After a Long Silence…

The dissertation is now wrapping up and, perhaps more importantly for this site, I’ve just received notice that I’ll be presenting at October’s PMR conference at Villanova.

I’ll be doing an in-depth look at structural units in Gregory’s homilies in a presentation entitled: “A Compositional Taxonomy for Gregory the Great’s Forty Gospel Homilies.” Now, does that sound exciting or what!

(Yes, I know, “…or what”)

In any case, I hope to be doing some of my research in public here in order both to engage in some dialogue (I hope) and to raise awareness about the place and importance of these homilies for the whole of the Western homiletical tradition.

Textual Parallels: Answering Jonathan

I’m getting back to the point that Jonathan raised on the post below. I keep exploring the issue of how to look at and construct parallels from a number of angles and as I consider a new project I’m embarking on (or will if my PMR abstract is accepted) I’ve got some more thoughts.

Jonathan’s defending paper parallels, And let me say, I am a fan of apaper parallels, and believe strongly that students of the New Testament and preachers need to own a copy of Throckmorton’s Gospel Parallels and be well versed in its use.

That having been said, I’m thinking about stages in a research project. There are some points where a static parallel is handy; others when it is less so. That is, as you go, you starting noticing things that require different different kinds of parallel examination that you wouldn’t have realized without the prior work.

I’m getting more and more keen on XML and the potential it offers for introducing markup into a text as you go. As I’m envisioning it, once you have uniform markup in a certain constellation of texts, different XSLT configurations could be used to display different kinds of parallels—or parallels within the same text given the right kinds of controls.

If the PMR presentation does get accepted I’ll try and put this into practice and see how well it works.

Textual Parallels

I’m working on a couple of projects right now that involve textual parallels.

To put it simply, I’ve become dissatisfied with the parallel colums thing. Isn’t there a better way to do this?

I mean think about it… The use of parallel columns was old technology when Codex Bezae(NT Uncial D)  had a facing page Latin/Greek text of the New Testament. Even then folks in Late Antiquity got that it didn’t work well, especially not for really big texts. Like, say, comparing the four gospels.

The point of Bezae, of course, was not to offer a parallel for the study of both texts. Rather, it was so either a Greek or Latin reader could read the Scriptures and someone who was competent in both could read both and make of the differences whatever they would.

The first serious system for studying the parallels between the Four was Ammonius and we honestly know nothing about his system. What we do have is the improvement on his work by Eusebius. Eusebius’s system is the single best piece of analytical scholarship of the Gospels to come out of the Patristic period and that’s no exaggeration. All scholars of Late Antiquity and the Early Medieval period whose work touches even tangentially on the Gospels needs to know this system. Period.

Here’s what his system does:

1. The entire text of all four gospels are divided into numbered sections, each gospel being numbered sequentially from one up to however many divisions it takes. Where divisions begin and end depend on where parallels exist or do not exist. In other words, there are some sections in didatic material in the Synoptics that contain half of a modern verse; in some parts of John, a section can span several printed pages. (Remember, too, that no uniform chapter or verse system existed until the thireenth century. As a result all Latin lectionary lists that I know identify where the reading starts by reference to the Eusebian canon in which the incipit appears.)
2. Thirteen numbered tables stand at the head of the gospels numbered from I to X with four instances of X. Each of the tables reflects a set of relationships going from the most complex to the most simple. Thus, Table I displays the sections where all four gospels share material that Eusebius decided was common to them all. Thus this table has four columns, one for each gospel, and numbers indicating to which section you should refer in each to find the parallel. Duplicates appear in the table indicating that some portions have more than one parallel—especially in cases where a bit in the Synoptics has several Johannine parallels.  Then tables II-IV have commonalities across three gospels (II: the Synoptics [Mt, Mk, Lk]; III: Mt, Lk, Jo; IV: Mt, Mk, Jo) and tables V-IX have commonalities across two (a key one being table V: Q [Mt, Lk]). Lastly, each gospel has a table X where passages unique to that gospel may be found.
3. Within the text of the gospels themselves, most gospel books contain a marginal reference indicating the table and the parallels. Thus you may see a number indicating the division and then (perhaps in red) a numeral from I to X. If the number is a “I” it will have at least three other numbers, sometimes with a sigil identifying the gospel.
4. The mechanics of the table are explained in Eusebius’s letter to Carpanius which is frequently found in Greek manuscripts;  Jerome explains it in the famous Letter to Damasus beginning “Novum Opus” which stands at the had of most Latin gospel manuscripts.

