apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

1/284

F

APOCRYPHA23, 2012

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

2/284

© 2012 , TurnhoutAll 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, recording, or otherwise,

without the prior permission of the publisher.

D/2012/0095/220ISBN 978-2-503-54673-5

Printed in the E.U. on acid-free paper

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

3/284

APOCRYPHA

Revue fondée en 1990 par

Jean-Claude PICARD et Pierre GEOLTRAIN

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

4/284

APOCRYPHA

REVUE INTERNATIONALE DES LITTÉRATURES APOCRYPHES

INTER NATIONAL JOU RNAL OF APOCRYPHAL LITERATURES

Directeur de la publicationJ.-D. DUBOIS

Secrétaires de rédactionR. BURNET et A. VAN DEN K ERCHOVE

Comité de lectureF. AMSLER , R. GOUNELLE, S.C. MIMOUNI,

E. R OSE, J.-M. R OESSLI, S. VOICU

Comité scientifiqueI. BACKUS, B. BOUVIER , F. BOVON, Z. IZYDORCZYK ,S. JONES, E. JUNOD, A. LE BOULLUEC, J.-N. PERÈS,

P. PIOVANELLI, M. STAROWIEYSKI

Revue publiée avec le concours scientifique delʼAssociation pour lʼÉtude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne(A.E.L.A.C.)

et dela Société pour lʼÉtude de la Littérature Apocryphe Chrétienne

(S.E.L.A.C.)

Adresse du secrétariat de la revue:187, rue Belliard

F-75018 PARIS

[email protected]

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

5/284

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

6/284

S

OMMAIRELiminaire ................................................................................................. 9

« Virtutes apostolorum: Editorial Problems and Principles » par Els R OSE .................................................................................... 11

« Reworking the Virtutes apostolorum in the Salzburg Sermon-Collec-tion (1st quarter of the ninth century) »

par Maximilian DIESENBERGER ........................................................ 47

« A (Socio)linguistic Approach to Hagiographic Text Transmission: theTorino Collection Biblioteca Nazionale D.v.3. (8th/9th c.) »

par Marieke VAN ACKER ................................................................. 65

« Editing a Fluid and Unstable Text: The Example of the Acts of Pilate (or Gospel of Nicodemus) »

par Rémi GOUNELLE ........................................................................ 81

« On the Evangelium Nicodemi before Print: Towards a New Edition » par Zbigniew IZYDORCZYK ............................................................... 99

« The Transmission of Marian Apocrypha in the Latin Middle Ages » par Rita BEYERS .............................................................................. 117

« Homiletic Texts and the Transmission of Eschatological Apocryphain a Medieval Irish Context »

par Caitríona Ó DOCHARTAIGH ......................................................... 141

« The Digital Edition: New Possibilities and Challenges » par Mariken TEEUWEN ..................................................................... 155

AUTRES CONTRIBUTIONS

« Un réexamen des notices de Théodore Bar Konaï sur les mandéens » par Jean-Marie DUCHEMIN ............................................................... 171

« Jésus, la lumière et le Père vivant. Principe de gémellité dansl’ Évangile selon Thomas »

par André GAGNÉ ............................................................................ 209

« Some Philological Notes on the Mäúéüäfä ‘Éräfétä läMaryam “Li- ber Requiei” (LR) »

par Tedros ABRAHA ......................................................................... 223

R ECENSIONS .............................................................................................. 247

LIVRES REÇUS ............................................................................................ 281

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

7/284

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

8/284

The Dynamics of Apocryphal Traditions inMedieval Religious Culture

Proceedings of the Expert MeetingUtrecht University, 19-20 January 2012

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

9/284

LIMINAIRE

In January 2012 an Expert Meeting took place at Utrecht University,organized as part of the research project The Dynamics of ApocryphalTraditions in Medieval Religious Culture, funded by the NetherlandsOrganisation for Scientific Research (NWO) and supervised by projectleader Els Rose since 2008. The project deals with the medieval tex-

tual transmission of the so-called Virtutes apostolorum, Latin rewritingsof the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, transmitted as a coherent serieswith a section on each individual apostle. While the Virtutes apostolorummight have circulated as a series earlier, the oldest extant manuscriptsdate to the second half of the eighth century. Within the project, the tex-tual approach consists of an examination of relevant manuscripts in orderto find answers to questions concerning coherence, context, and linguisticfeatures of the Virtutes, to be published together with a new edition cumtranslation in CCSA.

