneventan period (y).
Rome Lateran. 80 (Vitae SS.) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
The suprascript sign and the Beneventan period (y) are
regularly employed.
Rome Vallicell. E 16 (Evangelia) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
As a rule only the final interrogation-sign is used. But
the suprascript sign is found on fol. 83 V and on fol. 84.
1 Cf. Fedele, Melanges d 1 archtologie et cThistoire, xxx (1910) 313 sqq.
8 Cf. M. Vattasso-P. Franchi de' Cavalieri, Codices Vatic, latini (Rome
1 902) p. 507 sq.
3 Vatic, lat. 1349 and Flor. Laurent. San Marco 604. Cf. E. v. Dobschiitz,
Das Decretum Gelasianum (Leipsic 1912) p. 166 sq.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 267
Rome Basilicanus F 34 (fly-leaves) (Liturgical) saec. xi. Same
school.
The suprascript sign is used over quo, unde, an.
Rome Basilicanus C 138 (Gregor.) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
The suprascript sign is added on p. 86, also on the last
page over quomodo.
Rome Basilicanus F 1 1 (Liturg.) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
On fol. 70 the suprascript sign is added over quomodo.
Sutri, Archivio Notarile, Antiche coperte dei Protocolli, Inven-
tario N 137. Ser. Teolog. N 38. Three leaves from
a collection of homilies, saec. xi. Same school.
The suprascript sign is used over quare. 1
Vatic, lat. 7172 (Hymnar.) saec. xi/xii. Same school.
The suprascript sign is used on fol. 164 over quis.
Rome Chigi C VI 1 77 (Breviar.) saec. xi ex. Same school.
In uis . . . uidere ? the suprascript sign occurs over uis
(MS. unpaged).
Oxford Bodl. Add. D 104 (Comment, in Epist. Pauli) a. 1067.
Same school. The MS. was written for a church of
St. Cecilia, doubtless the one in Rome. 2
The suprascript sign occurs passim.
Zurich Cantonsbibl. (Rheinau)Qi (Hymnar.) saec. xi. Same
school.
Suprascript sign over quis, an ; also over en in En virgo.
1 Cf. Archiv. Pal. Ital. viii, fasc. 28, pi. 2.
2 Another nth-century MS. in the Roman script, also written for a church
of St. Cecilia, is the Epistolarium in the possession of S. C. Cockerell, Esq.,
Cambridge. The MS. has the suprascript interrogation-sign on foil. 3, 3V,
4, et passim. For these details I am indebted to the owner of the MS.
268 PUNCTUATION
V. MSS. of diverse origin and provenance
Rome Sessor. 39 (1372) (Gregor.) saec. viii.
The MS. is a miscellany. One gathering (foil. 83-90)
is in uncial. Here a corrector added the suprascript sign
on fol. 83 over quid, quur ; on fol. 83 V over quur and quid ;
on fol. 84 over quid. It is of interest to note that the collec-
tion of Codices Sessoriani of the Biblioteca Vittorio Emanuele
includes several Beneventan MSS., e.g. nos. 32, 53, 56, 81,
and 105.
Rome Vallicell. T. XIII (Vitae SS.) foil. 1-134, saec. x/xi.
Ordinary minuscule.
The MS. is composed of various heterogeneous parts.
Foil. 1-134 form part i. Here the suprascript interrogation-
sign is used, e. g. over quis, quid, quando.
Flor. Laurent. Ashburnh. 66 (Canones) saec. xi. Ordinary
minuscule.
The suprascript sign occurs on foil. 8, n v , 12, i8 v , e. g.
fol. 8, quid ergo est fratres ? (over quid)\ fol. i8 v , uis non
timer e diem occultum ? (over uis).
Brussels 9219 (Evangel.) 1 saec. xi. Ordinary minuscule.
The MS. comes from Aix-la-Chapelle. The suprascript
interrogation-sign is used over quid and quomodo. In num-
quid pot est c$cus c$cum ducere, it is placed over the first and
the final word, which corresponds to Beneventan usage of the
loth century.
Bamberg B II 1 5 2 (Cassiodor.) saec. x/xi. Ordinary minuscule.
The suprascript sign occurs frequently, e. g. on foil. 2 V , 3 V ,
5, 21, ioi v , et passim. The corrector who adds the final
1 I know the MS. only from a photograph in Traube's collection (foil. 35 V ,
36), to which Prof. Lindsay called my attention.
2 On the Bamberg MSS. see Traube, Palaeographische Forschungen, iv. 13 and
H. Fischer in Zentralblatt /. Bibliothekswesen, xxiv (1907) 383.
THE INTERROGATION-SIGN 269
interrogation-sign takes the trouble to erase the suprascript
sign (e.g. on foil. 3 V , 21, ioi v , et passing, manifestly because
it was foreign to his system of punctuation.
BambergEIII 14 (Hist, de Proeliis, &c.) a. 998-1018. Ordi-
nary minuscule.
As a rule only the final interrogation-mark is used. The
suprascript sign may be observed after fol. 222. In this
portion the Beneventan period (y) also occurs a coincidence
to which attention has been called in a number of preceding
cases. The foreign character of these two features and their
employment as parts of one system is evidenced by the attitude
of the corrector, who erases both the suprascript sign and the
comma of the Beneventan period (%'). A good example occurs
on fol. 242, e. g. quid ad te pertinet qua sim stirpe genitus y
Here the corrector erased the sign over quid, the comma
beneath the two points at the end, and added the final
interrogation-mark. The same occurs on fol. 246 and
elsewhere. After fol. 255 the scribe stopped using the Bene-
ventan period (y).
Vatic. Barb. lat. 588 (XII 31) (Bible) saec. xi ex. Ordinary
minuscule. 1
The suprascript sign occurs on foil. xii v , xiii v , xix v .
Lucca Capitol. 21 (August, in loh.). 2 Ordinary minuscule.
The original scribe used only the final interrogation -sign
(cf. fol. 121). Here and there it is a later addition. A cor-
rector of the i ith century inserted the suprascript sign passim.
Cf.foll. 36, 70V ?I .
Lucca Capitol. 13 (Ambros.de fide, &c.) foil. 1-5, foil. 214-41.
Ordinary minuscule.
1 According to H. M. Bannister it is of the Tuscan or Umbrian type.
2 In the nth century Monte Cassino established at Lucca the monastery of
St. George upon property presented, in 1056, by two nobles of Lucca. Cf.
Chron. Casin. ii. 90 (ed. Wattenbach, p. 689).
2 7 o PUNCTUATION
The main part of the MS. (foil. 6-2 1 3) is of the Qth century
and does not concern us. The suprascript sign is found in
the more recent portion, foil. 1-5 and foil. 214-41 (written most
likely in Lucca itself), e.g. on fol. 2 over quid and on fol. 241
over quomodo.
Lucca Capitol. 606 (Comes) saec. xi ex. Ordinary minuscule.
As a rule we find the final interrogation-sign. The
suprascript sign was used by first hand on fol. 7 over quid',
on fol. 138 over quis. It is added by a corrector on fol. 34,
et passim. The MS. is of liturgical character and was
written in Lucca. 1
Lucca Capitol. 19 (August, de civ. Dei). Ordinary minuscule.
The suprascript sign as well as the final interrogation-
sign is added.
Lucca Capitol. 123 (Collectio canonum). Ordinary minuscule.
The first hand has only the final interrogation-sign, the
second has also the suprascript sign.
Lucca Capitol. 36 (Gregor.) saec. xi/xii. Ordinary minuscule.
The suprascript sign as well as the final interrogation-sign
is used passim by first hand.
THE ASSERTION-SIGN
An interesting sidelight is thrown on the meaning, and
perhaps also on the origin, of the Beneventan suprascript
interrogation-sign by a second suprascript sign, shaped like
the Greek rough breathing h, which is found in a number of
Beneventan and in some non-Beneventan MSS. I have called
it the ' assertion ' sign in contradistinction to the interrogation-
1 Lucca alt esposizione della 'musica e del teatro in Vienna nel 1892 (Lucca
1892) pi. 8.
THE ASSERTION-SIGN 271
sign. The name was suggested by a passage which occurs on
p. 340 of the MS. Monte Cassino 103 saec. xi (Homilies), in
which an interrogation and an exclamation are contrasted, and
the contrast is brought out by means of the two signs 2 and K
The passage runs as follows :
Mirabantur ergo dicentes, qualis est iste, quia et uenti et mare
obediunt ei. Non interrogantes dicunt qualis est iste, sed asse-
rentes quod hie talis est cui mare et uenti obediunt. Qualis est
iste, hoc est quantus, quam fortis, quam potens, quam magnus.
Qualis est iste, maior Moyse, potentior Helia.
Here qualis used in the interrogative sense tenter rog antes)
is contrasted with qualis used in an exclamatory sentence
having the sense of an assertion (asserentes). Now it is only
by the intonation of the voice that we show which of the two
meanings of qualis is meant. We know that the 2-shaped
inflexion sign over interrogative qualis is intended to call
attention to the interrogative intonation of the sentence, and
similarly the h -shaped sign over non-interrogative qualis must
be intended to call attention to another and different intonation.
There can be no doubt, then, that the sign used over qualis,
quantus, and quam in the passage cited above is an inflexion
sign, and it is also clear that it is the inflexional counterpart
of the 2-shaped sign. What the precise value of the h sign is,
will better appear from one or two examples. 1
Qind est maius, orare, an corpus Christi accipere. utique corpus
Christi. 2
The question ends with accipere. The word utique begins
the answer and requires the intonation of an assertion.
qmbus hoc ascribi oportet, nisi clero et magnatibus Romanae urbis. 3
1 The examples are taken from MSS. of varied contents, some of which were
doubtless used for reading aloud, others for private perusal.
1 Rome Casanat. 641 (part ii) saec. x in., fol. 174.
3 Bamberg p in 20 saec. x, fol. 52. Other examples are found on fol. 105,
reproduced in Script. Benev., pi. 35 b .
272 PUNCTUATION
The interrogative inflexion ends with oportet\ the nisi-
clause is practically the answer, and the intonation is that of
a declarative sentence. A similar example is :
Qind est titulus ? nfsi clauis. 1
Here there is an interrogation-sign after titulus to mark the
end of the question, and nisi clauis, which is read like an
ordinary assertion, has the sign h over the first word having the
changed inflexion.
qind consulit numen. nosse se omnia quantum ad labores pertinet
dicit et concedit totam petitionem, etc. 2
The question ends with numen. The first word of the
answer has the assertion-sign.
Numquid reppulit deus populum suum. Absit. 3
The question and answer are uttered by the same person.
The different intonation is indicated by the two inflexion signs.
Quomodo inuocabunt in quern non crediderunt, aut quomodo credent
et quern non audierunt. 4
The juxtaposition of the two signs is instructive. Before
rising again to the interrogative inflexion required by the
second quomodo, the voice descends at the word aut to the level
of an assertion. The drop is indicated by the sign K
The above examples and many others might have
been cited 5 make it quite clear that the function of the
1 Monte Cassino 434 saec. xi, p. 21. At least fourteen other examples oc-
cur in the MS.
2 Vienna 27 saec. x, foil. ii6 v -i7.
3 Paris lat. 335 1 (Paul. Epist.) saec. ix, fol. 17. The punctuation is added by
a loth-century corrector.
4 Paris lat. 335 1 , fol. 20. Other examples occur on foil. 18, i39 v , i4i v (over
nonne, nisi, and aut).
5 A number of examples occur in the nth-century Passionarium, Naples
vm B 7, e.g. foil. 5, 14. Some of the examples in Monte Cassino 434 (Hieron.
in Psalm.) are : (I use here the modern punctuation and italicize the word which
has the h sign) Quare psalmi per ista tune organa canebantur ? Quia populus
carnalis erat (p. 9) ; Solus Dauid psalmos fecit, an et alii ? Non solus (pp. 9-10) ;
THE ASSERTION-SIGN 273
assertion-sign was to apprise the reader that, beginning with
the word over which the sign was placed, the sentence was to
have the intonation of an ordinary assertion. It goes without
saying that such a sign was useful in books meant for read-
ing aloud, especially parts of the Bible and passiones, which
abound in question and answer. But such a sign was particu-
larly helpful in the case of Beneventan MSS., because up to
the 1 1 th century an interrogative sentence had no interroga-
tion-sign at the end to show where the interrogative intonation
ended, as may be seen from the first few examples given above.
It is highly probable then that this circumstance had much to
do with the introduction of the h sign into Beneventan MSS.
It may also explain why the sign is apparently unknown out-
side the Beneventan zone. 1 Non-Beneventan MSS. with the
interrogation-sign have it invariably at the end of the question,
thus rendering the h sign superfluous in most cases.
The question which naturally occurs to us is why this parti-
cular sign was chosen to mark the beginning of the ordinary
declarative intonation. The reason suggested by the learned
P. Hugo Gaisser, whom I was privileged to consult, appeals
to me as the right one. According to this authority the sign
which I have called the ' assertion ' sign is identical with the note
d, the tonic in the Lydian scale, 2 which scale was adopted in
Quare omnes psalmi Dauid esse dicuntur? Quia rex fuit (p. 10) ; Quis est rex
glorie. ? Dominus exercituum ipse est rex glorie. (p. 78). I have also encountered
this sign in two MSS. written in the script of Rome and vicinity : Monte Cassino
29 saec. x/xi, Quid ergo utrique se distruunt? Absit (p. 107); Vatic, lat. 653
saec. xi, sed numquid omnipotens . . . criminibus inuolutis ? Minime (fol. cclxi).
1 The two exceptions (cited in the preceding note) which have come to my
notice seem to confirm the rule, for they occur in the MSS. Monte Cassino 29
and Vatic, lat. 653, written in neighbouring centres, which show the Beneventan
sign of interrogation, a clear index of Beneventan influence. It would be rash
to say positively that the sign is not found in non-Beneventan MSS., but I may
mention that scholars with wide experience of Latin MSS. like Traube, Delisle,
Poncelet, P. Ehrle, and Prof. Lindsay, whom I consulted, had not encountered it.
2 Cf. F. Bellermann, Die Tonleitern und Musiknoten der Griechen (Berlin 1847)
p. 27 ; F. A. Gevaert, Histoire et the'orie de la musique de tantiquite, i (1875) 215;
Smith and Cheetham, Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, ii (1880) 1359.
274 PUNCTUATION
Graeco-Roman music and later in ecclesiastical music. It is
the very sign which served as the basis of the system of
notation formerly attributed to Hucbald. 1 In the loth cen-
tury, as we have seen, the same sign was used as a reading
sign in South Italy. It would be too much to claim any con-
nexion between the M^t,s^ca enchiriadis and South Italy ; yet
such might exist between the musical note and the reading
sign. For it is not difficult to understand how a sign which
stood for the first note in the musical systems current at the
time, should come to be used as a declamation sign which
tells the reader that he should lower his voice to the tonic.
Be this as it may, it is interesting to observe that a sign which
originally came from Greek notation and was apparently used
in mediaeval Greek MSS. 2 is also used in Latin MSS. written
in centres which were no strangers to Greek culture, the
centres in the Beneventan zone.
THE ACCENTS 3
During the first period of the script (saec. viii-ix) the use of
accents may be said to be practically unknown. 4 Apart from two
MSS. treating grammatical subjects, Vatic, lat. 3313 saec. ix
1 Cf. Hucbaldi Musica enchiriadis in M. Gerbert, Scriptores ecclesiastici de
musica sacra (St. Blasien 1784) i. 153, 174 ; the work is reprinted in Migne,
Pair. Lai. 132, cols. 957 sqq. See also Ph. Spitta, 'Die Musica Enchiriadis
und ihr Zeitalter/ in Vierteljahresschriftfiir Musikwissenschaft, v (1889) 462.
On the authorship of the Musica enchiriadis see G. Morin in Rev. Be'ne'd.
viii. 343, and xii. 394.
2 Cf. O. Fleischer, Neumen-Studien (Leipsic 1895) part i, p. 75: 'im spat
mittelgriechischen System bezeichnen die Tone [i. e. acute, grave, circumflex] ein
Fortschreiten der Tonbewegung um einen Halb- oder Ganzton, die Hauche
[rough and smooth breathings f- and -j] aber einen Melodiesprung um eine Terz
oder Quinte.'
3 Wattenbach's account (Anlettung z. lat. Pal. 4 , p. 96) is brief and inadequate.
Steffens has a good description of the accents in Insular MSS. (Lat. Pal?,
Einleitung, p. xv), but he does not discuss their use in other scripts. See also
Nouveau Trait/, ii. 209 ; iii. 482.
4 In Vatic, lat. 3320 and Flor. Laurent. 66. 40 the accents are later additions.
THE ACCENTS 275
and Rome Casanat. 1086 saec.ix., where the accent is used
in examples which illustrate the text, 1 I have found them only
in Naples VI B 12 (a. 817-35). They are still lacking in Monte
Cassino 3, written between 874 and 892. Perhaps the oldest
MS. in which their use may be considered established is
Monte Cassino 384 saec. ix/x. Thereafter accents are found
in one shape or another in most Beneventan MSS.
The usage with regard to accents differed in different ages.
During the loth and the greater part of the nth century two
accents are employed, the acute and the circumflex. The
manner of their use recalls the ancient practice mentioned by
Priscian and others. For the laws laid down by the old
grammarians seem in the main to be followed by our scribes. 2
Thus we find the circumflex especially placed :
(1) over monosyllables which are long, e.g. me, s t t, re,
Ms 6,tu-,* and
(2) over a long penult when the ultima is short, e.g.
peccdre^ pertinere, isttus^filidque^
The acute is used over short monosyllables and over the
antepenult, thus: dn, efficdciter, spiritibits, quanddquidem,
itigiter, &c.
Whatever may have been the origin of this practice, it is
a curious fact that it falls into disuse by the end of the nth
century. The MSS. of the Desiderian period (1058-87), as
well as later ones, show as a rule only one type of accent, the
acute. Its function is obviously to mark the syllable to be
1 In Vatic, lat. 3313 I noted tribunal, tribundlis^ calcar, calcdn's, ambitus,
ambtta (fol. ccxv); in Rome Casanat. 1086 caupo, caupSnis.
2 See Priscian's ' De accentibus ' in Keil, Gram. Lat. iii. 519, and the excerpts
from Audax in Keil, I.e. vii. 357 sqq. The Latin grammarians are merely
repeating Greek doctrine (Lindsay, Latin Language, pp. 148 sqq.) which the
Latin scribe apparently endeavoured to put into practice.
3 I have also noted it over rem.
4 Exceptions to this rule are not few. I mention uide'ri, metiri, di$i, omnzno,
where the long ultima would, according to the grammarians, require the acute
and not the circumflex.
T 2
276 PUNCTUATION
stressed in reading aloud, no distinction being made between
long and short quantities. An analysis of the accented words
in MSS. of this period shows that scribes commonly employed
the accent in cases such as these :
(i) over monosyllabic words, e. g. re 1 , sj, me 1 , tti, his, tarn, crds,
(2) over the long penult of polysyllabic words, e. g. eddem,
dedtre, unius, expedtre, ortre, miser atidne ;
(3) over the antepenult, e.g. dliud, inspe'ximus, uiuimus,
dptimam, indiiere-,
(4) over foreign words, e. g. labdn, rachdl, elifdz ;
(5) over the syllable preceding enclitic que ;
(6) on the stressed syllable in the first part of a divided word,
e. g. uir\tus, lu\cem. This accent is easily mistaken
for a hyphen ; see below, p. 278 sq.
Accents over two consecutive vowels. In this connexion
mention may be made of another sort of accent which also
facilitated the reading but which was not concerned with indi-
cating stress or quantity. Two consecutive as, es, ?s, os, or M'S
were often set off by means of accents, thus : ddron, isddc,
me'e' (meae), .insidiis, frlit, 66libama, ttitis, stitim, &c. This
practice, which comes in toward the end of the nth century,
grows more frequent in the i2th and I3th. The accenting of
two consecutive z's is older and commoner than that of aa, ee,
oo, or uu. In Naples VI E 43, written between 1099 and 1 1 18,
it is already frequent. I have not found it in Desiderian MSS.
(1058-87).
Accented t. 2 From the use of an accent over two consecu-
tive zs, the custom gradually arose of putting an oblique
stroke over every letter i. This was done to avoid the confusion
1 The use of accents over monosyllabic words is particularly common in
Insular MSS. It is also found in early Caroline MSS.
2 On accented and dotted z'see Mabillon, De re diplomatica, p. 52 sq. ; Nouveau
Traite, ii. 209 sq.; iii. 482 ; Delisle in BibliotKeque de FEcole des chartes, iii (1852)
563 ; Wattenbach, Anleitung*, p. 52.
THE ACCENTS 277
resulting from the resemblance between the letter i and
the vertical strokes of m, n, and u. 1 From accented i to our
dotted i was but a short step. In the 13th-century MS.
Naples VI G 29 a somewhat later corrector inserted a stroke
over nearly every i. In Cava 24, however, written in 1 295, it is
used by the first hand. Here it is important to mention that
a stroke over the letter i is observable in many MSS. of the
nth, 1 2th, and i3th centuries where, however, it is merely an
accent, since the stroke forms no part of the letter as such
being merely placed over the i when that letter happens to be
in the accented syllable. 2 So we have iuit but not iuit, uinculis
but not uinculis.
THE HYPHEN
For lack of space the scribe frequently had to divide a word
and write part of it on one line and the remainder on the next.
The practice, however, of indicating the break in the word by
means of a stroke or hyphen, as we do now, is not observable
in Latin MSS. before the nth century. 3 As in other matters,
here too the Beneventan scribe is distinguished by his conser-
vatism. For he cannot be said to have used the hyphen at
all before the 1 2th century, as will appear from the following
statistics.
Beneventan MSS. which antedate the Desiderian period
(1058-87) invariably lack the hyphen. It is still absent in
dated Desiderian MSS.; forinstance, MonteCassino 99(a. 1072),
Monte Cassino444(a. 1 075-90), Vatic. lat. 1202 (a. 1058-87). As
the MSS. mentioned were executed with the greatest care and
1 In developed Beneventan, as well as in Gothic minuscule, a word like
minimum resembled an array of fifteen similar strokes, each scarcely distinguish-
able from the letter i. The stroke over the i was a great aid under the circum-
stances.
4 This observation was correctly made by Chroust in his description of
the Munich MS. of Leo Ostiensis (4623). Cf. Monum. Pal., Ser. i, Lief, x,
pi. 2.
3 Cf. Wattenbach, Anleitung*, p. 87.
278 PUNCTUATION
precision, and represent the highest point of perfection reached
by South Italian scribes, the absence of this feature is cer-
tainly due not to carelessness but merely to unfamiliarity with
it. In fact the hyphen is still unknown to a considerable
number of excellent post-Desiderian scribes, as is seen from
the MSS. Vatic. Borgian. lat. 2 1 1 (a. 1094-1 105), Naples VIII C 4
(a. 1094-1105), Munich 4623 (a. 1098-1106), Paris Mazar. 364
(a. 1099-1 105), and Vatic. Urbin. lat. 585 (a. 1099-1 105).
The first dated MS. in which the hyphen is regularly em-
ployed is Naples VI E 43, written in Benevento between 1099
and 1 1 iS. 1 During the 1 2th century the practice gains ground ;
during the I3th it becomes quite general. But exceptions
occur continually, 2 so that the absence of the hyphen is no
indication that the MS. is older than the i2th century, whereas
its presence, on the contrary, is an unfailing sign that the MS.
was written on this side of 1 100.
The hyphen, which is made by means of a fine stroke,
varies as to position in different MSS. and occasionally in the
same MS. It is placed either horizontally after the last letter
on the line, e.g. tri-buisti, disper-sa ; or obliquely on, above, or
below the line, thus : gen'tis, terri'torio-, or inter fi 'cit,di 'spositas,
rec *ta ; 3 or mo / dos, solli, cite, majgistrum? The hyphen, how-
ever, is not placed, as Pertz asserts, above the first portion
of a divided word. 5 In a large number of MSS. of the de-
veloped script the syllable which is stressed receives an accent
in the shape of a very fine oblique stroke. If in a divided word
the stress happens to fall on the first part, there is a decided
1 This date is derived from the list of popes entered at the beginning of the
MS. See Script. Benev., pi. 81.
2 No hyphens occur in Vatic, lat. 4928 (Benevento) c. a. 1113, Monte Cas-
sino 47 a. 1159-73, Rome Corsinian. 777 a. 1226-52, Cava 19 a. 1280.
3 Cf. Cava 1 8, written c. a. 1227.
4 Cf. Monte Cassino 440, written a. 1278-82.
5 See Pertz' Archiv^ v. 53 ; in his description of the Beneventan MS. Monte
Cassino 275 saec. xi (Gregor. Turon.) Pertz says: 'Die Theile eines Wortes
in zwei Zeilen finden sich selten durch einen feinen Strich am oberen Ende der
ersten (fu'neris) verbunden.'
THE HYPHEN 279
tendency to use the accent over that syllable. 1 That this mark
is an accent and not a hyphen is made clear by the fact that,
when in the divided word the accent happens to fall on the
second part, no stroke is seen over the first part. The obser-
vation will be borne out by an examination of the MSS. I give,
in illustration, a few examples taken from one of the most per-
fect of Beneventan MSS., Vatic, lat. 1202, 2 which are at the
same time typical of the usage in vogue after the end of the
1 1 th century.
narra|uit but fejcisse
fuis|set persua|sionis
subti liter ,, ma|gister 3
opu|sculum ca|ritate 3
1 See above, p. 276.
2 Written at Monte Cassino between 1058 and 1087; Script. Benev., plates 7 1-2.
3 Without any accent.
CHAPTER X
SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY
IN the matter of syllable division the Beneventan scribe
follows the ancient and traditional Italian practice as attested
by Roman inscriptions 1 and our oldest Latin MSS. 2 Whether
this practice corresponds to the laws of Latin pronunciation or
is a mere orthographic device for securing uniformity among
scribes and engravers is ultimately a question for the expert
in phonetics to decide. 3 What is certain, however, is that
Beneventan scribes did not follow the rule laid down by the
Roman grammarians, which, as Lindsay tersely states it, was
1 Cf. Mommsen, 'Die Stadtrechte von Salpensa und Malaca/ in Abhand-
lungen d. phil.-hist. Cl. d. K. sachsischen Gesell. d. Wiss. iii (1857) 55J
W. Dennison, ' Syllabification in Latin Inscriptions/ in Classical Philology,
i (1906) 47-68.
2 Cf. Mommsen, ' Livii Codex Veronensis/ in Abhandlungen d. K. Akad. d.
Wiss. zu Berlin, phil.-hist. Cl. (1868) p. 163, n. 2 and pp. 165-6 (a different
method is used in the Florentine Pandects and by the corrector of the Fulda
Gospels. These exceptions Mommsen explains as being due to the desire on
the part of the scribe or corrector to air his grammatical learning) ; Mommsen-
Studemund, Analecta Liviana (Leipsic 1873) p. 3; Brandt, 'Der St. Galler
Palimpsest/ in Sitzungsberichte d. phil.-hist. Cl. d. K. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien,
cviii (1885) 245-6; Traube, * Palaeographische Forschungen/ iv, in Abhand-
lungen d. hist. Cl. d. K. bayer. Akad. d. Wiss. xxiv. i (1906) 27; A. W. Van Buren,
'The Palimpsest of Cicero's De re public a! in Archaeological Institute of America,
Supplementary Papers of the Amer. School of Class. Stud, in Rome, ii (1908)
89 sqq. ; E. S. Buchanan, The Four Gospels from the Codex Corbeiensis (Oxford
1907), and The Four Gospels from the Codex Veronensis (Oxford 1911);
Buchanan does not discuss the orthography, but he transcribes line for line.
Similar transliteration will be found in other volumes of Wordsworth and White's
Old Latin Biblical Texts (Oxford 1883-). I have examined facsimiles of other
uncial MSS. with the same result.
3 Cf. Seelmann, Die Aussprache des Lateins (1885) pp. 137 sqq., whose views
are justly rejected by Hale in his article, ' Syllabification in Roman Speech/
in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vii (1896) 249-71.
SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY 281
this : l ' Never let a syllable end in a consonant if the conson-
ant can possibly be pronounced at the beginning of the next
syllable .' 2 So Servius in Donatum teaches explicitly 3 and
the others implicitly 4 that as many consonants go with the
following syllable as can stand at the beginning not only of
a Latin but also of a Greek word. According to this doctrine
we should divide the following words thus :
vi-ctriX) pro-pter, i-pse, a-tlas, su-bdo, o-mnis.
This, however, is not the way words are divided in Bene-
ventan MSS. ; the Beneventan scribe normally divided the
same words thus :
vic-trix, prop-ter, ip-se, at- las, sub-do, om-ms. 5
In the case of groups of consonants introduced by s, scribal
usage fluctuated, but on the whole s was more often joined to
the preceding than to the following syllable ; thus Beneventan
MSS. show divisions such as
expos-ca, and opu-sculum,
dis-ciplina, di-scipuhis,
His-paniam, di-spositas,
cus-todire, ,, apo-stolica,
illus-trabat, po-stremo.
A similar wavering in practice, due in all probability to
1 Lindsay, The Latin Language (Oxford 1894) p. 124, 139.
2 On the testimony of the grammarians see Seelmann, I.e., p. 140; Lindsay,
op. cit., p. 125, 140; and Hale, 1. c., pp. 251 sqq.
3 Keil, Grammatici Latini, iv. 427, 20.
4 Keil, ibid. ii. 45, 4 (Priscian); vi. 351, 11. 879 sqq. (Terentianus Maurus);
vii. 157, 2, and especially 205, i (Cassiodorus) ; vii. 263, 22 ; 268, 20 ; 273, 7 ;
279, 19; 286, 3; 289, 28 (Bede); vii. 305, 14; 306, 4; 307, i; 310, 33
(Alcuin). When Bede teaches i fructum cum dicis sive scribis, c secundae
syllabae iungis* (Keil, vii. 273, quoted by Hale, 1. c., p. 256), he is probably
enlarging on received doctrine ; for the fact, so far as 1 can judge, is borne out
neither by phonetics on the one hand nor by written documents on the other.