I look at this and recognize it instantly; it’s an ancient database.

So—given databases, mark-up, hyper-text, et al., which is the more excellent way: Bezae’s path or Eusebius’s?

Old Latin vs. Vulgate: Helpful Hint

If you ever have occasion to work with a Latin Gospel-book (or other gospel-containing text) and wonder if you’re dealing with the Old Latin or the Vulgate–not an uncommon issue in the early Insular world–here’s a tip:

Check Matthew’s Beatitudes (In the margin it’ll be marked as Eusebian division 25 or perhaps Ch. 11 in one of the more common schemes.)

• The Vulgate uses Beati (blessed)
• The Old Latin uses Felix (happy)

Furthermore, keep an eye on the order of the makarisms–most Latin translations reverse  Greek vss 4 and 5. Thus, “the meek (mites)” ought to be before “those who mourn (qui lugent)”. If that’s not the case–you’ve got something unusual on your hands… (If it’s a transcription, then regard the transcriber with suspicion!)

Aelfric on Lent 1 and Exeter’s Vainglory

The more I consider Aelfric’s sermon on Lent 1 (CH I.11), the more I’m struck by its similarities to Vainglory from the Exeter Book.

• We have two characters in both that are identified as sons of the Devil and God. (Well, ok, the devil isn’t his own son so that doesn’t quite work…)
• The Devil is confused as to Jesus’ identity precisely because he is not a gluttony, drunkard, nor luster.
• The boasting behavior of the drunkard in Vainglory is highlighted just as boasting is a major feature of the second temptation in Aelfric’s homily.
• The boaster, due to his ofermod is explicitly connected with the Devil and his army who tried to overthrow God in a fit of ofermod.
• The chief attribute of the opposing character in Vainglory is his humility for which he gains the title of God’s own son; likewise, humility (as the preeminent monastic virtue) is Christ’s chief characteristic for Aelfric.

I’m not positing dependence, of course, (and I need to read the intro to the Rule of Chrodegang…) it’s just fascinating how the connections come together.

I must remember to do a lit search to see what others have written on this connection…

Genesis and Responsories: A Concise Summary

In five previous posts, I have been investigating the relationship between responsories and the continuous reading of Scripture as it appears in the early medieval monastic Night Office.

I began with Ælfric’s legislation in the Letter to the Monks at Eynsham concerning the beginning of the continuous reading cycle:

“In Septuagesima we should read Genesis until mid-Lent and we sing the history ‘Alleluia: While it is present’ [Alleluia dum praesens est (CAO 6071)] first and for one day only, and for the week as a whole we sing the responsories from the psalms, ‘O how great is the multitude’ [Quam magna multitudo (CAO 7459)] and so forth. Then, in other weeks, we sing what is found in the antiphoner. But from mid-Lent we read Exodus and sing ‘The Lord said to Moses’…” (Christopher Jones, LME, 144-5)

So—what exactly do we find if we follow his advice and find out “what is found in the antiphoner”? I selected a fairly typical Benedictine antiphoner contemporary with Ælfric, the St. Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 390.

I found that in the six Sundays contained within the period allotted by Ælfric to Genesis, two of them focused on the start of liturgical seasons (Septuagesima and Quadragesima/Lent 1); the other four did indeed provide an interpretive framework for the Genesis text.

Each Sunday tended to group around a patriarch or two in the following fashion:

• Sexagesima addresses the Creation & Fall narrative picking up specifically on the creation of the cosmos, Adam as the pinnacle of creation, Adam’s disobedience, and Cain’s murder of Abel.
• Quinquagesima begins with Noah and moves to Abraham.
• Lent 2 presents the Jacob narrative.
• Lent 3 presents the Joseph narrative.

It’s worth noting that the grand majority of the responsories are taken directly from Scripture. Or—perhaps it’s more accurate to say that they are composed largely from Scriptural materials. For rarely is a verse utilized “as is”; bits of verses are stitched into one another to create a larger Scriptural pastiche which is typically literally faithful to its source but the very act of recomposition enables it to say something other and something more than the original words in the original context.

