Basel: Center for the Dissemination of Taio Caesaraugustanus’s Sententiae in the 15^th Century (pdf)

(*En Portugués aquí; En Español aquí; En français ici)

Abstract:

Taio Caesaraugustanus’s main work, the Sententiarum Libri V, was written in the mid-seventh century and is transmitted by at least twenty-two complete manuscripts, dating from the end of the eighth to the end of the seventeenth centuries. This paper tackles the relationship between four of these codices (P = Paris, BnF, lat. 12264; Q = Colmar, BM, 129 [206]; U = Basel, UB, A IV 6; X = Basel, UB, B I 14), all of them produced in the second half of the fifteenth century and, one way or another, linked with the city of Basel (Switzerland). The collation and the inspection of the manuscripts reveal that a dependency relationship exists between them, since Q U X derive directly or indirectly from P.

In addition, the textual evidence could be reinforced by codicological and historical data, which allow me to outline the history of the manuscripts and to establish at which moment they came into contact with each other. Furthermore, I will analyze the paratextual elements (tituli, capitulationes, colophons and so on) which disclose, for instance, that Taio’s work lost its true authorship throughout the Middle Ages and ended up being commonly attributed to Gregory the Great. This fact is unsurprising, as the Sententiae are a sort of cento based principally on Gregory’s Moralia, but, anyway, this erroneous attribution could be one of the causes which contributed to its wide transmission in the same place and in so brief a period of time.

Essay:

1. Introduction

Taio Caesaraugustanus’s principle work, the Sententiarum Libri V,[2] has been entirely transmitted by at least twenty-two manuscripts dating from the end to the eighth to the end of the seventeenth centuries,[3] and partially by some others, from which the most ancient must be dated to the second half of the eighth century.[4] This paper examines the relation of dependence between four of these codices, all of them copied in the second half of the fifteenth century:

P = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 12264

Q = Colmar, Bibliothèque Municipale, 129 (206), 1468

U = Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, A IV 6, 1469

X = Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, B I 14, 1470

A close reading of these manuscripts reveals an evident stemmatical link between them, which can be reinforced by historical arguments: all of them were produced in a very brief period of time, and three of them (Q U X) also in the same place, the city of Basel. They are a group of codices recentiores which at first sight show no significant textual innovation and, therefore, are not relevant for the constitutio textus. Nevertheless, they are stemmatically related to the Spanish branch of the tradition, composed of two manuscripts transmitting a version of the text with some interesting particularities that distinguish it from the rest of the extant codices:[5]

H = Madrid, Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Historia, 44, 9^th c.[6]

R = Barcelona, Archivo de la Corona de Aragón, Ripoll, 49, 10^th c.[7]

Likewise, the study of these manuscripts discloses the importance granted to the Sententiae in Basel at the end of the fifteenth century, probably due to the loss of their authorship and their erroneous attribution to Pope Gregory the Great (590-604). This fact is not really surprising if we bear in mind that Taio’s work is a sort of cento based mainly on Gregory the Great’s Moralia in Iob, and it has often been transmitted in the same volumes as other works of the Roman pontiff.[8] For such reasons, I consider that those manuscripts deserve an independent study from the rest of the tradition which may help to reconstruct more accurately the history of the text, whose high points are the Carolingian period and the Renaissance. To do so, I will, first, provide a description of the codices, looking at their codicological and paleographic features, content, and history, in order to deal later with their relationship and their position in the stemma.