The same may be said of his injunctions to write and pronounce maie-slas
(Keil, vii. 279, 19) and solle-mne (Keil, vii. 289, 28).
5 This is also true not only of the majority of Roman inscriptions but also
of our oldest MSS. in uncial, and even of Visigothic MSS., as far as I can trust
a cursory examination based on my photographs.
282 SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY
pronunciation, 1 is to be seen in the ^-group. We find
pug-nare and oppu-gnationem,
but the division commonly falls between the two consonants,
which is contrary to the rule of the grammarians.
Insecurity is also noted in composite words, where the
desire to divide etymologically 2 comes into conflict with the
habit of dividing phonetically, e. g.
co-gnoscamus, siib-audis, but tran-sire.
Briefly stated, then, the rule followed by Beneventan scribes
seems to be this : Divide after a vowel or diphthong unless
this involves beginning the next syllable with a group
of consonants not found at the beginning of a genuine
Latin word; in which case the consonants are distri-
buted between the preceding and following syllables in
a manner most conformable to ordinary Latin speech. 3
ORTHOGRAPHY
The test of orthography will become an important means
for localizing MSS. as soon as we can define more clearly the
orthographic peculiarities of different schools and provinces.
In the present stage of our knowledge it is easier to say what
spelling is usual in this or that region than to point out the
1 Speaking of the syllable division in the two tables from Salpensa and
Malaga of the time of Domitian, Mommsen (see above, p. 280, n. i) says that it
thoroughly conforms to the rules of Latin speech ' und wohl eben darum bei gn
schwankt [die Wortbrechung] cog-nitores, co-gnita '. An error by the scribe of
Cicero's De re publica is probably to be explained by the pronunciation of gn.
On p. 45, 11. 1-2 (Van Buren, 1. c., p. 133) he divides thus: sexagign-ta. The
second g is then expunged.
2 Such is the division sanctioned by the grammarians from Quintilian (i. 7. 9)
to Alcuin (Keil, vii. 306, 4). The latter, repeating the example given by
Caesellius (Keil, vii. 205, 4), recommends even obs-oleuit, a division which no
Italian scribe would normally allow.
3 Occasionally ' a scribe slips and divides in a manner which is utterly
impossible, e.g. aedifica\nt in Naples VIB 12, fol. 3 V , col. i, 1. 8; Script. Benev.,
pi. 14.
SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY 283
spelling peculiar to it. 1 The question is altogether one requir-
ing careful handling, since each MS., properly regarded, presents
its own peculiar problems, and the scholar must decide in each
case how far the orthography reflects local usage pure and
simple, and how far it is a compound of local peculiarities and
influences which affected the nature of the MS. in its long
course of transmission.
My own observations of the orthography of Beneventan
MSS. have furnished no new facts. The spelling found in the
generality of Beneventan MSS. is commonplace and calls for
no comment. It is scarcely distinguishable from that of other
Italian MSS. except in one particular : the Beneventan scribe
regularly reproduced assibilated ti in words like natio, peti-
tionem, citius, &c., by means of ^ which is a form of ti specially
reserved for soft ti. Save through some error he scarcely ever
writes ci for that sound. 2 In this respect, as has been shown
elsewhere, he is unlike most other scribes except the Spanish. 3
The orthographic features which may be regarded as in
a measure typical of Beneventan MSS., since they form rather
constant traits of their physiognomy, are the frequent con-
fusion of b and u, d and t, and the spelling michi and nichil.*
During the different epochs of the script the orthography
seems, on the whole, to vary little ; though it is true that the
more recent MSS. usually lack the diphthongs ae and oe found
in the gth century, and that the assimilation of verb and
1 An exception may be made in the case of Visigothic and Insular MSS.,
since they present a few marked characteristics in spelling.
2 To give a few examples. In Monte Cassino 295, p. 100, the scribe wrote
uicia this is later corrected to ut'Ba. In Vatic. Borgian. lat. 339 I noted cicius ;
in Vatic, lat. 3973, fol. 74, miens; fol. 279, ueneciis. Occasionally the assibilated
form of ti is used for d, e.g. faty in Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit. 277, fol. i5o v ;
offitym, soBorum in the MS. Rome Chigi c iv 113.
3 Cf. Stud. Pal, pp. 24, 25, 46.
4 That michi and nichil were preferred to mihi and nikil is evidenced by the
work of correctors. The scribe of Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix wrote nihil, mihi.
An nth-century corrector added the c.
284 SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY
preposition is more common in the more recent MSS. But
unassimilated forms occur even in MSS. of the nth century
or later ; in all such cases, however, there is probably a special
reason, such as an old archetype, to account for it. 1
For the sake of a rapid survey I give in tabulated form the
consonants and vowels most frequently confused in Beneventan
MSS. I should hesitate to do this from my own cursory notes
on the subject, if it were not that my observations are confirmed
by the careful description of Beneventan spelling given in
several critical editions of Beneventan texts. 2
r M nerbos, uobem, uenebolentiam, &c.
u for o
b for/
/for b
^for g
- scribsi, puplica, &c.
aucmentum, iugundius, &c.
gior c
ch for h : michi, nichil, &c.
^ r for * I reliquid, uelud, illut, aput, &c.
t for a J
/for//*: filosofie, anthropofagi, &c.
t magestatis, progectat, iesta, coniuie(coniuge),&c.
- J
1 That the unassimilated forms were regarded as archaic or obsolete appears
from corrections. Thus the scribe of Vatic, lat. 3320 saec. ix wrote conpulsus.
A corrector changed n to m. The scribe of Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823 saec. ix wrote
mlustonem, which a corrector changed to illusionem. Many more like examples
might be cited.
2 Mention may be made of the following: Historia Apollonii (ed. Riese);
Auxilius und Vulgarius (ed. Diimmler, p. 53) ; Solinus (ed. Mommsen 2 , p. ciii);
Vegetius (ed. Lang); Leges Langobardorum (ed. Bluhme;cf. Pertz' Archiv^ v.
259); Liber Pontificates (ed. Mommsen, Proleg., p. Ixxviii) ; Widukindi Res
gestae Saxon, (ed. Waitz; cf. Pertz' Archiv, v. 144); 'S. Silviae Peregrinatio
(ed. Geyer, p. ix) ; Gregor. Turon. Hist. Franc, (ed. Arndt; cf. Pertz' Archiv,
v - 53) j Chron. Monast. Casin. (ed. Wattenbach) ; Tacitus (ed. Andresen ; see
also his Stud. crit. et palaeographica) ; Seneca (ed. Gertz); Apuleius (edd.
Helm and Van der Vliet).
3 See Stud. Pal, p. 15.
SYLLABIFICATION AND ORTHOGRAPHY 285
h omitted . ,., , , .
. n I aud, en, hid, hubi, &c.
h superfluous J
m : frequently omitted or wrongly inserted.
I esitus, phalans, iusta, milex.
x for s j
The vowels most frequently interchanged are : e for ae
(especially after the 9th century) ; 1 e, ae, or $ for oe ; $ for e ; 2
e for z, and i for e ; i for y, and y for i ; o for u, and ^ for o.
1 The nth-century scribe of the Laurentian Tacitus (68. 2) often has ae,
a spelling which he doubtless took over from his ancient exemplar, but a con-
temporary corrector changes ae to e or / (cf. Andresen, Studio, critica et
palaeographica, ii. 23 sqq.).
2 e.g. */,
CHAPTER XI
MATERIAL DISPOSITION
WITHOUT pretending to treat any of the topics exhaustively,
I have put together in this chapter a number of small obser-
vations which, though obviously incomplete, may still be of
interest to the palaeographer.
Parchment, Pen, and Ink
The colour of ink naturally changes with time. In some
of the earliest Beneventan MSS., saec. viii-ix, it has a brownish
appearance, in others a pale olive-green. In later MSS. it is
rather black than otherwise. 1
The colour of the ink is not a trustworthy dating criterion.
In Monte Cassino 305 saec. xi in. the ink is black in some
places and brownish in others. On folio 6 1 of Vatic. Borgian.
lat. 211 saec. xi/xii a change of ink is noticeable though the
writing is by the same scribe. The first four and a half lines
are black, the rest somewhat yellowish. Evidently the ink was
watered. The pallor of the ink is likewise no guide as to age.
In a number of nth-century MSS. written in Monte Cassino
the ink has almost disappeared from the flesh side of the parch-
ment. This must have happened within a century or two after
the MSS. had been written, because some of them show i2th-
and 13th-century attempts at restoring the faded characters
of the nth. 2 The Laurentian Tacitus is a case in point. 3
1 Yet in Vatic, lat. 1468 saec. xiin. the ink is rather brownish.
2 This is true even of the finest Desiderian MSS. ; cf. Script. JBenev., pi. 70
(Vatic, lat. 1202, fol. clxii).
3 On foil. i02 v -3 the nth-century writing is retraced by a 13th-century
hand. See facsimiles in the Leyden reproduction of the MS., Codices Gr. et
Lat. photographies depicti^ vii. 2.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 287
The fault lay not in the ink but in the manner of preparing
the parchment. In some of the earlier MSS. the minium has
grown so dark as scarcely to be distinguishable from black ink.
It is difficult to describe the character of the parchment used
in the Beneventan centres. As a rule it is well prepared and
has a smooth, somewhat shining surface which is rather
yellowish on the hair side and more whitish on the flesh side. 1
The hair side is easily recognizable in most Beneventan MSS.
by the little dark spots. The best preserved Beneventan
MS. known to me is RomeCasanat. noi (All 32), written in
Bari in the nth century. This volume of the Gospels is as
fresh as if it had been written yesterday. The parchment is
very white and the ink very black.
An examination of the shaded strokes in Beneventan writing
shows very clearly that the pen-point was broad and cut at an
angle (') ; see above, p. 128.
The Size of MSS.
The size of a MS. must usually have been conditioned not
only by the use for which it was destined, but also by the
general prosperity of the centre that produced it. Leo
Ostiensis tells us that there were few books in Monte Cassino
before the nth century. 2 He might have added that they
were small in size compared with the large books produced
under Abbot Theobald (1022-35). The general growth and
prosperity of the Abbey in the i ith century is reflected in the
size as well as in the beauty of the MSS.
A few statistics may be not without interest. Unfortunately
in most cases we do not possess the exact original measure-
ments, since the margins have been considerably cut down.
1 The general look and texture of the South Italian parchment is easily
distinguishable from the parchment or vellum used in Germany. The latter is
tougher and has not the smooth, glossy, yellowish appearance of the Beneventan
parchment. Many Insular MSS. have a dull and somewhat rough surface
which is never found in Beneventan MSS.
2 Chron. Casin. ii. 52.
288 MATERIAL DISPOSITION
Our only precise data refer to the measurements of the
written space itself. For our purposes it will suffice to note
merely the length of that space, bearing in mind that the
usual MS. was oblong and its written space likewise oblong.
The outer margins were wider than the inner, the lower wider
than the upper. The outer lateral margin was of about the
same width as the lower. 1
The smallest Beneventan MS. known to me is a book de-
signed appropriately enough for ladies. It contains monas-
tic hours and a calendar, written for the nuns, possibly for
the abbess, of St. Mary's in Zara, Dalmatia (Oxford Bodl.
Canon. Lit. 277 saec. xi ex.). The written space in this MS.
measures nine cm. 2 Some other small liturgical books, with
written space measuring thirteen cm., are : Paris Mazar. 364
saec. xi/xii, Vatic. Urbin. lat. 585 saec. xi/xii, and Vatic, lat.
4928 saec. xii in. Of the same size but of unliturgical charac-
ter are Monte Cassino 753 saec. viii and Monte Cassino T XLV
saec. ix. 3
The largest Beneventan MS. known to me, Vatic, lat. 4222
saec. xi, is a lectionary written in two columns and measuring,
with margins, 63.5 x 37.5 cm. Other MSS. noteworthy for their
size are : Vatic, lat. 7810 saec. xi (Vitae Sanctorum), measuring
53.5 x 33 cm., written space measuring 46-2 x 25 cm. ; Naples
VI B 3 saec. xii (Comment, in Epist. B. Pauli) written by Ascarus
during a period of twenty years, the written space measuring
43 cm.; Monte Cassino 57 saec. xi in. (Hieron. et August.) mea-
suring 41 cm. ; Monte Cassino 109 saec.xi in. (Homil.) measuring
38 cm.; Monte Cassino 132 saec. xi in. (Hrabanus Maurus) mea-
suring 37cm. ; Monte Cassino 123 saec. x ex. (Josephus) measur-
ing 36 cm.
1 A very small book of no pretensions, like Monte Cassino 753, must have
had a margin of some three cm. A margin of six cm. is frequent. Many MSS.
show margins of eight cm., and wider margins also existed.
2 Another very small prayer book is the 13th-century MS. Chigicivii3,
written for the nuns of S. Gregory's in Naples. Including the margins the
volume measures 9X14 cm.
3 Cf. Script. Benev., plates 75, 79, 80, 82, 7, 19.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 289
I cite a few more measurements. Paris lat. 7530 (Grammat.)
and Cava 2 (Isidor.), both written in Monte Cassino between
779 and 797, have a written space of 22-3 cm. In Vatic, lat.
3313 (Isidor.) and Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823 (Isidor.), both saec. ix,
the written space is 17 cm. 1 The MSS. Monte Cassino 299
(Grammatica), Monte Cassino 187 (Anticimenon), and Rome
Casanat. 641 (part i) (Alcuin), all written in Monte Cassino in
the 9th century, have a written space measuring 26 cm. The
MSS. Benevento III 9 (Autpertus) and Naples VI B 12 (Pome-
rius), both saec. ix, with two columns to a page, have a written
space of 30 cm.
Disposition of the Page
The arrangement of the page did not depend upon the scribe's
whim or fancy. When he set out to rule his page for double
columns he did so either because his copy had two columns,
or because he aimed at calligraphic results which warranted
the freer use of parchment, or because it was the established
practice in his scriptorium, or for some other good and sub-
stantial reason.
The oldest extant Beneventan MSS. are written in long
lines and not in two or more columns. 2 Out of the sixteen
oldest Beneventan MSS. known to me only four are written
in two columns. 3 This is probably to be explained by the
uncalligraphic nature of the script during the 8th and 9th
centuries. For as soon as it became more calligraphic the
use of two columns became frequent. To be sure, the nature
and contents of a MS. often influence the disposition of the
page. But in the case of the earliest Beneventan MSS. the
use of one column was not due to contents, as the following
1 The provenance of both MSS. is Benevento.
2 The statement refers to MSS. containing continuous texts. In glossaries
the division of the page into several columns is inevitable.
3 They are : Benevento in 9, Rome Casanat. 1086, Naples vi B 1 2, and Vatic,
lat. 3320, which contains a glossary. Curiously enough, none of these is from
Monte Cassino, and the presumption is that they were all copied from foreign
models with two columns.
1443 U
290 MATERIAL DISPOSITION
example shows. Rome Casanat. 64 1 (part i) and Monte Cas-
sino 3 have in part precisely the same contents. In fact the
latter was copied from the former. The Casanatensis, written
between 81 1 and 812, has one column, the Casinensis, written
between 874 and 892, has two. 1 The more calligraphic MS.
has two columns, the less calligraphic one.
From about the last third of the 9th century the use of two
columns became frequent. Large MSS. with pretensions to
beauty, such as dedication copies, and especially large litur-
gical books, which rested on the lectern and were used in
divine service, were quite certain to be written in two columns.
It was easier for the lector to have a long line broken in two.
Books of ordinary size, on the other hand, particularly those
containing profane works, were written in long lines. This was
also true of certain ftturgical books which were meant to be held
in the hand and carried about, as psalters, breviaries, &c. Not
to render the volume too bulky the scribe used small charac-
ters and gave up the two columns to save space. Examples
of this kind of book we have in the excellently penned and
decorated MSS. Vatic. Urbin. lat. 585 saec. xi/xii and Paris
Mazar. 364 saec. xi/xii (Script. Benev., plates 79, 80).
The Signing of Quires
A MS. is normally made up of a number of gatherings,
which usually consist of four folded sheets or sixteen pages
forming a quaternion or quire proper. Not every gathering,
however, is a quaternio. The condition of the parchment or
other considerations made smaller or larger gatherings inevi-
table at times. When a book had to be copied in a very short
space of time, the quires were distributed among a number
of scribes. But not infrequently the entire MS. is the work
of one hand. To safeguard against the misplacement of quires
they had to be marked in some way which could serve as
a guide when the quires came to be united into a book.
1 Except the first quire, which is written in long lines.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 291
Judging from data at hand, 1 there was no strict rule about
marking. This appears clearly from the fact that two scribes
working on the same MS. occasionally use different kinds of
quire-marks. 2 Still, the great majority of scribes were imita-
tive in their method, and the MSS. display far more uni-
formity than diversity in the manner of marking quires.
Quire-marks consist either of letters, roman numerals, or
catchwords 3 (the word or syllable which stands at the begin-
ning of the following quire). Numerals and catchwords are
by far the most common. With the numeral we frequently
find, placed before, after, or below it, 4 some abbreviation of
quaternio, as QR written in ligature, Q, or QA. 5 Of these
QR was the most common.
Ordinarily the quire-mark is placed at the foot of the last
page of the quire, either in the middle of the margin or in the
right-hand corner. 6 In a few cases it is found on the first page
of the quire the modern printer's method. 7
The letters used for quire-marks were usually uncials or
capitals. In Naples VI 63 saec. xii, written by Ascarus, the
simple Beneventan minuscule is used. When the alphabet
1 Unfortunately many MSS. lack the signature, having suffered from the
binder's scissors, which dealt ruthlessly with margins.
2 e.g. the nth-century MSS. Cava 4, Naples vm B 4, and Vatic, lat. 3286.
Some quires are signed with numerals, others with catchwords.
8 ' reclamantes ' or * custodes '.
4 In Vienna 27 saec. x, foil. i2o v and i63 v , and in Monte Cassino 132
saec. xi in., it follows the numeral. In Oxford Bodl. Canon. Class, lat. 4 1
saec. xi/xii we find it before or below the numeral, and even between parts of
it, e. g. ii Q ii, which is the fourth quaternion.
5 Found in Monte Cassino 77 saec. x.
6 In Oxford Bodl. Canon. Patr. lat. 175 saec. xii in. the quire-marks are in the
lower left-hand corner. This is quite unusual.
7 e.g. in Paris lat. 7530 saec. viii ex. and Monte Cassino 109 saec. xi in. In the
Bodleian Juvenal (Canon. Class, lat. 41) we find the signatures on the last page;
but at the foot of the first page of the sixth and seventh quires there is a com-
bination of P and R (one line doing duty for the stem of both letters) which
E. O. Winstedt (Class. Review, xiii. 205) interprets as prima (sc. pagind).
This may also be a sort of quire-mark.
U 2
292 MATERIAL DISPOSITION
was exhausted Ascarus began again from the beginning, using
aa, bb, cc, &c. We find both letters and numerals in the same
quire-mark in Monte Cassino 753 saec. viii, e.g. E V, K X, &c.
My earliest example of signing by letters dates from the 8th
century, 1 my latest from the middle of the 1 2th.
In most MSS. prior to the nth century the quire-marks
are roman numbers. This method still prevails in the i2th
century. In Paris lat. 335 the numbers are written out or
abbreviated thus : PRIMUS, SEC., &c. The usual position
is in the middle of the lower margin. In a relatively small
number of MSS. the quire-mark is placed in the right-hand
corner. 2 In Flor. Laurent. 66. i saec. xi in. it is now in the
middle, now in the right-hand corner.
Signing with catchwords is practically the rule in the 1 3th
century. But the same method is employed in a considerable
number of 1 2th-century MSS. My oldest example is from the
beginning of the nth century. 3 The extent of the quire-
mark varies from a syllable to several words. The usual
position is the lower right-hand corner. Some MSS. have the
catchword in the middle of the margin. 4
Mention may here be made of the ornamental frame with
which scribes often embellished the quire-mark. The sim-
plest form of decoration consists of dots placed on two or on
all four sides of the letter or numeral. The more enterprising
scribe took pleasure in enclosing the quire-mark in a circle,
ellipse, square, oblong, or even more complicated figure. 5
Perhaps the favourite device was~to frame it on two or four
sides by means of parallel and gradually diminishing lines.
1 e. g. Bamberg HJ iv 15.
2 e. g. Vatic, lat. 3320, Vatic, lat. 3313, both saec. ix, Vatic, lat. 3549 saec. xi,
and Vatic. Barb. lat. 631 (xiv 4) saec. xi ex.
3 e.g. Benevento vi 33 and Monte Cassino 73.
4 e. g. Vatic, lat. 4958 saec. xi and Naples vi G 29 saec. xiii. In Rome Chigi
c iv 1 1 3 saec. xiii the catchwords in the lower margin are at right angles with
the text.
5 e. g. Cava 2 saec. viii ex., Paris lat. 335 saec. ix and x, and Monte Cassino 77
saec. x.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 293
When these lines are drawn on the four sides the effect is of
a square space enclosed within the bases of four isosceles
triangles. Often, however, these are carelessly drawn and end
in a capricious flourish. Occasionally quire-marks are in red. 1
The Ruling of Quires
After the sheets were folded and united into a quire they
were ruled. The ruling varied according as the MS. was
to be written in long lines or in two columns. 2 When two
columns were intended twice the number of vertical bounding
lines were drawn. These perpendiculars, which enclosed the
written space, were often in pairs instead of single, the reason
being that the space between each pair of perpendiculars
was reserved for capitals, which by projecting beyond the line
of writing indicated the beginning of a new passage precisely
the reverse of our modern method. The horizontal lines were
usually confined between the outer bounding lines. Occa-
sionally, however, they extended beyond them into the margin.
Prickings in the margin guided the ruling.
Up to about the middle of the / I2th century the ruling is
with a dry or hard point. As this manner of ruling depends
upon pressure, it is only necessary to apply the hard point with
sufficient force to have the impression penetrate several inner
sheets. And as a matter of fact, when the parchment is not
too tough we find only the two outer pages of the quire show-
ing the direct impression of the point. When the parchment
is thick the impression does not penetrate and the ruling is
repeated on fol. 3 and fol. 6 V of the normal quire or, if need
be, on each folio in turn.
My earliest instance of ruling with plummet is in Vatic,
lat. 5949 saec. xii ex. At the end of the 1 2th century I find it in
1 e.g. in Vatic, lat. 5845 saec. x in., Vatic, lat. 7231 saec. xiii, and Oxford Bodl.
Canon. Class, lat. 4 1 saec. xi/xii.
2 If we except glossaries, there are no Beneventan MSS. at least to my
knowledge which have three columns to a page.
294 MATERIAL DISPOSITION
Naples VIII B 5, Vatic. Ottob. lat. 3, Vatic, lat. 591. Of 13th-
century MSS. may be mentioned : Rome Casanat. 614, Vatic.
Barb, lat.528 (XI 171), Rome Vallicell.A 15, and Cava 24 a. 1295.
Corrections
Theoretically, a MS. upon completion went through the
hands of a corrector. Considering the number of uncorrected
errors that we find in almost every MS., the corrector's duty
could not have been taken seriously, or else it was entrusted to
men of small scholarship. Again, the corrections encountered
in our MSS. are by no means all contemporary with the scribe.
In some cases they are several centuries later. And of con-
temporary corrections some at least are plainly independent
of a corrector, since they show signs of having been made by
the scribe then and there as soon as he saw his error.
There are at least four different ways of making corrections.
If the error was slight the scribe did not resort to erasure, but
merely wrote the correct form over the wrong one. 1 This
method was also employed by readers who finding errors did
not take the time to correct them in better style.
When the error affected several words or lines a common way
was to erase the mistake and write the correction in its place.
Wherever possible this method was avoided, since the erasure
marred the clean look of the page. 2 Another frequent method
was to correct by cancelling. Through the wrong letter or
letters a fine line was drawn, usually obliquely from right to
left, and the correct reading was placed above the cancelled
one. 3
The commonest way of supplying or indicating small
omissions and making small changes was to use dots, expun-
1 Cf. Vatic, lat. 3320, where assibilated ti is often written over the ordinary ti.
Script. Benev., pi. 18.
2 Cf. Vatic. Pal. lat. 909. Script. Benev., pi. 55.
3 Cf. Flor. Laurent. 68. 2. The entire MS. is reproduced in the Leyden
series, Codd. Gr. et Lat. photographice depicti, vii. 2.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 295
gere. These dots were usually placed, one or more in number,
below the wrong or superfluous letter ; occasionally also above
the letter, or even all around it. 1 If the correction involved
not only the omission of certain letters but also their replace-
ment by others, the correct letters were inserted in the space
above the wrong ones. When an entire word had to be
substituted the correct form was placed interlineally above
the wrong word and both were preceded by one or two
dots (:). 2
In the case of omissions of some length the scribe or cor-
rector was wont to put M above the place in the text where
the omission occurred, and h~p (or h~s) before the supplied
passage inserted in the margin.
Occasionally the corrector wrote the right form in the
margin, marking the incorrect form by some arbitrary sign
repeated in the margin. 3 Omitted h was often indicated by
means of a sign resembling the rough breathing in Greek
uncial MSS. (h). The sign was inserted above the omis-
sion. 4 Where a superfluous h occurred it was marked by the
same sign reversed, 5 that is, by the smooth breathing. Any
other letter, if omitted excepting m and n, which had their
peculiar symbols was inserted interlineally above its proper
place in the line. 6
The letter R, signifying require, is found in the margin
opposite passages which caused difficulty to the copyist or
seemed puzzling or doubtful to a reader or corrector.
1 Cf. Monte Cassino 97. Script. Benev.^ pi. 36, col. 2, 1. 20.
2 In Vatic, lat. 4939 saec. xii both the dot and the inserted letter are
in red.
! The corrector of Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix often uses a mere dot. See
Script. Benev., pi. 21.
4 My earliest example is from the nth-century MS. Vatic, lat. 1468, but it
doubtless occurs much earlier.
5 Cf. Monte Cassino 28, p. 73, col. 2, penultimate line, reproduced in Script,
Benev., pi. 6i a .
6 Cf. Monte Cassino 73, p. 30, col. i, 1. 19 and col. 2, 1. 13, reproduced in
Script. Benev.) pi. 62.
296 MATERIAL DISPOSITION
Special Types
Greek words occurring in a text were usually in uncial.
To give the foreign word greater distinction the scribe
occasionally drew a horizontal line over it, e.g. 0OC, id est
deus ; or marked it by means of a transparent yellow wash,
a favourite means of calling attention. 1 Again, to make
a contrast we find uncials used among ordinary Beneventan
minuscule, where nowadays we should use italics, e.g. uoca-
bula . . . in TIOR deponens 2 or exeunt tamen in unam ter-
minationem, id est, RUS?
Numbers
Numbers when not written out are represented by roman
numerals. 4 Number four is made by four consecutive z's, not
by iv, and number nine by viiii, not by ix. After the beginning
of the loth century the final i often descends below the line. 5
This is generally the rule in MSS. of the nth, I2th, and i^th
centuries. 6 Occasionally it is the penultimate i which extends
below the line.
Number five is at first represented by letter u. Early in the
loth century we encounter a form which resembles more our
v. 1 In the i ith century and later it is distinctly v-shaped. 8
The custom of enclosing numerals between points, which is
an ancient practice, is perpetuated here and there in our
MSS., but with no regularity. 9 We also find the point now
before the numeral, now after it. 10
1 e.g. Vatic, lat. 3313 saec. ix, Monte Cassino 299 saec. ix, Monte Cassino 295
saec. x/xi, and others.
2 Vatic, lat. 3313. 3 Monte Cassino 299.
4 Arabic numbers are found in Vatic. Ottob. lat. 3 saec. xii/xiii ; but whether
by the first or by a later hand it is difficult to decide.
B See Monte Cassino 2 1 8 a. 909 and the quire-signatures of Vatic, lat. 5845
saec. x in. In Vatic, lat. 3342 saec.x there are cases of final i below the line,
and also projecting like z'-longa above it. Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 43.
6 Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 72 (Vatic, lat. 4958 saec. xi ex.).
7 Cf. ibid., pi. 40 (Vatic, lat. 5845). 8 Cf. ibid., pi. 72 (Vatic, lat. 4958).
' Cf. Cava 2, Monte Cassino 3 and 332. 10 Cf. Bamberg E in 4 saec.ix/x.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 297
In Monte Cassino 332 saec. ix/x (last quire) I noted quattuor
written thus : iiiior.
Colophons, Titles, Rubrics
In Beneventan MSS. we rarely find colophons or titles
written in rustic capitals, a noteworthy fact in view of their
frequent use in MSS. coming from the neighbouring scriptoria
of Rome and vicinity, not to mention those from the more
distant centres of North Italy, France, and Spain.
In the early period of the script (saec. viii-ix) colophons are
frequently written in uncial letters and in ordinary ink. 1
Gradually colophons written in Beneventan letters come into
vogue. These, as a rule, are red, to contrast with the letters
of the text, which are black. Colophons written in a curious
type of bastard uncials are found in a number of MSS. of the
9th, loth, nth, and i2th centuries. 2 The outlines of the
letters, as well as the spaces enclosed by them, are fre-
quently distinguished with one or more tints. In some
MSS. the inside of these uncials is filled with ordinary ink,
in others the uncials are merely drawn in outline. 3 Occasion-
ally the whole colophon is covered with a yellow transparent
wash. 4
In a few MSS. rubrics or summaries occur in the margin.
In Vatic, lat. 3342 saec. x and Pal. lat. 909 saec. x/xi the ru-
brics are enclosed within figures, which vary in shape with
the size of the written matter and the fancy of the scribe. In
Oxford Bodl. Patr. lat. 1 75 saec. xii in. the rubrics are written
in the margin at right angles with the text.
1 Cf. Script, Benev., plates 7, 9 (Monte Cassino 753 and Paris lat. 7530).
2 e. g. Flor. Laurent. 73. 41 saec. ix, Benevento in 9 saec. ix, Monte Cassino 132
saec. xi in., Vatic, lat. 595 saec. xi ex. See Script. Benev., plates n, 12, 59.