While individual verses and verse clusters are chosen from these narratives they are in no way chosen at random. They have been carefully chosen and the selections fit together into a precis of the narrative shaped by the liturgists’ own interpretations of the text. For instance, we note that the responsories focus fundamentally on the patriarchs. Obedience seems to be a central theme. The Fall narrative is shaped around it to the point of added in extrabiblical language. Doing so forms a parallel with authentic biblical language praising obedience in the Abraham narrative. Other themes also run through the selections; blessing in particular seems a predominate motif.  I’m sure further study would reveal others.

The upshot here is that when we consider early medieval materials that interact with, summarize or communicate Scripture—especially in broad narrative sweeps—it makes sense to pay attention to the responsories used to interpret those texts when they appear within the monastic Night Office.

Genesis and Responsories, Cont.: Lent 3

Continuing along with early medieval monastic responsories sung alongside the continuous reading of Genesis…

Videntes Joseph a longe (CAO 7863)
R: Seeing Joseph from far off, his brothers spoke among themselves saying, “Behold, here comes the dreamer. Come, Let us kill him and see if his dreams predicted this.”
V: And when Joseph was seen by his brothers—for he was loved by their father more than all of the others—they hated him, nor was anyone able to speak peacefully to them, thus they said; “Come, Let us kill him…”
Source: Gen 37:18-20.

Dixit Judas fratribus suis: Ecce (CAO 6477)
R: Judah said to his brothers, “Behold, Ishmaelites are passing by; come, let us sell him and not pollute our hands. Indeed, he is our flesh and our brother.”
V: When Ruben went out to the well and did not find him, tearing his clothes and going to his brothers he said, “The boy is not present; and where will I go?”; “Indeed, he is our flesh…”
Source: Gen 37:26-27, 29-30.

Videns Jacob vestimenta Joseph (CAO 7858)
R: Jacob, seeing the garment of Joseph, tore his clothes with tears saying, “A wild beast has devoured my son, Joseph.”
V: “See if this is the garment of your son or not;” and when the father saw it, he said: “A wild beast…”
Source: Gen 37:34a, 33, 32b.

Joseph, dum intraret (CAO 7037)
R: Joseph, when he entered into the land of Egypt heard a tongue that he did not understand; his hands worked at their labor, and his tongue spoke wisdom among the leaders.
V: His back was turned away from burdens. His hands worked…
Source: VgPs 81:6-7

Memento mei dum bene (CAO 7144)
R: “Remember me when it is well with you that you might suggest to Pharaoh that he lead me forth from this prison, for I am suffering under a trick and was sent innocent into the pit.”
V: “Indeed after three days, Pharaoh will recall your ministering and will restore you to your former position—then remember me. Suggest to Pharaoh”
Source: Gen 40:12b,13, 14. (Joseph prophesying to the cup-bearer)

Tollite hinc vobiscum munera (CAO 7769)
R: “Take these presents with you, and go to the lord of the land; and when you find him, prostrate yourselves upon the ground. May my God make you favorable to him and he may send back both your brother with you and he who is held in chains.”
V: “Take the fruit of the earth in your vessels and offer to the man presents. May my God make you favorable…”
Source: Gen 43:11, 14. (Israel telling his sons to go to Egypt to buy food from the incognito Joseph)

Iste est frater vester minimus (CAO 6999)
R: “Is this your youngest brother of whom you told me? God have mercy on you, my son!” And he hurried into the house and wept, because he broke out in tears and was not able to contain them.
V: But Joseph, lifting up his eyes, saw Benjamin standing there; his whole body was moved on account of his brother. And he hurried into the house…
Source: Gen 43:29b, 30, 29a. (Joseph reunited with his youngest brother.)

Dixit Ruben fratribus suis (CAO 6480)
R: Ruben said to his brothers, “Did I not say to you, ‘Do not sin against the boy’?—but you did not listen to me. His blood is required.”
V: “We deserve to suffer this, because we sinned against our brother seeing his anguish when he supplicated us but we did not hear him. His blood is required.”
Source: Gen 42:22, 21. (Ruben & brothers after their initial hardships in Egypt at the hand of Joseph.)

