Pars 5: Liber questionum in Evangeliis 2503512658, 2503030009

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page (Page 3)
Copyright (Page 4)
Section 1 (Page 5)
Section 2 (Page 9)
Section 3 (Page 11)
Section 4 (Page 20)
Section 5 (Page 40)
Section 6 (Page 49)
Section 7 (Page 50)
Section 8 (Page 54)
Section 9 (Page 72)
Section 10 (Page 100)
Section 11 (Page 134)
Section 12 (Page 172)
Section 13 (Page 208)
Section 14 (Page 228)
Section 15 (Page 233)
Section 16 (Page 247)
Section 17 (Page 259)
Section 18 (Page 264)
Section 19 (Page 1)
Section 20 (Page 5)
Section 21 (Page 6)
Section 22 (Page 98)
Section 23 (Page 108)
Section 24 (Page 109)
Section 25 (Page 110)
Section 26 (Page 111)
Section 27 (Page 120)
Section 28 (Page 154)
Section 29 (Page 155)
Section 30 (Page 156)
Section 31 (Page 157)
Section 32 (Page 164)
Section 33 (Page 166)
Section 34 (Page 168)
Section 35 (Page 186)
Section 36 (Page 193)
Section 37 (Page 194)
Section 38 (Page 195)
Section 39 (Page 197)
Section 40 (Page 198)
Section 41 (Page 266)
Section 42 (Page 295)
Section 43 (Page 296)
Section 44 (Page 297)
Section 45 (Page 316)
Section 46 (Page 324)
Section 47 (Page 325)
Section 48 (Page 332)
Section 49 (Page 333)
Section 50 (Page 340)
Section 51 (Page 342)
Section 52 (Page 343)
Section 53 (Page 371)
Section 54 (Page 374)
Section 55 (Page 378)
Section 56 (Page 396)
Section 57 (Page 408)
Section 58 (Page 410)
Section 59 (Page 412)
Section 60 (Page 413)
Section 61 (Page 426)
Section 62 (Page 427)
Section 63 (Page 454)
Section 64 (Page 457)
Section 65 (Page 480)
Section 66 (Page 492)
Section 67 (Page 564)

Citation preview

CORPVS CHRISTIANORVM Series

Latina

CVIII F

SCRIPTORES CELTIGENAE CVRA

CONSILII AB

ACADEMIA REGIA HIBERNIAE FT

ASSOCIATIONE BIBLICA HIBERNIAE ELECTI

Pars V

TURNHOUT BHEPOLSSPUBLISHER.S 2003

LJBER QVESTIONVM y IN EVANGELIIS

QVEM EDIDIT

J, RITTMUELLER

TURNHOUT BREPOLS

S3

PUBLISHERS

2003

This book has been printed on paper according

to the prevailing

ISO-NORMS. © 2003

BREPOLSSPUBLISHERS

(Turnhout

- Belgium)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced. stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

SCRIPTORES CELTIGENAE

A Note on

the Sub-Series

chief object of early Christian Ireland; but fifty years the case has been made, principally and

It has long been realized that the Scriptures were the

of study in the monastic schools

within the last initially by the late Professor Bernhard Bischoff, for regarding these learned circles as particularly prolific in producing exegetical, homiletic and theological works of their own. Many of the Latin-language texts in question survive in manuscripts of which scholars had long been aware, but a Hibernian origin for them had not been mooted because the extant codices were located abroad and did not bear obvious signs, such as insular palaeographical features, to suggest their pedigree. Bischoff s thesis, and the list of 'Irish symptoms' which he pro posed as diagnostic for texts emanating from Hibernian circles at home and on the Continent, have become widely but not univer sally accepted since they were first published (as 'Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Fruhmittelalter') in Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954). However, many of the texts concerned, as well as related ones, have remained unprinted; and it has become clear that only by publishing them can the issue of their origins and interconnections be clarified. Apart from this, these works consti tute primary evidence for the period in Latin theological history about which we know least, and thus have an intrinsic scholarly value of their own. Furthermore, they are of importance in other fields of study. For example, the Royal Irish Academy has for many years been undertaking a multi-faceted Dictionary of Medieval Latin from Celtic Sources (DMLCS) project; this project is founded upon a full-text database of the material involved (now being published by Brepols in a series of electronic editions under the title An Arcbiw of Celtic-Latin Literature), and the database will have considerable lacunae in it until editions of the exegetical material have become available for entering therein. It was in such a context, and to try to meet needs such as these, that what is now appearing as the Scriptores Celtigenae sub-series of the Corpus Christianorum was conceived. The first moves were made in the early 1980s when Revd Professor Martin McNamara of the Irish Biblical Association made contact with the DMLCS Edito rial Board and suggested a joint publishing venture, and when a se ries of meetings between representatives of the two bodies resulted in a form of cooperation designed to avoid any duplication of ef fort. A corpus of some twenty-six key texts, which all concerned were keenly interested in seeing edited, was identified; and in 1986 the Council of the Royal Irish Academy established a Joint Editorial Committee to oversee and coordinate the activities of a worldwide team of editors, several of whom had already started work.

6*

SCRIPTORES

CELTIGENAE

In 1987 Brepols joined the venture as a third, and most welcome, partner, it having become apparent that the texts being dealt with would fit appropriately into the renowned Corpus Christianorum. The management structure for the sub-series remained substantially unaltered, although the Committee consolidated the expertise avail able to it by appointing a voluntary international Authenticating Panel of scholars who would be equipped to assess the various draft editions as they were submitted. This panel remaining anonymous, the present Note is perhaps a suitable place to express the venture's debt to its members and the Committee's gratitude for their assis tance. Since that time, and largely thanks to the facilitation accorded to the venture at every stage by Brepols through their representative Dr Roel Vander Plaetse, the Committee has seen the various editions steadily approaching completion. As befits medieval works that are increasingly seen to be related, collaboration between their editors has been encouraged at all times; it culminated in a highly success ful International Conference on Early Irish Exegesis and Homiletics held at Maynooth in 1993, at which a common ethos behind the various texts could be discerned. This encouraged Brepols to un dertake publication of the Conference Proceedings, and gave them and the Committee the confidence to name the sub-series Scriptores Celtigenae; only further study resulting from (rather than anteced ent to) the appearance of its volumes will be able to indicate how appropriate a unifying title that has been. Finally, the other Committee members would like to pay tribute to the role one of their number, Martin McNamara, has played in bringing the sub-series into being: without his vision, enthusiasm and encouragement, the venture would neither have begun nor borne fruit. As it is, Scriptores Celtigenae (whether its name even tually proves to have been suitable or not) can perhaps be seen as an appropriate continuation of the inspiring labours of the late Revd Professor Robert McNally, whose volumes of Scriptores Hiberniae Minores have provided a pattern to follow within the Corpus Chris tianorum, and whose unpublished work provided a starting point for many of the editors in the present sub-series. The following bave served on the Committee Professor L. De Coninck — Dr A. Harvey (Secretary) Dr D. Howlett — Professor M. Lapidge — Professor P. Mac Cana, M.R.I. A. — Revd Professor M. McNamara, M.R.I.A. — Professor D. 6 Croinin, M.R.I.A. — Dr T. O'Loughlin Professor M. Richter — Professor A.B. Scott, M.R.I.A. The late Professor M. Sheehy