8 e. g. Vatic, lat. 3313 saec. ix, Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823 saec. ix, Flor. Laurent.
66.40 saec. ix ex., Vienna 27 saec. x, Monte Cassino 7 7 saec. x, Vatic, lat. 5735
saec. xi ex., &c. See facsimiles in Script. Itenev., plates 15, 17, 25, 31, 52.
4 e. g. in Bamberg E in 4 saec. ix/x, Monte Cassino 295 saec. x/xi, and others.
298 MATERIAL DISPOSITION
Ornamentation
The subject of miniatures and initial decoration does not
properly fall within the province of this work. An exhaustive
study of the whole subject is promised by a pupil of Dvorak of
Vienna. 1 Meanwhile the student will get a good idea of the
characteristics of the Cassinese style of initial ornamentation
from the chromo-lithograph facsimiles in Piscicelli Taeggi's
splendid Paleografia artistica di Montecassino, Longobardo-
cassinese (Monte Cassino 1878).^ Although our modern pro-
cesses are capable of reproducing the original colours more
faithfully, Piscicelli's work was excellent for its time and is
still indispensable. Here I merely mention the well-known
milestones in the development of South Italian initial
decoration.
After the MSS. of the 8th and 9th centuries, which show
the initials in their simplest form, the development may best
be traced in the following MSS. : 3
(1) Monte Cassino 175 (a. 915-34), Monte Cassino 269
(ante a. 949), of the Capuan period ;
(2) Monte Cassino 77 (saec. x ex.), Monte Cassino 759
(saec. x/xi) ;
(3) Monte Cassino 73, 104, 109, written under Abbot
Theobald (1022-35) ;
(4) Monte Cassino 99 and Vatic, lat. 1 202 (1058-87), written
1 Cf. F. von Baldass, ' Zur Initialornamentik der siiditalienischen National-
schrift/ in Anzeiger d. phil-hist. Kl. d. Kais. Akad. d. Wtss. in Wien, No. xxv,
Dec. 6, 1911.
2 On the subject see also his Le Miniature net codici cassinesi (1887, &c.);
Dom Latil, Le Miniature net rotuli delV Exultet (Monte Cassino 1899-1901) ;
. Bertaux, L'Art dans Vltalie mlridionale (Paris 1904) i. 155 sqq.; 193 sqq. ;
J. A. Herbert, Illuminated Manuscripts (London 1911) pp. 163 sqq. The
reproductions in Seroux d'Agincourt's Histoire de I' art, &c. (Paris 1823) are
too inexact and reduced to be of use to the student.
3 Most of them are reproduced in Scriptura Beneventana. For their contents
see list of MSS. given below in the Appendix.
MATERIAL DISPOSITION 299
under Abbot Desiderius, which show new elements borrowed
from the school of Ratisbon ; J
(5) Monte Cassino 47, Vatic, lat. 6082 (Monte Cassino), of
the second half of the i2th century ;
(6) Monte Cassino 85 and 115, written about 1200 the
very last representatives of the peculiarly Beneventan style.
The 1 3th century marks the introduction of the Gothic
type of initial, in blue and red, with scroll-lines in the same
colours counter-changed ; as in Monte Cassino 440 and
Cava 24.
1 The new type of initials found in Vatic, lat. 1 202 is manifestly copied from
such German models as the Gospels of Emperor Henry II (Vatic. Ottob. lat.
74). The latter MS. has some Beneventan writing on fol. 1 76 V and the Beneventan
punctuation is added passim. I think there can be no doubt whatever that this
very book once was in Monte Cassino and served there as a model to the
excellent miniator of Vatic, lat. 1 202. I also believe that Vatic. Ottob. lat. 74 is
one of the royal gifts recorded in the Chronicle of Monte Cassino (see above,
p. 260, n. 2).
CHAPTER XII
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
HAD we been present at a writing lesson given at Monte
Cassino, Benevento, Bari, or any other South Italian scripto-
rium, in any year between the end of the Qth and the middle
of the 1 3th century to use safe limits 1 we should, I believe,
have been impressed with the difficulties that had to be mastered
in order to write faultless Beneventan. 2 The mere reproducing
of letters in accordance with a given model formed but part
of the scribe's lesson, the mechanical part, which by dint
of practice soon became second nature. The more difficult
part of the lesson had nothing to do with skill in penmanship
as such, yet without it correct Beneventan was impossible.
Its concern was with the application of certain principles or
rules.
In order to appreciate what these rules were, let us take
a concrete example. Let us imagine a beginner trying to copy
the following two sentences from an original written in Caro-
line minuscule the easiest kind of exemplar:
Venite emite absque argento et absque ulla commuta&'one uinum
et lac. Quare appendix's argentum non m panibus et laborer
ttr m non m saturate ? 3
All was simple until the scribe reached the word commuta-
1 Within these time limits the character of the script was fixed and practically
unchanged. Before the end of the pth century the script was in a more or less
fluid state. After the middle of the i3th it was rapidly abandoning its traditions.
4 This statement takes for granted that Beneventan only was practised in
South Italy. My reasons for holding this view have been given above in
chap. v. I am aware, however, that even during the i2th century the ordinary
minuscule was in some places disputing the field with the Beneventan.
3 Isaiah 55. 1-2. Cf. Script. Benev^ pi. 68.
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 301
tione. Here a rule was involved. He had to be on the alert
in order to write the correct form of ti. He could not merely
substitute Beneventan letters for the Caroline. He had to
pronounce the word to himself and graphically represent the
soft sound of ti. When he came to appenditis he had to
remember to use quite another form of ti in order to represent
the hard sound, although his exemplar used the same form in
both words. In copying saturitate he had to combine r and i
and use a definite ligature for the uncombined ri of his Caro-
line exemplar. In his model he found short / everywhere, but
he was required to use z-longa in the word in. The Caroline
scribe used the same stroke to indicate the abbreviation of
uestrum and the omission of m in laborem, the Beneventan had
to use a horizontal stroke to mark the abbreviation and quite
a different sign, shaped like number 3, for the w-stroke. In the
last sentence, which contains a question, the Caroline original
had a sign of interrogation at the end, our scribe had to
remember to use a 2 -shaped sign over qitare, placing it as
nearly as possible over the accented syllable.
From all this it is clear that no mechanical transliteration of
a foreign exemplar was possible for the Beneventan scribe,
since correct copying involved at almost every step an act,
though ever so slight, of judgement or of memory. To be
sure, as the scribe grew familiar with the rules these acts
became fairly subconscious ; but thoughtless copying was out
of the question when the exemplar was non- Beneventan. And
if this was true when he copied from a Caroline MS., how
much more so when the original was in scriptura continua \
Here a mistake in the division of words might influence the
choice of the form of a letter. If his original in scriptura con-
tinua had ETIAM the scribe must write eS^am or et lam
according as he made one or two words out of his original.
Thus he was constantly called upon to make decisions upon
which depended the form of the letters he used. To per-
form his task properly it was incumbent upon him to master
the rules of the script.
302 RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
What were these rules ? How were they taught ? I fancy
they were formulated for the beginner in some such way as
this :
1. Distinguish between the soft sound of ti (as in natio)
and the hard sound (as in natis). Write ^ for the soft sound,
and CTJ for the hard sound. 1
2. Whenever ei, fi, gi, li, ri, or ti occur in a word, the two
letters should be written in combination, the i having the
enclitic form which extends below the line, except in the case
of e followed by semi- vocal i, when z'-longa is permissible as in
el us del do?
3. When i has the semi-vocal sound use z-longa, as in lam,
elus, lehmiis, &c. Likewise when i occurs at the beginning of
a word, the long form is preferred (In, Impar, Itinera, &c.),
except when the following letter extends above or below the
line, rendering the long form uncalligraphic, e. g. ibi (not Ibt),
Hie, ipse, &c. ; 3 or when initial /, by having the long form,
might be mistaken for semi-vocal /, e. g. ierat, ionius, iuit (not
ler at, Ionius, Iuit).
4. The omission of m should be denoted by the 3-shaped
w-stroke, and not by the ordinary abbreviation-stroke. 4
5. When a sentence is interrogative, place an inflexion sign
shaped like arabic number 2 over the interrogative pronoun
or adverb (cur, quid, &c.) in a nominal question, and over the
word or words which receive the raised inflexion in a predicate
1 Note that sound was the criterion.
2 Two rules came into conflict here, and the practice- therefore varies. See
above, p. 143.
3 The matter was thus left to individual judgement, and the practice varies.
In prepositional phrases like In italiam, ad imaginem, the short form of i is
often used because the phrase was considered as one word. On the other
hand, words like delnde, exlnde are often written with z'-longa, owing probably
to the inveterate habit of writing in with z'-longa.
4 That the two were not regarded as interchangeable is to be seen from the
substitution by correctors of the 3-shaped sign for the horizontal stroke where
the latter had been employed to denote omitted m. Yet there are MSS. they
are the exceptions in which omitted m is invariably marked by means of the
horizontal stroke. See above, p. 171 sq.
RULES^AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 303
question. (For the punctuation at the end of the question the
rules differed in different ages. 9*ee the detailed discussion
given above, pp. 236 sqq.)
The above five rules and customs (for only the first two are
strictly rules which must not be transgressed, the rest being
traditional practices which allowed some latitude) constitute the
most characteristic features of the Beneventan script. To these
must be added the abbreviations. For a mastery of the abbre-
viations current in his school and age formed an important
part of the scribe's writing lesson (see above, pp. 153 sqq.).
THE //-DISTINCTION
This is the most important of the rules, because of the
rigour with which it was observed and also because of its effect
upon the orthography of Beneventan MSS.
In classical Latin //must have had one sound, as appears from
the evidence of inscriptions and our oldest Latin MSS. ; also
from the absence of any statement to the contrary on the part
of grammarians. But we know that the assibilation of //began
at a relatively early period, as some instances date back as far
as the second century. Its prevalence since the 4th century
is attested by the fact that most of the later grammarians
from Pompeius to Isidore do not fail to call attention to the
phenomenon. Isidore in fact finds it necessary to teach that
words like iustitia, militia, malitia, &c., being Latin, should be
written with a /, and not with a 2, as the pronunciation would
suggest. 1
It is important to remember that the assibilation of // does
not invariably take place wherever // is followed by a vowel. 2
1 For further details see Stud. Pal., p. 1 7 sq.
2 On the assibilation of // and the exceptions see the citation from a mediaeval
grammarian given by Ch. Thurot in Notices ct extraits des manuscrits, &c.,
xxii (1868) part 2, p. 144 sq. See also the statement made by Papirius (Keil,
Gram. Lai. vii. 216) quoted in Stud. Pal., p. 18. There I also call attention
to erroneous formulation of the /z-usage in Beneventan MSS. It is not enough
that ti should be followed by a vowel. It must have the soft sound in order to
304 RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
There are three exceptions. No assibilation takes place
(1) when //", followed by a vowel, is preceded by the
letter s, e. g. caelestia, hostiis, qiiaestio, uetiistior, istius, &c. ;
(2) when ti, followed by /, stands for tiui, as in the verb-
ending of the perfect tense in ui, uit, &c., e. g. petit, petiit for
pctiui, petiuit, &c. ; x
(3) when ti represents the sounds of TL or OL as, for example,
in Eustratius* (from eucrrpartos) or strutii* (from a-rpovOLov).
For the practical purpose of facilitating reading, especially
reading aloud, it was only natural that attempts should in time
be made to eliminate the chance of confusion by graphically-
distinguishing the two different sounds of /z. 4 And as a matter
of fact traces of the attempt at differentiation are observable
during the 8th and 9th centuries in many quarters. 5 But,
except in two schools, the attempt remained abortive. The
Beneventan and Visigothic scriptoria did in time reserve
separate forms for assibilated and unassibilated ti\ and the
practice gradually became a cardinal rule of their calligraphy,
earlier, however, in the Beneventan. 6
The history of the //-distinction in Beneventan may be
briefly sketched as follows :
have the form ^. Wattenbach, Steffens, and Chroust observed correctly that
the graphical distinction was a matter of phonetic differentiation. So acute an
observer as Andresen failed to see that (Stud. crit. et pal. i. 8).
1 I have observed it often in Beneventoiv i5saec. x/xi and Rome Valli-
cell. T. IX.
2 The name occurs again and again with unassibilated ti in Rome Vallicell.
T. Ill and London Egerton 2889.
8 The word occurs in Munich 337. Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 42 a , col. i ad fin.
(suco strutii). The word is incorrectly transcribed in Roman. Forschungen, i. 91.
4 If we limit our consideration to calligraphic products, the need of such
a distinction must have first been felt in connexion with liturgical books. For
it is clear that the use of two forms of ti made the lector's task considerably
lighter.
5 For instance, in Spain (minuscule part of Autunay), in France (Paris lat.
12168, 8921), in North Italy (Milan Ambros. B 31 sup., Vercelli 148, Rome
Sessor. 40(1258), 41 (1479), 96(1565), and 63(2102)).
6 Cf. above, p. 115 sq.
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 305
The oldest South Italian MSS. do not display the ^'-dis-
tinction. We find, for instance, uafe, mitafur, and uiBfis,
miser aty, &c. in Monte Cassino 753 saec. viii ; and accipieBf, in-
uenieSp, and modulaQft, sentenQjis, noBftam, andpocyts (with ordi-
nary ti), &c. in Bamberg HJ IV 1 5 saec. viii. In these two MSS.
we find not only ordinary ti where later only ^ is permitted, but
what is more characteristic, the form ^ is used indifferently for
the hard and the soft sound, in which respect they resemble other
pre-Caroline MSS. By the end of the 8th century, to judge by
two dated MSS. from Monte Cassino, the custom of graphically
distinguishing the two sounds of ti must have been known in
that scriptorium. For the Cassinese scribes of Paris lat. 7530
and Cava 2 observe the distinction with fair regularity. It is
only here and there that we find assibilated ti represented by
ordinary ti (oj) and not by ^. As was to be expected the
practice won its way slowly. During the whole of the 9th
century there is considerable insecurity with regard to the ti
usage. 1 This is especially noticeable in the case of MSS.
written outside of Monte Cassino.
The scribe of Monte Cassino 187, who wrote before the
year 883, still shows imperfect mastery of the //-distinction. 2
By the end of the 9th century, however, the practice may be
said to be firmly established. 3 Thenceforth it is a rule of the
script.
The transcription of ^. In this connexion a few words on
the transcription of ^ will not be out of place. The ligature
^ is a combination of t + i in which the t has the same
1 See e.g. the MSS. Beneventoui9, Flor. Laurent. 73. 41, Naples VIB 12,
Vatic. Regin. lat. 1823, Vatic, lat. 3313, Vatic, lat. 3320, and Flor. Laurent. 66. 40.
The mistakes in these MSS. consist not in the promiscuous use of B but in
the use of ordinary ti (oj) for the soft sound of //.
2 His errors were rectified by an nth-century corrector.
3 Occasionally a scribe betrays his imperfect understanding of the value
of the form ^ by using a superfluous i after it, e. g. spa&ns for span's. See
facsimile of Monte Cassino 332 in Script. JBenev., pi. 30, col. i, lines 19, 30.
Mistakes found in MSS. of the developed period are usually due to wrong
division of words in copying from exemplars in scriptura continua.
1443 X
306 RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
' proclitic* form as in the ligatures ta, te, tu (see above, p. 148).
Scholars who transcribe this ligature by means of ci l are misled
by the resemblance of * proclitic ' / to a form of c which we
call ' broken ' c. That this is an incorrect analysis of the liga-
ture will be seen from the following considerations. Our
oldest Beneventan MSS. use ^ in words like ?/^/<?, mitftyur,
where ti is the only possible transcription of the ligature.
The same MSS. use ^ where // has the soft sound, e. g. graty,
uiS^um. In fact we find the same ligature used both for hard
and soft tim one word,e. g.peSftonem, iusQfta, where obviously
ti is the only correct rendering of the ligature. That the form
J did not stand for ci in the mind of the Beneventan scribe
clearly appears from an examination of any page of Beneventan
writing. Let us take a concrete example. On p. 403 of the
MS. Monte Cassino 305 2 ci is followed by a vowel five times,
by a consonant four times ; and ^ occurs four times. The
actual words are :
speobsa, commermim, felia'a, indiaa, sufkzat ;
prini/pio, con^'piens, susoperet, uoatem ;
infan^, pa^endo, al^or, gen^um.
Thus we see that ci and ^ were kept entirely distinct.
The page examined is typical. Words like pertinacia,
species, Decii, socio, Ancius are invariably spelt with ci and
not with ^. The Beneventan scribe managed to preserve the
classical spelling of these words because ci and ^, though their
pronunciation may have been similar, were not interchangeable.
The above arguments are, I believe, sufficient to prove
that ^ must be transliterated by means of //, but the evidence
of corrections establishes the fact beyond all possible doubt.
The scribe of Monte Cassino 187 saec. ix wrote perniQf for
1 The ligature is thus transcribed by F. Madan and E. W. B. Nicholson (A
Summary Catal. of Western MSS. in the Bodleian Library, &c., iv. 372 ; v, p. xiv)
in the word Dalmatie, which occurs on fol. i47 v of Oxford Bodl. Canon. Lit.
277. For other instances see Stud. Pal.^ p. 25, n. 2.
2 Script. Benev.) pi. 63.
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 307
pernicie. An nth-century corrector changed ^ to ci. There
would have been no sense in doing so, if ^ were the equiva-
lent of ci. Similarly in Monte Cassino 440 saec. xiii the scribe
wrote on fol. 1 7, col. i , 1. 30 conditynidus. This is corrected
to condicionibus.
In Monte Cassino 5 saec. xi in. praecio occurs for praetio.
A corrector changed ci to ty. 1 On p. 100 of Monte Cassino
295 saec. x/xi the original hand wrote uicia, the letter c having
the broken form. A corrector changed ci to ^. Here the
broken form of c is changed to the ' proclitic ' form of t. This
example demolishes the foundation of the theory that ^ = ci,
since it proves that ty has nothing to do with broken c.
So much for the correct transcription of the ligature ^. I am
aware that if we render ^ by means of ti in editing a Beneventan
text we do not show that a graphical distinction is made in
the MS. For all practical purposes, however, a note at the
beginning of the edition will suffice to call attention to the
phonetic and graphical distinction observed by the scribe. 2
LIGATURES WITH ENCLITIC i
Next in strictness after the ^-distinction is the rule for the
use of the ligatures with enclitic i. The forms j, , sj, If, , CTJ or
are regularly used wherever the two letters ei, ft, gi, /z, ri, or ti
occur in the same word. But, as in the case of the //-distinction,
this does not happen at once. The earliest MSS. (saec. viii-ix)
furnish many exceptions. It is not before the close of the Qth
century that the usage becomes uniform. 3 A clear proof that
correct calligraphy demanded the regular use of these ligatures
is to be derived from a study of corrections. The scribe of
1 The first eighteen pages of this MS. are in ordinary minuscule. On p. 16
iusticia is corrected to iustitia. On p. 1 7 cogitacio is corrected to cogitatio.
2 To reproduce the ligature in our texts only serves to disturb the familiar
look of the printed page. See, for instance, the edition of the Munich MS. of
Dioscorides Latinus in Romanische Forschungen, i. 53 sqq.
8 Exceptions to the rule are to be noted in Bamberg E in 4 saec. ix/x, but the
MS. shows other features which are foreign to Beneventan methods.
X 2
308 RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
Vatic, lat. 3320 wrote diet with uncombined ei, which a corrector
modified to j. In the word iactanti on p. 153 of Monte
Cassino 187 the scribe combined n and t, and left the i un-
attached. A later corrector carefully calls attention to the
error by placing a dot over the word in the text and writing
the ligature oj in the margin next to a corresponding dot.
The scribe of Paris lat. 335 wrote uncombined fi on fol. I24 V .
A corrector changed this to fi. And many other instances
might be mentioned.
THE USE OF Z-LONGA
The use of z-longa in Beneventan MSS. is a practice taken
over from cursive writing. 1 The Beneventan notary who
wrote in cursive the Diploma of Grimoald of the year 8io 2
uses z-longa initially and medially in precisely the same manner
as do Beneventan scribes of the best period. But the scribes
of the early Beneventan MSS. of the 8th and early Qth
centuries show insecurity in their use of z-longa or fail to use
it altogether. 3 An exception ought perhaps to be made in the
case of Monte Cassino ; for, to judge by the late 8th-century
MSS. Paris lat. 7 5 30 and Cava 2, Cassinese scribes must early
have had a clear sense of how to use z-longa. By the end of
the Qth century the use of z-longa had become an established
feature of Beneventan calligraphy, which lasted as long as the
best traditions of the script were preserved. 4 The broad
principles in accordance with which z-longa was employed are
stated above, on p. 302. Much latitude was left to the scribe,
which accounts for the lack of perfect uniformity of practice.
That the use of z-longa, however, was governed by rules and
formed one of the chief characteristics of the Beneventan
script are facts to which our MSS. bear ample testimony.
1 On the history of *-longa see Stud. Pal, pp. i sqq.
2 Cf. Script. Benev., pi. 6. 3 ibid., plates 7-20.
4 In a few 13th-century MSS. (Flor. Laurent. 29. 2 and RomeSessor. 32
(2093)) which are conspicuous for the adoption of diverse foreign elements, we
find short /even in words like in, iam.
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 309
And since we find correctors modifying short i to z-longa, it is
a clear sign that the two forms could not be used indifferently.
Further proof that the regular use of z-longa was habitual with
well-trained scribes may be had from an examination of margi-
nalia and interlineal glosses. 1 For in such crowded writing the
short form of i would certainly seem more suitable and natural.
Yet the Beneventan scribe used z-longa in the marginalia
precisely as he did in the longest text. He did so because it
was a rule he had learnt with his first lessons in writing.
THE PRACTICAL VALUE OF THE RULES
To the palaeographer these rules are interesting in
themselves. Their very existence is for him significant.
Script rules presuppose system, tradition, and a high sense of
the dignity of book-making. In South Italy to write a book
was to write Beneventan ; and to write Beneventan was to
observe certain rules. A knowledge of these rules, then,
brings us that much nearer to the ancient scribe. But have
these rules any value to the philologist and editor of mediaeval
MSS. or documents ? They have a practical value, over and
above the aid which they furnish to correct and rapid reading.
From the point of view of philology the //-distinction is of
interest because the practice tended to preserve ancient ortho-
graphy. For it is owing to the //-distinction that Beneventan
MSS. are so singularly free from barbarous spellings like
tercio, racio, leccio. So thoroughly were the ti rules drilled
into every scribe, that the frequent occurrence of ci for // in
a Beneventan MS. may safely be attributed to copying from
a non- Beneventan exemplar. 2
Thorough knowledge of scribal practice is indispensable
when a text happens to depend upon a Beneventan MS. which is
1 A very interesting example is furnished by the Munich MS. of the Monte
Cassino Chronicle, which has marginal additions in the author's handwriting.
See Script. Benev., pi. 78.
2 A case in point is the MS Monte Cassino 275 containing Gregory of Tours'
History of the Franks,
310 RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
in a poor state of preservation. When in order to decipher the
writing one is forced to count letter-spaces and give heed to the
faintest trace of a letter, then only exact knowledge avails.
The editor of Varro's De lingua latino, or Tacitus' Histories
is in such a position. He must accordingly be familiar with
the rules for the assibilation of ti, and he must know that ^
was used for soft ti and ctj for hard ti, and that ti before
a vowel does not always have the form ^, as is commonly
stated.
To know how the ligatures with enclitic i were used is
important for the understanding of certain errors which have
crept into our texts ; it is also an aid in deciphering obliterated
portions of Beneventan MSS. The ligature j has puzzled
ancients as well as moderns. The German scribe who copied
the Chronicle of Monte Cassino in Beneventan writing (Munich
4623) mistook the ligature for q. The ligature j with a stroke
intersecting the i is the Beneventan way of abbreviating ems.
The same form occurs in the MS. London Cotton Nero A II, 1
where a. recent editor, unfamiliar with the ligature, took it for
ex? It is important to know that in Beneventan f and i form
a ligature, but not s and i. The Beneventan ligature of fi (f$)
resembles the Insular ligature of si. This must of necessity
have been a source of confusion to ancient scribes. 3 Monte
Cassino 205, which shows by its abbreviations clear signs of
having been copied from an Insular exemplar, has confitus for
consitus. The Beneventan scribe manifestly mistook the
Insular ligature. Our texts show that this type of error was
common. The letters /and i combine but not b and i. In this
matter the Beneventan scribe merely preserves ancient cur-
sive tradition. The fact that b is not followed by enclitic i in
1 Fol. 37 (35), last line. The MS. recalls Beneventan, but is of non-Italian
origin.
2 The mistake occurs, as I learn from Dom Wilmart, in Miscellanea Ceriani
(Milan 1910) pp. 149 sqq. (in the running title) and p. 155. Earlier the same
error was made in A Catal. of Ancient MSS. in the Brit. Museum, ii. 54, col. 2.
3 Cf. Traube, Textgeschichtc d. Regula S. Benedicti (2nd ed.) pp. 80 and 124.
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 311
cursive settles the disputed question as to whether Karalis or
Karabis is the correct reading of the city mentioned in the
celebrated subscription in the Hilary MS. preserved in the
Chapter Library of St. Peter's (0182). The ligature of ri (^)
has been mistaken for an r with an abbreviation-stroke, and
transcribed by rum. Trombelli misread it for r. 1 The ti
ligature (^) was doubtless misunderstood by scribes unfamiliar
with Beneventan and misread for q with a stroke over it. 2 The
mistake which moderns have fallen into is that of transcribing
it by means of ci. Inasmuch as the ligatures with enclitic i are
obligatory and have fixed forms, knowledge of them is essential
in deciphering faded writing, and is altogether a distinct aid in
reading Beneventan MSS. in which the separation of words is
imperfect. So, for example, we know that no word can end with
the ligature ^, for this form, representing as it does assibilated
/z*, must be followed by a vowel ; we also know that enclitic i
cannot begin a word, since this ligature can occur only within
the limits of the same word.
The rules of z-longa are not without some importance for
textual criticism. The resemblance between z-longa and the
letter / has been the cause of their frequent confusion in
ancient as well as in modern texts. A scribe to whom the
practice of z-longa was foreign and it was that to almost all
scribes not Visigothic or Beneventan could easily mistake
oblectat for obiectat (written oblectat)
malorum maiorum (malorum)
alas aias (alas).
Errors of this type throw some light on the archetype, for
they go back, directly or indirectly, to an exemplar which
must have used z-longa, i. e. to a MS. in Visigothic, Bene-
ventan, or early pre-Caroline French or Italian minuscule.
That the z-longa rules may be an aid in deciphering can
be illustrated by an example already cited elsewhere : 3
1 See above, p. 29, n. 2. 2 Traube, ibid., p. 80.
3 Cf. Stud. Pal., p. 13.
3 i2 RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT
' In a passage in the Historiae of Tacitus (iv. 48. 10) editors
have wavered between the readings ius and ms. 1 Its last
editor, Andresen, gives : legatorum ius adoleuit. The Bene-
ventan MS. upon which the text is based is hardly legible on
that page, as the ink has grown very pale. But the two words
are impossible to confuse in Beneventan, for ius must be
written with z-longa and ms must begin with a short letter.
The MS., even in its present state, shows plainly that the first
letter was short, in which case the correct reading is ms and
not ius correct at least palaeographically.' 2
Owing to phonetic reasons the substitution of g for j is
a feature common to MSS. of different schools. Beneventan
scribes frequently write g for semi-vocal i. They also often
write z-longa (i. e. semi-vocal z) for soft g, e. g. conlule, pro-
lenuere, ambales, &c. This type of error is apparently more
frequent in scripts like the Beneventan (and Visigothic), in
which semi-vocal i has a definite form.
The subject of the interrogation-sign has been treated at
length above (pp. 236 sqq.). The feature that interests us here
is the use of the suprascript reading sign. This was so general
a practice as to merit being considered a rule of the script.
There are plenty of exceptions ; but the best scribes observe
the practice carefully. It is so peculiarly Beneventan that its
presence in a non- Beneventan MS. is a fair presumption of
Beneventan influence, direct or indirect in other words, it
suggests at once either the milieu in which the MS. was copied
or the precise character of the original.
There is another use to which we can put the rules. We
can make them our test as to whether or not a MS. is Bene-
ventan. For there are a number of MSS. which are so like
Beneventan products as to be easily mistaken for them when
judged by the general impression, but which are clearly not
Beneventan when tested by their observance of the rules. A
1 Cf. Andresen, In Taciti hist, studio, crit. et pal. ii (1900) 13.
2 Cf. the Ley den reproduction of the MS. in the De Vries series : Codd.
Graec. et Lat. photographice depicti^ torn. vii. 2, fol. p4 v , col. 2, line 21.
X
rt
10
(U
I
3
J5
"o o5 do
DH a OH C <U
-?Si|Js
g, 2
.a <u
.9
I!J.
cj Jr; g
rf i 1
sl I
To face p. 312
RULES AND TRADITIONS OF THE SCRIPT 313
case in point is furnished by the Turin fragments of the Liber
Pontificalis reproduced in Codici Bobbiesi and described as
Beneventan. 1 Some resemblance to Beneventan writing cer-
tainly exists, but the non-Beneventan character of the fragments
becomes manifest as soon as they are confronted with a copy
of the same matter written in accordance with the rules of
Beneventan calligraphy. 2 For the purposes of illustration it
will suffice to give a few lines of the Turin fragments on one
side, and a Beneventan transcription on the other. 3 See fac-
similes on plate ix.
1 Cf. Cipolla, Codici Bobbiesi (Turin 1907) pi. 82, p. 178. The exact
term used in the description is longobardo-casstnese, which is another name
for Beneventan.
2 That the letters a and / do not have the typical Beneventan forms is
mentioned by Prof. Cipolla.
3 The Beneventan characters used are those of the developed period.
CHAPTER XIII
DATING
THE dating of Beneventan MSS., it is generally admitted,
presents peculiar difficulty because the script developed very
gradually during its long life of five centuries, and the essential
forms of the letters remained virtually unchanged throughout.