Merito haec patimur, quia peccavimus (CAO 7146)
R: “We deserve to suffer this, because we sinned against our brother seeing his anguish when he supplicated us but we did not hear him. For this reason tribulation has come upon us.”
V: Ruben said to his brothers, “Did I not say to you, ‘Do not sin against the boy’?—but you did not listen to me. For this reason tribulation has come upon us.”
Source: Gen 42:21, 22. (Ruben & brothers after their initial hardships in Egypt at the hand of Joseph.)

Dixit Joseph undecim fratribus (CAO 6476)
R: Joseph said to his eleven brothers, “I am Joseph whom you sold into Egypt. Does our old father still live about whom you have told me? Go, bring him to me that he might live.”
V: “For two years the famine has been in the land; it will yet remain another five. Go, bring him to me…”
Source: Gen 45:4b, 3, 6.

Nuntiaverunt Jacob dicentes (CAO 7251)
R: They announced it to Jacob saying, “Your son Joseph lives and he himself rules over the whole land of Egypt,” upon hearing his spirit was revived and he said, “It is enough for me. I will go and I will see him before I die.
V: And when Jacob heard that his son was alive, as if waking from a deep sleep said: “It is enough for me…”
Source: Gen 45:26a, 27b-28, 26b.

Salus nostra in manu tua est (CAO 7559)
R: “Our salvation is in your hands, lord. May your mercy rest upon us that we may serve you in quietness.”
V: “May your soul live, lord, that we may not see death, nor our little ones be wanting. that we may serve you in quietness.”
Source: I know of no direct citations here. The language could fit either monastics imploring Christ or the brothers imploring Joseph, especially given an alternate verse form: “They also came to Egypt to Joseph saying, ‘Give us food that we might live’” [found in Hesbert's GDFL].

Here we clearly have a Joseph set but it’s constructed in such a way to bring out two parallel texts. First, it harkens back to the Cain and Abel story, particularly with the themes of death and pollution by blood in Dixit Judas fratribus suis: Ecce (CAO 6477), Dixit Ruben fratribus suis (CAO 6480), and
Merito haec patimur, quia peccavimus (CAO 7146).

Second, Joseph appears as a very pronounced type of Christ. The innocent, beloved above others by the father, is set upon by his sinful brothers. His innocence is put in direct connection with three days in bondage. Even Joseph’s title dominus terrae [referenced in Tollite hinc vobiscum munera (CAO 7769)] sounds remarkably Christological in this setting. The repetition of the brothers’ confession in
Dixit Ruben fratribus suis (CAO 6480) and
Merito haec patimur, quia peccavimus (CAO 7146) is entirely appropriate in a Lenten setting and the connection between the brothers’ sins against Joseph and the contemporary hearers’ sins against Christ would not be missed. The last responsory in particular containing plausible pseudo-dialogue between the brothers and Joseph reveals how many of the exchange map onto both Joseph and Christ.

Genesis and Responsories, Cont.: And They’re Back…

After a hiatus for the First Sunday in Lent, the responsories on Genesis return with the Second Sunday in Lent:

Tolle arma tua (CAO 7767)
R: Take up your weapons, quiver and bow, bring [something] from [your] hunting that I may eat, and my soul will bless you.
V: And when you bring back some game, then make me savory meat that I may eat. And my soul will bless you.
Sources: Gen 27:3-4. (Isaac prepares to bless Esau.)

Ecce odor filii (CAO 6601)
R: Behold the odor of my son is as the odor of a plentiful field that the Lord blessed. May my God make you increase as the sands of the seas and give to you the blessing of the dew of heaven.
V: The one who curses you, let him be cursed, and the one who blesses you, let him be filled with blessings. And give to you…
Sources: Gen 27:27b, 28, 29b. (The blind Isaac blesses Jacob.)

Det tibi Deus de rore coeli (CAO 6415)
R: May the Lord give to you the dew of heaven and the abundance of the fatness of the earth. Peoples, tribes will serve you; you will be lord over your brothers.
V: And the sons of your mother will bow before you. You will be lord over your brothers.
Sources: Gen 27:28, 29a. (The blind Isaac blesses Jacob.)

Dum exiret Jacob (CAO 6540)
R: When Jacob went out of his land, seeing the glory of God he said, “How terrible is this place! It is none other than the house of God and the gate of heaven.”
V: “Truly the Lord is in this place and I did not know it. It is none other…”
Sources: Starts with a quick summary of the action (Jacob leaves home, sleeps, sees the ladder to heaven), then Gen 28:17, 16b.