—

— —

FAMILIAE CARISSIMAE MEAE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am indebted to all those who assisted me in the production this edition. The librarians and staff

of

of

the following institutions

allowed me to study their manuscripts either in person or through photographs or microfilm: the Cambridge University Library; the Bischofliches Priesterseminar at Fulda; the Universitats- und Landesbibliothek Sachsen-Anhalt in Halle; the Dean and Chapter of Hereford Cathedral; the British Library; the E.A. Lowe Collection of Photographs, the Pierpont Morgan Library,

New York, from

negatives in the Bodleian Library; the Archives du Loiret and the

Bibliotheque municipale, Orleans; the Bibliotheque nationale, Pa ris; the Biblioteca Vaticana and the Vatican Film Library at St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri; the Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna; and the Hill Monastic Manuscript Library at St. John's University, Collegeville, Minnesota. The librarians at Bryn Mawr College, Harding University School of Religion, Harvard Memphis Theological Seminary, Memphis/Shelby University, County Public Library System, the University of Memphis, the Me dieval Institute at the University of Notre Dame, Rhodes College, University of Tennessee,

and Villanova University permitted The Irish Biblical Association provided a grant for expenses incurred while examining manu scripts in Fulda, London, Orleans, and Paris in the summer of 1991. the

me to use their research

facilities.

Individuals who helped me include the late Prof. Bernhard Bischoff, who provided a photocopy of the Fulda manuscript, Prof. Denis Brearley, Dr. John Carey, Dr. Sean Connolly, Prof. Cheryl Cox, the late Prof. James E. Cross (by his transcription of Worcester F 64 and by his continued encouragement), Dr. Marie Postenrieder Dohan, Revd. Tony Forte, Prof. David Ganz, Dr.

Anthony Harvey, Prof. Thomas R. Hall, Prof. Michael Herren, Prof. Thomas Hill, Prof. James John, Prof. Joseph Kelly, whose gene rous access in 1993 to his microfilm copy of Quedlinburg, Cod. 127 (the Frigulus manuscript) enabled me to produce the kind tion

of

of edi

the Liber questionum in euangeliis that I had envisioned,

Prof. Bengt Lofstedt, Prof.

John Murdoch,

Dr. Nerys Patterson, Dr.

Karen Reiber, Prof. Elizabeth Sears, who wrote to me about the Lemarie editions

of

the homilies in the Ripoll Breviary,

Prof. Da

vid Sigsbee, Dr. Marina Smyth, who alerted me to relevant books and provided needed items, Ms. Darlene Townsend, Prof. Hildegard Tristram, who urged me to read Fidel Radle's work on Sma

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

iO*

ragdus,

Prof. Charles

Wright,

Vander Plaetse and Luc Jocque

and Prof. Jan Ziolkowski. Rod of Corpus Christianorum advised

me on technical issues relating to publication. I extend my heart felt thanks

to Ms. Martha

Kelly of Memphis, Tennessee,

cared for my children from their births through the birth

who

of

this

edition. I am especially grateful to Prof. Daibhi 6 Croinin and to the Revd. Prof. Martin McNamara, who invited me to contribute to Scriptores

Celtigenae.

My husband, Dr. F. Curtis Dohan, Jr., and my children, Katherine and David, provided continued, patient encouragement. This book

is

for them.

INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I.

- THE WORK

Liber questionum in euangeliis (LQE) is a full-scale commen tary on the Gospel according to Matthew, intended as a reference work for ecclesiastics

who wrote, taught, or preached. Working its anonymous Irish re dactor gathered together all available patristic and native com mentary for Matthew's twenty-eight chapters, adapting much of in the first quarter

of

the eighth century,

on Matthew by Frigulus, Hiberno-Latin commentator who flourished in the late seventh-

an already comprehensive commentary a

eighth-century period. The LQE redactor altered fre quently, though in minor ways, the generally more faithful ren derings of patristic exegesis preserved by Frigulus. He also incor porated much of Aileran's Interpretatio mystica et moralis pro-

to early

genitorum Domini Iesu Cbristi (a work not used by Frigulus), interspersed additional shorter observations between chunks of text borrowed from Frigulus, and substituted

some readings from

the Irish Bible-text tradition for the more standard

Vulgate

rea

dings found in Frigulus, whose commentary already employed a large number of Irish Bible-text variants. The various manuscript witnesses

to LQE, and the sigla used to designate

them, are set

of Chapter II below (p. 50*), while Chapter provides a synopsis of their affiliations.

out at the beginning

VIII (pp. 1,

- Place

259*-263*)

of Composition

LQE is one of thirteen commentaries on Matthew (and one of thirty-nine Bible commentaries altogether) that Bernhard Bischoff were of Hiberno-Latin origin because of characteristics they share among themselves and with early "academic" writing in Irish.' Bischoff claimed that, in general, these commentaries are believed

1 Bischoff identified the commentaries as Hiberno-Latin

based on his paleograanalysis of their manuscripts and on his comparison of their contents with known Hiberno-Latin works. Although BischofFs list may undergo some pruning, a substantial number of the commentaries will ultimately be acknowledged as products of the Hiberno-Latin exegetical method. See B. Bischoff. "Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Fruhmittelalter" and "Anhang: Die Man-Glossen (Manchianus?) des Evangeliars, London B.M. Harley 1802", in his phical

CHAPTER

12*

anonymous, have sources,

a sparse

cite the titles

of

I.

- THE

WORK

transmission,

patristic

use rare and unusual

works in similar ways, share

with Hiberno-Latin grammatical literature (e.g., ecloga, pauca), use the formula locus, tempus, persona, causa scribendi, express "the conceptual connection" between a current and pre vious lemma through beret, preface the answer to a question with non difficile, quin dubium, or non dubium, introduce compa title-forms

risons from the animate and inanimate world with the word more,

word in the three sacred languages (Hebrew, Greek and Latin), regularly employ conceptual schemata borrowed from the Fathers (e.g., the active life and the contemplative life, the allego rical interpretation of numbers), and develop a mode of exegesis render

a

based on a tendency to enumerate.