During the Expert Meeting, members of the project presented particu-lar problems and possible solutions concerning the Virtutes apostolorum,while the other speakers contributed with presentations of related textcorpora, either apocryphal texts or genres in combination with which theVirtutes apostolorum have been transmitted (hagiography, sermons). Themain questions concern the complexity of dealing with a series or col-lection of texts that are also transmitted individually in earlier ages andin different (though comparable) contexts; the question how languagecan form an instrument to get a better grip on the mutual coherence ofthe manuscripts and their descent, and to reconstruct, if not a classic

stemma, a network of interrelations; how modern editorial techniques(both digital and on paper) can be usefully employed to provide the userwith an adequate insight into the way these texts were transmitted andused in medieval Christian culture; finally, how a contextual approachto the transmission of apocryphal texts in medieval religious culture canenlarge our understanding of these texts and their use.

Thanks are due to the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research(NWO) that sponsored the Expert Meeting. Likewise, the organizer of theExpert Meeting thanks Utrecht University, particularly its Faculty of theHumanities and its Research Institute for History and Culture, for hosting

the project as well as the conference.

Els Rose

Editor of the Acts of the Utrecht Expert Meeting

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

10/284

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

11/284

10.1484/J.APOCRA.1.103237 Apocrypha 23, 2012, p. 11-45

Els ROSE Faculty of Humanities, Utrecht University

VIRTUTES APOSTOLORUM :EDITORIAL PROBLEMS

AND PRINCIPLES*

The school of New Philology urges us as editors of medieval texts to

take into account variance as a core characteristic of medieval manuscript transmissions. The scope of variance, however, remains unclearin the programmatic studies presented by this trend, which concentratesmainly on linguistic variants. Therefore, an elaborate methodology toincorporate variance in our editorial work still needs to be developed. It is the aim of this article to present a set of propositions in prepara-tion of an edition of the Latin transmission of the Virtutes apostolorum ,in order to add to the development of this methodology. The spectrumof variance in the Virtutes apostolorum as a series embraces textualvariants ; variants concerning the presentation of the text at the level of

the individual sections dedicated to one apostle (order of the apostles,choice of text, choice of redaction) ; variants in (the presence of) para-texts (titles, chapter titles, prologues, epilogues) ; variants caused by themanual transmission of these texts (corrections, uncorrected errors) ;and variants inserted by the users/readers of the series (semantic glosses, both vernacular and Latin, marginal glosses indicating liturgi-cal use, stress marks on words for the bene fit of oral performance).The analyses show the great diversity in the preserved manuscripts. Themain question will be how we can create an edition of such a complex

* This article is based on a paper delivered at the annual conference ofthe Association pour l’Étude de la littérature apocryphe chrétienne (AELAC)à Dole (France), 30 June-2 July 2011, and on a paper presented at the ExpertMeeting The Dynamics of Apocryphal Literature in Medieval Religious Cul-ture, Utrecht (the Netherlands), 19-20 January 2012. It is my pleasure to thankthe participants in both conferences for their helpful remarks. I particularly liketo thank Valentina Covaci, Renske van Nie, Maarten Prot, Tom de Schepper,Évina Steinova, Mariël Urbanus, and Giorgia Vocino for their contributions tothe discussions in preparation of the papers and the Expert Meeting, as well asPeter Schrijver and Rémi Gounelle for their careful reading of an earlier draft.