The ability to date Beneventan MSS. with any degree of
accuracy can, therefore, be gained only from a careful study
of the dated monuments of the script. A comparison of the
dated monuments shows that certain features as punctua-
tion, abbreviations, initials had a distinct development, the
different stages of which coincide with definite periods of time.
A knowledge of these stages, therefore, is most important for
us, since they furnish us with objective dating criteria. A full
discussion of the material upon which the dating criteria are
based will be found in the preceding chapters. Here it will
suffice to repeat the main facts bearing on the subject of
dating.
In dating Beneventan MSS. scholars have often disagreed
by several centuries. Montfaucon (Bibl. Bibl. i. 217) assigns
Monte Cassino 3 (Alcuin, &c.) to the i ith century. The same
date is given by Thiele (Antike Himmelsbilder , p. 161). The
Cassinese tradition (Caravita, Tosti, Piscicelli Taeggi) favours
the year 812. This date has been accepted in our text-books
(Reusens, Elements de pal. p. 64, Thompson, Handbook of Gr.
and Lat. Pal., p. 220, and Introd. to Gr. and Lat. Pal., p. 351).
But Rodolico has correctly assigned the MS. to the end of
the Qth century (Archivio Stor. Ital. xxvii (1901) 326). The
precise date (874-92) is furnished by the paschal tables
(Loew, Die alt es ten Kalendarien aus Monte Cassino, p. 8, and
Script. Benev., pi. 24). Vatic, lat. 1197 (Vitae SS.) is assigned
DATING 315
to the 9th century by B. Krusch (Mon. Germ. Hist. Auctt.
Antiq. iv, pars 2, p. vii). The MS. has, however, on fol. xiii
some verses in honour of Bp. Walter of Sulmona (t A.D. 1 104)
which are almost contemporary. The editors of the Nouveau
Trait^, iii. 293, ascribe Rome Corsinian. 777 (Vitae SS.) to the
loth century. Internal evidence shows that it could not have
been written before the i3th century (Script. Benev., pi. 93).
The 9th-century glossary Vatic, lat. 3320 (Script. Benev., pi. 18)
is assigned by P. de Nolhac to the nth (La Bibl. de Fulvio
Orsini, p. 242). For the divergent views expressed on the
date of Vatic, lat. 3227 (Cicero) see M. Seibel, 'Wilhelm
v. Christ zum 60. Geburtstag/ in Abhandl. aus d. Gebiet
d. klass. Alter turns- Wiss. (Munich 1891) p. 17. Many similar
examples might be given. The heretical views put forth by
A. Marignan with regard to the dates of many Beneventan
MSS. (Le moyen age, ser. ii, vol. xiv (1910) i sqq.) are not to
be taken seriously.
In dating any MS., as Mabillon wisely taught, the general
impression should be the first guide. 1 The next step is to
confirm or correct that impression by an examination of details.
In dating a Beneventan MS. it is important to ask if it origi-
nates in Monte Cassino or not. For the script of Monte
Cassino is often half a century in advance of the writing
produced in other centres. The development was more rapid
at Monte Cassino and the decline set in sooner there than
elsewhere in the Beneventan zone. Another consideration to
be borne in mind is the nature of the MS. Liturgical books
are usually written with great care and, contrasted with con-
temporary MSS. of profane contents and less careful penman-
ship, seem more recent than the latter. Experience teaches
that it is impossible to be certain of the date of a MS. from
a specimen of one or two pages, since contemporary hands
occasionally show in the same MS. so marked a difference in
1 Mabillon, De re diplomatica, p. 241: 'Non ex sola scriptura, neque ex
uno solo characterismo, sed ex omnibus simul de vetustis chartis pronuntian-
dum ' (cited by Traube, Vorles. u. Abhand. i. 23).
3 i6 DATING
style and skill as to seem several generations apart. 1 The colour
of the ink is not a trustworthy criterion (see above, p. 286 sq.).
Although it is true that the essential forms of the letters
remained constant, there were considerable minor variations
from age to age, and this variation constitutes a very good
criterion for dating, as may be seen from the facsimile speci-
mens given in chapter vii. There is lack of uniformity and
precision in the earliest period (saec. viii-ix). In the formative
period (saec. x) there is still a good deal of freedom and swing
in the descending strokes. In the mature period (saec. xi-xii)
the script is extremely uniform, fine and heavy pen-strokes
alternating with perfect regularity. The very angular appear-
ance of the script belongs to the period of decline (saec. xiii).
The letters are poorly made and the strokes fail to join
properly. It should be noted that MSS. produced in the
district of Bari and vicinity (including Dalmatia) are in a
roundish type of writing which lacks the strong contrast of
fine and heavy stroke. This makes MSS. of the Bari type 2
appear older than contemporary MSS. originating in centres like
Monte Cassino, Benevento, or Naples. The size of the letters
is no criterion. Single letters are, on the whole, dangerous
guides, 3 the letter r excepted (see above, p. 137).
Next to the form of letters may be mentioned the form of
the points used in punctuation. The two points and virgule
(/), which combine to denote the main pause, are differently
made in the different epochs of the script. Their use by first
hand is a sign that the MS. is not older than the end of the gth
century. Especially characteristic is the form of the virgule.
In MSS. of the end of the Qth and most of the loth century
it is a sinuous line made with a free swing. In MSS. of the
mature period the virgule has more the form of our comma
and the arrangement of points and virgule is more uniform and
regular. In a number of MSS. of the i2th and i3th centuries
1 A good example is Monte Cassino 103 saec. xi.
2 See above, pp. 150 sqq.
;! See description of letters a and / given above, pp. 133 and 138 sq.
DATING 317
the two points are often joined, forming a zigzag line. In some
of them the head of the virgule is merged with the two points
(see above, p. 233). The simple oblique stroke (/) marking
the slightest pause is not found before the nth century.
The presence of the interrogation-sign, if by the first hand,
indicates that the MS. is not older than the end of the 9th
century. The use of the interrogation-sign (other than v) at
the end of the question as well as over some word at the begin-
ning of the question, argues that the MS. is not older than the
nth century (see above, pp. 244 sqq.).
The stroke over two consecutive i's (it) does not come in
before the 1 1 th century. The stroke over every i dates from
the 1 3th (see above, p. 277).
The exclusive use of the acute accent, regardless of quantity,
merely to mark stress, is not older than the nth century
(see above, p. 275 sq.).
The use of the hyphen at the end of a line to indicate
division of a word dates from the i2th century (see above,
p. 277 sq.).
Ruling with plummet is not found in MSS. anterior to the
1 2th century (see above, p. 293 sq.).
The style of initials is a trustworthy index of the age of
a MS., provided the ornamentation is contemporary with the
script (see above, p. 298 sq.).
Next to the script itself, the abbreviations are the most reli-
able objective criteria. As certain abbreviated forms do not
come into use before a given period, their very presence in
a MS. supplies a terminus a quo. No conclusion, however,
can be drawn from their absence, since in the case of some
MSS. (for instance, liturgical books used for reading aloud)
scribes purposely refrained from using all the abbreviations
they knew. The syllable tur was abbreviated differently in
different periods. From the end of the 8th century to the
middle of the loth 1 MSS. use /with a horizontal stroke (cc) or
1 There are a few later examples.
o
i8 DATING
flourish. From about the middle of the loth to the first third
of the i ith they use t with a comma (cr 1 ). In all later MSS.
tur is expressed by means of t with a 2-shaped stroke (cr)
(see above, pp. 217 sqq.).
fy = 'eius is not found before the end of the 9th century. 1
i in comes into use in the nth century. 2
ois, 01, &c. = omnis, omni, &c. do not antedate the 1 1 th
century. 3
or = igitur I . f
I rarely occur before the i ith century. 4
% = ergo J
Abbreviation by means of suprascript letters (e.g. c = era,
jr=gra, p=pra, &c.) dates from the nth century. It does
not grow common before the end of the century. In the
1 3th century the number of such abbreviations is greatly
increased. 5
I have here enumerated the most striking examples. There
are other, more delicate criteria, which do not permit of such
simple formulation. Moreover, the criteria given above are
not to be used mechanically. No date ought to be based on
any single criterion alone. The date suggested by one cri-
terion can be relied on only when it is not contradicted by other
tests, especially by the test of the general impression.
Our concern being with one script, it is unnecessary to
discuss here the aids furnished by internal evidence, which
hold good for all kinds of writing. But attention should be
called to one common error, namely, that of dating MSS. con-
taining paschal tables by means of the first year in those
tables. 6 The assumption which underlies such an error is that
the tables begin with the actual year of writing. This is
1 See above, p. 200. 2 See p. 205. s See p. 211 sq.
4 See p. 203 sq. 5 See p. 174.
6 Rodolico made this error when he assigned Monte Cassino 230 to the year
969 (Archiv. Stor. Ital. xxvii. 331, n. i). See also Loew, Die dltesten Kalen-
darien aus Monte Cassino, p. 3.
DATING 319
rarely the case. In the great majority of MSS. paschal tables
begin with a year which is the first of a i 9-year cycle, the tables
being arranged in blocks of 19 years. As their object was to
tell the day on which Easter would fall, it was useless to copy
tables for years gone by (unless the tables were intended for
inserting annalistical entries). Accordingly the inference to
be drawn from the tables is that the actual year of writing is
contained in the first cycle of 19 years. But a date thus
gained must not be accepted blindly. To be thoroughly
acceptable it must be confirmed by the verdict of the script.
CHAPTER XIV
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
FEW scribes have left us their names. Modesty may or may
not account for this reticence. But judging from the quality
of the penmanship which often goes with signed MSS., it
would seem that only the better scribes signed. Perhaps it
was not permitted to any but the master-scribes to indulge in
a subscription. How else are we to explain the presence of
only one signature in a MS. on which three scribes collabora-
ted ? Is it merely that one of the three was communicative ?
Or is it that the scribe who signed his name had the right and
sanction to do so ? Whatever be the true explanation, it is
certainly a fact that MSS. destined for dedication copies, as
for instance, Monte Cassino 99, written by Leo and presented
by John, were usually executed by the best scribes available,
and such copies most often mention the scribe. So the signa-
ture is in all probability a title of distinction. If this is true,
then those names which have come down to us have gained in
significance as being those of the leading copyists of their time
and scriptorium ; and we are but rewarding merit in handing
them on to posterity.
If we are to take their own word for it, scribes did not enjoy
their work. They are fond of telling us that their writing was
not done merely with three fingers, but that eyes and neck
felt the strain and the whole body was in pain :
Tria digita scribunt
sed totum corpus laborat.
And they vow that the last line is as welcome to them as
land to the weary mariner. Although these are conventional
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 321
phrases, used by hundreds of scribes, they express a sentiment
which doubtless has a goodly stratum of truth in it.
The following list contains all the scribes who have come to
my notice. For Monte Cassino scribes I depend almost wholly
upon Caravita, 1 whose patient and careful researches have been
invaluable. No attempt is made to emend the subscriptions.
I have confined myself to scribal subscriptions as opposed to
editorial ones. 2 MSS. reproduced in Scriptura Beneventana
are preceded by an asterisk.
1. Aandoys (?). In his subscription on p. 416 of Monte
Cassino 81 saec. xi, containing St. Gregory's Moralia (books
xxii-xxxv), 3 Aandoys uses the same formula that we find in
two other Monte Cassino MSS. of the Moralia (Nos. *77 and
80) written by John and Stephen. 4
Explicit, iuuante domino, liber xxxv
Hoc in libro constant uolumina
Non plus xiii
Papa a Gregorio
Edita sanctissimo
Hunc Aandoys (?) scribere decreuit. atque compleuit
Quisquis quern tetigerit. Sit illi lota manus.
Aperiat dominus lectori, per omnia sensum.
Scriptori autem. perpetuum regnum. Amen.
In the 1 5th century the MS. belonged to the Monastery of
S. Maria di Albaneta, about a mile from Monte Cassino.
2. Antonius. Monte Cassino 324 saec. xi in., containing
1 Caravita, / codici e k arti a Monte Cassino^ vol. ii (Monte Cassino 1870).
1 The subject of editorial subscriptions has been treated by O. Jahn,
F. Haase, and especially by Reifferscheid in his De Latinorum codicum
subscriptionibus (Breslau 1872-3). For recent literature see Traube, Varies.
u. Abhandl. ii. 124. A dissertation on this subject is to appear in Traube's
Quellenu. Untersuchungen. Beneventan MSS. containing such subscriptions are
the Bamberg Cassiodorus (HJ iv 1 5), the Cassinese MS. with grammatical
treatises (Paris lat. 7530), and the Laurentian Tacitus and Apuleius (68. 2),
likewise from Monte Cassino.
* Caravita, op. cit. ii. 75 ; Bibl. Casin. ii. 301.
4 See below, pp. 325 and 333.
14 Y
322 SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
lulianus Toletanus' Prognosticon, was written in part by An-
tonius, who signs his name as follows :
ego autem fratres minumus omnium antonius pauca ex multa eius
acta quae oculis meis uidi prout capere potui adiuuante domino scripsi.
Ipso auxiliante qui cum patre cum sancto spiritu in unitate uiuit et
regnat deus in secula seculorum. 1
3. Ascarus of Carminiano. The huge volume of Haymo's
Commentary on the Pauline Epistles, now * Naples VI B 3, was
executed between 1145 an< ^ JI ^5> m Carminiano near Troja, 2
by the subdeacon Ascarus, who employed twenty years of his
life upon the task, as we learn from the following subscription
on fol. 219, written in capitals and enclosed in a decorated
border :
HIC LIBER FINITUS
ATQUE SCRIPTUS EST
DIGITIS ASCARI
ECCLESIE SANCTI
LAURENCII IN CARMI
NIANO SUBDIACONI
ETAS CUIUS ANNOS
VIGINTI OCCUPABAT.
The exact date and hour when the MS. was begun we
learn from a note at the foot of the first page :
Anno millesimo centesimo quadragesimo quinto, Mense februario,
Indictione octaua, Die iouis, primo int(eruallo ?) hie liber inceptus est,
cuius sumptus petrus malum seruitium bone memorie in omnibus
operibus ecclesie sancti laurentii in carminiano primus distributor
extitit. In quo tempore domnus hismah(i)ele sacerdos ecclesiam
procurabat.
4. Autaris. On the MS. of Prudentius, *Monte Cassino
374saec. ix/x, two scribes collaborated, and the better one of
the two signed his name in red uncials at the end of a book
on p. 21 Q. 3 But for some reason, perhaps out of professional
1 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 87. * See above, p. 59.
* The page is reproduced in Script. Benev^ pi. 28.
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 323
jealousy, perhaps as a punishment, his name was erased.
I make out the name to be Autaris :
EGO QUI SCRTPSI AUTARIS PECCATQR.
5. Causus. The MS. Monte Cassino 442 saec. xi contains
the Regula S. Benedicti, with glosses and other matter.
According to Caravita * the first part was written by the monk
Causus, under whose portrait on fol. 80 we read :
Pro anima Causi monachi hec facta est. Omnis qui legitis Orate
pro eum Causo monacho.
The book may have been written by another monk and
only presented by Causus pro anima sua.
6. Eustasius of Benevento. The handsome MS. of the
martyrology and St. Benedict's Rule, which now forms *Vatic.
lat. 5949 saec. xiiex., was executed for the nuns of S. Sophia
of Benevento by the scribe Eustasius, and decorated by a
monk from Sipontum. On fol. 1 78 we see a seated figure at
work on this very MS., with the page open at the words Regulam
sancti Benedicti? Over the figure is written M. Sipontinus,
but the name is above an erasure. Another name had stood
there, presumably that of Eustasius. In front of the seated
figure is one standing. It wears the monk's hood, holds
a cane in the left hand, and gives the benediction with the
right. This figure had a name, but it has been utterly
erased. If we examine the sixteen verses of the subscription
which follows, the reason for the erasure may become plainer.
For the verse in which the prior's name is given is also over
an erasure. There may have been a change of priors. The
scribe may first have inserted the name of the prior during
whose time the main part of the book had been written, but
desiring perhaps to please the new prior he made the change.
From the way in which Eustasius calls himself an ' unsurpassed
scribe ' it may not be too bold to argue that his was the name
written over the seated figure. The verses are as follows :
1 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 57 ; G. Morin, Reg. S. Bened. traditio, &c., p. xv.
2 The page is reproduced in Script. Benev.^ pi. 89.
Y 2
324 SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
Omnis huius operis decor quern delectat,
Dum inspectat oculis manibus attrectat,
Aures eius monitis internas inflectat ;
Lucra nam prudentibus maxima conuectat.
Tetras nam explicitum opus per auctores,
Praua queque resecat instruitque mores ;
Mulcet uisum litteras nodos et colores,
Ingerens optutibus excellentiores.
Huius sacer edidit uerba benedictus,
Scriptor est eustasius scriptor indeuictus ;
Is cuius imperio liber est conscriptus,
Prior monasterii Johannes est dictus.
Sipontinus denique potens in sculturis,
Viuidis coloribus auro celaturis,
Decorauit uariis nodis et figuris,
Miris hunc efficiens mirum ligaturis. 1
7. Grimoaldus of Monte Cassino. The beautiful folio
volume of homilies, now *Monte Cassino 109, was written in
the first half of the nth century by Grimoald, who is in every
respect the immediate precursor of the excellent Desiderian
scribe Leo. On fol. 148, inside the circle of an initial letter o t
are pictured the figures of Christ seated, with the Virgin on
his right and St. Benedict on his left, and the monk Grimoald,
volume in hand, being dedicated to Christ by the saint.
Under the figure of the monk we read :
Grimoaldus diaconus et monachus scripsit. 2
8. Grimoaldus. The MS. Rome Vallicell. D 36 saec. xii r
containing the Acts of the Apostles, has on fol. 100 this sub-
scription :
Sancte iohannes intercede pro anima grimoaldi scriptoris.
9. laquintus of Capua. The achievement of this scribe
1 These verses have been edited, with many errors, by d'Agincourt, Histoire
de tart, &c., iii., pi. 69, fig. i (Engl. ed., London 1847). Eustasius is mentioned
by Bradley, Dictionary of Miniaturists, &c. i. 316.
2 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 76 sq.; Bill Casin. ii. 470; Piscicelli Taeggi, Lc
miniature nei codici cassinesi, pi. i.
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 325
marks one of the milestones in Beneventan calligraphy. He
worked in the abbey of St. Benedict of Capua while Aligern
was its abbot (i. e. before the year 949). We know this from
the inscriptions at the beginning and end of *Monte Cassino
269 containing the Moralia of St. Gregory. The following
words, written in capitals of various colours, occur on the first
page of the MS. :
INCIPIT IN EXPOSI
TIONE BEA TI IOB PARS
MORALIO RVM QVAR
TA SANCTI GREGORII
PAPAE VRBIS ROMAE QVAE
IN LIBROS SEX DISTIN
GVITVR QVEM ALI
GERNVS VE NERABILIS
BENEDICTI MONASTERII
ABBAS IPSI VS CENOBII
CAPVANI FIERI PRE
CE PIT. 1
At the foot of the last page (351) this subscription is seen :
Qui libro legit in isto, oret pro laquinto sacerdote et monacho scri-
ptore, ut deum habeat adiutorem. 2
10. lohannes. On p. 490 of *Monte Cassino 77 (saec.x,
second half), which contains books xxviii-xxxv of St.
Gregory's Moralia, we have the same subscription as in
Monte Cassino 8 1 , written by Aandoys, 3 except that in the
third line octo is substituted for xiii, and in the sixth line
lohannes stands for Aandoys*
11. lohannes. In Monte Cassino 760 saec. xi, a volume of
the Old Testament which ends with the book of Ruth, we
read on fol. 2i9 v :
1 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 34 sq.; Bibl. Casin. v, pars i, p. 22 sq.
2 Cf. Piscicelli Taeggi, Pal artistica, &c., pi. 3. Bradley, I.e. ii. 143.
* See above, p. 321, under Aandoys.
4 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 33 ; BibL Casin. ii. 293.
3 26 SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
Explicit liber Ruth deo gratias dicite omnes. Amen. Rogo uos
omnes christicole qui in hunc librum legite . . . Orate pro lohannes
indignus Sacerdos ad Dominum. Ut meis uestrisque peccaminibus
indulgeat ipse. Qui uiuit et Regnat per secula cuncta. Amen. 1
In the 1 3th century the MS. lay in the monastery of
St. Benedict in Cesamo.
12. lohannes. Monte Cassino 543 saec. xi, containing the
Prophets, has on fol. 204 a subscription strikingly like the one
in Monte Cassino 760 (see above, no. n). Both MSS. are
doubtless the work of one scribe.
Explicit malachias propheta. Deo gratias Amen. Rogo uos christi-
cole qui in hunc librum legitis. Ut pro me lohannes indignus famulus
preces dirigatis ad dominum. Ut ille qui regit cuncta climata. Me et
uos perducat ad regna etherea. Amen. 2
The book belonged to the house of St. Benedict in Cesamo,
as appears from the ex libris on fol. i.
1 3. lohannes Capuanus. The MS. *Cava 24, containing
the Vitae SS. Patrum Cavensium, marks the last milestone
in Beneventan calligraphy. Though written in 1295 it is still
surprisingly free from the worst features of the period of decay.
This is due to the excellence of the scribe, of whom we read
on fol. 3 7, col. 2 as follows :
Huius scriptoris Capuani uita lohannis,
Sit multis annis quern ditet celicus annis,
Qui monachus fidus, lucet quasi nobile sydus,
In christo nitidus uirtutum cui placet ydus.
Quod iussit fieri scrutatrix sedula ueri,
Plena dei donis abbatis cura leonis.
Cenobio felix clua abbas crimine mundus,
Et post in celis leo militet iste secundus. 3
1 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 86. a Caravita, op. cit. ii. 86.
J There is a faulty transcription of this in Muratori, Scriptt. vi. 236, and in
P. Guillaume, Essai historique sur I'abbaye de Cava, p. 1 80. In the penultimate
line Guillaume reads incorrectly elucet.
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 327
On fol. 36, on the completion of the Vitae, the scribe ex-
presses his feelings in the familiar verses :
Laus tibi sit christe
quoniam liber explicit iste.
14. lohannes Diaconus. At the end of the third book
of Isidore's Sententiae in * Vatic. Regin.lat. 1823 saec. ix, we
read on fol. 1 1 8 as follows :
Ego lohannes quamuis indignus
diaconus qui hoc codicem exara
uit omnes qui hunc librum
lecturi l estis oret pro me peccatorem si deum
habeatis protectorem. 2
15. lohannes Diaconus of Naples. The second part
of the Gesta Episcoporum Neapolitanorum, in the MS.* Vatic,
lat. 5007 saec. x in., breaks off with the life of Athanasius
(1872). Another hand begins with these words :
Hucusque lohannes Diaconus.
Que sequuntur Petrus edidit
Neapolitan^ sedis subdiaconus. 3
According to Waitz the MS. may be an autograph ; which
seems to me probable. Thus John and Peter may also be
regarded as scribes.
1 6. lohannes Presbiter of Troja. One of the scribes who
worked on Monte Cassino 552 saec. xi, containing the Acts of
the Apostles, gives his name on fol. 103 in a long and wordy
1 Up to here the writing is in uncial. The rest is in minuscule.
2 Facs. in Script. Benev.^ pi. 17 ; Arevalo, Isidoriana, iv, cap. ci. 21 (Migne,
P. L. Sly col. 849). Arevalo, a propos of this subscription, mentions several
roth-century instances of this name, and tries to identify our scribe with them,
but this is impossible, since our MS. is assuredly of the 9th century ; Arevalo,
op. cit. iii, cap. Ixxxv. 6 (Migne, P. L. 81, col. 626). But the subscription may
not be original. The way the scribe spread his letters to write the word exarauit
suggests that he was copying.
3 See Script. Benev.^ pi. 41, and Mon. Germ. Hist. SS. Rer. Lang, et Ital.,
pp. 399 and 435.
328 SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
subscription redeemed by the literary allusion : e Troia aduena
fuit et ille. He came from Troja, a town east of Monte
Cassino and north of Benevento. Cf. subscriptions 1 1 and 12.
Rogo uos omnes christicole qui in hunc librum legitis. ut oretis pro
me ad dominum. Aut si minus siue plus inueneritis. Rogo uos omnes
emendate ilium, quia sicut nautes desiderat portum uidere. ita scri-
ptor desiderat librum complere. Scriptoris si forte uelis cognoscere
onoma. Presbyter uocitatur iohannes. et ipse indignus. E troia
aduena fuit et ille. Hoc opus auxiliante deo perfecit et ipse. Ipsius
ad laudem et sancti patris abbatis benedicti. Oro ne dominum cesses
lector rogitare. Ut meis uestrisque peccaminibus indulgeat ipse.
Qui sine fine regnat. In saecula eterna. Amen. 1
17. Iohannes Subdiaconus. At the end of De exitu
Troianorum historia, on fol. 20 of *Flor. Laurent. 66. 40
saec. ix ex., occurs the subscription :
EXPAICIT
IOHANNES . SUBDIAC.
SCRIPSIT. 2
The intrusion of a Greek letter or two in a colophon is
a practice of which Irish and English scribes were particularly
fond. 3
1 8. Iohannes Subdiaconus of Monte Cassino. Three
scribes collaborated on the MS * Monte Cassino 5 containing
Ambrose on Luke. At the end of the volume, fol. 268, the
last scribe has left us a long subscription with some particulars
which date the MS. in the abbacy of Atenolf (101 1-22) :
Prologus scriptoris :
Christe qui sedis summe in arce.
Iohannes Subdiaconus qui tertia pars de me scripsit. chrfste parce
eis delictis.
Ad omnes qui et legunt. christe parce eis in euum.
1 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 58.
9 Cf. Vitelli-Paoli, Collezione Fiorentina, fasc. i, pi. 3 ; Bandini, CataL Cod.
lat. BibL Laur. i, col. 812.
s The MS. shows other Insular symptoms (Traube, Perrona Scottorum,
p. 496) and the subscription may have been copied from an Insular original.
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 329
Sicut qui nauigat desiderat portum. ita scriptor nouissimum
uersum.
Qui nescit scribere. putat nullus esse laborem. Sed qui habet
intentos oculos et inclinata ceruice.
Tria digita scribunt. sed totum corpus laborat.
Rogo uos omnes qui hie mellifluos flores carpitis, cum hie aliquid
minus inueneritis non maledicta ingeratis sed ut ueniam
tribuatis. Legentis. uitam. Scriptori. ueniam. Possidentis.
salutem. 1
After a short space there follow (p. 531) eighteen verses in
honour of St. Benedict, of which I give only the opening and
closing lines, which contain the facts that interest us here :
O benedicte pater, monachorum pastor, alumne.
Exiguum munus suscipe queso libens
Quod tibi nunc supplex Atenolfus optulit abbas
Et forsan satagis scriptoris nosse uocamen
Johannes subdiaconus et monachus indignus peccator.
1 9. Johannes Vngarus. The latter part of Monte Cassino
466 contains the Passion of St. Thomas of Canterbury in charac-
ters of the end of the I3th century. At the end of the Passio
a later hand wrote in poor Beneventan letters
Istum librum scripsit frater Johannes Vngarus.
Caravita suggests that this may be the monk of that name
who died in I466. 2 The script is against such a supposition.
20. Leo of Monte Cassino. The prince of all Beneventan
scribes was, as we should expect, a monk of Monte Cassino ;
and his performances fall in the period of Desiderius (1058-
87), when the abbey was at the height of its glory. On the
first page of *Monte Cassino 99, a beautiful volume of homilies,
we have a picture of St. Benedict enthroned, Abbot Desiderius
laying his arm about the priest John, who is holding the dedi-
1 Cf. Caravita, op. cit. ii. 63 sq. ; Reifferscheid, Bibliotheca patrum lat.
Ital ii(i872) 313.
J Caravita, op. cit. ii. 317.
330 SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
cation volume, and the scribe Leo kneeling before the saint.
John has just assumed the Benedictine habit, in honour of
which event he is dedicating this volume to the patron saint.
The dedication verses are :
Accipe dignanter quod fert pater alme. iohannes.
Munus. et aeterni sibi confer munera regni.
Supplicis ac uotis plus inde faueto leonis
Est studio cuius opus actum codicis huius.
The exact date of the MS. we learn from a note on the
next page (fol. i y ) :
Anno domenice incarnationis millesimo septuagesimo secundo. In-
dictione decima, &C. 1
and
Huius scriptorem pie Christe Leonem
In libro uitae dignanter supplico scribe.
21. Leo Ostiensis. The author of the excellent Chron-
icle of Monte Cassino merits a place among the best scribes,
to judge from the specimens of his writing which are still
extant. The corrections, additions, and marginalia in * Munich
4623 (Chron. Casin.) are by Leo ; 2 likewise the historical
marginal entries in the calendar of * Vatic. Borgian, lat. 211,
and the fine writing in Monte Cassino 413, containing the Life
of St. Mennas.
22. Madelbertos. On p. 269 of Monte Cassino 439
saec. x, containing a glossary, Eucherius, canones, &c., the
scribe wrote, half in Greek, half in Latin, what may be pre-
sumed to be his name :
MADEABEPTCOC. 3
The MS. probably comes from Apulia.
1 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 150 sq. ; Bibl. Casin. ii. 397 (gives older literature);
Piscicelli Taeggi, Le miniature, &c. (unpaged), describes Monte Cassino 99 and
reproduces some drawings.
2 Mon. Ger. Hist. SS. vii, pi. iv ; A. Chroust, Monumenta Palaeographica,
Denkmaler der Schreibkunst, Ser. i, Lief, x, pi. 2.