Finally, although the com

mentaries regularly adopt a multiple-sense exegesis, usually two

fold, sometimes three-fold, rarely four-fold, their primary interest is the literal sense.

inventory of Hiberno-Latin characteristics for LQE2 includes its anonymous authorship, its treatment of Matthew's persona,3 locus, tempus, causa scribendi, the demonstrationes,4 Bischoff

s

significationes, and figurae of the evangelists, the use of beret to

Atittelalterlicbe Studien. 1, Stuttgart 1966. pp. 205-273; first published in SE 6 (1954). pp. 189-279, and translated by C. O' Grady as "Turning-Points in the History of Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages, I. Introduction. II. Catalogue of Latin F.xegetical Literature. Both Hiberno-Latin and That Showing Irish Influence, up to the Beginning of the Ninth Century" and "Appendix: The 'Man'-Glosses (Manchianus?) of the Gospel Book London B.M. Harley 1802". in McNamara 1976. pp. 74-160 (pp. 80-88). M. Gorman. "A Critique of Bischoffs Theory of Irish Exegesis: The Commen tary on Genesis in Munich Clm 6302 CWendepunkte' 2).JMLat has recently questioned the validity of all of Bischoff s criteria.

7 (1997), pp. 178-233. Gorman's argument

claim that the commentaries on Bischoffs list are "pre exclusively in Continental copies" (p. 192). Nor does he discuss the exten sive bilingual Old Irish and Latin glossing of biblical texts, which supports Bischoffs conclusions. Four scholars have since published cogent analyses of Gorman's critique that should be read in con]unction with it: (1) M. Herren, "Irish Biblical Commentaries before 800". A Distinct Voice: Medieval Studies in Honor of Leonard E. Boyle, OR, ed. J. Brown & W.P. Stoneman, Notre Dame IN 1997, pp. 391-407; (2) G. Silagi. suffers from his inaccurate served

"Notwendige Bemerkungen zu Gormans Critique of Bischoffs Theory of Irish Exegesis'", Peritia 12 (1998), pp. 87-94; (3) D. 6 Croin1n. "Bischoffs Wendepunkte Fifty Years On", RBen 11o (2000), pp. 204-237 (4) Ch. Wright. "Bischoffs Theory of Irish Exegesis and the Genesis Commentary in Munich Clm 6301 ; A Critique of a Critique ",JMLat 10 (2000). pp. 115-175. 2 Bischoff. "Turning-Points", nos. 16I and 16II, pp. 113-114. 3 LQF.. Praefatio. pp. 1, 5/13. 4 LQE, Praefatio, pp. 2. 47-4. 84.

CHAPTER

I.

-

THE WORK

establish context, the frequent use

of

13*

more and non difficile,

the

frequent enumerations, the significance of VIIIP gradus caeli, the uita6 tbeorica et actualis, and the inclusion of some Greek words and phrases. delight

in questions,

numbers, reference to the

Four features not remarked by Bischoff confirm LQEs Hiberno-

Latin origin: its proven Hiberno-Latin sources, its Old Irish words, its

Irish-Latin Bible text readings, and

graphical

L

its manuscripts'

Irish paleo-

features.

- Hiberno-Latin

Sources

The LQE redactor adapted much of his material from the com mentary on Matthew by the Hiberno-Latin writer Frigulus, who

flourished

at the end

of the

seventh or the beginning

of the

eighth

century.7 Frigulus, in turn, borrowed material from the HibernoLatin writers Augustinus Hibernicus De mirabilibus sacrae scripturae (655) and Adomnan De locis Sanctis (683 x 686), and from the Collectio canonum Hibernensis (ca. 700 x 725), as well as from a host of patristic Latin authors. Since the Frigulus manuscript, Halle, Qu. Cod.

127, is missing folios corresponding to sections in where from three other Hiberno-Latin writers ap passages LQE pear, whether the LQE redactor borrowed them together with

other exegesis from Frigulus or whether he used them indepen dently cannot be determined: Pseudo-Anatolius (s. VI

7)

De ra-

tione pascbali, Cummianus De controuersia pascbali (632 x 635), (s. VII ?). As noted above,

and the MAN glosses on the Eucharist

LQE also has lengthy verbatim excerpts from Aileran (ob 665 .'), Interpretatio mystica et moralis progenitorum Domini Iesu Cbristi, a work not used by Frigulus.

ii,- Old Irish

Words

LQE has at least three Old Irish words and phrases, plus one relatinized Irish word. The first two are glosses, ortho-

possible

graphically datable to the first half of the eighth century

at the

latest.

5 LQE, p. 183. 73/5 (Mt 9, 35); LQE. p. 293. 45/6 (Mt 18, 12). 6 LQE. p. 89, 90/2 (Mt 5, 2); LQE. p. 91. 38/9 (Mt 5. 5); LQE. p. 116. 50/2 (Mt 5. 29); LQE, p. 385. 91 (Mt 24, 21). 7 The relationship between Frigulus and LQE is discussed on pp. 39*-43*. infra.

CHAPTER

14*

The first gloss

is preserved

I.

-

THE WORK

in the early ninth-century Irish frag

-

ment LQE(T) as an interlinear gloss dilse cimbeto ('a captive's 8 flagillatum over iesum at Mt 27, 26 (438, 54/5). due') (The Fri-

-

gulus manuscript and

John

is defective

for this passage.) Whitley Stokes

Strachan wrote that "the spelling cimbeto for cimbetbo

of writing the tenuis for the spirant" in the Archaic Irish, mostly single-word, glosses by the prima manus glossator of the St. Paul Epistles in Wurzburg, Universitatsbibliothek, M. p. th. f. 12 (s. VIIIex).9 These Archaic Irish glosses, transcribed by the prima manus from an older may perhaps be compared with the practice

exemplar,

are linguistically datable, according to Rudolf Thurney-

sen, to "about or before 700 A.D".'0 (The large body of glosses by the main glossator is dated linguistically "to about the middle of the eighth century".)"