The article was written within the framework of a research project funded bythe Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) and executed atUtrecht University. I like to thank the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, Paris,and the Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen for allowing the reproduction of their manu-scripts on p. 34 and 35 of this article.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

12/284

E. ROSE12

and composite medieval text transmission so that its fl uidity and vari-ability become visible, as well as its use in medieval religious practice.

L’École de la Nouvelle Philologie défend le retour aux manuscritsainsi que l’attention aux variantes dans la transmission manuscrite destextes. Cependant, l’idée de ‘‘variante’’ est souvent limitée aux variantestextuelles, tandis qu’il y a d’autres sortes de variantes qui témoignentaussi de spéci ficités ainsi que des différents usages qui ont été faitsdes manuscrits. Le présent article examine la transmission latine desVirtutes apostolorum dans le monde médiéval. Dans cet ensemble detextes, plusieurs sortes de variantes sont analysées : variantes textuel-les, variantes dans la présentation du texte au niveau des sectionsindividuelles dédiées à un apôtre (ordre des apôtres, choix des textes,

choix des rédactions), variantes dans les paratextes (titres, titres deschapitres, prologues, épilogues), variantes causées par la transmission(corrections et passages fautifs mais non corrigés), variantes créées par l’usage des textes (gloses vernaculaires et latines, gloses margi-nales indiquant l’usage liturgique, signes d’accentuation). Les analysesattestent de la grande diversité des manuscrits conservés. La question principale est de savoir comment éviter que l’édition des Virtutes apos-tolorum ne fournisse une présentation trop statique d’une tradition tex-tuelle complexe et composite, et comment faire pour qu’elle atteste lavariabilité qui caractérise ces textes, de même que l’usage de ces textes

dans la pratique religieuse du Moyen Age.

The Virtutes apostolorum : Variety rules

Variety and textual instability have been highlighted positively overthe past decades as key characteristics of handwritten text transmis-sion. ‘Return to the manuscripts’ is the device of the movement thatidentifies itself as the ‘New Philology’, or Nouvelle Philologie. Thismovement urges scholars to take seriously the variety that character-izes manuscript transmission, instead of chopping one’s way through

the jungle of variants in search of a common ancestor or archetype.In the Introduction to the special issue of Speculum (1990), dedi-

cated to the programme of the New Philology, Stephen Nichols definesits main objectives. Nichols emphasizes the need to consider diversityas the principle characteristic of medieval text transmission and to takeaccount of this in our editorial work : ‘[…] not simply to live with it, but to situate it squarely within our methodology’. 1 While Nichols’ callto make diversity the core of our editorial methodology found responsein broad circles of medievalists (and philologists of other periods), theway to implement it is not straightforward, nor does Nichols describesuch a method in detail.

1. Stephen G. NICHOLS, “Introduction : Philology in a Manuscript Culture”,Speculum 65, 1990 (The New Philology), p. 1-10, at p. 9.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

13/284

VIRTUTES APOSTOLORUM 13

The label ‘New Philology’ implies that previous philological meth-odologies are considered insuf ficient. We find a discussion of the meth-odology criticized most by the defenders of the new school in one of

the latter’s principal sources of inspiration : Bernard Cerquiglini’s Élogede la variante (1989).2 In this essay, Cerquiglini first reconsiders what became known as the Lachmannian method, associated with the Ger-man philologist Karl Lachmann († 1851) 3 and propagated in France byGaston Paris. Lachmann developed a genealogical approach to manu-scripts, in line with the nineteenth-century tendency to consider cul-tural phenomena (not only language, but also, for instance, liturgicaltraditions) as biological organisms.4 Family traits, interrelating differ-ent manuscripts, became visible in variants that Lachmann considered‘scribal errors’. Starting with the assumption that two scribes would

never make the same mistake (an assumption called into question byothers5), the Lachmannian method connected manuscripts in whichsimilar ‘inherited defects’ were found, and thus created a family treeof manuscripts : the stemma codicum. The stemma finds its roots in areconstructed ‘Ur-text’, also called ‘the hypothetical ancestor’ or, inless genealogical terms, ‘the archetype’ – not identical with but closelyrelated to the original. This archetype is, in most cases, the reconstruc-tion of a manuscript now lost.