3 Cf. A. Amelli in Spicileg. Casin. i (1893) p. Ixxxv and pi. 5.
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 331
23. Maio Diaconus of Spalato. In some fragments of
a psalter now preserved in the Archiepiscopal library of
Agram occurs the subscription which tells us that the volume
was executed by Maio at the order of Archbishop Paul
(1015-30):
Arbiter eterne, solus mirum qui fincxerat globum, iube hunc
uolumen tuo sacro sereno aspicere uultu, quod pro suam adque
suis debita obtulit domno Paulus uenerabilis archiepiscopus, hoc
librum psalmorum ad laudem sanctorum martirum, Domnii, Anastasi
atque sanctorum Cosmae et Damiani. Sed et uos quoque, studiosi
lectores, obnixe precamur, ut cuique manu uenerit, in uestris precibus
me commemoretis. Rex regum dicite cuncti, christe deus, abde ei
scelus. Me simul infimus diacono Maioni scriptore, ut et uos deum
habeatis adiutorem et in euum feliciter letetis. 1
24. Martinus of Monte Cassino. In the year 1010 Martin
wrote the folio volume of the Lives of the Saints, now * Monte
Cassino 148, as we learn from the subscription on fol. 253 :
Hunc librum scriptum anno domi
nice incarnationis millesimo. x
Indictione octaba. feliciter.
Martinus peccator et scriptor libri
huius habebit in conuersione
monachorum annos iii. 2
25. Paulus Diaconus. Monte Cassino 349 saec. xi in.,
containing the Acts, Apocalypse, and Epistles, was written in
part by Paulus Diaconus. The verses on p. 292, which I
take to be the scribe's, conclude with the words :
Scriptoris si forte uellis cognoscere nomen
Paulus diaconus uocitatur et ipse monachus.
Hoc opus auxiliante deo perfecit et ille.
Ipsius ad laudem et sancti archangeli michaelis.
Oro ne dominum cesses lector rogitare,
Gratum ut accipiat scriptoris uotum et ipse. Deo gratias.
Alius incepit ego finibi. 3
1 Cf. Raki, Star ine Jugoslav enske Akademije, vii (1875) 47 sqq. ; facs. pi. 2.
2 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 63 ; BibL Casin. iii. 306.
3 Tosti, Storia della badza, &c., i. 104 ; Caravita, op. cit. ii. 49.
332 SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS
The MS. probably came from the monastery of St. Michael
near Monte Cassino.
26. Petrus Diaconus of Naples. Petrus belongs to our
list of scribes if we are right in regarding the end of the Gesta
Episcoporum Neapolitanorum (*Vatic. lat. 5007) as autograph
(see above, p. 327, under lohannes Diaconus of Naples).
27. Savinus of Albaneta. The abbey of Saint Mary of
Albaneta, near Monte Cassino, was founded by Liutius. 1
While Liutius was prior of it (1025-55) Savinus wrote the
homilies and other tracts which form the MS. *Monte Cassino
305. At the end, on p. 686, we read the subscription proper,
the dedication, and the usual imprecation :
DEO GRATIAS. Ceptum est. et perfectum est.
Ego frater Sauinus scripsi.
Omnes qui legitis, Rogo uos orate pro me peccatore.
Etherii rutilant. hie regis dogmata clara.
Faustas que mentes semper ad astra ferunt.
Hec uia christigeros deducit ad atria uite.
Hec celum pandens cordis opaca fugat.
O ueneranda . . .
Hoc sacrum munus suscipe queso placens.
Quod mente fideli optulimus nos tibi.
Liutius PRIOR et Sauinus scriptor atque monachus iure.
Vinclis huic anathematis innodauit in euum.
Hunc librum istinc qui demere temptauerit.
Obsitus atque tue metuende molitus ire.
Ultima iudicia pro hoc tibi soluat ait.
Redde uicem se . . . idus opimum.
Leti percipiat gaudia summa dei. 2
We further learn that the MS. was bound in the i3th century
by Galterius :
Ego frater Galterius relegaui istum librum. Rogo ut omnes qui
legitis orate pro me. 3
1 Cf. Leo Ostiensis, Chron. Casin. ii. 30. For further literature see Bibl.
Casin. v, pars i, p. 78.
2 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 73; Bibl. Casin. v, pars i, p. 78.
3 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 69.
SCRIBES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 333
28. Stephanus. Monte Cassino 80 saec. xi, containing St.
Gregory's Moralia, books xxii-xxxv, was written by Stephen,
whose subscription is the same as that in * Monte Cassino 77
and 8 1, the only change being in the division of the lines. 1
See above, pp. 321 and 325, under Aandoys and lohannes.
2 9- Symeon. The well-known Register of St. Angelo in
Formis near Capua was in all probability the work of Symeon.
At the end of the volume (* Monte Cassino Regesto 4 a. 1 137-
66), on a page originally left blank, we read :
Ego frater symeon diaconus et monachus scriptorque. 2
Caravita conjectures that he is also the miniator and illumi-
nator of the volume.
30. Turbonus. Monte Cassino 23 saec. xi in., containing
St. Augustine's Commentary on John, has on p. 121 the follow-
ing subscription, which doubtless discloses the name of the
scribe :
Rex deus immense : quo constat machina mundi
Infelix ego quicquid posco : perfice clemens.
Ab hoc precor. quicumque frater legens
istum percurrerit librum
Praecando dicite. deus coeli dele cuncta Turboni
indigni diaconi et monachi facinora
Ac clementer cunctis da peccatis suis ueniam
Et in coelis mansionem pariter cum omnibus sanctis. Amen. 3
1 John has twelve lines from Hoc in libro to pefpctuum regnum. Stephen
puts them into six. Cf. Caravita, op. cit. ii. 52 ; Bibl. Casin. ii. 299.
2 Caravita, op. cit. i. 302 sq. and ii. n.
3 Caravita, op. cit. ii. 52.
APPENDIX
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
NOTE. Italics are used when the portion of the MS. written in Beneventan is
insignificant or fragmentary.
The date assigned to a MS. is an approximate one. In this list saec. xi l = first
half of the nth century, saec. x? = second half ; saec. xiin. = the period between
1000 and 1030, saec. xiex. = the period between 1070 and 1 100 / saec. xifxii =
circa noo.
* The asterisk denotes that the MS. is reproduced in ( Scrip fur a Beneventana '.
ABERDEEN.
King's College C 2 3. 63. Written partly in ordinary minuscule,
saec. xii in. (Augustinus, De doctrina Christiana), partly in
contemporary Beneventan (Beda in Cantica Canticorum).
AGRAM.
Archiepiscopal Library. Psalterium (s.n.). The last nine leaves
are in Beneventan, a. 1015-30. See p. 63.
AREZZO.
Fraternita di S. Maria vi 3. Composed of two MSS., saec. xi 2 :
(i) foil. 1-15. Hilarius, Liber mysteriorum et hymnorum.
(ii) foil. 16-37. ' Peregrinatio Silviae.' See p. 70.
ASSISI.
S. Francesco Sacro Convento A 258. Palimpsest. Primary script
is Beneventan, saec. x/xi ; upper script (Sedulius, Liber
Paschalis) is saec. xi ex. (according to Bethmann in Pertz*
Archiv, xii. 540).
BAMBERG.
Konigliche Bibliothek.
B v 19 (Pair. 101). Patristica. Written in ordinary minuscule. Four lines
of Beneventan writing \ saec. x, on the fly-leaf.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 335
BAMBERG (cont.).
Konigliche Bibliothek.
*E 1114 (Hist. 6). Saec. ix/x. Victor Vitensis, Hist, persecutionis
Wandalicae (foil. 1-88, in ordinary minuscule) ; Paulus
Diaconus, Hist. Romana (foil. 89-19^ are in Beneventan,
foil. 1947-248, in ordinary minuscule).
*HJivi5(Patr. 61). Saec.viiiex. Cassiodorus,Institutiones; Gregor.
Turon., De cursu stellarum; Isidorus, De natura rerum, &c.
*Pni2o (Can. i). Saec. x in. Auxilius et Eugenius Vulgarius,
De Formosiana calamitate.
BARI.
Archivio del Duomo. Two rolls in Beneventan writing :
(i) *Exultet Roll (8 pieces) and Benedictio fontis, &c. (4 pieces),
saec. xi 1 (ante a. 1067).
(ii) Exultet Roll, saec. xii, ut vid. See pp. 67 and 151.
BENEVENTO.
Biblioteca Capitolare.
in i. Saec. xi/xii. Vitae Sanctorum.
Hi 2. Saec. xi/xii. Vitae SS.
in 3. Saec. xi/xii. Vitae SS.
1114. Saec. xi/xii. Lectionarium.
1115. Saec. xi/xii. Lectionarium.
ill 6. Saec. xi. Lectionarium.
in 7. Saec. xi/xii. Lectionarium.
m 8. Saec. x/xii. Lectionarium (ab Epiph. usque ad Domin.
Palm.).
*m 9. Saec. ix in. Ambrosius Autpertus, Speculum parvulorum,
seu Expos, libri Apocal.
iv 10. Saec. x/xi. Lectionarium.
iv ii. Saec. x/xi. Lectionarium.
iv 12. Saec. xi/xii. Lectionarium (pro Domin. et feriis Quadra-
gesimae).
iv 13. Saec. x/xi. Lectionarium.
iv 14. Saec. x/xi. Libri Regum, Parabol., Eccles., Cantica Can-
tic., Sapient., et Vitae SS.
iv 15. Saec. x/xi. Gregorius M., Moralia in lob.
iv 16. Saec. xii/xiii. Gregor. M. in Ezechielem.
rv 17. Saec. xii. Ambrosius in Symbolum Apostolicum.
336 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
BENEVENTO (cont.).
Biblioteca Capitolare.
iv 18. Saec. xi. Lectionarium (in festiv. per annum).
v ig. Saec. xii. Breviarium (a festo S. Nicolai usque ad fer.
iv Hebd. iv Quadrages.). An imperfect ' Liber typicus '
or ' Correctorium '.
v 20. Saec. xii. Breviarium (a fer. iii post Pasch. usque ad
festum SS. Cosmae et Damiani). An imperfect ' Liber
typicus '.
v 21. Saec. xii/xiii. Antiphonarium monasticum (a fer. vi
Hebd. i Advent, usque ad mensem Decemb.).
v 22. Saec. xii. Breviarium monasticum (a Sabb. ante Advent.
usque ad coenam Domini),
v 23. Saec. xiii. Breviarium monasticum (ante Domin. ii
Advent, usque ad Sabb. sanct.).
v 25. Saec. xii. Breviarium monasticum.
v 26 Saec. xii in. Martyrolog., Regula S; Benedict!, et
Homiliae.
v 27. Saec. xiii. Breviarium.
vi 29. Saec. xii. Missale et Kalendarium.
vr 30. Saec. xiii. Missale (a Domin. ii post Epiph. usque ad
fest. Omnium SS.).
vi 31. Saec. xi/xii. Evangeliarium (a Domin. iii Advent, ad
fer. iv maioris hebdomadae).
vi 33. Saec. x/xi. Missale.
vi 34. Saec. xi/xii. Troparium.
vi 35. Saec. xii. Troparium.
vi 36. Saec. x/xi. Sententiae PP. et Homiliae.
vi 37. Saec. xi ex. Hymni, Martyrol., et Regula S. Benedict!,
vi 38. Saec. xi. Troparium.
vi 39. Saec. xi. Troparium.
vi 40. Saec. xi. Troparium.
vu 42. Saec. xii. Breviarium.
vn 44. Saec. xiii in. Lectiones et Orationes.
Armadio mobile I. Ordo officii. Saec. xii.
Armadio mobile II. Necrologium Confrat. Collegiatae Eccl. S.
Spiritus. Saec. xii ex. (post a. 1183).
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 337
BERLIN.
Konigliche Bibliothek.
Theol. Quart. 278. Saec. xi ex. Evangeliarium. See pp. 63, 77,
and 151.
Hamilton 3. Saec. xii. Acta Apostolorum, Epistolae, Apocal.
BISCEGLIE.
Archivio del Duomo. Evangeliarium (s. n.}. Saec. xi ex. See p. 69.
BOLOGNA.
Bibl. Universit. 2843 (S. Salvatore 486). a. 1070. Amatus
monachus Casinensis, Versus in honorem Petri et Pauli
Apost. See pp. 30 and 70.
CAPUA.
Archivio del Duomo. Exultet Roll. Saec. xi. See p. 69.
Seminario Arcivescovile.
Epistolae et Actus Apost. (s. n.). Saec. xi. See p. 151.
Augustinus in lohannem (s.n.). Saec. xi. See p. 151.
CATTARO.
S. Chiara. Pontificalis fragm. cum notis. Saec. xii. See pp. 63
and 151.
CAVA (LA).
Archivio della Badia di Santissima Trinita.
*2. a. 779-97. Isidorus, Etymologiae; Kalendarium, Tabulae
paschales, &c. See p. 70.
3. Saec. xi ex. Beda, De temporibus ; Kalendarium,
Annales Cavenses. See p. 69.
4. Saec. xi in. Leges Langobardorum. See p. 67.
5. Saec. xii. Lectiones, Hymni et Officia Sanctorum.
6. Saec. xi/xii. Gregorius M., Regula Pastoralis. Partly
in Beneventan, partly in ordinary minuscule. See p. 151.
7. Saec. xi/xii. Gregor. M., Moralia in lob ; Hieronym.,
Expos, in Sacram Scripturam. Partly in Beneventan,
partly in ordinary minuscule.
8. Saec. xi/xii. Gregor. M., Moralia in lob.
10. Saec. xi/xii. Gregor. M., Moralia in lob.
12. Saec. xi/xii. Ambrosius, Expos, in Evangelia.
338 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
CAVA (LA) (cont.).
Archivio della Badia di Santissima Trinita.
*i8. Saec. xiii in. (c. a. 1227). Benedictus Barensis, De septem
sigillis. See p. 69.
^19. a. 1280. Evangelia, Apocal., Regula S. Bened. et Kalen-
darium. See p. 69.
*24. a. 1295. Hugo Venusinus, Vitae Patrum Cavensium.
See p. 69.
Miscellanea. Collection of leaves in Beneventan writing, used
for strengthening the binding of MSS. u, 13, 14, 15, 17,
20, 21, 22, 23, and 29.
CHANTILLY.
Mus6e Conde*. Necrologii Ragusani fragm. (4 foil.). Saec. xiii ex.
See pp. 64 and 74.
CHELTENHAM.
Phillipps Collection, MS. 3069. Saec. xii. Beda in Epist. Canonicas.
CHIETI.
Bibl. Capitolare 2. Gregorius J/., Dialogi. Written in ordinary minus-
cule, saec. xi. Foil, i-ii, fly-leaves (part of a Graduate), are in Bene-
ventan, saec. xt.
COPENHAGEN.
Old Royal Collection 1653. Saec. xi ex. Soranus (Muscio), Hippo-
crates, Oribasius, &c. See p. 19.
ESCORIAL.
Real Biblioteca de San Lorenzo.
L in 19. Saec. xii. Collectio Canonum.
M u 16. Martial, in i $th-century writing. Initial and final fly-leaves
(biblica) are in Beneventan, saec. xit.
Z ni 19. Saec. xi ex. Collectio Canonum.
ETON.
College Library, Bl. 6. 5. Saec. xi. Theodotus, Ecloga ; Maxi-
mianus, Elogiae VI ; Statius, Achilleis ; Ovid, Remedia
amoris, Epistulae (Heroides) ; Arator, Historia Aposto-
lorum. See p. 152.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 339
FLORENCE.
Biblioteca Laurenziana.
16. 37. Saec. xi/xii. Psalterium.
29. 2. Saec. xiii. Apuleius. See p. 70.
51. 10. Saec. xi ex. Varro, De lingua latina ; Cicero, Orationes ;
Auctor ad Herennium. See p. 70.
66.1. Saec. xi in. Hegesippus. See p. 71.
66. 21. Saec. xi ex. lustinus, Epitome historiarum Pompei
Trogi. See p. 71.
*66. 40. Saec. ix ex. Exordia Scythica ; Dares Phrygius, De
excidio Troiae ; Historia Apollonii regis Tyri ; Versus
Cellani abbatis, &c.
68. 2. Saec. xi med. Tacitus, Historiae (i-v), Annales (xi-xvi) ;
Apuleius, Metamorphoses and Florida. See p. 71.
68. 6. Saec. xii/xiii. Caesar, Commentarii.
*73. 41. Saec. ix in. Antonius Musa, De herba betonica ; ps.-
Apuleius, Herbarium; ps.-Dioscorides,Deherbisfemininis,
&c. See p. 1 8.
Ashburnham 55. Saec. x ex. Vitae Sanctorum.
San Marco 604. Saec. xi in. Liber Pontificalis ; Hieron., De viris
illustr.; August., De haeresibus; Cassiodor., Instit.; Decretum
Gelasianum, and a list of Neapolitan bishops (foil. 1-5).
See p. 73.
GAETA.
Archivio del Duomo. Three Exultet Rolls : (I) saec. xi, in the
original part ; (ii) saec. xi ; (iii) saec. xi/xii, to judge from
the miniatures. See p. 69.
GLASGOW.
University, Hunter. MS. v 3. 2. Saec. x in. Hippocrates, Galen,
&c. See p. 19.
GOTTINGEN.
Universitatsbibliothek. Fragments of a Passio, in Beneventan writing,
. saec.xijxii. From the binding of the incunabulum (Hain 15019) of
the ' Statuta Romano, ' bearing the press-mark ' lus. Stat. viii. 2230 '.
LAUSANNE.
Archives de Lausanne, Musee d'Historiographie Vaudoise. One
leaf from a Missale plenum in Beneventan writing, saec. xi. Ten
fragments from the same MS. are in Zurich, Staats-Archiv. See below.
Z 2
340 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
LEIPSIC.
Universitatsbibl. 3503 (Hanel 6). Saec. xi. Isidorus, Etymologiae,
lib. v ; lulianus, Epitome latina Novellarum lustiniani.
LEYDEN.
Bibliotheca Publica Univ. 118. Saec. xi ex. Cicero, De natura
deorum, De divinatione, De legibus. See p. 50, n. 5. The
MS. should have been mentioned in the list on p. 71.
LONDON.
British Museum.
Arundel 234. Sallust. Written in ordinary minuscule. One fly-leaf is in
Beneventan, saec. xii in.: Amandi Vigiliensis episcopi Epistola de
reliquiis S. Pantaleonis, fyc.
Egerton 2889. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS. See p. 151.
*Add. MS. 5463. Evangelia in uncial, saec. viii. Additions and corrections
in Beneventan, saec. x, passim, e.g. foil. 5, 5 V , 88 V , 222, 229. See
P. 75-
Add. MS. 11916. Saec. xi ex. Auctor ad Herennium. FolL
33 T -4O V are in Beneventan, the rest in ordinary minus-
cule.
Add. MS. 16413. Saec. xi in. Varia theologica et patristica,
Excerpta ex Canonibus.
Add. MS. 18859. Saec. xii. Psalterium, with canticles, prayers,
&c. Cf. Paris Mazar. 364.
Add. MS. 23776. Saec. xii. Marty rologium. See p. 67.
Add. 28106 (vol. ii). Bible, written in ordinary minuscule ; initial and
final fly-leaves are in Beneventan, saec. xi/ xii (Leo Ostiensis,
Chronica Monasterii Casinensis). See Paris Nouv. Acq. lat.
2i 9 9,/07. 17.
Add. MS. 30337. Saec. xi ex. Exultet Roll. See p. 71.
Collection of H. Yates Thompson, MS. 8. Saec. xi/xii. Martyro-
logium, Regula S. Benedicti, &c. See p. 75.
LYONS.
Bibl. de la Ville 788 (706). A collection of fragments. FolL 23-6
(JDonatus Minor) are in Beneventan, saec. x/xi.
MACERATA.
Bibl. Comunale. Pontificate (s. ;/.). Saec. xii in. See p. 67.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 341
MADRID.
Bibl. Nacional.
A 151. Composed of three patristic MSS., written in ordinary
minuscule, except foil. 161-84, which are in Beneventan,
saec. xi/xii, ut vid.
(i) foil. 2-67. Isidorus and Canones.
(ii) foil. 68-120. Alcuin, De virtutibus et vitiis.
(iii) foil. 121-84. Isidorus, De ortu et obitu Patrum, De
officiis, &c. ; Alcuin, De Trinitate ; ps.- Ambros., De
conflictu vitiorum, &c. ; ps.-Augustinus, De fide
sanctae trinitatis (in Beneventan), et alia.
B 3. Saec. x. Homiliarium.
D 117. Saec. xi, ut vid. Leges Langobardorum.
MANCHESTER.
John Rylands Library, MS. 2. Saec. xi in. Exultet Roll.
MILAN.
Bibl. Ambrosiana C 90 inf. Saec. xi ex. Seneca, Dialogi. See
p. 71-
MIRABELLA ECLANO.
Archivio della Chiesa Collegiata. Exultet Roll. Saec. xi, ut vid.
See p. 69.
MONTE CASSINO. 1
Archivio della Badia.
i. Saec. xi. Canones, Epist. decretales.
*3. a. 874-92. Alcuin, De Trinitate ; Computi ecclesiastic!*,
Tabulae paschales, Annales, &c.
4. Saec. ix in. Ambrosius, Contra Artanos. Written in Visigothic.
An i \th-century Beneventan hand transcribed Visigothic margina-
lia in cursive.
*5 a. 1011-22. Ambrosius, Expos, in Lucam.
6. Saec. xi ex. (probably a. 1058-87, the period of Abbot
Desiderius). Anastasius bibliothecarius, Historia Tri-
partita.
1 In the case of Monte Cassino, no regard has been paid to MSS. that have
only fly-leaves in Beneventan writing.
342 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cant.).
Archivio della Badia.
11. Saec. xi ex. Augustinus, Homiliae, Sermones.
12. Saec. xi ex. Augustinus, Sermones.
13. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Eugippius, Excerpta
ex operibus Augustini.
14. Saec. xi. Augustinus, De Civitate Dei.
15. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Augustinus contra
Faustum et Felicem.
16. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Augustinus, Epistolae.
17. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Augustinus, Sermones.
20. Saec. xi. Augustinus, De Consensu Evangelistarum.
21. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Tractatus in lohannem.
22. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Tractatus in lohannem (continua-
tion of the preceding MS.).
23. Saec. xi in. Augustinus, Tractatus in Epistolam lohan-
nis ; pp. 108-30 are saec. xi ex.
24. Saec. xi. Augustinus, Enarrationes in Psalmos et Tract,
in Epist. lohannis.
25. Saec. xi in. Augustinus, Confessiones.
26. Saec. xi ex. Augustinus, Enarrat. in Psalmos.
27. Saec. xi ex. Augustinus, Enarrat. in Psalmos (continua-
tion of the preceding MS.).
*28. Circa a. 1023. Augustinus, De Civitate Dei.
37. Saec. xi in. Beda, Expos, in Lucam et alia.
38. Saec. xi in. Beda, Expos, in Acta Apostol. et Apocal.
40. Saec. xi in. (probably a. 1022-35, the period of Abbot
Theobald). Beda, Expos, in Marcum.
42. Saec. xi in. Beda, Expos, in Cantica Canticorum.
*47. a. 1159-73. Martyrologium, Regula S. Benedicti, Necro-
logium, Annales, &c.
48. Saec. xi in. Claudius ep., Expos, in Epistolas Pauli.
50. Saec. xi ex. Collationes PP. ; Palladius, Historia
Lausiaca ; Athanasius, De observatione Monachorum.
51. Saec. xi 1 . Cassianus, Collationes. See p. 75.
52. Saec. xi. Cassianus, Collationes et alia. See p. 75.
53. Saec. xi. Cassianus, Collationes.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 343
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
54. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Cassianus,Collationes.
*57. Circa a. 1023. Comment, in Psalmos ex Augustino et
Hieronymo.
*6g. Saec. ix ex. Varia medica.
71. Saec. xi med. Registrum Epistolarum Gregorii M.
*73- a. 1022-35. Gregorius M., Moralia.
74. Saec. xi med. Gregorius M., Moralia. See p. 75.
75. Saec. xi (probably Desiderian). Gregorius M., Moralia.
76. Saec. x 2 . Gregorius M., Moralia.
*77. Saec. x 2 . Gregorius M., Moralia.
%
78. Saec. x. Gregorius M., Moralia.
79. Saec. xi med. Gregorius M., Moralia.
80. Saec. xi med. Gregorius M., Moralia.
8 1. Saec. xi med. Gregorius M., Moralia. See p. 75.
82. Saec. x/xi. Gregorius M., Moralia.
83. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Gregorius M., Homi-
liae XL.
84. Saec. xi ex. Gregorius M., Homiliae in Ezechielem.
85. Saec. xii/xiii. Gregorius M., Dialogi.
86. Saec. xi 1 . Gregorius M., Moralia.
90. Saec. xi. Auxilius presb., Etymologicon.
91. Saec. xi med. Hieronymus, Epistolae.
94. Saec. xi 2 . Hieronymus, Comment, in Isaiam.
95. Saec. xi 1 . Eusebius (Rufinus), Historia Ecclesiastica.
*97. Saec. x in. Varia medica.
98. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
*99. a. 1072 (Desiderian). Lectionarium.
100. Saec. xi in. Homiliarium.
101. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
1 02. Saec. xi in. Homiliarium.
103. Saec. xi in. Homiliarium. See p. 75.
104. a. 1022-35. Homiliarium.
105. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
344 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
106. Homiliarium. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-64, saec. xi 2 .
(ii) pp. 65-800, saec. xi in. (probably a. 1022-35).
107. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
1 08. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
*iog. a. 1022-35. Homiliarium (continuation of MS. 104).
no. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Lectiones, Homiliae,
et Vitae SS.
in. Homiliarium. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-396, saec. xi 1 .
() PP- 397-409> sae c- xi ex.
112. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
113. Saec. xi ante med. Homiliarium.
114. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
115. Saec. xii/xiii. Homiliarium.
1 1 6. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Homiliarium.
*i 23. Composed of different parts :
*(i) pp. 1-192, saec. x 2 . Josephus, De bello ludaico.
(ii) pp. 193-240, saec. xi 2 .
(iii) pp. 24i-54 5 saec. xi 2 .
(iv) pp. 255-70, saec. xi ex.
(v) pp. 271-320, saec. xi/xii, in ordi-
Vitae SS.,
Sermones
Patrum, &c.
nary minuscule.
124. Saec. xi 1 . Josephus, Antiquitates ludaicae.
125. Saec. xi 1 . Collectio Canonum.
126.. Saec. xi 2 . Sermones Leonis Magni et aliorum.
127. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Missale. See p. 75.
*i32. Saec. xi in. (ante a. 1023). Hrabanus Maurus, De origine
rerum.
133. Saec. xi 2 . Hrabanus Maurus, Comment, in libros Regum.
139. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
140. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
141. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
142. Saec. xi 2 . Vitae SS.
143. Saec. xi med. Vitae PP. Anachoretarum et alia.
144- Saec. xi 2 . Vitae SS.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 345
MONTE CASSINO (cant).
Archivio della Badia.
145. Saec. xi 2 . Vitae SS.
146. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
147. Saec. xi 2 . Vitae SS. et Homiliae.
*i48. a. TOIO. Vitae SS.
149. Saec. xi 2 . Vitae SS.
152. Vitae SS. et alia. Composed of three parts :
(i) foil. 1-33, Gothic script, saec. xv.
(ii) foil. 34-79> sa ec. xi 1 .
(iii) foil. 80-102, saec. xi 2 .
153. Saec. xii. Amalarius Fortunatus, De divinis Officiis.
154. Saec. xi 2 . Ambrosius, Expos, in Psalmum Beati im-
mactdati.
162. Saec. xi 2 . August inus, Opera.
163. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Opera.
164. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Contra lulianum.
165. Saec. xii 2 . Augustinus, Opera.
1 66. Saec. xii 2 . Augustinus, Opera. By the same scribe as
MS. 165.
167. Saec. xii 2 . Augustinus, Opera. By the same scribe as
MS. 165.
1 68. Saec xi 2 . Augustinus, Opera.
169. Augustinus, Opera. Composed of two parts :
(i) pp. 1-129, saec. xi 1 . De vera religione.
(ii) pp. 130-208, saec. xi in. De disciplina Christiana.
170. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Opera.
171. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Contra Academicos.
172. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, De baptismo contra Donatistas.
173. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, De symbolo, De quinque hae-
resibus, De reconciliandis paenitentibus.
*i75- a. 915-34. Paulus Diaconus, Comment, in Regulam S.
Benedicti. See p. 69.
177. Saec. xii 1 . Beda, Historia gentis Anglorum.
178. Saec. xi 2 . Beda [Florus], Collectaneum in Epistolas Pauli
ex operibus Augustini.
346 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
179. Saec. xi l . Marty rologium, Emortuale, Regula S. Bene-
dict!, et alia. See p. 75.
1 80. Saec. xi 2 . Beda, Expos, in septem Canonicas Epistolas.
181. Saec. xi 1 . Beda, Historia gentis Anglorum. Probably
the original of MS. 177.
^187. Saec. ix 2 . lulianus Toletanus, Anticimenon de quaestio-
nibus Veteris et Novi Testamenti.
189. Saec. xi. Boethius, Institutio Arithmetica.
191. Composed of two MSS.:
(i) pp. 1-128, saec. xi med. Evangeliarium.
(ii) pp. 129-200, in ordinary minuscule and Beneventan,
saec. xi. Boethius, De differentiis topicis. See
P- 75-
194. Saec. xi ex. Bruno ep. Signiensis, Homiliae in Evan-
gelia totius anni.
195. Saec. xi ex. Bruno ep. Signiensis, Expos, in Levit,
Numer., et Deuteronomium.
196. Saec. xii. Bruno ep. Signiensis, Sermones et Sententiae.
198. Saec. xii/xiii. Breviarium. See p. 75.
199. Saec. xii ut vid. Breviarium. Lost since May, 1779.
204. Saec. xi med. Cyprianus, Epistolae, et alia.
205. Saec. xi. Collectio glossae Novi et Veteris Testamenti.
211. Saec. xi ex. Evangelia.
214. Defensor, Liber Scintillarum. Saec. xi (pp. 9-20, in
Beneventan ; the rest in ordinary minuscule, saec. xiii).
216. Saec. xii ex. Canonum Epitome.
217. Saec. xi 2 . Glossarium et alia.
*2i8. a. 909. Glossarium.
220. Didymus, De Spiritu Sancto. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-75, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xiii.
(ii) pp. 75-149, in Beneventan, saec. xii.