2. Description of the Manuscripts

P = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 12264

This is a parchment manuscript measuring 300 × 220 (230 × 150) mm (11.81 × 8.66 [9.06 × 5.90] in.), with 4 fly-leaves + 262 ff. + 4 fly- leaves, two columns of 38 lines each, and quires: (15IV)120 + (1V)130 + (3IV)154 + (1V)165 + (12IV)262, signed with capital letters. The script is a very regular Gothic textualis in the two first hands and Gothic cursive in the third one; there are few abbreviations. Only the first one identifies himself with the same colophon in f. 29^rb and f. 156^vb: Scriptor qui scripsit cum Christo uiuere possit. Nomen scriptoris Thomas, plenus amoris. The manuscript’s contents are as follows: ff. 1^ra–129^rb Taio Caesaragustanus, Sententiae; ff. 129^va–136^vb Leonardo Bruni, De milicia; ff. 136^vb–40^rb Leonardo Bruni, Inuectiva contra hypocritas; ff. 140^rb–144^va Leonardo Bruni, Vita Aristotelis; ff. 144^va–149^vb Leonardo Bruni, De studiis et litteris; ff. 149^vb–156^vb Leonardo Bruni, Isagogicon moralis discipline; ff. 158^ra–262^va Balduinus Cantuariensis, Liber de sectis hereticorum. The manuscript belonged to the library of Thomas Basin, who notes it in margine: f. 262^va: Istud uolumen scribi fecimus nos, Thomas, episcopus Lexouiensis, donauimusque bibliothece eiusdem ecclesie, anno Domini 1489. It was later sold by the chancellor Pierre Séguier (1588-1672) and inherited by his grandson, Henri du Cambout (1665-1732), who donated it to the Parisian abbey of Saint-German-des-Prés. The volume bears the ex–libris of this abbey (f. 1^r Sancti Germani a Pratis) with the press-mark N. 369.[9]

Q = Colmar, Bibliothèque municipale, 129 (206), 1468

This is a paper factitious manuscript (section A + incunabulum [fragment] + section B) with measurements of 300 × 215 (209 × 135) mm (11.81 × 8.46 [8.23 × 5.31] in.), 292 × 225 (184 × 117) mm (11.5 × 8.86 [7.24 × 4.6] in.), 302 × 225 (210 × 130) mm (11.89 × 8.86 [8.27 × 5.12] in.), 2 fly- leaves + 133 f. + 21 f. + 142 f. + 1 fly-leaf; 35–38 long lines per page, and quires: A. 2(VI)24 + 2(V)44 + 1(IV)52 + 1(V)62 + 5(VI)122 + 1(VI-1)133, Incun. I(V)10 + 1(VI-1)21, B.11(VI)132 + 1(V)142. The script is a hybrid libraria/currens in only one hand for two codicological units. The scribe is Iohannes Knebel, as both colophons (A. f. 130^r and B. 139^v) reveal: Scriptor qui scripsit ut Christo uiuere possit. Anno Domini MCCCCLXVIIIº, die ueneris 23 mensis decembris, ego Iohannes Knebel cappellanus et assisius chori Basiliensis scripsi et finiui hos libros; Finitus et scriptus est per me Iohannem Knebel die sanctorum Geruasii et Prothasii, anno MCCCCLXIIII. The codex contains the following items: A. f. 1^r–130^v Taio Caesaragustanus, Sententiae; B. f. 1^r–48^v Augustinus Hipponensis, Retractationum libri II; f. 49^r–139^v Ieronymus Stridonensis, Comentaria in Isaiam; 140^v non–identified poem (INC: Saluator Domini uelut exposuere latini). The pages from the incunabulum transmit a passage of Augustine’s De doctrina Christiana. Q was copied, therefore, in Basel, since I. Knebel (ca 1413-1481) was provost in Basel Cathedral, canon in Lautenbach,[10] royal notary and, from 1460, notary at Basel University. Later, it must have been sold and moved to Colmar; on the last fly-leaf there are two brief notes concerning some economic transactions, written in old German by Theobaldus Groβ, priest at Colmar church. Today, it is preserved in the Dominican library there in this Alsatian town.[11]

U = Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, A IV 6, 1469

This is a paper manuscript measuring 320 × 222 mm (225 × 150 mm) (12.6 × 8.74  [8.86 × 5.9] in.), with 1 fly-leaf + 198 ff. + 1 fly-leaf, two columns of 51-63 lines each, and quires: VII14 + 2VI38 + III44 + VIII-258 + VI70 + V80 + 2VI104 + (VII-1)117 + 2VI141 + (III-1)146 + 3VI182 + VIII198. The script is a textualis libraria in the two first hands and Gothic cursive in the third (ff. 147-196). Only one of the names of the scribes is known, Iohannem Herstael, who wrote the colophon after f. 144^rb: Explicit quadripartitus apologeticus beati Cyrilli episcopi. In quo quidem speculo limpidissimo omnis sapiencia claret. Scriptusin marg. per me fratrem Iohannem Herstael canonicum regularem professum in domo sancti Leonardi in Basilea Anno domini M cccc lxix in octaua sancti Andreae). The codex contains the following material: ff. 1^va–92^va Taio Caesaragustanus, Sententiae; ff. 93^ra–114^rb Robertus of Tumbalena, Commentarius in Cantica Canticorum; ff. 118^ra–144^rb Boniohannes of Messana, Quadripartitus figurarum moralium; ff. 147^ra–194^vb Wilhelmus Textor, excerptum from Super canonem missae tractatus commentatorius; ff. 195^ra–196^va Wilhelmus Textor, Conclusiones de sepultura ecclesiastica ad decanum ecclesiae Mariae in Düsseldorf. U was copied at Basel Cathedral, as can be read in the quoted colophon and in the ex–libris in f. 2^r: Liber Ecclesie Sancti Leonhardi in Basilea maiori Ordinis Canonicorum Regularium Sancti Augustini. Furthermore, it was, for a while, in the hands of the editor Michael Furter (d. c. 1516), who produced a volume comprising different works attributed to Gregory the Great. Among them is located the Commentarius of Robertus of Tumbalena, which is actually followed by an explicit written in a different script: Explicit expositio beati Gregorii pape super Cantica canticorum impressa Basilee Anno 1496 in quadragesima per F[urter?]. This work contains lots of marginal notes related to its structure, probably made by the editor himself.[12]

X = Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, B I 14, 1470

This is a parchment manuscript with the following measurements:  367 × 265 mm (14.45 × 10.43 in.) (f. 1–78^r: 257/270 × 176/180 [10.12/10.63 × 6.93/7.09 in.]; f. 79^r–144^v: 262/268 × 170–190 mm [10.32/10.55 × 6.69/7.48 in.]), as well as 2 fly-leaves + 146 ff. + 2 fly-leaves, two columns of 48-58 lines each; quires: (VI-1)A-10 + 12V130 + (V-2)B (the first and last pages are not numbered but are identified by the letters A and B, respectively). The script is a Gothic textualis in the first two hands and Gothic cursive in the last. None of the scribes have been identified. The manuscript contains: ff. 1^ra–78^rb Taio Caesaraugustanus, Sententiae; ff. 79^ra–144^va Gregorius I Papae, Homiliae XL in Euangelium. X lacks possession notes, which hinders one from outlining its history; however, Gustav von Meyer and Max Burckhardt also postulate a relationship between this manuscript and the Basel Cathedral’s monastery: “Basler Kartause und Dominikanerkloster fallen wegen der äuβern Gestaltung auβer Betracht; das Titelschild mit seiner r. Signatur weist den Band in die Nähe der jenigen aus dem Basler Domstift, auch fällt die Niederschrift des zweiten Teils in die Amtszeit des bibliophilen Bischofs Johannes von Venningen (reg. 1458-1478).”[13]

3. Relationship between P Q U X

Before examining the exact interrelationship between P Q U X, we must look at the position of P in the Sententiae tradition as a whole, as it is the head of this branch of the stemma. On the one hand, P (and its descendants) transmits the longer version of the Sententiae, as do the greater part of the extant manuscripts,[14] and, on the other hand, it descends from the Spanish branch transmitting this one. The extant Spanish manuscripts (H R), both dating from the Carolingian period, descend from a common hyparchetype, Λ, and the numerous conjunctive errors shared by H R and P reveal that the last one also descends from the same ancestor, although each of them present separative errors which rule out a relation of dependence.[15] One omission shared by H P R is especially significant: the absence of chapter 35 from the fifth book, or rather, the last chapter of the work. The most reasonable hypothesis is that the common model was mutilus; nevertheless, the title of this chapter is also missing from the capitulationes in the three manuscripts, so it must be assumed that, during the transmission process, someone became aware of the loss and removed this title from the table of contents.

Likewise, P and R share a series of conjunctive errors, separately concerning H (and vice versa), which enables one to postulate another hyparchetype, λ, from which both of them descend. The relationship between the elements composing this branch of the tradition can be represented by the following stemma codicum:

After establishing the relations defining the highest branches of hyparchetype Λ, the next logical step is to outline the relationship between P and its descendants, whose linkage can be demonstrated by stemmatical arguments, confirmed by direct proof, and contextualized by historical evidence.