Si Dominus Deus meus fuerit (CAO 7650)
R: “If the Lord my God will be with me in the way that I walk, guard me, and give me bread to bring forth and a garment that covers me, and recall me when I hail him, he will be my God as a refuge and this stone will be a sign.
V: “Truly the Lord is in this place and I did not know it. He will be my God…”
Sources: Gen 28:20, 21b, 22a.

Erit mihi Dominus in Deum (CAO 6668)
R: “He will be my God and this stone which I raise as a pledge I will call the house of God; and out of everything that you give me, a tenth part and peace offerings I will give to you.”
V: “If the Lord my God will be with me in the way that I walk and guard me. A tenth part and peace offerings I will give to you…”
Sources: Gen 28:22, 20.

Oravit Jacob et dixit (CAO 7334)
R: Jacob prayed and said, “Lord who said to me, ‘Return to the land of your birth’ deliver me from the hand of my brother, for I fear him greatly.”
V: “God in whose sight my fathers walked, Lord who gave me peace from my youth. Deliver me…”
Sources: Gen 32:9, 11. (The now wealthy Jacob returns to face the wrath of Esau)

Dixit angelus ad Jacob (CAO 6465)
R: The angel said to Jacob, “Release me, it is dawn.” He responded, “I will not release you unless you bless me.” So he blessed him in that place.
V: “Blessing, I will bless you.” So he blessed him…
Sources: Gen 32:26, 29b. The beginning of the verse is not a direct quote from this location but is thematically pervasive especially given the selections of the previous responsories. (The Angel of the Lord blesses Jacob after a whole night of wrestling.)

Vidi Dominum facie ad faciem (CAO 7874)
R: “I saw the Lord face to face, and my soul has been saved.”
V: And he said, “No longer will you be called Jacob, but Israel will be your name.” And my soul…
Sources: Gen 32:30b, 28a. (The Angel of the Lord renames Jacob as Israel.)

So, this whole set hits the high points of the Jacob narrative. Clearly the high points for early medieval liturgists are the scenes of blessing—the blessing of Isaac upon the trickster Jacob, the vision at Bethel and Jacob making a covenant with God, then the blessing at Phanuel.

Genesis and Responsories, Cont.: A Pause for Quadragesima

Continuing yet again with our look at how the Genesis readings are contextualized and framed by the responsories with which they are paired in the early medieval monastic Night Office, we come to a not unexpected break in the interpretive flow. Liturgically, Lent does not begin on Ash Wednesday but with the First Vespers of Quadragesima so, sure enough, the first Matins of Lent hammers the Lenten themes and makes no reference whatsoever to Genesis. This too teaches us something: the responsories serve to interpret the Scriptures, yes, but their primary obligation is to the rhythms of the year. When the continuous reading of the Scripture is the most seasonally thematic part, the responsories work with them; when it’s not, it does something else.

Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile (CAO 6600)
R: Behold–now is the acceptable time; behold–now is the day of salvation. Let us commend ourselves in much patience, in much fasting, through the weapons of the righteousness of the power of God.
V: In all things let us exhibit ourselves as ministers of God that our ministry not be blamed. Through the weapons…
Sources: 2 Cor 6:2b, 4, 5, 7, 4, 3. This is a section of the appointed Epistle for the day.

Paradisi portas aperuit nobis (CAO 7348)
R: The time of fasting will open to us the gates of Paradise. Let us receive it, with prayer and supplication, that we may glory in the day of resurrection with the Lord.
V: Behold–now is the acceptable time; behold–now is the day of salvation giving no one any offense. That we may glory…
Sources: The first two sentences have no clear Scriptural parallels that I can think of; as for the rest… 2 Cor 6:2b, 4, 5, 7, 4, 3.

Emendemus in melius (CAO 6653)
R: Let us change ourselves for the better because we sinned in ignorance. Lest the day of our death overtake us suddenly, let us beseech a time of penitence and may we not be found [unready]. Harken, Lord, and have mercy for we have sinned against you.
V: We, with our fathers, have sinned, we have done injustice, we have committed iniquities. Harken, Lord…
Sources: Again, lots of Scriptural language but no compelling parallels that I can think of.