221. Saec. xi med. ps.-Dionysius Areopagita (loh. Scottus),
Caelestis Hierarchia, &c.
225. Saec. xi ex. Varia medica.
226. Saec. xi in. Collectio patristica (SS. Ephraem, Basilius,
Prosper, lulianus Pomerius, et alii).
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 347
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
229. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Evangeliarium.
*23<D. a. 969-87. Varia patristica, Computi ecclesiastic!, Ka-
lendarium, &c. Written partly in Beneventan, partly in
ordinary minuscule. See pp. 69, 88 sqq.
234. Saec. xi 1 . loh. Diaconus et Gaudericus Episc., Vita S.
dementis Papae et Martyris.
235. Saec. xii 2 . Gilbertus, Concordia Epistolarum Pauli.
246. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-84, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xii/xiii.
Evangelium lohannis cum glossa.
(ii) pp. 85-148, in Beneventan, saec. xii ex. Comment
in Esaiam et alia.
247. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-128, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xiii. Biblica
et alia,
(ii) pp. 129-380, in Beneventan, saec. xii. Victorinus,
Hieronymus, et alii.
257. Petrus Diaconus. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. xii. A
few words in contemporary Beneventan are on pp. 18-21.
267. Saec. xi in. Gregorius M., Homiliae in Ezechielem.
*26g. ante a. 949. Gregorius M., Moralia; Tabulae paschales.
See p. 69.
270. Saec. xi ex. Gregorius M., Homiliae XL in Evangelia,
et alia.
271. Palimpsest :
(i) Upper script, Beneventan, saec. xi med. Gregorius
M., Dialogi.
(ii) Second script, Beneventan, saec. x/xi. Missale
plenum.
(iii) Lowest script, uncial, saec. vii/viii. Augustinus in
Psalm. ; Missalis Gregor. fragm. (A. Wilmart, Rev.
Bdned. xxvi. 281 sqq.) See p. 75.
275. Saec. xi ex. Gregorius Turonensis, Historia Francorum.
276. Saec. xii ex. Collectio de divinis Officiis.
280. Saec. xi ex. Guaiferius, Homiliae et Versus ; Alfanus,
Carmina varia.
284. Saec. xi ex. Hieronymus, Expos, in Ecclesiasten.
286. Saec. xi-. Hieronymus, Expos, in Ezechielem.
348 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cant.).
Archivio della Badia.
287. Composed of three MSS. :
(i) pp. i-ioo, saec. xi med. Origen (Rufin.), Homiliae in
librum lesu Nave,
(ii) pp. 101-190, saec. x. Hieronymus, Expos, in
Ecclesiasten ; palimpsest : upper script, saec. xi.
(in) pp. 191-311, saec. x. Hieronymus, Expos, in
Danielem.
288. Saec. xii. Hieronymus, Expos, in Danielem et in Evang.
Marci ; Homiliae loh. Chrysostomi.
290. Saec. xii. Hieronymus, Comment, in XII Prophetas.
291. Saec. xi 2 . Hieronymus, Comment, in Epistolas Pauli.
292. Saec. xi. Hieronymus, Quaestiones Hebraicae, et alia.
293. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1207, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xiii. Hiero-
nymus, Quaestiones Hebraicae, et alia,
(ii) pp. 208-382, in Beneventan, saec. xi 2 . Hieronymus,
Adversus lovinianum, et alia.
295. Composed of different parts :
(i) pp. 1-64, palimpsest : the lower script (uncial),
Cassianus, Institutiones ; upper script (Bene-
ventan, saec. x ex. or xi in.), Hieronymus, Epistolae.
(ii) pp. 65-257, saec. x ex. or xi in. Hieronymus,
Epistolae.
(iii) pp. 258, 264, saec. xiii; pp. 260-1, saec. xiin. ;
p. 259, ordinary minuscule.
297. Composed of three MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-136, saec. xi. Hieronymus, Dialogus adversus
Pelagianos.
(ii) pp. 137-248, saec. xiin. Beda, Chronicon ; Collectio
Canonum.
(iii) pp. 249-64, saec. xi. Festus, Breviarium.
298. Composed of three MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-48, saec. xi in. Hieronymus, Epistolae.
(ii) pp. 49-80, saec. xi post med. Ambrosius, De
Mysteriis.
(iii) pp. 81-244, saec. xi. Widukindus, Res gestae Saxo-
nicae.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 349
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
*2gg. Saec. ix. Hildericus Magister, Ars Grammatica.
300. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-194, saec.xii. Historia recuperationis Hieru-
salem et Antiochiae ; Gesta Salvatoris.
(ii) pp. 1 95-209, saec.xiv. Isidorus,De ortuet obitu PP.
302. Cassiodorus, Historia tripartita. Written in different
ages, hands, and at different periods : pp. 4-366 are in
ordinary minuscule, saec. x-xi ; pp. 315-78, in Bene-
ventan, saec. xi ex.
303. Circa, a. 1019. Patilus Orosius, Historiae. See p. 58.
*3O5. a. 1025-55. Homiliarium. See p. 75.
310. Saec. xi 2 . Homiliarium. See p. 75.
314. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Cassiarius, Institu-
tiones.
317. Saec. xi in. Johannes abbas Cluniacensis, Sententiae
morales super lob.
318. Saec. xi. Micrologus, et varia opera de Musica. Seep. 75.
321. Saec. xi 1 . Isidorus, Sententiae et Synonyma.
322. Saec. x ex. or xi in. Praedestinatus ; Isidorus, Diffe-
rentiae ; Eucherius, Instructiones.
324. Saec. xi in. lulianus Toletanus, Prognosticon, et alia
patristica.
326. Saec. xi ex. luvencus, Evangeliorum Libri Quattuor.
*332. Saec. ix/x or x in. Martianus Capella, De nuptiis Philo-
logiae et Mercurii.
333. Saec. xi ex. Maximus Confessor, De obscuris in Sacra
Scriptura ad Thalassium.
339. a. 1058-87 (Desiderian). Liber Sacramentorum.
343. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-25 1, saec. xiiex. Origen (Rufmus), Homiliae.
(ii) pp. 254-396, saec. xi. Origen (Rufinus), Periarchon.
See p. 151.
344. Saec. xi. Origen (Rufinus), Homiliae in Numeros.
345. Saec. xi in. Origen (Rufinus), Homiliae in Leviticum et
ludices.
347. Saec. xi ex. Origen (Rufinus), Expos, in Epistolam Pauli
ad Rom.
350 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
348. Saec. xi ex. Palladius, Historia Lausiaca ; Athanasius,
De Observatione monachorum ; Praedestinatus (cf. MS.
323).
349. Saec. xi in. Actus Apost, Apocal., Epist. Canonic.,
Epist. Pauli.
350. Saec. xi 2 . Paterius, Liber testimoniorum.
351. Saec. xi. Paulus Aegineta, De curatione totius corporis.
352. Saec. xi ante med. Paulus Diaconus, Expos, in Regulam
S. Benedict!*.
358. Saec. xi ex. Petrus Damianus, Epistolae, Sermones,
Carmina.
359. Saec. xi ex. Petrus Damianus, Epistolae, Sermones.
360. Saec. xi ex. Paulus Diac., Expos, in Reg. S. Benedict!.
371. Saec. xi/xii. Philippus presb. in lob ; Hegemonius, Acta
Archelai.
372. Saec. xi in. Paenitentiarium Summorum Pontificum.
See p. 75.
*374. Saec. ix/x. Prudentius.
384. Saec. x in. Sententiae PP.
391. Saec.xi. Solinus, Collectanea rerum memorabilium.
400. Saec. xi 1 . Vitae PP.
*4Oi. Saec. x. Glossarium.
*4O2. Saec. x ex. Glossarium.
413. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-241, saec. xi. Vitae SS. Wenceslai, Remigii.
(ii) pp. 245-68, saec. xi ex. Passio S. Fidis, Vita S.
Mennatis. Autograph of Leo Ostiensis.
415. Saec. xiii. Zacharias Chrysopolitanus, Super Quattuor
Evangelia.
424. Saec. xi med. Lectionarium.
426. Saec. xi 2 . Missale plenum. See p. 75.
434. Saec. xi. Psalterium cum expositionibus.
439. Saec. x. Glossarium, Eucherius, Canones, et alia.
*440. a. 1278-82. Bernardus Ayglerius, Comment, in Regu-
lam S. Benedicti.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 351
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
442. Miscellany containing Regula S. Benedicti, Litaniae,
Orationes, et alia :
(i) foil. 1-71, saec. xi 1 . Regula S. Benedicti.
(ii) foil. 72-80, saec. xi. Glossae in Regulam.
(iii) foil. 81-184, saec. xi ex. (Desiderian). Liturgica.
(iv) foil. 185-200, saec. xi.
443. Saec. xi. Regulae Basilii, Pachomii, et Macharii ; Defen-
sor, Liber Scintillarum.
*444. a. 1075-90. Kalendarium et Regula S. Benedicti.
446. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) pp. 1-198, saec. x/xi. Regula S. Benedicti, Oratio-
nale anni circuli.
(ii) pp. 199-352, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xii. Hiero-
nymus in Genesim.
*45O. Saec. xii ex.-xiii in. Chronica Mon. Casinensis Maior.
451. Saec. xi. Ordo Romanus (cf. Rome Vallicell. 05).
, 453- Saec. xi ex. (Desiderian). Sermones et Carmina de SS.
Benedicto, Scholastica, et Mauro. Cf. Vatic, lat. 1202.
462. Vitae SS. et Homiliae. Composed of two parts :
(i) foil. 1-16, saec. xii.
(ii) foil. 17 sqq., saec. xi in.
463. Saec. xi 1 . Vitae SS. See p. 75.
465. Saec. xi. lohan. Diaconus, Vita S. Gregorii Papae.
466. Composed of different parts : pp. 185-214 are in Bene-
ventan, saec. xiii. Passio S. Thomae Cantuariensis.
506. Saec. xi. Hymnarium. The lower script of the palim-
psest portion is Beneventan, saec. x/xi.
518. Saec. xii. Registrum S. Placidi.
520. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Octateuch.
521. Saec. xi 1 . Composed of two MSS. (according to Dom
De Bruyne) :
(i) Acta Apost, Epist. Cathol., Apocal.
(ii) Libri Regum, Sapient., lob, Tob., ludith, Esther, et
Macchab. See p. 75.
522. Saec. xii. Collectio Canonum.
527. Saec. xi ex. Pars Vet. Testamenti et Acta Apostol.,
Epistolae Pauli.
352 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
531. Saec. xi 1 . Pentateuch.
534. Saec. xi 1 . Pentateuchi pars et Homiliae.
535. Saec. xi 1 . Prophetae maior. et minores. See p. 75.
536. Saec. xi ex. Prophetae maiores.
540. Saec. xi/xii. Missale plenum et Kalendarium.
541. Saec. xi. Cresconius, Concordia Canonum.
542. Saec. xii 2 . Antiphonarium.
543. Saec. xi. Prophetae maior. et minores. See p. 75.
546. Saec. xii/xiii. Graduale et Kalendarium.
552. Saec. xi in. Actus Apost., Epist. Canonicae, Apocal.,
Cant. Canticorum, Sapient., Eccles., Quattuor Evangelia,
Passio SS. Pages 1-207 are saec.xiin.; pp. 207 sqq.
may be somewhat later ; p. 206 is saec. xiii, and contains
the oldest known Italian verses : Eo siniuri seo fabello \
lobostru andire compello, &c.
553- Saec. xi in. Libri Regum et Salomonis.
554. Saec. x. Collectio Canonum. Written in Caroline
minuscule, except pp. 1-50, where Beneventan and Caro-
line hands alternate.
559. Saec. xi/xii. Breviarium. Cf. Paris Mazar. 364.
565. Saec. xii. Octateuch.
571. Saec. xi ex. (probably Desiderian). Prophetae maiores et
minores.
572. Saec. xi 1 . Libri Regum, ludith, Esther, Macchabaeorum.
575. Saec. ix. Augustinus, Enchiridion ; Prosper, Sententiae
ex Augustino. A portion of this MS. is in the miscellany
T XLV.
580. Saec. xi. Lexicon prosodiaawi. On pp. i-io Beneventan and
ordinary minuscule occur.
583. Saec. xi in. Octateuch.
589. Saec. xiii/xiv. Prophetae.
595. Saec. xi post med. Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones.
640. Saec. xii ex.-xiii. Registrum S. Matthaei Servorum Dei.
*753- Saec. viii med. Isidorus, Sententiae. Cf. Monte Cassino
MS. T XLV.
*759- Saec. xi in. Octateuch.
760. Saec. xi. Octateuch. See p. 75.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 353
MONTE CASSINO (cont.).
Archivio della Badia.
792. Saec. xiii. Vitae SS.
805. Saec. xi 2 . Augustinus, Sermones. See p. 74.
Regesto No. 3. Saec. xii. Registrum Petri Diaconi.
*Regesto No. 4. a. 1137-66. Registrum S. Angeli ad Formam.
See p. 54.
Exultet Roll. a. 1106-20. See p. 76 under Sorrento,
Exultet Roll. Saec. xi. A fragment of a roll, presented by
M. Camera of Amalfi.
Miscellanea.
* TXLV. A bound volume composed of par is of different MSS., three
of which are in Beneventan :
(*) saec.xi. Grammatica.
(if) saec. viiimed. Isidorus, Sententiae {formed quire q of
Monte Cassino 753).
(iii) saec. ix. Augustinus, Soliloquia, $c. {formed part of
Monte Cassino 575).
Collections of loose fragments. There are seven, bundles, of which
the most important are :
(i) Gregor. M., Dialog, lib. it. Saec. ximed.
(22) Fragm. biblica. Saec.xi in.
(Hi) Fragm. biblica. Saec. xiex.-xii.
(iv) Fragm. liturgica (Breviar.). Saec. ximed..
(v) Fragm. lilurgica (Missal.). Saec. xiex.
(vi) Fragm. liturgica (Missal.). Saec. xi ante med.
(mi) Varia liturgica, patristica, classica :
(a) Debris of a beautiful Desiderian Martyrology.
(b) Debris of Virgifs Aeneid (iii-xii). Saec. xi. See
p. 151. '
(c) Beda, De temporum ratione. Saec. x.
MUNICH.
Hof- u. Staatsbibliothek.
*337- Saec. x. Dioscorides Latinus. See p. 19.
3.1098-1106. Leo Ostiensis (sive Marsicanus), Chronica
Monasterii Casinensis. See p. 71.
Saec. ix/x. Hyginus, Fabulae. Four small fragments
of the codex unicus Frisingensis.
15826. Cassiodorus, De anima. Written in ordinary minuscule, safe. xi.
Fol. 96 (/. 9 to end of page) is in contemporary Beneventan See
p. 262.
1443 A a
354 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
NAPLES.
Archivio di Stato.
48. Saec. xiii ex. Breviarium Benedictinum.
74. Saec. xiii in. Vita et obitus S. Guilielmi (foil. 1-65).
79. Saec. xiii. Breviarium monasticum.
Bibl. Brancacci I B 1 2. Saec. xii. Leges Langobardorum.
Bibl. Nazionale.
iv F 3. Saec. xii. Ovid, Metamorphoses cum glossis. See p. 151 .
vi AA 3. Saec. xi ex. Vet. Testament! pars. See p. 77.
vi AA 4. Composed of three MSS.:
(i) foil. 1-198, saec. xii/xiii] Parts of the Bible, written
(ii) foil. 199-259, saec. xii J in ordinary minuscule,
(iii) foil. 260-7, 270-6 (Vitae SS.) are in Beneventan,
saec. xii. See p. 77.
vi AA 5. Saec. x/xi. Vet. Testam. (Genes. ludic.). On fol. i is
the entry : ' lib maioris ecctie ben ne ' (see facs. on p. 66).
The Naples MS. should have been included in the list
given on p. 68.
vi B 2. Saec. xi in. Homiliarium. See p. 77.
*vi B 3. a. 1145-65. Haymo, Comment, in Epist. Pauli. See
P- 75-
vi B ii. Saec. xi/xii. Haymo, Comment, in Epist. Pauli. See
P-77-
*viBi2. a. 817-35. Pomerius (ps.-Prosper), De vita contempla-
tiva; Tabulae paschales, Kalendarium, &c. See p. 77.
vi B 13. Saec. xii. Collationes Patrum. Foil. 1-96 are in ordi-
nary minuscule, with Beneventan rubrics. Foil. 97-135
are in Beneventan. See p. 77.
vi D i. Saec. xi ex. Hieronymus, Quaestiones Hebraicae ;
Eusebius, Chronicon. See p. 77.
*viE43. a. 1099-1118. Breviarium, Kalendarium, Tabulae pa-
schalesj &c. See p. 67.
vi E 45. A liturgical leaf (fragment of a Breviarium , with neums) in Bene-
ventan writing, saec. xii.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 355
NAPLES (cont.).
Bibl. Nazionale.
vi F 2. Saec. xi/xii. Psalterium. Cf. Paris Mazar. 364.
vi G 29. Saec. xiii. Hymnarium.
vi G 31. Composed of two MSS.:
(i) foil. 1-46, saec. xi ex. Breviarium.
(ii) foil. 47-59, saec. xiii. Rituale. Belonged to the
Bibl. Vallicelliana, Rome,
vi G 34. Saec. xii. Processionale. See p. 77.
viii AA 19. Saec. xii ex. Homiliarium. Belonged to Bp. Cavallieri
of Troja, and should be added to the MSS. mentioned on
P- 77-
vin B i. Saec. xiii. Vitae SS. (lanuarii, Athanasii, Aspreni, &c.).
Foil. 17-59 are in Beneventan. See p. 73.
vin B 3. Saec. xi. Vitae SS. Originally formed the second part
of a MS. of which VIII B 4 was the first part. See
P. 77-
vin B 4. Saec. xi. Vitae SS. See p. 77.
vin B 5. Saec. xii/xiii. Vitae SS. See p. 77.
vin B 6. Saec. xi. Vitae SS. See pp. 77 and 151.
vin B 7. Vitae SS. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) foil. 1-109, saec. xi.
(ii) foil. 110-17, saec. xii/xiii. See p. 73.
vm B 8. Vitae SS. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) foil. 1-40, saec. xi.
(ii) foil. 41-63, saec. xiii. See p. 73.
*vinC4. a. 1094-1105. Kalendarium, Martyrologium, &c. See
p. 71.
S. Martino 3. Antiphonarium et Hymnarium. Composed of two
MSS.:
(i) foil. 1-15, saec. xii.
(ii) foil. 1648, saec. xii/xiii. See p. 67.
S. Martino n. Saec. xii/xiii. Breviarium Benedictinum. Foil. 1-4
are saec. xiii. See p. 68.
S. Martino 14. Saec. xi. Hymnarium et Antiphonarium. See
p. 151.
A a 2
356 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
OXFORD.
Bodleian Library.
Canonici Class, lat. 41. Saec. xi/xii. Juvenal, Satires with scholia.
Canonici Class, lat. 50. Saec. xi. Virgil, Bucolics, Georgics,
Aeneid, with scholia. See pp. 151.
*Canonici Bibl. lat. 61. Saec. xi ex. Evangeliarium, &c. See pp.
64 and 151.
*Canonici Patr. lat. 175. Saec. xii in. Anselmus, Comment, in Octa-
teuchum ; Melus Barensis, Versus in honorem S. Mariae,
&c. See pp. 67 and 151.
*Canonici Lit. lat. 277. Saec. xi ex. Horae B. V. M. cum aliis
officiis. See pp. 64 and 151.
*Canonici Lit. lat. 342. Saec. xiii. Missale plenum. See p. 64.
Douce 127. Saec. xi ex. Psalterium. See p. 76.
Roe I. The four Gospels, in Greek writing, saec. xi. Fly-leaves i-ii and
224-7 (Cassiodorus, Histor. tripartita, lib. x) are in Beneventan,
saec. xii.
PADUA.
Bibl. Universitaria 878. Beda in Cantica Canticorum. Written in ordi-
nary minuscule, saec. xii. Initial and final fly-leaves (Euseb.-Rufinus,
Hist. Ecclesiastica, lib. Hi} are in Beneventan, saec. xii. See p. 152.
PARIS.
Bibliotheque Nationale.
MSS. lat.
*335 Epistolae Pauli. Composed of two MSS. :
(i) foil. 1-136, saec. ix.
(ii) foil. 137-55, saec. x.
*753- a. 779-97. Varia grammatica, Kalendarium, Tabulae
paschales, &c. See p. 71.
10308. Saec. xi. Virgil, Bucolics, Georgics, Aeneid, with glosses.
17177. Miscellany. Foil. 18-19 (pair is tied) are in Beneventan, saec.x.
Nouv. Acq. 710. Circa a. uoo. Exultet Roll. See p. 69.
Nouv. Acq. 1628. Miscellaneous fragments. Foil. 19-26 (medico) are in
Beneventan, saec. xi ex. Seep. 19.
Nouv. Acq. 2199. Miscellaneous fragments. FoL 1 7 is in Beneventan,
saec. xi/xii (Leo Ostiensis, Chron. Monasterii Casinensis, ii.
32-4). Parts of the same MS. are in London Add. 28106.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 357
PARIS (cont.).
Bibliotheque Nationale.
MSS. lat.
Nouv. Acq. 2389. Miscellaneous fragments. FoL 13, a part of 'a Missal,
is in Beneventan, saec. xi or xii {according to Dom A . Wilmarf).
*Bibl. Mazarine 364. a. 1099-1105. Breviarium, Kalend., Annales.
Similar MSS. are London Add. 18859, Naples VIF 2, Vatic.
Urbin. lat. 585, and Vatic, lat. 4928. See p. 72.
PISA.
Museo Civico. Exultet Roll. Saec. xi.
PRAGUE.
*Universitatsbibl. 1224 (vn A 16). Miscellany. Two leaves are in Bene-
ventan, saec. x. Livy, Hist. Romana (iii. 37. 7-40. 4). See p. 18.
RAGUSA.
Library of the Dominicans. Patristic and biblical fragments from eight
MSS. enumerated above, on p. 64 sq. See also p. 151 sq.
RIETI.
Bibl. Capitolare. Excerpta ex Canonibus (s. ;/.). Saec. xi (accord-
ing to Bethmann in Pertz' Arckiv, xii. 488).
ROME.
Bibl. Angelica 1496 (v 3. 3). Palimpsest. Upper script (varia
medica: Galen, Hippocrates, Garipontus) is in ordinary
minuscule, saec. xii ; lower script (medica) is in Beneventan,
saec. xi.
Basilica di S. Pietro, Bibl. Capitolare.
G 46. S. Bernardus, Meditationes. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec.
xiii. The fy-leaf (liturg^) is in Beneventan, saec.xi.
G 49. Saec. xiii. ' Meditationes psalm, paenitentialium.'
H 44. Saec. xii/xiii. Tractatus de Medicina.
Bibl. Casanatense.
614 (B in 7). Saec. xii/xiii. Pontificate.
*64i (B iv 18). Composed of two MSS. :
(i) foil. i-8i,a. 811-12. Alcuin, DeTrinitate; Computi
eccles., Kalendarium, Tabulae paschales, &c. See
p. 72.
(ii) foil. 82-189, saec. x in. Varia patristica, Vitae SS.
358 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Casanatense.
724 (B 1 13). Composed of parts of three distinct rolls :
(i) Pontificate. Saec. x ex. ut vid. See p. 68.
(ii) Benedictio fontis. Saec. x/xi, ut vid. See p. 68.
(in) Exultet Roll. Saec. xii.
*io86 (AIIIII). Saec.ix. Ursus ep. Beneventanus, Artis Pri-
sciani Abbreviatio. See p. 68.
noi (A ii 32). Saec. xi (2nd half). Evangelia. See p. 151.
1104 (B ii 23). Vitae SS., Vet. Testam., &c. Miscellany : (i) foil.
1-7, saec. xii ex. ; (ii) saec. xiii ; (iii) saec. xi ex. ; (iv) saec.
xii ; (v) a palimpsest, lower script being Beneventan,
saec. xii.
1408 (A 1 16). Saec. xii. Vitae SS.
Bibl. Chigi.
Avi45. Petrus Damianus, Epist. et Sermones. Written in ordinary
minuscule, saec. xii ex. FolL 1-4 (except 3 V ) are in contemporary
Beneventan.
Avii2O2. Saec. xii. Bruno ep. Signiensis, Expos, in Psalm.
C iv 113. Saec. xiii. * Officium B. Virginia.' See p. 73, n. 3.
C vi 176. Saec. xii in. Breviarium.
D v 77. Saec. xi ex. Psalterium, with canticles, litany, &c. See
p. 75 sq.
Bibl. Corsini.
*777 (41 G 12). Vitae SS., &c. Composed of two parts :
(i) foil. 1-75, saec. xii, ut vid.
(ii) foil. 75 v -i92, a. 1226-52. See p. 73.
Monastery of St. Calixtus. A liturgical fragment (with neums) in
Beneventan writing, saec. xi, is in the posssession of Dom Greg.
Palmieri, O.S.B.
Bibl. ValHcelliana.
A 7. Saec. xi. Homiliae, Vitae SS.
Aio. Saec. xii. Homiliarium.
A 15. Saec. xiii. Pentateuch.
A 16. Saec. xi. Homiliae, Vitae SS.
A 17. Saec. xii. Prophetae maiores et minores.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 359
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Vallicelliana.
Ba. Hieronymus in Prophet. Minores. Foil. 53-225 are in
Beneventan, saec. xi (and half).
B3. Prophetae maiores et minor es. 'Written in ordinary minuscule.
Fol. 198 (fly-leaf} formed two leaves of a Beneventan MS.,
saec. x/xi, containing Acta SS.
B 5. Saec. xiii in. Homiliae, Vitae SS.
B 24. Sacramentariuvi Sublacense. Written in ordinary minuscule, a.
1075. Entries in Beneventan writing occur on fol. 101.
*B32. 3.1059-70. Necrologium, Regula S. Benedict!, &c.
See p. 77.
B38 2 . Augustinus, Enarrat. in Psalmos. Written in uncial, saec.
vii/vin. On fol. I, upper margin, is an addition in Beneventan ,
saec. xi. Forms part of the same MS. as Vatic. Ottob. lat. 319.
B 39. Saec. xiii. Lectionarium, Vitae SS.
B 42. Saec. xii ex. Haymo, Comment, in Epist. Pauli.
659. Palimpsest. The lower script of foil. 1-39 (Expos, in
Genesim) is Beneventan, saec. xiii.
B66. Foil. i-88 are in Beneventan, saec. xi ex. Glossae in
Nov. Testam., &c.
C 9. Gregorius M., Dialogi ; Vitae SS.
Foil. 1-137, saec. xii in. ; foil. 138-73, saec. xii ex. or xiii in.
Foil. 152-66 are palimpsest, the lower script (Priscian's
Institut. Grammaticae) being Beneventan, saec. ix. Foil.
167-73, likewise palimpsest, are written over liturgica
with neums.
C 32. Saec. xi. Ordo Romanus.
Foil. 97-105 are palimpsest, the upper script being
somewhat more recent than the body of the MS.
036. Miscellany. Foil. 183-207 (liturgica) are in Beneventan
saec. xii.
39. Gregorius M. } Cura Pastoralis. Foil. 136-208 are in
Beneventan, saec. xii.
051. Saec. xi/xii. Breviarium.
70. Foil. 78-127 (patristica) are in Beneventan, saec.xi.
DS. Saec.xi. Ordo Romanus. Cf. Monte Cassino 45 1 * of
which it may be a copy.
3 6o HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. VaUicelliana.
D 8. Saec. xii ex* Vet. et Novum Testam. See p. 76.
D 36. Saec. xii. Acta Apostolorum.
D 42. Composed of various MSS. :
(i) foil, i-io, saec. xiii. Comment, in lohannem.
(ii) foil. 11-25, saec. xii. Vitae SS.
(iii) foil. 26-37, saec. xiex. Vitae SS.
(iv) foil. 38-47, saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
(v) foil. 48-63, saec. xii. Homiliae.
(vi) foil. 64-8, saec. xii (2nd half). Fragm. librorum
Paralipom. Palimpsest,
(vii) foil. 69-76, saec. xii (2nd half). De dedicatione
Pantheon.
052. Homiliarium. Foil. 1-61 are in Beneventan, saec. xii
(2nd half). Palimpsest in part.
E 24. Psalterium. Written in ordinary minuscule. One fly-leaf (par/
of a Missal) is in Beneventan, saec. xifxii (according to P. Lie-
baerf}.
E28 1 . Foil. 86-149 are in Beneventan, saec. xii. Epistolae
Pauli cum glossis. See p. 152.
F2. Collectio Canonum. Palimpsest; the lower script is
Beneventan, saec. xi.
F8. Foil. 179-226 are in Beneventan, saec. xi (2nd half).
Canones Paenitentiales.
G 98. One folio, marked 25, containing liturgical matter with neums and
part of the Passio S. Anastasii, is in Beneventan , saec. xii in.
R 32. Composed of the debris of Hebrew, Greek, and Latin MSS. In
Beneventan writing are :
(i) fol. 20, saec. xi in. Liturgical fragm. with neums.
(it) foil. 21-6, saec. xii ex. Liturgical fragm. with neums.
(m) foil. 35-6, saec. xi ex. (Desiderian). Fragm. of a beautiful
Martyrology.
(iv) foil. 39-40, saec. x. Glossarium.
(v) foil. 89-90, saec.xi. Liturgical fragm.
Tom. in. Composite MS. Foil. 1-164 are in Beneventan, saec.
xiex. Vitae SS.
T.iv. Saec.xii/xiii. Vitae SS.
T. vni. Saec. xi/xii. Vitae SS. (Some leaves are more recent.)
T. ix. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 361
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Vallicelliana.
T. xi. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS.
T. xui. Composite MS. Vitae SS.
(i) foil. 191-212, saec. xiii in.
(ii) foil. 213-28, saec. xii ex.
(iii) foil. 229-43, saec. xi.
T.xv. Composite MS. Lectionarium, Vitae SS.
(i) foil. 1-191, saec. xii/xiii.
(ii) foil. 192-234, saec. xi.