3. 1. Stemmatical Arguments

Even though all the errors in P are present in Q U X, these three manuscripts contain distinguishing and common errors absent in P. The list of mistakes in P inherited by Q U X is quite long; especially significant, however, are the marginal annotations of a second hand (close in time to P) correcting the text (P2), since Q U X, unaware that they are almost certainly glosses, include them in the body of the text:

• 1. 186. maius] plus P2in marg.QUX
• 2. 1583. post iustus] martir add. P2s. l.QUX
• 3. 1547. post feceris] et quod tibi uis fieri idem proximo feceris add. P2in marg.QUX

By the same token, in these cases in which P2 indicates the suppression of a fragment by subpunctuatio, Q U X omit them straightaway:

• 2. 921. non P, expunxit P2, om. QUX
• 2. 1745. non P, expunxit P2, om. QUX
• 3. 237. cum sequenti hora P, expunxit P2, om. QUX

The manuscripts Q U X also share a great number of conjunctive errors, absent in P, which force one to postulate a codex deperditus et interpositus among P and its descendants, π. Likewise, Q shows their own errors, absent in U X, and U X share errors absent in Q, so that two branches would arise from this deperditus: Q and U X. Lastly, the exact connection among U and X must be defined; three possibilities must be kept in mind: either X is a copy from U, or U is a copy from X, or both of them descend from a common ancestor (π2). The first option must be rejected, since U shows several errors absent in X, most of them hardly amendable by conjecture. The second option could be taken into account due to the scanty number of separative errors in X bearing in mind the length of the work. Nevertheless, some arguments against this possibility can be put forward: (I) omissions from X, even though some of them are monosyllables, could not be retrieved by the scribe of U (unless he had another copy of the work at his disposal), (II) those omissions of U evinced by a spatium uacuum are difficult to explain if X was its antigraph, (III) while X does not include the titles of most of the chapters in the body of the text, they are invariably present in U, and (IV) manuscript U is dated 1469 and X 1470. In light of these data, the most feasible option is that they both descend from a common ancestor: π2.

The relationship between these codices can be represented by the following stemma:

3. 2. Direct Proof

Two additional pieces of direct evidence can be provided to reinforce the stemmatical relationship. The first proof is related to the colophon of the work, which is exactly the same in the four witnesses (P Q U X), five hexameters with leonine rhyme and pentemimer caesura:

Explicit Liber Sententiarum beati Gregorii. Amen.

Liber Gregorii romani praesulis almi

dulcia uerba gerens explicit hic finens,

fieri hunc uoluit scribendo quique peregit,

quisquis quem legeris orans memineris.

Scriptor qui scripsit cum Christo uiuere possit.

 

The second one is related to the corpus embracing the Sententiae. In the majority of manuscripts, the work is preceded by two paratextual elements by way of a prologue: a nuncupatory letter addressed to bishop Quiricus of Barcelona and a brief poem formed by twelve hexametres, Epigramma operis subsequentis.[16] Furthermore, one branch of the longer version, the hyparchetype θ from which manuscripts CE DKN J L derive, also preserve, at the end of Taio’s work, the responsio from Quiricus Barcinonensis to the initial letter,[17] as well as two opuscules entitled De cruce Domini and De non uelle mentiri.[18] On the contrary, P Q U X (and, in this case, also H R) form the only ensemble of manuscripts transmitting the longer version without these paratexts.

3. 3. Historical Evidence

Historical evidence corroborates the strong links connecting Q U X: the three of them were copied in a period of only two years (1468-1470) and at scriptoria placed in the same city, Basel. The two codicological units constructing manuscript Q were made by Iohannes Knebel, priest, notary, and chronicler of this city, 1468 and 1469 respectively, as can be deduced from the colophon closing each unit. It must be supposed that the factitious manuscript was made in Basel as well because of its binding and the incunabulum located between the two units, also published in this city. Codex U was copied at the scriptorium of the Augustinian monastery of Sankt Leonhard. The origin of X, however, is more obscure; codicological inspection reveals that it is an excellent quality volume of noteworthy size, its layout is very painstaking (in contrast with U), and some signs show a probable link with Basel Cathedral. Since they were copied almost simultaneously and stemmatical proof discloses that U and X are stemmatical twins, it is not implausible to think that two copies were produced from a common model: a luxury exemplar for the cathedral and a modest one intended for the Augustinian monks of Sankt Leonhard. It is surprising that two independent copies were produced in so brief a period of time; maybe, it could be supposed that they were copied “by quires,” a fact which can be supported by the next argument: quires in manuscript U are fitting for the different books of Sententiae, and the third and fourth are sewn in reverse order.