In jejunio et fletu orabant (CAO 6910)
R: In fasting and prostrations the priests prayed, saying, “Spare, Lord, spare your people, and do not give your inheritance over to destruction.”
V: Between the vestibule and the altar the priests implored. “Spare, Lord…”
Sources: Joel 2: 12a, 17b. In the Tridentine Breviary, Joel 2:17 is the Little Chapter for Vespers during Lent. According to the Office Chapter lectionary for Lent in Cod. Sang. 342 it was not the Vespers reading there—but the Little Chapter for the Night Office was Joel 2:12.

In omnibus exhibeamus nos (CAO 6920)
R: In all things let us exhibit ourselves as ministers of God with much patience that our ministry not be blamed.
V: Behold—now is the acceptable time; behold—now is the day of salvation. Let us commend ourselves in much patience. That our ministry…
Sources: 2 Cor 6:4a, 3b, 2b. This responsory contains most of the same elements as the first, merely reversing the order in the response and verse.

Abscondite eleemosynam (CAO 6012)
R: Hide your alms in the bosom of the poor and they [the alms] will pray for you to the Lord. For just as water quenches fire, so alms quench sin.
V: Honor the Lord out of your substance, and out of your first fruits give to the poor. For just as water…
Sources: I can’t locate a source for the first sentence but the second is Sir 3:33 and the verse is from Prov 3:9.

Tribularer si nescirem (CAO 7778)
R: If in tribulation I were ignorant of your mercy, Lord, you said, “I do not wish the death of the sinner, but repent and live”, the one who calls the Canaanite and tax collector to penitence.
V: But you received Peter weeping, merciful Lord. The one who calls…
Sources: Ezekiel 18:32 contains the quotation, the rest is built around gospel material, particularly the tears of Peter after the crowing of the cock in Matt 26:75|Mark 14:72|Luke 22:62.

Angelis suis mandavit de te (CAO 6087)
R: He commanded his angels concerning you, that they guard you in all of your ways; they will carry you in their hands lest you strike your foot against a stone.
V: Upon the asp and basilisk you will walk; you will tread on the lion and the dragon. They will carry you in their hands…
Sources: VgPs 90:11-13. The appearance of this psalm is fascinating as it pulls together a whole bunch of liturgical threads. While it is cited from the psalms, it actually makes its entrance through the Gospel of the Day, Matthew 4:1-11; this psalm is referred to in the debate between Jesus and the devil found there. If you then look at the data from Hesbert’s Antiphonarium Missarum Sextuplex where he pulls together the Propers from six early sources you’ll see that every single one of them from the Introit to the Tract to the Offertory to the Communion are based on this psalm.

Pater, peccavi in coelum (CAO 7362)
R: “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me as one of your hired hands.”
V: “Do not the hired hands in my father’s house abound with bread, but here I perish from hunger? I will rise and I will go to my father and I will say to him. Make me as one of your hired hands.”
Sources: Luke 15:18b-19, 17b-18a. The repentance of the prodigal son.

Ductus est Jesus in desertum (CAO 6529)
R: Jesus was led into the wilderness by the Spirit that he might be tested by the devil, and drawing near the Tempter said to him, “If you are the Son of God, speak that these stones may become bread.”
V: And when he had fasted for forty days and forty nights, afterward he hungered. And drawing near the Tempter said…
Sources: Matthew 4:1, 3, 2. A portion from the Gospel of the Day.

Looking over the choice of texts, we see a real confluence here between the appointed Mass texts and the Night Office; this is one of those points where the cross-over is not just notable but extensive. The Epistle, Gospel, and the Psalm featured in the Mass liturgy all feature quite heavily here. Once again we’re reminded that the different liturgies despite their different functions are interwoven—even more so at the main points of the Church Year.

What Every Medievalist Should Bookmark: Catalogue of Digitized Medieval Manuscripts

Playing off the popular What Every Medievalist Should Know series, I’ve been thinking about some digital resources that every medievalist should have bookmarked. Larry recently pointed to this one and it definitely belongs on the list.

With the explosion of medieval manuscripts on the web, it was just a matter of time before someone got around to doing this and this site, the Catalogue of Digitized Medieval Manuscripts, represents a good start. However, more remains to be done for this site to reach its full potential.