Bischoff found this same Irish gloss applied to the same lemma (Iesum flagillatum A. dilse cimbeto) in Wurzburg, Universitatsbibl., M. p. th. f. 61, f. 27b, a manuscript in Irish script from the second half of the eighth century. This manuscript comprises a copy of Matthew in Irish majuscule with an accompanying com mentary (AN Wb-Mt) of interlinear glossing and thirty attached Pal, 1, p. 484. Cimbeto is the gen. sg. of cimbid 'captive, prisoner'. 9 Tbes. Pal. 1, pp. xxi. A list of the prima manus instances of tenues written instead of spirants is on pp. xxiv-xxv: comtinol, forcanit, cetarcoti, fulget, rigteg. 8 Tbes.

tuercomlassat, aincis. adcumbe. Kenney, no. 461, and CIA 9, no. 1403. dated the main manuscript of the Pauline Epistles, which was written in Ireland, to "saec. VIIFx". B. Bischoff &. J. Hof. mann. Libri Sancti Kyliani Die Wurzburger Scbreibscbule u. die Dombibiiotbek im VIII. u. IX. Jabrbundert. Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte des Bistums und Hochstifts Wurzburg, Wurzburg 1952, no. 15 (p. 98). dated it "nach der Mitte des 8. Jh." Thurneysen and Kenney, followed by Bischoff and Hofmann. raised the possibility that the scribe of the main text and the prima manus (responsible for the oldest set of glosses) were the same person: (1) Thurneysen. most empha tically (G'O/§ 5.1): "the scribe of the Latin text had himself written a few glosses'; (2) Kenney: "the so-called prima manus. possibly that of the scribe of the text"; (3) Bischoff and Hofmann: "die erste Schicht der Glossen, wohl von der Texthand". Lowe did not identify the prima manus as the scribe of the main Pauline text, noting only "many Erse and Latin glosses by several contemporary Irish hands". He did. however, remark that "probably the oldest of the four" Irish hands res ponsible for the glosses in the Wurzburg Matthew commentary "has some resem blance to the text script of the Wurzburg S. Paul" and that the Wurzburg Matthew was "partly glossed" in the Irish monastic centre "where the Wurzburg St. Paul originated" (CIA 9, no. 1415). Bischoff & Hofmann, Libri Sancti Kyliani p. 11, support this observation. 10 Tbes. Pal , 1. pp. xxiii-xxv; Kenney. no. 461 (p. 635): "the end of the 7th or beginning of the 8th century"; Bischoff & Hofmann. Libri Sancti Kyliani, p. 98: "Formen aus dem Ende des 7, oder dem Anfang des 8. Jh.". 11 GOI § 5.1.

CHAPTER I.

- THE

WORK

15*

vellum slips in small, pointed Irish minuscule. Herrad Spilling de termined that four contemporary scribes, working together, were responsible for the commentary. He concluded on paleographical grounds that the entire volume

- Gospel

text and commentary likely assembled in Ireland in the late eighth century.'2 The shares often identical Latin exegesis with LQE. commentary

- was

Bischoff proposed that this gloss, linguistically datable to the ear lier part of the eighth century, could have been copied from a glossating work on Matthew. Daibhi 6 Croinin very plausibly sug gested a Bangor origin or at least "a north-east

localisation" for T

and for the Wurzburg Matthew.'3 He based his conjecture

on

(1) a

slip in the Wurzburg Matthew containing a passage dating "from

about Mo-Sinnu moccu Min (ob 610) and the computus at Bangor, on (2) the Bobbio provenance of, and therefore a possible Bangor origin for, LQE(T), and on (3) the the early seventh

century"

shared gloss that ties these two manuscripts cally, temporally, cause the script

and exegetically.

of

6

together

linguisti

Croinin cautioned that be

the computus slip is different from that

of

the

other slips, the computus slip could not with certainty be connec ted to the commentary

from

its

beginning and could not there

fore prove its Bangor origin. He downplayed the shared gloss as a

"tenuous"

link between the Wurzburg Matthew and the Bobbio

LQE fragment (T) with its possible Bangor origins. Nevertheless, he was not altogether willing to discount the idea. I believe,

however, that the weight of the evidence does esta but between

blish a link not only between these two manuscripts the two Matthew commentaries

they contain,

and does point to

their joint origin in Bangor or at least in Bangor's area in the north-eastern

12 Bischoff.

part

"Turning-Points",

of Ireland:

the significant

of influence amount of

no. 22, pp. 124-126, proposed a general date of

VIII-IX" for the entire volume. J. Hofmann and he of "s. VIII2" to the Gospel text and a date of s. IXm

"saec.

had earlier assigned

date

to the commentary in

a

their 1952 catalogue, Libri Sancti Kyliani, no. 16 (pp. 11and 99), a dating adopted earlier in Kenney. no. 462. CLA 9, no. 1415, suggested a s. VIIIa date for the entire

which accords with Spilling's more recent findings, which are found in in Fulda, Mainz und Wurzburg," in Die Wen und Europa im friiberen Mittelalter, 2, ed. H. Lowe, Stuttgart 1982, pp 890-

volume,

his "Irische Handschrifteniiberlieferung

892.

i3 D. 0 Cr6inin. "Wurzburg, Universitatsbibliothek. M. p. th. f. 61 and HibernoLatin Exegesis in the VIIIth Century", Lateiniscbe Kultur im VIII. Jabrbundert:

Trauber-Gedenkscbrift, ed. A. Lehner & W. Berschin, St. Ottilien 1990, p. 214. 6 Croinin details the origins of the Bangor computus in "Mo-Sinnu Moccu Min and the Computus of Bangor", Peritia 1 (1982), pp. 281-295.

CHAPTER

16*

I.

-

THE WORK

native exegesis shared between LQE and the Wurzburg Matthew, and the Archaic Irish gloss found identically in a confirmed Bob-

bio manuscript of LQE with probable Bangor connections and in the Wurzburg Matthew, which contains a slip attesting to the ori gin of the Bangor computus. The likelihood of a Bangor origin for LQE

by the existence of the tenth-century Bre much of it verbatim or altered to a greater or

is strengthened

ton manuscript

V,

lesser extent from a manuscript better

text than

of LQE

do the two manuscripts

branch, the Late Carolingian branch a

that preserves a generally

of

the best-attested

[/x].

Monks travelling from Bangor to Bobbio could have followed route that Columbanus and his companions may have taken

when they left Bangor for the Continent ca. 590. Jonas of Bobbio in his biography of Columbanus (ca. 640) wrote that they ad Britannicos perueniunt sinus ... ('reached British shores ...').'4 G.S.M. Walker wrote that this "obscure passage" could apply either to

of

Great Britain or to Brittany and noted that "the placenames

Coulomb on the gulf of Cornwall, may preserve route".'5 The placename

St.

Malo, and

St.

St.