Manuscript P, head of this branch, is not related to Basel; in fact, it seems that it never left France, so it is accurate to hypothesize that it was a codex interpositus (represented by π) that travelled from the French zone to Switzerland. Lastly, in the four witnesses the Sententiae have lost its real authorship and are attributed to Gregory the Great, as can be read in the poem mentioned above, where they are quoted as Liber Gregorii Romani. This false attribution contributed to its dissemination and supplied the work with greater authority.

4. Towards a Stemma of the Sententiae

In order to conclude, I would like to outline some reflections arising from the data revealed. Regarding stemma codicum of the Sententiae as a whole, which I hope to publish in the not too distant future, I can advance that the Spanish branch of the tradition, that is, the descendants from hyparchetype Λ (HR P QUX), is one of the three main branches descending from the archetype at the head of the tradition:

According to these links, the absence of paratextual elements (and the chapter 5.35) in Λ must be understood as a loss or omission from this branch itself, since they seem to have already been in the archetype of this version of the work (Ω2).

Additionally, as several centuries isolate manuscript P and its descendants (Q U X) from the two Spanish manuscripts (H R), the most plausible option is that many codices interpositi had been lost in the meanwhile and, therefore, Λ was one of the most well- stocked branches. The attribution of the work to Gregory the Great is already visible in H R, where we can read at the beginning Incipit Liber Sententiarum Domini Gregorii papae Romensis subtractum ex Liber Moralium and In nomine Domini incipit Liber Sententiarum Sancti Gregorii papae Rome, respectively, and this fact must have been the most essential factor for its large spreading. That is why, as mentioned above, the exhaustive analysis of these four witnesses (P Q U X), and their link with two of the most ancient manuscripts from the tradition allow me not only to isolate a relatively large branch inside the stemma codicum and to reject some of them for the constitutio textus, but also to reconstruct partially the history of the text.

The Sententiae were copied in Spain in the middle of the seventh century, but the first preserved testimony cannot be dated before the last quarter of the eighth century. Its diffusion in the Iberian Peninsula cannot be correctly evaluated because only two complete testimonies are preserved (H R). During the Carolingian period, the longer version was mainly spread in French territory, and only isolated manuscripts of Germanic origin have survived. It was not until the late medieval period that the work acquired greater prominence in the areas corresponding to modern Austria, Switzerland, and Slovenia. Finally, the only evidence of Italian origin also dates back to the Renaissance; however, it is plausible to think that there was an earlier Italian tradition that has not reached the present. 

NOTES

[1] This paper has been produced with the support of a PhD Research Fellowship granted by the MINECO (BES–2016–077953) and related to the research project “Corpus de inscripciones y textos hispano-latinos sobre arquitectura religiosa y civil altomedieval” (HAR2015–65649–C2–1–P).

[2] CPL 1268; Díaz 208-9; PL 80 col. 727-990. Since there is currently no critical edition of Taio’s Sententiae, I am preparing it as my PhD dissertation, under the supervision of Professor Isabel Velázquez Soriano at the Complutense University (Madrid).