2. Bernard CERQUIGLINI, Éloge de la variante. Histoire critique de la philo-

logie, Paris, 1989.3. And yet, in Michael Driscoll’s words, Lachmann ‘never produced a

stemma’. Michael James DRISCOLL, “The Words on the Page : Thoughts on Phi-lology, Old and New”, in Judy QUINN and Emily LETHBRIDGE (eds.), Creating the

Medieval Saga : Versions, Variability, and Editorial Interpretations of Old NorseSaga Literature, Odense, 2010, p. 87-104, at p. 88.

4. For a survey of the Darwinian background to a genealogical approachto cultural phenomena, particularly texts copied by hand, see Caroline MACÉ and Philippe V. BARET, “Why Phylogenetic Methods Work : The Theory of Evo-lution and Textual Criticism”, in Caroline MACÉ e.a. (eds.), The Evolution ofTexts : Confronting Stemmatological and Genetical Methods, Pisa, Istituto edi-

toriali e poligrafici internazionali, 2006, p. 89-108. With regard to liturgy, cf.Anton BAUMSTARK , Liturgie comparée, Chevetogne, 1953. This third edition ofwhat was first published as a series of articles in Irenikon 11, 1934, was revised

by Bernard BOTTE, who added the subtitle Principes et méthodes pour l’étudehistorique des liturgies chrétiennes. See also Fritz WEST, The Comparative Lit-urgy of Anton Baumstark , Bramcote, 1995, part. p. 16-25.

5. CERQUIGLINI, Éloge de la variante, p. 77 ; DRISCOLL, “The Words on thePage”, p. 89. Early in the twentieth century, Joseph Bédier (1864-1938) formu-lated a critique of Lachmann’s method of learned reconstruction. In an essaydated 1928, Bédier rejected the scientific objectivity of a reconstructed (‘Ur-’)text, and advocated instead the selection of a ‘best manuscript’, to be chosen

among the manuscripts still extant. Whereas the Lachmannian method consid-ered every textual variant a scribal error, Bédier took the scribe more seriously.Joseph BÉDIER , La tradition manuscrite du Lai de l’ombre. Ré fl exions sur l’artd’éditer les anciens textes, Paris, 1929. Cf. DRISCOLL, “The Words on the Page”,

p. 89-90.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

14/284

E. ROSE14

The programme of renewal formulated by the adherents of the NewPhilology – in many cases scholars of medieval vernaculars – is aptlycaptured by the title of Cerquiglini’s essay (labelled ‘polemical’ by

Michael Driscoll6

) : ‘Éloge de la variante’, ‘In Praise of the Variant’.Cerquiglini describes the Lachmannian method as archaeological, itsaim being to reconstruct a historical reality now lost, given the factthat the Lachmannian archetype exists only in the work of the stem-matologist. Cerquiglini dismisses the search for an archetype, and isof the opinion that the philologist should not work as an archaeologist but rather as a comparatist. His or her main objective should be to pre-sent variety as the main characteristic of handwritten text transmission,‘[…] for archaeology reduces to unity that which derives its meaningor significance from variety’.7

In imitation of Cerquiglini, subsequent defenders of the New Philol-ogy put the phenomenon of variety centre stage. They underline Cer-quiglini’s statement that ‘variation in the vernacular literature of theMiddle Ages is its core characteristic, a state of alterity which is soconcrete that it shapes the very object, and which is so primary thatit should be the editor’s prime concern to show it’. 8 Variance rules inthe medieval written world perceived through the lens of Cerquigliniand the New Philologists. Or, even more poignantly : chaos has takenover, as the Old Norse philologist Michael Driscoll puts it, referring toPaul Zumthor’s discussion of the instability of handwritten text trans-mission.9 Driscoll recalls the introduction of the notion of ‘mobility’(‘mouvance’) as an essential quality of a medieval text in Zumthor’s Essai de poétique médiévale (1972), a main source of inspiration forCerquiglini and, hence, for the New Philologists. Just as Cerquiglini praises the variant, Driscoll follows Zumthor in his positive approachto the instability of medieval manuscript transmission : ‘[…] textualinstability (variance, mouvance, unfixedness) is so fundamental a fea-ture of chirographically transmitted texts that rather than trying to bringorder to this chaos we should celebrate it’.10