Columb on the shore of

a record of the saint's passage by that evidence suggests, then, that Columba

nus, and Bangor monks after him, may have used a route similar to the "interior route" to the Continent taken by Samson

of Dol

ca. 565) and favored by other sixth-century churchmen: sai ling from Ireland, stopping at a monastery on the Pembrokeshire

(ob

coast, perhaps St. David's, or (in the case

of Samson) Insula

Pyrus

(Ynys Pyr, now Caldy Island, near Tenby, in South Pembroke shire), landing at St. Columb Porth on the north Cornish coast (Samson landed at Padstow before proceeding to nearby Docco, now

St.

Kew), crossing the Cornish peninsula, embarking from

a

port in the estuary of the Fowey (Samson had probably embar ked for Dol at Golant, whose church is still dedicated to him), then crossing the Channel, possibly stopping in the Jersey archi pelago.

Whereas Samson disembarked in the Rance estuary, si Dinard and St. Malo, and traveled

tuated between present-day southeast to Dol, placename

evidence suggests that Columbanus and his monks disembarked in the cove of Guesclin, which is

14 Ionas. Vita Columbani (ca. A.D. 639 x 642). ed. B. Krusch, Monumenta Ciermaniae Historica: Scriptores Rerum Merouingicarum, 4. Hanover 1902. I, 4. 15 G.S.M. Walker, "Introduction. Chapter I. Biographical', Sancti Columbani Opera. Dublin 1957, p. xix

CHAPTER I. northeast

of

the estuary

of

- THE

WORK

17*

the Rance, proceeded south

3

km. to

Coulomb, and then southeast to the Columban foundations of Luxeuil, Annegray, and Bobbio.'6 Using this interior route, an eighth-century monk on a journey from Bangor to Bobbio could St.

well have deposited a copy of LQE in a monastic library on the N.E. Armorican coast, a copy which a tenth-century redactor used as the basis

for the collection in

V.

Although the first gloss could have been added anytime during or after the redaction of LQE up to Ts transcription in Ireland in the early ninth (?) century, the occurrence of a second Irish gloss spelling suggests a date well before 750. This second Irish gloss, archaic in spelling and otherwise unattested, is also datable to the first half of the eighth century. It is now em with an archaic

bedded within the body of the text: verbal noun redigutb ('a le velling, a smoothing'; Old Irish reidiugud) originally glossing/?^ ndamentum in commentary on Mt 4, 21 (84, 77). (The French Carolingian manuscripts LQE[S and O] both preserve this gloss, but is again defective because a folio is mis

the Frigulus commentary

sing.) Final -tb for -d is a characteristic of the Wurzburg prima manus glosses but is found only intermittently in the main body

of glosses.'7 According

to

John

Carey, final -tb for -d "is an archaic

A

is,

orthographic feature, on the way out already in Wurzburg", that by the middle of the eighth century.'8 third word, Old Irish anagogien, formed from anagoge, -is sense') and provi

of the LQE com

mentary and did not begin as an interlinear gloss. list interpreting

the m munera

of the Magi

belongs to

at Mt 2, 11 (49, 86) as

a

an original part

It

of avaywyr} ('spiritual

ded with an Irish ending -ien,

is

(f.), the latinized form

///

1,

18

p.

1.

a

a

16 B. Merdrignac, "Bretons et Irlandais en France du Nord - VIc-VIIIv siecles", Ireland and Nortbern France. AD 600-850, ed. J.-M. Picard. Dublin 1991. pp. 121124. outlines the "interior route" (ie. the transpeninsular route) and discusses Columbanus's sea journey from Ireland, his disembarkation and sojourn in Armorica before his departure for Austrasia. and the existence of northeastern Miniac) directly possible Columban monastic foundation (Mare St-Coulman south of St. Coulomb. The placename details of Samsons journey to Dol are from E.G. Bowen. Bri tain and tbe Western Seaways. New York 1972. pp. 80-81. and based on Vita Prima Samsonis. ed. R. Fawtier. La Vie de saint Samson. Paris 1912, 40. 17 See GOl 130.2: "Dental spirants of whatever quality are more frequently re " presented by -d than by -tb among the glosses of the Wurzburg main glossator. Tbes. Pal. xxiv. lists the following instances by the Wurzburg prima manus of -tb for later -d: diltutb 6c2, iroutb 11j3. roslogetb 13d24. macdatb 17^9. Personal communication (14 Nov 1988).

CHAPTER

18*

sensus scripturae: bistoria,

I.

-

THE WORK

anagogien, tropobgia.'9 (The Frigulus of Mt 2, 2-11,

commentary lacks the entire spiritual interpretation

which may be the LQE redactor's own contribution.) Anagogien is also the form preserved in the oldest surviving copy of the eighth-century Hiberno-Latin commentary Pauca problesmata de enigmatibus ex tomis canonicis, Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica, Reg. lat 76 (ca. 800 A.D., N. France), whose two later manuscripts have Latin accusative

the form adopted by Gerard

anagogen,

MacGinty in his edition (CCCM

173,

2000, p. 23):

anagogien (anagogen

P

II,

Pauca problesmata, Praefatio 52, iiii: diuisio inter historiam et trophologiam et allegoriam Quarta

et

R).

The Wurzburg prima manus glossator also wrote anagogien as spiritali at Wb. 26t6.20 fourth word, possibly Irish, belongs to commentary on med1a

A

an interlinear gloss over in intellectu

a

6

nocte at Mt 25, (389, 97): in similitudine Egepti temporis. LQE(O), the only manuscript witness for this passage, has egesti, relatinized where the scribe misread -p- as -5-. Egepti may be form based on Egept, gen. sg. Egeipt, the Old Irish form of Aegiptus, Aegipti.

"

The first two glosses, dilse cimbeto and redigutb, verify only passed through Irish hands sometime in the first half of the eighth century, not that necessarily Irish in ori gin. Egepti, the apparently relatinized gen. sg. form of Egeipt from it is

that this commentary

Latin Aegypti, may mean the same thing. The use

of anagogien, is

however, in the body of the exegesis, not borrowed from the Fri and not originally an interlinear gloss, gulus commentary, strong evidence that LQE originated in an Irish center of learning. The Bobbio provenance of LQE(T), which has the first gloss, sug

a

19 LQE(S) spells anagogien, whereas LQE(O) altered the spelling to the Latin accusative anagogen. the incorrect case in context that requires the Latin nomi native

anagoge.