[3] A = Paris, BnF, lat. 9565, 9^th c.; B = Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preuβischer Kulturbesitz, theol. lat. 2º 741, 9^th c.; C = Paris, BnF, lat. 2306, 8-9^th c. ; D = Erfurt, UB, CA 2° 119, 14^th c.; E = Paris, BnF, lat. 12265, 17^th c.; F = Florence, BML, Plut. 21.18, 15^th c.; G = Ghent, UB, 310, 2º ¼, 9^th c.; H = Madrid, BRAH, 44, 9^th c.; J = Paris, BnF, nouv. acq. lat. 1463, 9^th c.; K = Leipzig, UB, 1298, 14^th c.; L = Laon, BM, 319, 9^th c.; M = Montpellier, BUM, H 62, 9^th c.; N = Graz, UB, 702, 14^th c.; O = Oxford, BL, Laud. Misc. 433, 9^th c.; P = Paris, BnF, lat. 12264, 15^th c.; Q = Colmar, BM, 129 (206), 15^th c.; R = Barcelona, ACA, Ripoll 49, 10^th c.; S = Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, HB VII 37, 11^th c.; T = Tours, BM, 315, 9^th c.; U = Basel, UB, A IV 6, 15^th c.; X = Basel, UB, B I 14, 15^th c.; Z = Brussels, Bibliothèque Royale “Albert Ier” II 2567 (1240), 9^th c.

[4] b = Bern, UB. Burgerbibliothek (Bibliotheca Bongarsiana), 611, 8^th c.; l = Laon, BM 121, 9^th c.; li = Livorno, Biblioteca Comunale Labronica “Francesco Domenico Guerrazzi” Sez. XVI, n. 12 (Inv. 476), 11^th c.

[5] A third manuscript (C = Paris, BnF, lat. 2306, 8–9th c.) might have been copied in Spain as well, specifically in Catalonia, yet this hypothesis is not conclusive and, for the time being, I prefer to put its origin on hold; see Jesús Alturo i Perucho, “El glossari contingut en el manuscrit París, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 2306,” Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, Serie III, Hª Medieval I. 3 (1990): 11-19; Bernhard Bischoff, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts (mit Ausnahme der wisigotischen). Aus dem Nachlass herausgegeben von Birgit Ebersperger. Vol. 3 (Padua-Zwickau), 3 vols. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2014), 68-69, no. 4163; Julia Aguilar, “Le manuscrit Paris, BnF, lat. 2306 des Sententiae de Taion de Saragosse : un exemplaire inconnu de la bibliothèque de Jacques-Auguste de Thou,” under review.

[6] See Manuel C. Díaz y Díaz, Libros y librerías en la Rioja altomedieval (Logroño: Servicio de cultura de la Excma. Diputación provincial, 1979), 254-57; Elisa Ruíz, Catálogo de la sección de códices de la Real Academia de la Historia (Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 1997), 275-78.

[7] See Manuel C. Díaz y Díaz, Manuscritos visigóticos del sur de la Península. Ensayo de distribución regional (Seville: Universidad de Sevilla, 1995), 125-27; Joel Varela, “Autores y lecturas en los monasterios femeninos de la Península Ibérica en el siglo X,” in Voces de mujeres en la Edad Media, ed. Esther Corral Díaz (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018): 495-504.

[8] On the sources of the Sententiae, see Joel Varela, “Las Sententiae de Tajón de Zaragoza. Sus modelos literarios y su aproximación a la teología de Gregorio Magno,” e-Spania 30 (2018): 1-15; Julia Aguilar, “Aproximación a las fuentes de los Sententiarum Libri V de Tajón de Zaragoza y su influencia en la transmisión manuscrita de la obra,” in Actas del VII Congreso de Latín Medieval Hispánico, ed. Mª Adelaida Andrés Sanz et alii (Florence: Sismel – Edizioni del Galluzzo, forthcoming).

[9] Manuscript examined personally at BnF (Paris) on the 14^th of September 2018. On this manuscript, see Leopold Delisle, Inventaire des manuscrits de Saint-Germain-des-Prés conservés à la bibliothèque impériale sous les números 11504–14231 du fonds latin (Paris: Auguste Durand et Pedone-Lauriel, 1868), 44; André Vernet and Charles Samaran, “Les livres de Thomas Basin,” Latomus 145 (1976): 324-39, especially 331–32; Yannick Nexon, “La Bibliothèque du chancelier Séguier,” in Histoire des bibliothèques françaises, vol. 2. Les bibliothèques sous l’Ancien Régime (1530-1789), ed. Claude Jolly (Paris: Éditions du Cercle de la librairie, 1988), 181-93; James Hankins, Repertorium Brunianum. A critical Guide to the Writings of Leonardo Bruni (Rome: Instituto Palazzo Borromini, 1997), 524; Nicole Bérieu et alii, Les réceptions des pères de l’Eglise aux Moyen Age. Le devenir de la tradition ecclésiale (Münster: Aschendorff, 2013), 529.