It incorporates and catalogues some of my favorite sites, such as the Cologne Cathedral Library and the Library of St Gall, and looks to add more as they become available. Because it catalogues these sites that I use, I do wonder about their interface, their data tagging practices, and its limitations.

Disclaimer: While I am a New Testament Medievalist, I feed my family as a database programmer. I really do understand the complications of building an engine of this sort—trust me, I’ve done it before both for public and private consumption. Criticisms follow, but they are intended to be completely constructive and should not detract from both the promise and need for this site.

Because the site works with my favorite libraries which tend to be both biblical and liturgical, I quickly notice some lacunae and potential conceptualization issues.

1. Not all of the manuscripts on the identified sites are contained in the catalogue. For instance, only one missal (the Leofric Misal), one Gospel Book (the Bodleian’s Auct. D.2.16), and one gradual appear. There are no antiphoners catalogued. Or sacramentaries. Or lectionaries. From my own personal lists I know that quite a number of all of these appear at the St Gall and Cologne sites. So—this catalogue is a work in progress.
2. The complex relationship between author, editor, and scribe is not tackled. I saw the name “Notker” as I was browsing authors and started to worry. Notker Balbus is a seminal figure for the study of chant. He’s the author of a treatise on chant and is also responsible for notating some of the best surviving chant manuscripts—which are online at the St Gall site. How, I wondered, would these manuscripts be identified? Would he be listed as the author of these antiphoners and sacramentaries? After all, he didn’t write them or even edit them, but it is crucial that his name be connected with them in some fashion. It turns out, though, that Notker’s name leads to only one manuscript, the one with his treatise in it. The issue of linking him with the sacramentary and antiphoners is side-stepped for the time being.
3. The site appears to rely on external summaries for title and author data leading to duplicates. That is, it seems that the site catalogues its materials based on however the host site catagorizes them. Thus, when you browse “Titles” you’ll come across duplicates where a title appears in both English and Latin. (I didn’t see any German language duplicates introduced but the potential certainly exists given the available collections.)  “Dupes” are database designers recurrent nightmares. They’re almost inevitable in *any* unscrubbed data set and—we hates them… They appear here in Titles, but also in Authors:  for instance, there are separate entries for “Gregory”, “Gregory I”, and “Gregory the Great”.
4. The date system is inconsistent. A search for “Provenance equals England” reveals a large potential problem. The first entry has a date of  “c. 1200″, the second has a date of “s. xvi 1/3″. It turns out that the date search box appears as a drop down (good choice!) so that as you type it will attempt to auto-populate and in doing so shows you the available dates in the database. Unfortunately, if you want to see the manuscripts from around 1000 you have to run three searches, one that looks for “10..”, one for “c. 10..” and one for “s. xi…”  The only way to fix this is to build a new date column in the database maximized for searching. My own suggestion would be to leave in the date column they currently have, and to add one that groups manuscripts by general period—then populate the date search drop-down with *that* field rather than the field from the manuscripts’ hosts.
5. The shelfmark lookup system is clunky. Clicking on “Browse by: Shelfmark” brings up a string of numbers sorted as text. Thus we get “1″, “10″, “100″ as the first three entries with no indication of in which library the numbered shelf might exist. Personally, I’d love to see this tweaked by simply doing a join between the location field and the shelfmark field. Whilke it might make this search somewhat reduant with the “Browse by: Location” I think it’d make the Shelfmark system much more user-friendly.

As I consider what’s on the site and what’s not, it seems to me that what I would offer them is more a caution than a critique. Because so much of the liturgical material is not yet up, they have the opportunity to think through exactly how to present it. Me, I think it’d be great to be able to search for “Mixed Gelasian” or “Hadrianum” for sacramentaries/missals but I’m not sure how that would fit into their current conceptualization.

A further issue not yet taken up is the inevitable problem of homiliaries—do you simply lump them under the name of the editor (which is quite necessary to be sure) but do you break out the individual patristic authors as well?

Kvetching aside, this site is definitely one to watch. It’s a great start to a much needed index and I look forward to seeing how they decide to tackling some of the issues ahead of them that makes manuscript study the fascinating and sometimes frustrating field that it is.

Update: I received a very nice email from the head of the project. He assured me that the site is a first draft and that future improvements are indeed in the wings pending further funding.