20 DIL, fasc.

&

P.

is

a

§

"A", col. 319, 46 et seq. GOI 917 lists other Old Irish words in by-form of the adjective firidn, Priscien. septien (Septuagint), and firien, firion ('just'), borrowed from Welsh gwirion. 21 £gept, EgetUpt (DIL, fasc. "E", col. 65, 35 et seq.). The terminology for the found in M. Herren. "Old Irish relatinizing of Irish words borrowed from Latin Lexical and Semantic Influence on Hiberno-Latin." Irland und Europa Die Kircbe Ni ChathAin im Fri1bmittelalter/ Ireland and Europe: Tbe Early Cburcb, ed. M. Richter, Stuttgart 1984, p. 206. -ten.

CHAPTER gests that

Twas

transcribed

tained close ties. Could

iii,

LQE

I.

- THE

at Bangor,

WORK

19*

with which Bobbio main

itself have been redacted at Bangor?

- Irish Latin Bible-Text Readings

LQE preserves textual variants found only in Gospels transcri VL[rJ) or in Gospels whose texts are closely related to the Irish tradition (VG[ELQ]) but written outside Ireland, ie., in Brittany (VG[E]), Wales (VG[L]), or bed in Ireland (VG[DEpEpm«R dim mull r

J

Iona (VG[Q]). " Fifty-six LQE textual variants found only in one or more Irish-influenced Vulgate texts (VG[DELQR]) but not in all and/or in other such manuscripts are the subject of list 1.23

-

-

22 M. McNamara, "History of Research",

Studies

on Texts

of Early Irisb Latin

and Dordrecht 1990, Gosf>els (AD. 600-1200), Instruments Patristica 20, Steenbrugge pp. 6-7, and "Background to Irish Latin Gospel Renderings", Studies on Texts, pp. 18-21. The single uncapitalized initials following VL symbolize Vetus Latina texts. For the list of sigla of Biblical manuscripts, see B. Fischer, Die lateiniscben Evangelien bis zum t0jabrbundert. I. Varianten zu Mattbdus. Freiburg 1988, p. 13*. and J. Wordsworth and H.J. White. Nouum Testamentum Domini Nostri lesu Cbristi Latine. 1, Oxford 1889, pp. xi-xiv, xxviii. xxxi-xxxiii. Uncapitalized initials follow ing VG symbolize manuscripts traditionally considered to be Vetus Latina witnes ses, but which B. Fischer has concluded transmit a primarily Vulgate text, inclu ding for Matthew: f (Jg), r^ (Hg), g, (Bg), g, (Pg). (Fischer's sigla are in parentheses and organized according to country. In this edition the traditional single lower case initial is cited.) See Fischer, supra, pp. 14*, 17*-18*, 26*, Chapter and verse are those of the Stuttgart Vulgate edited by R. Weber. Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam uersionem,

1-2, Stuttgart 1983l. 23 Both the VG(Ep) and VG(Epm») Bible-text variants in the Echternach Go spels (Paris. B.N., lat. 9389 [ca. 700, Rathmelsigi ?\) also belong to the Irish family

of Gospel texts. D. 6 Cr6inin has argued that the Echternach Gospels were transcribed ca. 700 in Rathmelsigi, Ireland, where the Anglo-Saxon priest Willibrord did his clerical studies, where he was ordained, and whence he sailed for missionary work on the Continent. See D. 6 Cr6in1n, "Rath Melsigi, Willibrord, and the Earliest Echternach Manuscripts", Peritia 3 (1984), pp. 17-49. 6 Croinin's view has strong support from McNamara's listing of the number of times that a VG(Epm«) variant coincides with one or all of the VG(DELQR) family of Gospel texts. McNamara's analysis summarizes the differing opinions about the origins of the Echternach Gospels and gives a complete list of its marginalia. He writes that the Echternach Gospels are "heavily glossed in a hand that is regarded as being either the same as the main hand of the text or contemporary with it". He concludes that most of its marginal variants "coincide ... with one or more of the text forms of [the Irish (Celtic) family of texts, and they] are. thus, important evidence that the Irish family was well-estab lished as a text by AD. 700, and that the Ep annotator had access to one, and most probably to more than one, manuscript with such a text. The glosses pro vide very strong evidence that the centre in which the Echternach Gospels were written, or the tradition standing behind them, had very strong Irish affiliations" (M. McNamara. "Echternach Marginalia and the Irish Gospel Text", Studies on Texts, pp. 36-37) The three lists of LQE variants, infra, also show that VG(Ep) and VG(Epm») fre quently correspond to VG(DELQR) variants found in Frigulus and LQE.

CHAPTER

- THE

I.

WORK

LQE lexical variants found in one or more members of the Irish-influenced family of texts (but not unanimously in the VG[DELQR] texts for a given variant), where these variants also Thirty-eight

exist in manuscripts

belonging to other Vulgate traditions, are the subject of List 2. Thirty-five LQE textual variants (orthographical and lexical) shared by all members of the VG(DELQR) family, albeit with texts from other Vulgate families, are the subject of LIST 3.

1)

Bible-Text Variant List

list

1

itemizes the ten variants that LQE shares with at least one other Irish Gospel text, where Frigulus agrees with the Vulgate 1A

-

nos. 2, 3, 5, 7), disagrees with both LQE and the (four instances no. 4), or omits the entire Bible verse or part of Vulgate (once the lemma (twice nos. 1, 8). In the case of LQEs Aileran source, which Frigulus omits altogether, LQEs three Bible-text variants agree with VG(D mull) or VG(E r,), where Aileran has a critical

-

Vulgate reading (nos. 6, 1.

Mt

9, 10):

dilusus S O PAS-R] cfr di/delussus VG(D/L);

2, 16 (52, 34/5)

inlusus VG; uersiculum om. FRI 2.

Mt

3, 4 (59, 79)

enim S O VG(E mull dim gat)] autem FRI VG

cfr Mt, 5, 23 (111, 54/5) aduersus F S O] cfr aduersus VG(R); aduersum AG FRI ; cfr aduersum VG 4. Mt 6, 33 (1o0, 41) ergo S O VG(DEQR)] autem VG; om. FRI 5. Mt 7, 15 (149, 93) uobis S O VG(DEpm«LQR)] om. FRI VG 3.

6.

Mt

8, 11 (12,

60/1) multi ab oriente et ab occidente:

ab2 S O

VG(D mull)] om. AIL VG; AIL om. FRI FRI VG 7. Mt 13, 26 (241, 99) apparuit S O VG(ER)] apparuerunt 8. Mt 18, 16 (295, 74) te non audierit S O (Ri) VG(R)] non te a. transp. VG; om. FRI 9. Io 10, 10 (13, 86) amplius S O, SED-S Mt (38, 78), VG(E) VL(r/ 8)] abundantius AIL VG; AIL om. FRI 10. Io 10, 16 (13, 87) de S O, SED-S Mt (38, 28), VG(E) VL(r/e d c a ff2)] ex AIL VG; AIL om. FRI LIST iB has forty-six

additional

Frigulus in twenty-seven Frigulus

testimony

is

(nos.

absent

the Quedlinburg manuscript 45):

Irish-only variants. LQE follows 1-12,

14-23,

39-40,

for the other is defective

42-43,

nineteen

(nos.