[10] There is another codex preserved in Colmar library, 81 (476), copied by Knebel also in Lautenbach which contains Gregory the Great’s Homiliae XL in Evangelia. This is a remarkable fact if we bear in mind that Taio’s Sententiae in our codex (Q) are also attributed to the Roman pope and that manuscript X contains not only the Sententiae, but also this ensemble of sermons.

[11] Manuscript examined personally at Colmar Bibliothèque Municipale on the 26^th of September, 2018. On this manuscript, see Pierre Schmitt, “Les Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque municipale de Colmar,” Bulletin des bibliothèques de France 3 (1967): 83-91; Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France. Départements, vol. 56 (Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale de France, 1969), 65-66.

[12] Manuscript examined personally at Basel Universitätsbibliothek on the 5^th of September, 2018. On this manuscript see Beat Matthias von Scarpatetti, Die Kirche und das Augustiner-Chorherrenstift St. Leonhard in Basel (11./12. Jh. –1525): ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Stadt Basel und der späten Devotio Moderna (Basel: Helbing und Lichtenhahn, 1974), 302, 308, 371; Beat Matthias von Scarpatetti, Die Handschriften der Bibliotheken von Aarau, Appenzell und Basel (Dietikon-Zürich: Urs Graf, 1977), II, no. 84. A more complete description can be found in https://www.e-codices.unifr.ch/de/description/ubb/A-IV-0006/HAN

[13] Manuscript examined personally at Basel Universitätsbibliothek on the 5^th of September 2018. On this manuscript see Gustav von Meyer and Max Burckhardt, Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Basel: beschreibendes Verzeichnis. Abt. B, Theologische Pergamenthandschriften, (Basel: Universitätsbibliothek, 1960), b58; Beat Matthias von Scarpatetti, Die Handschriften der Bibliotheken von Aarau, Appenzell und Basel (Dietikon-Zürich: Urs Graf, 1977), I no. 353. A more complete description can be found in https://www.e-codices.unifr.ch/en/description/ubb/B-I-0014/HAN

[14] Only six surviving manuscripts, A B G M O T (see above n. 3), transmit the briefer version. Furthermore, the main difference between these versions is the inclusion of two chapters (1. 9 and 1. 15), the addition of other passages, and the transposition of some others. Likewise, whereas the common text for both versions derives generally from Gregorian works, the passages absent in the briefer version come from works by Augustine, Ps. Augustine, Isidore, and Paterius.

[15] Owing to lack of space, it is not possible to include in this paper lists of errors confirming my stemmatical conclusions. I hope to develop the links between all the extant manuscripts and present the complete stemma codicum when I publish the critical edition of the work.

[16] For the critical edition of both paratextual elements see Julia Aguilar, “Epistula ad Quiricum Barcinonensem antistitem y Epigramma operis subsequentis de Tajón de Zaragoza. Estudio, edición crítica y traducción.” Euphrosyne — Revista de Filologia Clássica 46 (2018): 181-204.

[17] I am preparing the critical edition of Quiricus’s letter together with Salvador Iranzo Abellán.

[18] Concerning these opuscules see Julia Aguilar, “De cruce Domini y De non uelle mentiri: dos opúsculos inéditos basados en sermones tardoantiguos (estudio y edición crítica),” Ágora. Estudos Clássicos em Debate 23 (2020): forthcoming.

Bibliography

Primary

CPL = Clavis Patrum Latinorum, 3^rd edition. Edited by Eligius Dekkers and Aemilius Gaar. Turnhout: Brepols, 1995.

Díaz = Index Scriptorum Latinorum Medii Aeui Hispanorum, 2 volumes. Edited by Manuel C. Díaz y Díaz. Salamanca: Universidad de Salamanca, 1958-1959.

PL = Patrologia Latina, 227 volumes. Edited by Jacques-Paul Migne. Paris: apud Jean-Paul Migne editorem, 1844-1855.