T. xvi. Composite MS. Vitae SS., Varia patristica et liturgica.
(i) foil, i-ioi, saec. xii.
(ii) foil. 102-24, saec. xi.
(iii) foil. 125-32, saec. xii.
(iv) foil. 133-9, saec. xi.
(v) foil. 148-55, saec. xi/xii.
(vi) foil. 160-207, saec. xi.
(vii) foil. 208-15, saec. xii.
T.XVII. Composite MS. Vitae SS., &c.
(i) foil. 1-161, saec. ximed.
(ii) foil. 163-8, saec. xiii.
(iii) foil. 1 74-80, saec. xii.
(iv) foil. 181-6, saec. xii.
T. xix. Saec. xi. Vitae SS., &c. Foil. 1-31 are saec. xi in.
T.xx. Composite MS. Varia patristica, Vitae SS., &c. In
Beneventan are :
(i) foil. 1-87, saec. ximed.
(ii) foil. 161-4, saec. xi/xii.
(iii) foil. 167-70, saec. xii.
T.xxi. Composite MS. Varia patristica, Vitae SS., &c. In
Beneventan are :
(i) foil. 1-117, saec. xi ex.
(ii) foil. 118-25, saec. xii ex.
(iii) foil. 126-31, saec. xi in.
(iv) foil. 140-4, saec. xi ex.
(v) foil. 145-50, saec. xii.
(vi) foil. 151-4, saec. xii ex.
(vii) foil. 155-68, saec. xiii.
(viii) foil. 169-80, saec. xii.
(ix) foil. 197-202, saec. xi.
(x) foil. 203-40, saec. xi in. In the same script as part iii.
362 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Vallicelliana.
T. xxn. Composite MS. Vitae SS.
(i) foil. 1-163, saec. xi med.
(ii) foil. 164-81, saec. xii.
Archivio Vaticano, *Regesti Vatican! I. Saec. xi ex. Register of
John VIII. See p. 73.
Bibl. Vaticana.
Vaticani latini.
378. Martyrologium, Regula S. Benedict!, Sfc. Written in ordinary
minuscule, saec. xi ex. On foil. 28, 53, and f2 v are entries in
Beneventan.
591. Saec. xii/xiii. Gregorius M., Cura Pastoralis.
595. Saec. xi ex. Gregorius M., Dialogi.
968. lohannes de Capistrano, Speculum Conscientiae^ in \th-century
writing. The final fly-leaves, foil 151-2 (part of a Missal\ are
in Beneventan, saec. xii.
1197. Saec. xi ex. Vitae SS. See p. 76.
*I2O2. a. 1058-1087 (Desiderian). Lectionarium, containing
Gregory's Life of St. Benedict, homilies and verses in
honour of SS. Scholastica and Maur, &c. Cf. Monte
Cassino453. See above, p. 72.
1203. Saec. xi ex. Desiderius, Miracula S. Benedict!. See p. 72.
1349. Saec. xi. Collectio Canonum et Conciliorum.
1468. Saec. xi. Glossarium. See p. 152.
1573. Saec. xi. Virgil, Bucolics, Georgics, Aeneid.
3227. Saec. xii in. Cicero, Philippics, Somnium Scipionis ; O
Roma nobilis, &c. See p. 72.
3253. Saec. xi. Virgil, Georgics and Aeneid.
3262. Saec. xi ex. Ovid, Fasti. See p. 72.
3281. Saec. xii in. Statius, Achilleis ; written over fragments
of the Old Testament, in uncial.
3286. Saec. xi. Juvenal, Satires with glosses.
*33i3. Saec. ix. Priscian, Institutiones Grammaticae. See p. 68.
*33i7- Saec. x. Servius in Vergilium.
*332o. Saec. ix. Glossarium, &c.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 363
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Vaticana.
Vatican! latini.
3321. Glossarium, $c. Written in uncial, saec. viii. The paper fly-leaf
bearing the ownership mark of Fulvio Orsini has, at the left edge,
the reversed impression of Beneventan writing of the nth century.
3327. Saec. xii/xiii. Sallust, Bellum Catilinae, Bellum lugur-
thinum. See p. 152.
3328. Strips in Beneventan writing, saec. xiii, are used for strengthening
the binding. Strips from the same MS. are used in Vatic, lot.
3262.
3340. Saec. xi. Paulus Orosius, Historiae adversum Paganos.
*3342. Saec. x. Solinus, Collectanea rerum memorabilium.
*3375- Eugippius. Written in semi-uncial, saec. vi. Additions in nth-
century Beneventan, inserted in the margin or over the erased semi-
uncial text, occur on foil. 17, 2O V , 212, 237 V , 26^, 275, 6fc. See
P- 73-
3539- Saec. xi ex. Sulpicius Severus, Vita S. Martini ; Caesa-
rius, Homiliae ; Basilius, Regula, &c.
3549. Saec. xi ex. Cassianus, Collationes.
3741. Saec. xi ex. Evangelia.
3764. Vitae Summorum Pontificum. Written in ordinary minuscule,
saec. xii xii. OnfoL 4-4 v are additions in Beneventan. See p. 69.
3784. Saec. xi (Desiderian, a. 1058-87). Exultet Roll. See
p. 72.
*3973- Saec. xiiex. (post a. 1178). Romualdus Salernitanus,
Chronicon. See p. 74.
4222. Saec. xi (ist half). Lectionarium.
4770. Missale plenum. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. x ex. A
contemporary Beneventan hand continues the text for about 20 lines
onfol. 216, and 12 lines onfol. 2i6 v .
4918. Isidorus, De fide Catholic a contra Tudaeos. Written in ordinary
minuscule, saec. xii. The first fly-leaf and eight small strips used
for strengthening the binding come from a gth-century Beneventan
MS. of Gregory's Dialogues.
The small strips used for strengthening the binding formed part of
the same MS. of Gregory as is found in Vatic, lat. 4918.
*4928. Saec. xii in. Breviarium,AnnalesBeneventani. Seep. 68,
and compare Paris Mazar. 364.
4923.
4924.
364 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ROME (cent.).
Bibl. Vaticana.
Vatican! latini.
*4939- Saec. xii (ist half). Chronicon Monasterii S. Sophiae.
See p. 68.
4948. Saec. xi in. Euseb.-Rufinus, Historia Ecclesiastica, &c.
4955. Saec. xi. Paralipomena, lib. ii ; Hrabanus Maurus in
libros Regum ; Augustinus, Confessiones, Soliloquia,
Quaestiones ; Hieronymus, Contra lovinianum, &c. See
p. 68.
*4958. Circa a. 1087 (Desiderian). Martyrologium. See p. 72.
4981. Saec. xiii. Collectio Canonum.
*5OO7. Gesta Episcoporum Neapolitanorum. Composed of two
parts :
(i) foil, i-ioo, in uncial, saec. viii/ix.
(ii) foil. 101-30, in Beneventan, saec. x (ist half). See
P- 74-
5100. Saec. xiii. Evangeliarium. See p. 73.
5419. Saec. xii. Necrologium, Homiliae Capitulares, Regula
S. Benedict!*. See p. 68.
5735- Saec.xi (Desiderian, a. 1058-87). Gregorius M., Dialogi.
See p. 72.
^5845. 3.915-34. Collectio Canonum. See p. 69.
*5949 Saec. xii ex. Martyrologium, Regula S. Benedicti, Kalen-
darium, Homiliae Capitulares, &c. See p. 68.
6082. Saec. xii. Missale Benedictinum. See p. 7 a.
7231. Saec. xiii. Missale plenum.
7606. Saec. xii. Vitae SS.
7701. Pontificate, in curious minuscule, saec. x, ut. vid. On fol. 34* is
half a page (liturg.) in Beneventan, saec. xiin.
7810. Saec. xi. Vitae SS.
7814. Saec. ix. Gregorius M., Dialogi.
7818. Pontificale, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xii. Pages 327-42
(Epist. Brunonis ep. Signiensis) are in Beneventan, saec. xii.
*982o. Saec. x ex. Exultet Roll. See p. 68.
10504. Boethius, De Consolatione ; Prosper, Epigram., in \\th-century
minuscule. The fly-leaves marked i, la, 74, and 75 (part of an
Antiphonary) are in Beneventan, saec. xiii.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 365
ROME (cent.).
Bibl. Vaticana.
Vaticani latini.
10645. Composed of the debris of several MSS. In Beneventan writing
are:
(z) foil. 3-6, saec.xi ; part of a Missale plenum. See p. 152.
(it) fol. 63, saec. xii ; part of a Breviarium ; served as fly-leaf
of Vatic, lat. 6865.
(n't) fol. 64, saec. xii ex. ; part of a Graduale iroparium.
(iv) fol. 68, saec. xiiiex.; part of an Antiphonarium.
(v) fol. 69, saec. xiii ; part of a Hymnarium.
10657. Saec. xiii. Chartularium Abbatiae S. Mariae de Mare.
See p. 76.
10673. Saec. xi. Fragment of a Graduate.
Vatic, gr.
1666. Gregorius M., Dialogi, written in Greek, circa a. 800. The
paschalion on fol. 42 is in Beneventan letters (saec. x ex.); on foil.
4i v -2 the dies paschales are in Greek and Benevenlan letters.
Barberiniani latini.
160(1x29). Saec.xi. Herbarium, Galen, Priscianus, Oribasius,
&c. Written in ordinary minuscule and contemporary
Beneventan. See p. 152.
421 (xi64). Saec.xi in. Martyrolog., Regula S. Benedicti, &c.
528 (xii7i). Saec. xiii. Hymnarium.
560 (xii 3). Missale. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. xifxii. One
line in Beneventan writing^ saec. xii, is added in the upper
margin of fol. i6 v .
583 (xn 26). Saec. xiii. Vitae SS.
592 (xnii). Saec.xi ex. Exultet Roll. See p. 72.
603 (xmi2). Saec. xii/xiii. Missale. See p. 69.
63i(xiV4). Saec. xi ex. Pontificate. See p. 72.
646 (xiv 19). Martyrolog., Reg. S. Benedicti. Written in ordinary
minuscule, saec. xi/xii. Additions in Beneventan occur passim.
697 (xiv 70). Rituale Capuanum, saec. xiv. Two liturgical fragments
serve as fly-leaves : A is saec. xiii in. ; Z, saec. xiii ex.
699 (xiv 72). Saec. xii ex. Missale.
(xxxiV4i). Saec. xii in. Chronicon Vulturnense. See p. 75.
366 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ROME (cont).
Bibl. Vaticana.
Barberiniani latini.
3750 (XLIV in). A paper MS. of the i6th century, from Naples. A frag-
ment of a Missal in Beneventan writing, saec. xiii, is in the cover.
Stampati Barb. HH. I. 189. In the cover of this book is a fragment of
a MS. of Homilies in Beneventan writing, saec. xi.
Borgiani latini.
*2ii. a. 1094-1105. Missale. See p. 72.
339. a. 1082. Evangeliarium. See pp. 74 and 152.
Ottoboniani latini.
3. Saec. xii/xiii. Martyrologium. See p. 73.
37. Martyrologium. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. xiii. The
last two leaves are in Beneventan, saec. xii.
74. Evangelia. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. xi. Two lines
in Beneventan writing, saec. xi, are added onfol. 176.
145. Saec. xi. Collectarium (Hymni, Cantica, Lectiones, Le-
taniae et Collectae).
1 60. Saec. xii. Epistolae Pauli.
246. Apocal. cum glossis. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. xii.
One and a half folios before the MS. proper and one and a half
after it are from a Breviarium in Beneventan writing, saec. xi.
396. Saec. xi. Evangeliarium. See p. 152.
319. Augustinus, Enarrat. in Psalmos. Written in uncial, saec. vii/viii.
Onfol. 39, lower right margin, is a note in Beneventan writing,
saec. x. Cf. Rome Vallicell. B 38'.
576. Saec. xii ex. (foil. 2-220) and saec. xiii (foil. 1 + 221-377).
Missale. Folios 1+341-377 are palimpsest; the lower
script (part of two Missals) is Beneventan, saec. xi. See
p. 152.
1406. Saec. xi ex. Porphyrius, Isagoge, &c. ; Cicero, Liber
topicorum ; Boethius, De topicis differentiis, De hypo-
theticis syllogismis, and De divisione. See p. 73.
1939. Saec. xi ex. Macrobius super Somnium Scipionis ;
Boethius, Comment, in Aristot. peri hermenias, &c.
See p. 73.
Ottob. gr.
250. Epistolae S. Nili, in Greek. Front and back fly-leaves (4 foil.)
are from a Martyrologium, saec. xi ex. (JDesiderian, #. 1058 87).
Seep. 73.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 367
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Vaticana.
Palatini latini.
178. Hieronymus, Contra Pelagianos. Written in ordinary minuscule,
saec.x. The last fly-leaf (Antiphonar.) is in Beneventan, saec.
xiifxiii. See p. 152.
*gog. a. 977-1026. Landolfus Sagax, Historia Miscella; Vege-
tius, Epitoma rei militaris. See p. 74.
Reginenses latini.
334. Composed of two parts :
(i) foil. 1-56, in ordinary minuscule, saec. xii. Ora-
tiones, Litaniae, &c.
(ii) foil. 57-100, in Beneventan writing, saec.xi/xii.
Processionale. See p. 76.
1105. Tractatus de Medicina. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec, xii.
Foil. 68-76 are palimpsest ; lower script (part of a Missal) is
Beneventan, saec. x.
*ia67- Composed of different parts :
(i) Foil. 1-135 (Euclid, Boethius), saec. xiii, and foil.
136-8 (Beda), saec. xi, are in ordinary minuscule,
(ii) In Beneventan script are foil. I39~4O V and part of
143, saec. ix/x (Calendarial matter) ; foil. i4i y -a v ,
saec. x (Versus Marci Poetae de S. Benedicto) ;
foil. I43 v ~5o v , saec. ix/x (Dracontius, Satisfactio).
See p. 68.
*i823. Saec. ix. Isidorus, Sententiae; Eucherius, Instructiones.
See p. 68.
Urbinates latini.
*585- 3.1099-1105. Diurnale. See p. 73.
602. Saec.xi/xii and saec. xiii. Troparium. Foil. i v -23 v ,
99 v -ioo v are palimpsest, the lower script being saec. xi/xii,
as in the bulk of the MS., and the upper, saec. xiii.
Probably written at Monte Cassino.
Riser va Breviaria 13 (i a Raccolta 5330). Strips in Beneventan
writing (? Vitae SS.) strengthen the binding of this book.
Bibl. Vittorio Emanuele.
419. Fragments of different MSS. In Beneventan writing are : (i) one
Varia 89. leaf(liturgi) in 2 cols., saec.ximed.; (ii)part of a leaf in 2 cols.,
saec. xi (inc. in ea parte) ; (iii) fragm. in 2 cols., saec. xiii (inc.
tanta multitudo).
368 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ROME (cont.).
Bibl. Vittorio Emanuele.
Sessoriani.
33 (2093). Saec. xiii. Hieronymus, Epistolae ; Gregorius M.,
Moralia in lob.
53 (1346). Saec. xi/xii. Sulpicius Severus, Dialogi ; Gregor.
Turonensis, De miraculis S. Martini, Hist. Francorum.
56 (1526). Saec. xi. Gregorius M., Dialogi.
81(2030). Saec. xii/xiii. Augustinus, De continentia, De
agone christiano, &c. ; Paulinus ep. Nolan., Epist. ad
Augustinum, &c.
105 (1377). Saec. xiii. Bruno ep. Signiensis, Expos, in Psalm.
SALERNO.
Bibl. Capitolare.
(1) Liber Confratrum S. Matthaei (foil. 1-12), Necrologium (foil.
13-51), saec. xi/xii. Foil. A, B, C + D, (Lection., Am-
bros., Evang. Luc.) are saec. xi. See p. 74.
(a) Lectionarium marked ' Expositio Evangelii '. Saec. xii/xiii.
SPALATO.
Archiv. Capitol.
*(i) Thomas Spalatensis, Historia Salonitana (s.n.), circa a. 1368.
See pp. 65, 76.
(2) Evangeliarium (s.n.). Written in uncial ', saec. mii in. Additions in
Beneventan occur on foil. I35~6 V , 242*. See pp. 65, 76.
SUBIACO.
Archivio del Monastero di S. Scolastica.
xio. Lectionarium. Written in ordinary minuscule, saec. xi.
Foil. 131-8 and 228-35* are in Beneventan, saec. xi,
according to V. Federici, / monasteri di Subiaco, ii. 4.
xci 96. Sermones. In various scripts, saec. xiii. Partly in
Beneventan, saec. xiii (cf. Federici, ibid., p. 5).
TERAMO.
Archivio della Curia Vescovile. Chartularium Ecclesiae Teramanae.
Nine leaves are in Beneventan, saec.xii. See p. 76.
HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS. 369
Bibl. Capitol. Evangel iarium. Saec. xii. See pp. 76 and 152.
TROVES.
Stadtbibliothek.
(1) Four leaves (s. n.) marked ' Fragmenta ex Vita Mauri mart.' ', in Bene-
ventan writing, saec. xii (according to W. M. Lindsay).
(2) Fragm.fasc. vii. A small fragment (patristic a}, in Beneventan, saec. x.
TROJA.
Bibl. Capitol. Exultet Roll. Saec. xii. See p. 77.
TURIN.
Bibl. Nazionale KIVS. Saec. xi ex. Miscellanea Herbaria. De-
stroyed in the fire of 1904. See p. 19.
VELLETRI.
Bibl. Capitol. Exultet Roll. Saec. xi ex. See p. 73.
VIENNA.
K. K. Hofbibliothek.
*27. Saec. x in. Servius, Comment, in Vergilium. See p. 74.
*58. Saec. x. Virgil, Bucolics, Georgics, Aeneid. See p. 74.
*68. Saec. x ex. Theodor. Priscianus, Euporiston ; Caelius
Aurelianus, De morbis acutis. See p. 76.
394. Saec. xii/xiii. Leges Langobardorum. See p. 67.
*9O3. Saec. x. Epistolae Pauli.
981. Saec. xii. Comment, in Psalmos. See p. 74.
1106. Saec. xii. Breviarium Benedictinum.
1 1 88. Saec. xi and xii. Vetus Testam. (Genes.-Judic.). Foil.
1-48, saec. xii ; foil. 49-222, saec. xi ; foil. 223-9, saec.
xi in. See p. 74.
3495- Initial and final fly-leaves (a part of Book iv of Justinian's
Institutiones) are in Beneventan writing, saec. xii (according to
Dr.J.Bick).
Universitat, Institut fur oesterreichische Geschichtsforschung.
Nine liturgical fragments bought by Dr. R. Eisler from a bookbinder
of Trau and presented to the University. Fragm. marked HS. A/i,
HS. A/2, HS. A/%, and US. A/4 are in the Bari type of writing,
saec. xi/xiii, and seem to be parts of one MS. Fragm. HS. B (Anti-
phon.) is in the Bari type, saec. xii xii. HS. D is in the same type,
saec. xiex. HS. E is saec. xi. HS. F is saec. xiii. HS. G is in the
Bari type, saec. xii/xiii. See pp. 65, 152.
144? B b
370 HAND LIST OF BENEVENTAN MSS.
ZARA.
Archives of the Convent of St. Mary. Codex S. Mariae ladrensis.
Part i is in Beneventan, saec. xii. See p. 65.
Archiepiscopal Archives. Codex monasterii S. Grisogoni. Saec.
xii. See p. 65.
ZURICH.
Staats-Archiv, Sammelband Ferd. Keller (property of the Antiquarian
Society) 5. 32-42. Ten fragments (25x18 19x13 cm?) of a
Missal in \\th-century Beneventan writing with some features of the
Bari type (see p. 1 50). The Lausanne leaf mentioned above comes
from the same MS.
INDEX OF MSS.
NOTE. App. refers to the list of Beneventan MSS. given in the Appendix which
precedes.
ABERDEEN
C a 3- 63 91, App.
AGRAM
Archiepisc. Library
Psalter. 63, 76, 331, App.
AMIENS
6 243.
7
9
AREZZO
vi 3 19, 50, 70, App.
ASSISI
A 258
AUTUN
37
App.
116,304.
98.
BAMBERG
A I 5 (Alcuin-bible)
Bug 216.
B II 15 268.
B in 30 1 14.
B v ig App.
D II 3 265.
Era 4 142, 198, 296-7, 307,
App.
E ni 14 83, 269.
HJivis6, 20, 143, 177, 181,
184, 189, 202, 292,
305, 321, App.
M v 10 216.
P ill 20 9, 20, 55, 179, 1 80, 200,
248, 271, App.
BAR!
Exultet Rolls, Benedictio fontis.
57,67, 151, App.
BENEVENTO
in i App.
in 2 App.
in 3 A PP-
in 4 App.
B b 2
BENEVENTO (cont.)
in 5 App.
in 6 App.
ni 7 App.
in 8 194, App.
rag 5, in, 184, 191,197, 289,
297, 305, App.
iv 10 App.
iv 1 1 App.
iv 12 App.
IV 13 240, 249, App.
IV 14 240, 249, App.
IV 15 209, 249, 304, App.
IV 16 App.
IV 1 7 App.
IV 1 8 App.
V ig App.
V 20 App.
V 21 App.
V 22 App.
v 23 App.
v 24 86.
v 25 App.
v 26 194, App.
v 27 App.
V 28 86.
VI 2g App.
VI 30 App.
vi 3 1 App.
vi 32 86.
VI 33 165, 181, 210, 248, 292,
App.
VI 34 App.
VI 35 App.
vi 36 App.
VI 37 App.
vi 38 App.
VI sg App.
vi 40 App.
vi 4 1 86.
vn 42 App.
vii 43 86.
vn 44 App.
vn 45 86.
vn 46 86.
Armadio mobile I (Ordo Officii)
App.
Armadio mobile II (Necrolog. eccl.
S. Spiritus) 43, App.
372
INDEX OF MSS.
BERLIN
Theol. Quart. 378 63, 77, 151, App.
Hamilton 3 App.
BERNE
83 33-
BISCEGLIE
Evangeliarium 57,69, 147, 151, App.
BOLOGNA
1576 216.
2843 30, 70, 183, 214, App.
BRESLAU
R 169 245.
BRUSSELS
9219 268.
9850-2 97.
CAMBRIDGE
Collection of S.C.Cockerell
Epistolar. 267.
CAPUA
Archivio del Duomo
Exultet Roll 54, 69, App.
Seminario Arcivescovile
Actus Apost, &c. 69, 151, App.
Augustinus 69, 151, App.
CARLSRUHE
Reich. 3 208.
57 96, 202.
CASSEL
Theol. Q. 10 202.
CATTARO
S. Chiara (Fragm. Pontifical.)
63, 151, App.
CAVA
i (Bible) 28, 52, 85, 99, 108-9.
a 6, 41, 52, 70, 107, 176, 188-9,
207, 289, 292, 296, 305, 308,
App.
3 43, 44, 69, App.
4 52, 67, 179, 291, App.
5 28, App.
6 151, 176, App.
7 216, App.
8 App.
10 App.
19 App.
18 42, 69, 182, 246, 278, App.
CAVA (cont.)
19 69, 175, 230, 246, 278, App.
24 41, 42, 44, 69, 231, 246, 277,
294 299, 326, App.
Miscellanea App.
CHANTILLY
Frag. Necrolog. Ragusan.
43, 64, 74, App.
CHELTENHAM
3069 214, App.
12261 no.
CHIETI
2 App.
COLOGNE
2IO 211.
COPENHAGEN
Old Royal Collection
1653 19, App.
DUSSELDORF
63 209.
EINSIEDELN
27 208.
ESCORIAL
L in 19 214, App.
M II 16 App.
Z in 19 App.
ETON
Bl. 6. 5 17, 18,152, 203, App.
FLORENCE
Bibl. Laurenziana
16.37 App.
29. 2 16, 17, 70, 179, 181, 183,
191, 193-6, 199, 204, 308,
App.
45- 15 28.
51. 10 16, 17, 18, 70, 195, 211,214,
App.
66. i 71, 203, 205, 220, 292, App.
66. 21 18, 71, 212, 214, App.
66.40 20, 189, 207, 211, 274,
297, 35> 328, App.
68. 2 (Tacitus) n, 16, 17, 18, 24,
25, 70-1, 137, 181, 183,
188,193-4,200,211,214,
251,285-6,294,312,321,
App.
68. 6 17, 188-9, X 94> App.
73. 41 18, 297, 305, App.
78. 19 28.
INDEX OF MSS.
373
FLORENCE (cont.)
Bibl. Laurenziana
Ashburnham 17 108.
55 192, 221, App.
66 268.
San Marco 604 73, 184, 194-5,
266, App.
FULDA
Bonifatianus 2 28.
QAETA
Exultet Rolls 69, App.
GLASGOW
v 3. 2 19, 193, 224, App.
GOTTINGEN
Fragment App.
IVREA
I 28,97,110.
LAUSANNE
Archives (Missale Plenum) App.
LEIPSIC
3503 (Hanel 6) 20, App.
LEYDEN
118 17, 50, 182-3, 195, App.
Vossin 28.
LONDON
British Museum
Arundel 234
Cotton Nero A n
Egerton 1934
2889
App.
202, 310.
170.
151, 304, App.
Harley 3063 97, 209.
gr. 5598 257-8.
Add. MSS. 5463 42, 53> 75> 95,
110,241,257, 259, App.
11916 17, 199, App.
16413 App.
18859 App.
33776 67, App.
25600 170.
28106 (vol. ii) App.
30337 71-2, 104, App.
3>3i 97, I lo-
Collection of H. Yates Thompson
8 (Martyrology) 58, 75, App.
LUCCA
13 269.
19
21
36
123
270.
269.
270.
270.
490 1 08, 110, 211.
606 270.
LYONS
788 (706) 197, App.
MACERATA
Pontificale 67, App.
MADRID
Bibl. Acad. Hist.
20 (Aemil. 22) 170.
Bibl. Nacional
i9(Ai6) 17,71.
A 151 App.
B 3 176, 178, 208, App.
D 117 App.
Tolet. 15. 8 235.
Bibl. Univ.
31 170.
MANCHESTER
John Rylands
2 App.
MILAN
Bibl. Ambrosiana
B 31 sup. 114, 202, 304.
C 5 inf. 107.
C 90 inf. 17, 18, 71, 198, 207,
App.
C 98 inf 95-6.
C 301 inf. 107.
F 60 sup. 107.
I 2 sup. 206.
L 99 sup. 96.
Josephus on papyrus 95.
MIRABELLA ECLANO
Exultet Roll 69, App.
MONTE CASSINO
i 214, App.
3 124, 179, 200, 208, 216, 243,
247, 275, 290, 296, 314, App.
4 107, 109-10, 170, 259, App.
5 50, 90, 112, 198-9, 212, 214,
219, 260, 307, 328, App.
6 App.
11 App.
1 2 App.
374
INDEX OF MSS.
DNTI
: CASSINO (cont.)
MONTE
CASSINO (cont.}
13
App.
IOO
221, App.
14
App.
IOI
App.
15
App.
IO2
220, 244-5, App.
16
App.
103
75, 220, 245, 271, App.
17
App.
104
203, 245, 298, App.
19
107, 109, 170.
105
App.
20
214, App.
I O6
App.
21
App.
107
App.
22
App.
I 08
App.
23
221, 333, App.
IO9
50, 288, 291, 298, 324, App.
24
App.
no
App.
25
223, 244, App.
in
193, 205, 214, 242, App.
26
App.
112
App.
27
App.
"3
App.
28
50, 80, 203, 212, 295, App.
114
App.
29
264, 273.
"5
299, App.
30
264.
116
App.
37
244, App.
123
192, 196, 213-4, 260, 288, App.
38
211, 222, 245, App.
124
192, 204, 210, 220, App.
40
244, App.
125
177, 179, 182-3, 191, 196,
42
222, 245, App.
2 1 1-4, App.
214, 278, 299, App.
126
A
App.
48
245, App.
127
75, 212, 214, App.
49
59, 74-
132
179, 185, 192, 212, 219, 220,
50
App.
225, 288, 291, 297, App.
51
75, App.
133
165, 211, 214, App.
52
75, App.
139
App.
53
App.
140
App.
54
App.
141
App.
57
50,80,203,205,212,219,222,
142
App.
245, 288, App.
143
194, App.
69
19, 195, App.
144
App.
71
App.
145
App.
73
50, 244-5, 292, 295, 298, App.
146
App.
74
58, 75, App.
147
App.
75
App.
148
50, 189, 192, 212, 219, 230,
76
App.
234, 244-5, 331, App.
77
192, 225, 291-2, 297-8, 321,
149
App.
325, 333, App.
150
55, 264.
78
222, App.
152
App.
79
App.
153
App.
80
321, 333, App.
154
App.
81
75, 321, 325, 333, App.
162
App.
82
249, App.
163
App.
83
App.
164
App.
84
App.
165
App.
85
299, App.
166
App.
86
179, 190, 193-5, 211, 214,
167
App.
App.
1 68
App.
90
206, App.
169
244, App.
91
App.
170
App.
94
App.
171
App.
95
App.
172
App.
97
19, 134, 178, 200, 224, 295,
173
App.
App.
175
54, 69, 229, 245, 248, 298, App.
98
App.
177
App.
99
50, 214, 245, .277, 298, 320,
178
App.
329, 330, App.
179
43, 75, 214, App.
INDEX OF MSS.
375
MONTE
CASSINO (cont.)
MONTE
CASSINO (cont.)
453
App.
300
App.
1 80
App.
302
193. 2 i5, App.
181
187
App.
in, 143, 145,176,178-9,185,
303
205,211-3,215,219,223,244-5,
App.
188-9, I 9 I > 2OO > 2IO 222
305
58, 75, 244, 286, 306, 332,
242, 283, 289, 295, 305-6,
308, App.
310
App.
75, App.
189
App.
3H
App.
iQi
75, 214, 216, App.
317
75, App.
194
App.
3i8
75, App.
195
214, App.
321
App.
196
App.
322
177, I79> 189, 191, 193, 205,
198
75, App.
App.
199
App.
324
185, 220, 223, 321, App.
202
86.