46), but because

13, 24-38,

41,

44

CHAPTER 1.

+

Mt

1, 19 (33, 55)

2.

Mt

3, 16

Mt

5, 14 (103, 13)

WORK

21*

homo S O h FRI VG(DEEpLR)] om. VG caeli ... ei S O FRI VG(dim)] transp. VG

esset

3.

- THE

I.

+

(70, 85/6) in aliis exemplaribus

additur "huius": mundi

huius S O FRI VG(D)] om. VG 4.

Mt

5,

om. est 5 O FRI

20/O /xw/ habundantius

(119,

37

VG(DEp'L')

qui S O FRI VG(EQ)] quicumque VG 6. Mt 6, 22 (141, 11) si oculus simplex S O FRI] cfr VG[R si oc. tuus simplex est]; si fuerit oculus tuus simplex VG 7. Mt 7, 15 (140, 94) uobis S O (Ri) FRI VG(DEpmgLR)] om. VG 8. Mt 9, 9 (174, 80) transisset S O (transs-), FRI PAS-R VG(gat) transiret VG VL(k Mt 16 (178, 54) committit FRI VG(D[con- Epm«Q]L)] inmittit VG 10. Mt 20 (179, 95) ante ecce om. et FRI VG(Ep') 11. Mt Iesus FRI VG(DR)] om. VG (183, 27) autem 12. Mt 10, FRI VG[me neca- R]) VL(k (202, 51) me negauerit h)] negauerit me transp. VG Mt

5, 41 (121,

72)

S

O S O

+

S

33 36

(205, 25) uerba haec

O

11,

S

Mt

1

9,

13.

O

O

S

9,

9.

9,

l)]

5.

VG(Epm«LQR)]

cfr omnia

uerba haec VG(E gat), sermones hos VG(D); om. VG; deest in FRI

Mt

13, 35 (244,

S

71) absconsa

FRI VG(R)] exeuntes VG FRI VG(DLQ)] ergo VG O FRI VG(Epm«LQR)] abscon-

O

16.

euntes

(237, 10) autem

5

13,

S

12, 14 (222, 94)

Mt

O

Mt

15.

18

14.

Mt

18, 20 (297,

uidens quod

94) ero

uero VG (om. FRI VG(EEpm«)]

+

S

19.

11)

FRI VG[Ep*])

quia VG

(-de), O FRI VG(R)] Iudaeae VG

S

17, 12 (285, 48)

S

14, 30

Mt

O O

Mt

18.

S

(260,

17.

O

dita VG

(Ri)] cfr ego ero FRI VG(EQR);

21.

Mt

(304, 53) Iudae

19, 21 (307, 1/2)

omnia

VS

O

20. Mt 19,

1

sum VG

FRI VG(EEpm«LQ[+

bona R])]

O

illi

S

22. Mt 20, 24 (319, 15) audientes

+

om. VG

FRI VG(EpLQ')] om.

(Ri) VG O

O

deest

(349, 53) manibus

et manibus

VG;

et pedibus

et pedibus

S

27. Mt 22,

eius

(Ri) VG;

13

ff,)] factum

h q

b

ff2

VS VG(DEp'LQR) VL(c in FRI

26. Mt 21, 42 (343, 22) factus

a

S

S

O

6)

S

FRI] cfr quia gentium 23. Mt 20, 25 (319, 20) quia gentium principes VG(LR); quia principes gentium (Ri) VG mitte VG(R)] iacta te VG; deest in FRI 24. Mt 21, 21 (336, O; iuit VG; deest in FRI 25. Mt x1, 30 (338, 59) iit VG(Ep')] ut

VG(DELR)] pedibus

om. O; deest in FRI

CHAPTER

22*

28.

Mt

dum VG 29.

sicut C S O PAS-R VG(DE)] quemadmo-

23, 37 (371, 24)

in FRI

; deest

Mt

- THE WORK

I.

nonne O VG(DELR) VL(b r,)] ne GR-M VG

25, 9 (388, 53)

VL; deest in S FRI 30.

Mt

25, 30 (398, 5)

inutilem

+

autem O VG(DQ)] om. (Ri) VG;

deest in S FRI 31.

Mt 26,

(404,

10

15)

bonum tramp. VG; 32.

Mt 26,

17

bonum opus O VG(DEEpLQ) VL(r,)] opus in S FRI manducare O VG(Q)] comedere VG; deest

deest

(406, 61)

in S FRI 33.

21 (407, 88) me tradet Va O VG(LQ)] cfr tradet me h); me traditurus est VG; deest in S FRI Mt 26, 22 (408, 94) contristati + sunt Va O VG(DEEpLR)] om.

Mt 26,

VL(r,/d 34.

a ?

VG; deest in 5 FRI 35.

Mt 26,

36.

Mt 26, 40 (421,

28 (411,

m5 FRI

46) est + enim

potuisti C VG(QR dim gat g2)] potuistis O

23)

VG; deest inSVBl 37.

Mt 26,

22, 46] 38.

VG (om. Va O VG[Ep*]); deest

ne C O VG(LR dim gat), VL(r, '/h), VG-Lc

41 (421, 25)

ut non VG; dees/ in S FRI

Mt 26, 69 (430, 82) autem O VG(EQ) VL(r,/h n)] uero VG

VL0*; dees/ in 5 FRI

suo VG (om.

S

sexta autem hora VG; deest in

monumento

h)]

O

27, 60 (449,

a

+

40. Mt

ab hora autem VI O FRI (a. h. a. sexta) VG

83)

a

27, 45 (444,

ff2

Mt

5)

39.

(mull dim) VL(r, .'/d

FRI VG[Ep*]

;

deest

(451,

in

42) milites

O

Mt 27,

S

41.

diam VG

65

VL) VG(DLQR* gat) VL(r/h)] custo-

FRI

S

1,

S

42. Mc 15, 23 (441, 21) uinum myrratum O FRI VG(D)] murratum uinum transp. AG VG; deest in O FRI VG(QR)] in diem VG 80 (57, 38) ad diem 43. Lc

Bible-Text Variant List

2

2)

S

O

36

S

O

d c

5

VG(D) VL(r,)] meus 44. Lc 10, 29 (355, 97) proximus meus a); deest in FRI proximus O VG; mihi proximus AG VL(e 61 Lc Iesus 22, (432, 23) VG(E) VL(d)] Dominus AG VG; 45. deest in FRI Lc (166, 98) uobiscum Go FRI VG(DEpm«R)] cfr uobis 24, 46. VG; deest in

Further LQE lexical variants are found in one or more members of the Irish-influenced family of texts (but not in all the VG

CHAPTER I.