Secondary

Aguilar, Julia. “Aproximación a las fuentes de los Sententiarum Libri V de Tajón de Zaragoza y su influencia en la transmisión manuscrita de la obra.” In Actas del VII Congreso de Latín Medieval Hispánico, edited by María Adelaida Andrés Sanz et alii. Florence: Sismel – Edizioni del Galluzzo (MediEvi), forthcoming.

Aguilar, Julia. “Le manuscrit Paris, BnF, lat. 2306 des Sententiae de Taion de Saragosse: un exemplaire inconnu de la bibliothèque de Jacques-Auguste de Thou.” Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi: forthcoming.

Aguilar, Julia. “De cruce Domini y De non uelle mentiri: dos opúsculos inéditos basados en sermones tardoantiguos (estudio y edición crítica).” Ágora. Estudos Clássicos em Debate 23 (2019): 107-26.

Aguilar, Julia. “Epistula ad Quiricum Barcinonensem antistitem y Epigramma operis subsequentis de Tajón de Zaragoza. Estudio, edición crítica y traducción.” Euphrosyne: Revista de Filologia Clássica 46 (2018): 181-204.

Alturo i Perucho, Jesús. “El glossari contingut en el manuscrit París, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 2306.” Espacio, Tiempo y Forma, Serie III, Hª Medieval I.3 (1990): 11-19.

Bérieu, Nicole et alii. Les réceptions des pères de l’Eglise aux Moyen Age. Le devenir de la tradition ecclésiale. Münster: Aschendorff, 2013.

Bischoff, Bernhard. Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts (mit Ausnahme der wisigotischen). Aus dem Nachlass herausgegeben von Birgit Ebersperger. Vol. 3 (Padua-Zwickau). 3 volumes. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2014.

Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France. Départements. Volume 56. Paris: Bibliothèque Nationale de France, 1969.

Delisle, Leopold. Inventaire des manuscrits de Saint-Germain-des-Prés conservés à la bibliothèque impériale sous les numéros 11504–14231 du fonds latin. Paris: Auguste Durand et Pedone-Lauriel, 1868.

Díaz y Díaz, Manuel C. Libros y librerías en la Rioja altomedieval. Logroño: Servicio de cultura de la Excma. Diputación provincial, 1979.

Díaz y Díaz, Manuel C. Manuscritos visigóticos del sur de la Península. Ensayo de distribución regional. Seville: Universidad de Sevilla, 1995.

Hankins, James. Repertorium Brunianum. A Critical Guide to the Writings of Leonardo Bruni. Rome: Instituto Palazzo Borromini, 1997.

Meyer, Gustav von and Max Burckhardt. Die mittelalterlichen Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Basel: beschreibendes Verzeichnis. Abt. B, Theologische Pergamenthandschriften. Basel: Universitätsbibliothek, 1960–1975.

Nexon, Yannick. “La Bibliothèque du chancelier Séguier”. In Histoire des bibliothèques françaises, volume 2 (Les bibliothèques sous l’Ancien Régime, 1530-1789), edited by Claude Jolly, 147-55. Paris: Éditions du Cercle de la librairie, 1988.

Ruíz, Elisa. Catálogo de la sección de códices de la Real Academia de la Historia. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 1997.

Scarpatetti, Beat Matthias von. Die Kirche und das Augustiner-Chorherrenstift St. Leonhard in Basel (11./12. Jh.–1525): ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Stadt Basel und der späten Devotio Moderna. Basel: Helbing und Lichtenhahn, 1974.

Scarpatetti, Beat Matthias von. Die Handschriften der Bibliotheken von Aarau, Appenzell und Basel. Dietikon-Zürich: Urs Graf, 1977.

Schmitt, Pierre. “Les Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque municipale de Colmar.” Bulletin des bibliothèques de France 3 (1967): 83-91.

Varela, Joel. “Autores y lecturas en los monasterios femeninos de la Península Ibérica en el siglo X.” In Voces de mujeres en la Edad Media, edited by Esther Corral Díaz, 495-504. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018.

Varela, Joel. “Las Sententiae de Tajón de Zaragoza. Sus modelos literarios y su aproximación a la teología de Gregorio Magno.” e-Spania 30 (2018): 1-15.

Vernet, André and Charles Samaran. “Les livres de Thomas Basin.” Latomus 145 (1976): 324-39.