326
App.
204
20, App.
332
200, 202, 204, 224, 296-7, 305,
205
155, 178, 180-1,183,186,191,
App.
193-4, 200, 205, 214, 310,
333
App.
App.
334
87.
211
App.
339
App.
214
App.
343
151, App.
216
App.
344
App.
217
214, App.
345
App.
218
124, 243, 296, App.
347
App.
220
App.
348
App.
221
App.
349
221, 245, 331, App.
225
19, App.
350
App.
226
209, 214, App.
351
19, 194, App.
229
App.
352
App.
230
54,69,87-91, 179, 198-9, 2 *8,
358
App.
318, App.
359
App.
2 34
App.
360
App.
235
App.
361 (Frontinus, Petrus Diac.) 17, 86.
246
App.
37i
20, App.
247
App.
372
75, 185, 205, 207, 221, App.
257
86, 262, App.
374
208, 322, App.
267
App.
384
195, 204, 208, 243, 247, 275,
269
54,69,185,192,195,218,298,
App.
325, App.
39i
18, App.
270
App.
400
App.
271
75, App.
401
App.
275
176, 204, 214, 278, 309, App.
402
179,225, 2 34, 2 45, App.
276
182, 190, 194-6, App.
413
330, App.
280
App.
415
App.
284
204, 246, App.
424
App.
286
App.
426
75, App.
287
App.
434
133, 215, 272, App.
288
App.
439
204, 222, 330, App.
290
App.
440
15,44, 165, 176,181,185,192,
291
App.
2 78, 299, 307, App.
292
214, App.
441
87.
293
App.
442
323, App.
295
205, 220, 248, 283, 296-7, 307,
443
242, App.
App.
444
277, App.
297
220, App.
445
87.
298
11, 214, 242, App.
446
165, 168, 185, 225, App.
299
143, 176, 178, 197, 2 43, 245,
450
204, App.
289, 296, App.
45i
165, 203, App.
376
INDEX OF MSS.
MONTE CASSINO (cont.)
462 215, App.
463 75, App.
465 App.
466 198, 329, App.
506 215, App.
518 App.
520 App.
521 75, App.
522 App.
527 App.
53i App.
534 App.
535 75, App.
536 App.
540 App.
541 App.
542 App.
543 75, 215, 326, App.
546 App.
552 212, 215, 221, 327, App.
553 245, App.
554 App.
557 86.
559 105, App.
565 App.
571 App.
572 App.
575 187, 202, 208, App.
580 App.
583 245, App.
589 App.
595 App.
640 133, 165, 177, 182, 207, 215,
App.
753 41, 182, 191, 198, 288, 292,
297, 305, App.
759 181, 191, 245, 298, App.
760 75, 215, 325-6, App.
792 182, 212, App.
805 74, App.
Regesto 3 (Petri Diaconi) App.
Regesto 4 (S. Angelo in Formis) 54,
69, 214, 333, App.
Exultet Roll (Sorrento) 76, App.
Exultet Roll (fragment) App.
TXLV 139, 187, 208, 288, App.
Miscellaneous fragments (7 fasc.) App.
Virgil, Aen. iii-xii 18, 151, App.
gr.277 47-
gr-431 47-
gr-433 47-
MONTPELLIER
69 209.
MUNICH
337 19, 194, 224, 304, 307, App.
MUNICH (cont.)
4623 13, 71, 90, 133, 156, 176,
183, 194-5, 203, 212,
214-5, 277-8, 309, 310,
330, App.
4646 156.
6437 17, App.
14765 263.
15826 91, 205, 262, App.
NAPLES
Archivio di Stato
48 App.
74 App.
79 App.
Bibl. Brancacci
I B 1 2 App.
Bibl. Nazionale
IV A 8 107.
IV F 3 18,30, 151, 203, App.
VlAAs 77, 215, App.
VI AA 4 77, 206, App.
VI AA 5 App.
VI B 2 77, 184, 194, 203, 209,
249, App.
VI B 3 59, 75, 189, 198, 288,
291, 322, App.
viBn 77, 165, 198, App.
VI B 12 59, 77, 176, 188-9, 211,
275, 282, 289, 305,
App.
VlBis 77, App.
VI D i 77, 184, App.
VI E 43 67, 165, 177, 182, 203,
212, 276, 278, App.
VI E 45 App.
VI F 2 215, App.
VI G 29 277, 292, App.
VI 031 195, 215, App.
VI G 34 77, App.
VHI AA 19 App.
VHi B i 73, App.
vm B 3 77, 147, 182, 192, 215,
257, App.
VHI 64 77, 215, 291, App.
vni B 5 77, 294, App.
vraB6 77, 151, 181, 203, 209,
App.
vni B 7 73, 209, 249, 258, 272,
App.
vni B 8 73, 209, App.
Vlil C 4 71, 203, 278, App.
San Martino 3 67, App.
ii 68, App.
14 151, 203, App.
INDEX OF MSS.
377
342
Douce 127
NOVARA
84 28, 206.
OXFORD
Bodleian Library
Canon. Class, lat. 41 17,190,195,
212, 291, 293, App.
-50 18, 151, 204-5, App.
Canon. Bibl. lat. 61 64, 77, 151,
198, App.
Canon. Patr. lat. 175 57, 67, 151,
188, 194, 196, 203,
291, 297, App.
Canon. Lit. lat. 277 64, 77, 151,
209-10,262,283,288,
306, App.
43, 64, 74, 165, 246,
App.
76, 177, 183, 212-13,
215, App.
Roe I App.
Add. D 104 267.
Misc. gr. 313 (now Auct. inf. ii. 2)
257-8.
PADUA
878 152, App.
PARIS
Bibliotheque Nationale
Latin 335 169, 172, 195, 208, 225,
272, 292, 308, App.
208.
97, no.
158.
6, 16, 17, 18, 41, 66,
68, 71, 107, 133, 143,
176, 178-9, 182, 189,
190, 198, 207, 242,
245, 289, 291, 297,
305, 308, 321, App.
97-
304.
97-
18, 215, App.
209.
97, 304-
118.
App.
97-
Nouv. Acq. 710 69, App.
1203 (Lection, of Charlem.)
98,228,243,251.
1597 1 10.
1619 1 10.
653
3836
5730
7530
8913
8921
9427
10308
11681
12 1 68
12598
17177
17655
PARIS (cont.)
Nouv. Acq.
1628 19, 179,215, App.
2 1 80 2O6.
2199 App.
2389 App.
Bibl. Mazarine
364 72-3, 105, 1 88, 190, 203,
212, 278, 288, 290, App.
PISA
Exultet Roll App.
PRAGUE
1224 (vn A 1 6) 1 8, App.
RAGUSA
Library of Dominican Friars
Liturg. and patristic fragm. 64-5,
74, 1 51-2, App.
RIETI
Excerpta ex Canonibus App.
ROME
Bibl. Angelica
1496 (v 3. 3.) 19, App.
Basilica di S. Pietro
138 267.
Di82 311.
F ii 48, 267.
F 15 48.
F34 267.
G 46 App.
G 49 App.
H 44 19, App.
Bibl. Casanatense
614 (B m 7) 294, App.
64i l (B iv 18) 66, 68, 72, 184,
188, 190, 198,
289, 290, App.
64i a (B IV 1 8) 191, 196, 200, 208,
240, 244, 248,
258, 271, App.
724 (part i) Pontificale 68, App.
724 (part ii) Benedictio fontis 68,
App.
724 (part iii) Exultet Roll App.
1086 (A in ii) 6, 17, 1 8, 68, 178,
198, 275, 289, App.
iioi (A ii 32) 67, 151, 287,
App.
1104(61123) App.
1408 (A i 1 6) App.
Bibl. Chigi
A v 145 App.
A VII 202 App.
378
INDEX OF MSS.
ROME (cont.)
Bibl. Chigi
Civil 3 55, 73, 283, 288, 292,
App.
C VI 176 App.
C VI 1 77 267.
Dv 77 58, 75, App.
Bibl. Corsini
369 108.
777 55, 73, 177, 246, 278, 315,
App.
Bibl. Laterana
78 32, 84.
79 32, 84, 266.
80 32, 84, 216, 266.
S. Calisto (Monastery), Collection of
Dom Greg. Palmieri (Liturg.fragm.)
App.
Bibl. Vallicelliana
A 7 App.
A i o App.
A 15 24, 194, 294, App.
A 16 198, 212, 215, App.
A 1 7 App.
B 2 App.
B 3 App.
B 5 App.
B 24 (Subiaco Sacram.) 48,
92, 215, 217, App.
B 25 2 no.
B 32 33, 77, 215, App.
B s8 2 App.
B 39 App.
B 42 App.
B 59 App.
B 66 193, App.
C 9 165, 208, App.
C 32 200, 215, App.
C 36 App.
C 39 App.
C 51 App.
C 70 App.
DS 196, 203, 215, App.
D 8 76, App.
D 36 324, App.
D 42 App.
D 52 App.
E 1 6 217, 266.
E 24 App.
E 28 1 1 52, App.
F 2 App.
F 8 App.
F 85 48.
G 98 App.
R 32 203, App.
T. in 304, App.
T. iv App.
ROME (cont.)
Bibl. Vallicelliana
T. vm 32, App.
T. IX 304, App.
T. XI App.
T. xni 206, 215, 268, App.
T. XV App.
T. xvi App.
T. xvil App.
T. xix App.
T. xx 199, App.
T. xxi App.
T. XXH 32, 204, 215, App.
Vatican Archives
Regesti Vat. I 20, 30, 31, 38, 73,
140, 214-5, App.
Bibl. Vaticana
Vatic, lat.
378 48,91, 199,217,261, App.
591 242, 294, App.
595 214-5, 297, App.
653 266, 273.
968 App.
1189 2^5.
1197 32, 76, 246, 314, App.
1202 50,72,92,176,215,230,
234, 245-6, 260, 277,
279, 286, 298-9, App.
1203 72, App.
1274 266.
1322 161, 201.
1339 266.
1349 39, 213-15, 226, 266,
App.
1406 217.
1468 152,178, 203, 286, 295,
App.
1573 18, App.
3227 17, 72, 178, 195. 215,
315, App.
3251 217.
3252 24, 28.
3253 1 8, App.
3262 17, 18, 72, 181, App.
3281 18, 186, 190,194-5,215,
App.
3286 291, App.
3313 18, 68, in, 200, 274-5,
289, 292, 296-7, 305,
App.
3317 18, 135, 185, 192, 222,
244, App.
3320 29, III, 133, 135, 155,
176-9, 184, 187-9,
195, 198, 274, 284,
289, 292, 294, 305,
308, 315, App.
3321 42, 95, App.
INDEX OF MSS.
379
ROME (cont.)
Bibl. Vaticana
Vatic, lat.
3327 18, 152, 186, 188, 193,
203-4, App.
3328 App.
3339 24, 29.
3340 215, App.
3342 17, 1 8, 176, 178, 196,
296-7, App.
3375 55. 73, 204, 259, App.
3539 2 1 5, App.
3549 165, 204, 214, 292, App.
3741 144, 169, 177, 182-3,
194, 212, 214-5, App.
3764 51, 69, 217, App.
3784 71-2, 183, App.
3833 217.
3835 41, 264-5.
3836
3973 56, 74, 230, 283, App.
4222 288, App.
4418 217.
4770 199, 260, App.
4918 App.
4920 217, App.
4923 App.
4924 App.
4925 App.
4928 68, 106, 181, 210, 278,
288, App.
4938 208.
4939 25, 68, 212, 295, App.
4948 226, App.
4955 53, 68, 78, 195, App.
4958 72, 139, 183, 195, 207,
292, 296, App.
4981 165, App.
5001 28.
5007 24, 42, 55, 69, 74, 95,
1 10, 200, 234, 239,
327, 332, App.
5100 73, App.
5419 68, 181, App.
5735 72, 215, 297, App.
5757 (Cicero) 158, 282.
5763 95-
5845 20, 54, 69, 146, 180,
200-1, 211, 234, 245,
293, 296, App.
5949 33, 43,68,293, 323, App.
6081 199.
6082 72, 177, 207, 299, App.
6808 48,217.
7172 267.
7231 293, App.
7606 34, App.
7701 App.
7810 182, 288, App.
ROME (cont.}
Bibl. Vaticana
Vatic, lat.
7814 in, App.
7818 App.
9820 68, App.
10504 App.
10645 !5 2 , App.
10657 62, 76, App.
10673 App.
Vatic, gr.
1633 47-
1666 App.
2O2O 47.
2138 47.
Barb. lat.
160 (ix 29) 19, 152, 206,
215, App.
42 1 (xi 64) 39, App.
528 (xi 171) 294, App.
560 (xil 3) 199, 261, App.
583 (xil 26) 257, App.
588 (xn 31) 269.
592 (xiii i) 71, 72, 183, App.
603 (xni 12) 69, 165, 182,
App.
63 1 (xiv 4) 72, 215, 292,
App.
646 (xiv 19) 217, 261, App.
679 (xiv 52) 48.
697 (xiv 70) App.
699 (xiv 72) App.
2724 (xxxiv 41) 58, 75, 215,
App.
3750 (XLIV 1 1 1) App.
Stamp. Barb. HH. I. 189 App.
Borgian. lat.
211 48, 72-3,91, 176-7, 194,
203, 207, 212, 232,
234, 265, 278, 286, 330,
App.
339 65,74, 152, 283, App.
Ottob. lat.
3 73, 294, 296, App.
37 App.
74 241, 260, 299, App.
145 App.
160 App.
246 App,
296 152, App.
319 App.
576 152, 193, App.
1406 17,73, IS 1 * App.
1939 18, 73, 165, 193, 215,
App.
Ottob. gr. 250 73, App.
INDEX OF MSS.
ROME (cent.)
ST. GALL (cont.)
Bibl. Vaticana
235 28
Palat. lat.
242
178 152, App.
348
9<>9 9, 18, 55, 74, 139, 219,
350
222, 229, 234, 294,
567
297, App.
1631 (Virgil) 158.
864 215.
Regin. lat.
1398. i 28.
ii 85.
267 108.
ST. PAUL IN CARINTHIA
316 no.
XXV - 28.
334 76, App.
67
708 108.
886 160.
ST. PETERSBURG
1 1 05 App.
1267 30, 68, 243, 254, App.
1823 30, 68, 189, 190, 208,
211, 284, 289, 297,
305, 327, App.
F.v.I, no. 2 1 10.
F.v.I, ii 98.
F.v.XIV, i 98.
O. V. I, 2 1 10.
Q.v.I, 2 237.
1997 208.
Q.v.I, ,,ii 237.
Urbin. lat.
SALERNO
585 72-3, 105, 188, 193,
212, 278, 288, 290,
App.
Liber Confratrum S. Matthaei, &c.
45, 56, 74, 215, App.
602 App.
Lectionarium 56, 74, App.
Riserva Breviaria 1 3 App.
SPALATO
Bibl. Vittorio Emanuele
Sessor.
Evangeliarium 65, 76, App.
Hist. Salonitana 65, 76, 196, App.
23 (1254) 202.
31(1568) 217.
SPOLETO
32 (2093) 181-2, 191, 193, 268,
308, App.
Vitae SS. 48, App.
38 (2095) 206.
STUTTGART
39 (1372) 268.
40 (1258) 114, 304.
4 12 199, 202, 263.
41 1479) 114,206,304.
SUBIACO
45 1364) 217.
53 1346) 268, App.
55 2099) 96.
x 10 App.
XCI 96 App.
56 1526) App.
Regestum Sublacense 48, 217.
63 2102) 114,202,304.
66 (2098) 206.
SUTRI
81(2030) 179, 189, 191, 215,
Liturg. fragm. 267.
242, 268, App.
96(1565) 202,304.
TERAMO
105 (1377) 193, 268, App.
Chartulary 76, App.
419
TT? A il
MS. Varia 89 App.
AivAU
Evangeliarium 65, 76, 152, App.
ST. GALL
1 08 28.
TROVES
109
Stadtbibliothek
125
Bibel HS. 22 (Ada-Gospels)
126
98, 228.
185 28, 1 10.
Fragm. fasc. vii App.
227 28.
Fragm. Vitae S. Mauri App.
INDEX OF MSS.
381
TROJA
Exultet Roll
59> 77, 209, App.
TURIN
A u 2 95.
a II 2* 107.
D v 3 28, 97.
F iv i 107.
K IV 3 19, App.
O iv 20 107.
Archivio di Stato (Fragm. Libri Ponti-
ficalis) 313.
VELLETRI
6 48, 265.
Exultet Roll (s. n.)
VERCELLI
148
72-3, App.
304.
108.
183 96, 161, 196, 245.
VERONA
XV (Gai Institut.) 160.
XVI
209.
XX
if
XXIX
)f
XXX
tt
XXXI
n
XXXVI
w
XL
97-
XLIII
209.
XLIV
t)
XLV
tj
LHI
161.
LIV
209.
LXXXII
tt
LXXXVI
206, 209.
VERONA (cent.}
LXXXIX 1 08.
xci 209.
xcn
VIENNA
15 158-
16 107.
27 18, 74, 248, 272, 291, 297,
App.
58 18, 74, 248, 257, App.
68 19, 76, 176-7, 234, App.
394 67, App.
580 29.
903 189, App.
981 74, App.
1 1 06 App.
1188 74, 165, 194, 209, 249, App.
1 86 1 (Psalt. of Charlemagne) 98.
2160* 234.
3495 App.
Universitat, Instit. fur oesterreich.
Geschichtsforschung (Liturgical
fragments) 65, 152, App.
WOLFENBUTTEL
Weissenb. 64 95.
ZARA
Archiepisc. Archives (Codex Mona-
sterii S. Grisogoni) 65, App.
Convent of St. Mary (Codex S.
Mariae ladrensis) 65, App.
ZURICH
Cantonsbibliothek
C i (Alcuin-bible) 98, 226.
Rheinau 91 267.
Staats-Archiv, Sammelband Ferd.
Keller, S. 32-42 App.
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
d'Agincourt, S., 33, 146,
298, 324.
Alcuin, 231, 281-2.
Amari, M., 21, 45.
Amelli, A., 108, 219, 222,
330.
Andoyer, R., 52.
Andresen, G., 137, 139,
284-5, 304, 312.
Annuario Ecclesiastico, 48.
Anonymus Salernitanus,
53-
Archiv. Pal. Ital., 45, 56-
7, 92, 203, 225, 260, 267.
Arevalo,F., 29-30, 37, 254,
327.
Armellini, M., 91.
Arndt, W., 32-3, 56 (M.
G. H.), 284.
Augustine, 238.
Bahrens, E., 28.
Baldass, F. v., 298.
Balzani, U., 21.
Bandini, A. M., 28, 220,
328.
Bannister, H. M., 35, 65,
67, 73, 76, 250-1.
Barbier de Montault, X.,
57-
Bartoli, M. G., 60, 62.
Bastard, A. de, 97.
Batiffol, P., 21, 47.
Becker, G., 58, 59, 80.
Bede, 281.
Beer, R., 98, 234-5.
Beissel, S., 260.
Bellermann, F., 273.
Bertaux, E., 67-8, 71, 298.
Besselius, G., 27.
Bethmann, L. C., 33, 44,
.49,51-4,56,59,72,112.
Bibliotheca Casinensis,
50, 70, 80, 86, 91, 108,
219-23, 321, 324-5,
330-3.
Bluhme, see Blume.
Blume, F., 49, 51, 52, 54,
67, 284.
Bohn, P., 237, 250.
Boretius, A., 33.
Borgia, S., 31, 52, 53, 78.
Bradley, J. W., 324-5.
Brandt, S., 280.
Bresslau, H., 35, 40.
Bretholz, B., 25, 34, 45,
240.
British Museum, Catal.
Add. MSS., 36.
Catal. Ancient MSS.,
42, 97, 3io.
Buchanan, E. S., 280.
Bulic, Fr., 60, 65.
Byzantinische Zeitschrift,
258.
Caesellius, 282.
Cagin, P., 65, 105.
Camera, M., 23.
Capasso, B., 21-3, 34, 36,
42, 54, 83.
Caravita, A., 21, 25, 32,
43-4, 48-50, 58-9, 70,
80, 84, 86-7, 203, 219-
23, 321-6, 328-33.
Carmi, L, 34, 240.
Carta, F., see Mon. Pal.
Sac.
Caspar, E., 21,32, 84,88,
262.
Cassiodorus, 281.
Chapman, J., 21.
Chatelain, E., 28, 41-2,
95, 97, 157, 215.
Cheetham, S., see Smith.
Chevalier, U., 49.
Chron. Casin., 21, 78-82,
92, 260, 269, 287, 332.
Chroust, A., 35, 168, 277,
330.
Cipolla, C., see Mon. Pal.
Sacra; and 34, 95, 107,
313.
Clark, A. C., 36.
Cod. Diplom. Barese,
56-7, 67, 209, 223.
Cod. Diplom. Cavensis,
23, 28, 41, 48, 51-2, 57,
108, 207, 223-5.
Codd. Gr. et Lat. photog.
depicti, 286, 294, 312.
Colmi-Baldeschi, L., 67.
Collect. Bullarum Basil.
^ Vatic., 58.
Collezione Fiorentina, 47,
216, 328.
Delisle, L., 28-9, 36, 41,
97, 170, 216,222, 276.
Denifle, H., 56.
Dennison, W., 280.
Dobschiitz, E. v., 266.
Dudfk, B., 32, 84.
Diimmler, E., 92 (Neues
Archiv), 284.
Ebert, A., 53.
Ebner, A., 35, 52, 65.
Ehrensberger, H., 35, 76.
Ehrle, Fr., 31, 35, 65, 96.
Ewald, P., 32, 99.
Farlati, D., 60-2.
Fedele, P., 22-3, 36, 39,
73, 91, 265-6.
Federici, G. B., 32.
Ferotin, M., 108.
Fischer, H., 268.
Fleischer, D., 255, 274.
Franchi de 5 Cavalieri, P.,
47, 266.
Franz, A., 21.
Frati, C., see Mon. Pal.
Sacra.
Frati, L., 70.
Freeman, E. A., 21, 60.
Fumagalli, G., 28.
Gamurrini, G. F., 70.
Garampi, G., 30-1.
Gasquet, F. A., 21.
Gattula, E., 21, 80, 219.
Gaudenzi, A., 260.
Gay, J., 21, 76.
Gerbert, M., 274.
Gertz, M. C., 71, 284.
Gesenius, F. H. W., 255.
Gesta Episc.Neapol.,54-5.
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
38.
Gevaert, F. A., 273.
Geyer, P., 284.
Giacosa, P., 21.
Giesebrecht, W., 21, 56.
Gildersleeve, B. L., 238.
Goldmann, A., 24.
Gottlieb, Th., 25, 53, 58-
9,80.
Granata, F., 53.
Grenfell, B. P., 176.
Guillaume, P., 51, 108,
326.
Haase, F., 245.
Hagen, H., 33.
Hahn, S. F., 229.
Hale,W.G., 280-1.
Hartel, W. v., see Loewe.
Hartwig, O., 21.
Haskins, C. H., 21.
Heinemann, L. v., 62.
Heinemann, O. v., 95.
Helm, R., 284.
Herbert, J. A., 298.
Hildemar, 232, 256.
Hirsch, F., 21.
Holder, A., 95-6.
Hucbald, 274.
Huillard-Bre'holles, J. L.
A., 45-
Hunt, A. S., see Grenfell.
Ihm, M., 34, 95-
Imme, Th., 237-8.
Isidore, 234.
James, M. R., 75.
Jannelli, C., 30, 54.
Jirecek, C., 60, 62.
Jones, D., 238.
Keil, H., 275, 281-2, 303.
Knoll, P., 32.
KrSnjavi, I., 43, 65.
Krusch, B., 315.
KukuljeviC, I., 60.
Lake, K., 21, 47.
Lang, C., 284.
Latil, A, M., 67, 69, 76-7,
298.
Lehmann, P., 30.
Leo Ostiensis, see Chron.
Casin.
Liebaert, P., 35. 65, 96.
Lietzmann, H., see Fran-
chi.
Lindsay, W. M., 36, 107,
153, 160-1, 168, 176,
199,209,211,275,281.
Lock wood, D. P., see Has-
kins.
Lodge, G., see Gilder-
sleeve.
Loew, E. A., 41, 52, 68,
75, 94-6, 99, 103, 108-9,
114-16, 148, 252, 259,
283,303,306, 308, 311,
314, 318, Script. Benev.
passim.
Loewe, G., 32, 99, 209.
Lucca all' Esposizione,
270.
Lucius, J., 60.
Lupi, C., 32.
Mabillon, J., 21, 25-6,
37, 42, 49, 51, 54, 97,
107-8,256,276,315.
Madan, F., 64, 76, 306.
Maffei, S., 24, 26-7, 30.
Magliano, A., 59.
Mai, A., 24, 42, 49.
Manitius, M., 21.
Marignan, A., 315.
Marini, G. L., 31-2, 37.
Martin, H., 132.
Marus, J. B., 21.
Menttk, F., 55.
Mercati, G., 49, 71, 87.
Meyer, W., 145, 149-
Mittermiiller, R., 256.
Mommsen, Th., 71, 196,
280, 282, 284.
Mon. Germ. Hist., &c., 28,
97, 104, 330.
Mon. Pal. Sacra, 28, 69,
97-
Montalembert, C. F. de,
21.
Montfaucon, B. de, 49,
52, 54, 314.
Morelli, C., 68.
Morin,G., 35, 45, 87,274,
323-
Munoz y Rivera, J., 170.
Muratori, L. A., 326.
Nicholson, E. W. B., see
Madan.
Nitti di Vito, F., 57.
Nolhac, P.de,24, 29, 315.
Norden, E., 256.
Nouveau Traite", 27-8, 42,
43,97,227,274,276,315-
Ottley, W. Y., 27.
Ozanam, A. F., 21.
Palaeographical Society,
71, 97, 104, 170.
New Pal. Soc., 97, 176.
Pale*ographie musicale, 69,
250.
Paoli, C., 28, 34, 45, 47,
168,221, 240, 328.
Papirius, 303.
Pertz, G. H., 28-9 (M. G.
H.), 90, 278, 284.
Petit de Baroncourt, 43.
Petrus Diaconus, 21 ; see
also Chron. Casin.
Piscicelli Taeggi, O., 34,
50-1, 86, 88, 99, 200,
223, 240, 242, 254, 298,
324-5, 330.
Poggio, see Tonelli and
Mai.
Poncelet, A., 35, 49, 54,
78 (Anal. Boll.), 114,
265.
Poupardin, R., 36, 215,
216.
Praetorius, F. v., 255,
257-8.
Priscian, 275, 281.
Prou, M., 34, 216.
Quantin, M., 43.
Quentin, H., 33 (Rev.
BeneU), 35, 75-
Racki, Fr., 36, 60- 1, 63,
65, 331-
Randolph, C. B., 258.
Reiflferscheid, A., 49, 80,
321, 329.
Renzi, S. De, 21.
Reusens, E. H. J., 34,
Riese, A., 284.
Rinaldo, O., 53.
Rodolico, N., 34, 99, 251,
254, 314, 318.
Romani scheForschungen ,
304, 307-
Rose, V., 21.
Rossi, G. B. De, 31, 34.
Rostagno, .,71,251, 254.
Rozan, Abbe", 51.
Sabbadini, R., 33, 71.
Savini, F., 76.
Schenkl, H., 28.
Scherer, C., 28.
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Scherrer, G., 28.
Schiaparelli, L., 36.
Schipa, M., 21, 56.
Schumm, W., see Bress-
lau.
Seelmann, E., 280-1.
Seibel, M., 315.
Sickel, Th. v., 97, 181.
Silvestre, J. B., 28, 41-2,
51,97, 108,223.
Smiciklas, T., 60-2.
Smith, W., 273.
Spagnolo, A., 209.
Spitta, Ph., 274.
Stefanelli, V., 59.
Steffens, Fr., 34, 41, 45,
95-8, 107, 114, 160-1,
168, 176, 202, 216, 226,
228, 274.
Studemund, W., 280.
Sufflay, M. v., 60-1, 63,
65.
Swarzenski, G., 260.
Swete, H. B., 97.
Tamassia, N., 23, 58.
Tangl, M., see Arndt.
Tassin, see Nouveau
Traite*.
Terentianus Maurus, 281.
Thibaut, J. B., 237, 250,
255-6.
Thiele, G., 314.
Thomas Capuanus, 229.
Thompson, E. M., 34, 37,
314.
Thurot, Ch., 229, 256, 303.
Tiraboschi, G., 21, 53, 56.
Tonelli, T., 24.
Tosti, L., 21, 48, 50, 61,
80, 87, 331-
Toustain, see Nouveau
Traits'.
Traube, L., 21, 25, 27, 30,
35, 47, 52, 55, 7o, 95,
98, 114, 153, 155, 161,
163, 171, 173, 175, 181,
204, 207-8, 216, 219,
240, 256, 263-4, 268,
280, 310-11, 315, 321,
328.
Tria, G. A., 59.
Trombelli, G. C., 29, 146,
Van Buren, A. W., 280.
282.
Vattasso, M., 217, 266.
Vita, G. De, 29, 31, 256.
Vitelli, G., see Collezione
Fiorentina.
Vliet, J. van der, 200, 284.
Vollmer, F., 28, 36.
Vries, S. de, 216.
Wagner, P., 250.
Waitz, G., 28 (M. G. H.),
33, 55, 83, 284, 327.
Wattenbach, W., 21, 25,
28, 34, 37, 99, 112, 156
(M. G. H.), 170, 182,
199, 215, 227-8, 235,
240, 254, 274, 276-7,
284.
Weinberger, W., 25.
White, H. J., see Words-
worth.
Wilmart, A., 36, 39, 70,
310.
Winstedt, E. O., 160, 291.
Winterfeld, P. v., 71.
Wordsworth, J., 280.
Zaninovi, A., 63.
Oxford : Horace Hart M.A. Printer to the University
v
University of Toroito
Library
DO NOT
REMOVE
THE
CARD
FROM
THIS
POCKET
Acme Library Card Pocket
LOWE-MARTIN CO, LIMITED