- THE WORK

23*

[DELQR] texts for a given variant), where these variants also exist in manuscripts belonging to other Vulgate traditions, list 2A con

reading (nos.

or omits the relevant clause (no.

1, 2, 4)

3).

tains five cases where LQE agrees with members of the Irish family, whereas Frigulus either agrees with the critical Vulgate

While

Frigulus does not cite from Aileran at all (Aileran follows the Vul reading with strong Irish Bible-text

support

5):

a

gate), LQE adopts

(no.

3,

f

O

S

super2

VL(r/e

VG(DQR/P

8); supra

...

f)l

super

O

...

S

S

super

a

...

d c

10, 19)

8)

i

q

(Lc

a

d c

5.

13,

VL(e

AIL

84

9)

O

b2

3,

b

a

c

3.

78

l

b q

a

f)

O

S

2,

1)

8

53

9)

1.

Iudae HIV" PAS-R VG(DLQR/CKMtVXZe)] (Mt Iud(a)eae HI FRI VG 2. 63, ex SO VG(DELQ dur mull dim/CFZ' VL(c (Mt S1] de FRI VG 64, 11) baptizo uos (Mt VG(DER mulP dim gat/TY aur g,) VL(d q)] uos baptizo tramp. VG; om. FRI Fili Dauid VG(DEL/Z')] osanna Fili Dauid 4. 372, 52 (Mt 21, ante osanna (supra) transp. Va; cfr Filii VG(Ep'QR); Filio Dauid FRI VG 41,

cfr super, supra AIL VG;

om. FRI

list

has thirty-three different variants. LQE and Frigulus lar gely agree in twenty (nos. 2-18, 20, 22, 32) while for eleven others 2B

Mt 4,

25 (88, 63)

q

a

1,

a

1,

O

S

b

1,

de (Iudaea)

S

l

1,

15, VL(r/e ff2)-Mt, VG(f)-Io uenturus est VG; deest in FRI 2.

VG(f)-Mt, VL(r/e ff>Io 15, VL(+ l)-Io

56) uenit

O

15.27 (207,

c b q

Io

11;

1,

Mt

3,

1.

is

Frigulus has either non-committal testimony (no. 23) or the Queddefective (nos. linburg manuscript 24-31, 33):

FRI VG(DEpQR/AJKVY)]

27]

om.

(126, 80) in absconso

5 O

Mt

6, 4

3.

VG FRI VG(DEpLQR/B*JM)]

in

abscondito VG O

S

6,

18 (139,

cfr Mt

6,

6,

4.

(Ri) FRI VG(DEpm,{LQR/ 76) in absconso B'JM)] in abscondito VG 4.6.18: in absconso ... abscondito ... abscondito VG(Ep) cfr Mt Mt

4.6.18:

in

abscondito

...

absconso

...

absconso

num

6,

Mt S

5.

VG(Epmg) 11 (97,

66) cotidianum FRI VG(DEEpm«L/CT)] cottidia-

O; supersubstantialem

VG

CHAPTER

24*

Mt 6,

VG

num S: supersubstantialem Mt

6,

11 (143,

71)

Mt

VG(DEEpm«L/CT)] cottidianum

cotidianum

S O FRI VG(EEpL'H)]

13 (128, 24) nos inducas

6,

S

VG; om. FRI

O: supersubstantialem 6.

THE WORK

O FRI VG(DEEpm«L/CT)] cottidia-

cotidianum

11 (128, 18)

-

I.

inducas

nos transp. VG Mt 6,

7.

16

(138,

8.

Mt

S O (Ri)

exterminant

64)

HI

FRI

VG(D/

VL] demoliuntur VG

ABCFHejMMtO»|TVXYZ')

alii addunt "bona" S O] cfr (uultis) bona in

7, 12 (148, 72)

AG FRI VG(Q/g,) VL(h) 9.

Mt 7,

16 (149,

Mt 7, 24

10.

96) ex S O FRI VG(D/B)) a VG 43) super S O FRI VG(DEp'LQR/Z')]

(151,

supra

VG 11.

super S O FRI VG(DEEpLR CJKMtTZ)] supra

Mt

7, 26 (152, 58)

Mt

8, 2 (153, 72)

VG 12.

leprosus

quidam S O FRI VG(DLQR mull

+

Vf

aur) VL(c a b b2 h q)] quidam leprosus transp. VG(g,); quidam om. VG dim gat

Mt

13.

(166,

26

8,

5)

S O FRI

uentis

VG(EEpm«LQR gat/

uento VG

BCJKMTVX'Z)]

Mt 8, 28 (171, 96) possit 5 FRI VG(DE[posit Epm«]L/HJ g,) VL(b h l o)] sit O; posset VG b2 S O FRI] cfr obtul-, optul- VG15. Mt 9, 2 (172, 20) obtulerunt 14.

16.

Mt

c a b b2 h q); offerebant VG 20 (283, 13, 26) super S O FRI VG(EpLR/0)]

17.

Mt

14, 19 (258, 63)

18.

Mt

16, 13 (274,

(dim/f g,) VL(k

q

b

dab

l

O

FRI VG(r2 gat/f aur) VL(d

a

20. Mt 16, 23 (279, 2.4) sed quae ff22

gj

ff,)] qui in me

VG(E mull r2/J) VL(e

S

sapis quae

b

ff,)] sapis ea quae FRI VG S

q

ff22

16, 23 (279,

a

O

Mt

19.

1)

BBfCAFJMOTX'Z* f aur g,) VL(e d quem VG

S;

super S O FRI VG(R/JZ')] supra VG + me O FRI VG(E'LR mull dim

quem

ff, q

3)

supra VG

ff,)] sed ea quae VG r2

S

S O

d

S

V

D]

ff2

(282, 84) nubs

n b

17,

c a

Mt

5

O VG(EEpm«LQR mull dim gat nubes FRI VG: DELTA g2/CA) VL(d 22. Mt 19, 28 (310, 54) in generatione ista O FRI VG([-ni ista Ep,",,][ista om. L/OlQR)] in regeneratione VG FRI; di23. Mt 21, 16 (329, 81) dicunt Va VG(DEEp'LQ/JKT)] cant VG; om. 21.

28

CH^QKMMtTXZ