6. DRISCOLL, “The Words on the Page”, p. 90.7. CERQUIGLINI, Éloge de la variante, p. 68. We can differ in our opinions

about the extent to which Cerquiglini’s comment does justice to the archaeo-logical method.

8. ‘La variance de l’œuvre médiévale romane est son caractère premier, alté-rité concrète qui fonde cet objet, et que la publication devrait prioritairementdonner à voir’. CERQUIGLINI, Éloge de la variante, p. 62. Cf. NICHOLS, “Philol-ogy in a Manuscript Culture”, p. 9 ; Suzanne FLEISCHMAN, “Philology, Linguis-tics, and the Discourse of the Medieval Text”, in Speculum 65, 1990, p. 19-37,

at p. 25.9. Paul ZUMTHOR , Essai de poétique médiévale, Paris, 1972/2000, e.g. p. 93

(‘L’œuvre est fondamentalement mouvante’) and 94 (‘L’œuvre, ainsi conçue, est par définition dynamique’).

10. DRISCOLL, “The Words on the Page”, p. 104.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

15/284


Celebrating the chaos of textual instability is familiar to scholarswho study the transmission of apocryphal texts, for which fluidity isone of the most characteristic properties. In my approach to the Virtutes

apostolorum, a medieval series of Latin rewritings of the apocryphalActs of the Apostles, the overall aim is to enlarge our insight into theuse of these texts in medieval religious culture. In this endeavour, vari-ety is an important key, because it can inform us about the differencesin reception, transmission and use per region and period. The presentarticle concentrates on the methodological implications of Nichols’ plea, examining how a modern edition can incorporate this variety inorder to make visible not simply a readable text cut off from its perfor-mative context but also its medieval uses. I will not be able to providea complete answer to this question within the scope of this article, for

an editorial methodology for such an edition or text presentation stillneeds to be developed. The aim here is to identify different kinds ofvariance in the medieval transmission of the Virtutes apostolorum aswell as the challenges they present, and to propose a survey of prin-ciples and possible strategies for dealing with these problems.

How to de fine the Virtutes apostolorum

The aim of this article thus formulated hides the most fundamental problem concerning the Virtutes apostolorum, namely the dif ficulty ofdefining precisely what this label covers. The title Virtutes apostolorum refers to a series of narrative texts on the apostles, coherent to a certaindegree, but marked at the same time by so much variation that thelegitimacy of the label ‘collection’ becomes questionable. Moreover, avariety of (series of) texts on the life and martyrdom of the apostlescirculated in different regions of the Latin Middle Ages under varioustitles and variously combining the protagonists and textual accounts oftheir deeds. Therefore, before listing the editorial problems and principles more specifically, it is best to clarify first what I mean when I use

the term Virtutes apostolorum, and define what this title can and whatit cannot cover in the context of my own specific research parameters,earlier scholarly assertions notwithstanding.

It is dif ficult to establish when and where a coherent series of Virtu-tes apostolorum occurred for the first time. Previous scholars, particu-larly Richard Lipsius, pointed to late sixth-century Gaul as the cradleof the phenomenon, considering Venantius Fortunatus (530-c. 610) andGregory of Tours (538-594) as likely candidates to have been involvedin the compilation of the series. 11 Elsewhere, I have elaborated on the problematic character of this assumption, and indicated that the first

convincing piece of evidence for the existence of the narrative Virtutes

11. Richard LIPSIUS, Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegen-den, Braunschweig, 1893-1890, vol. 1, p. 117-178.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

16/284

E. ROSE16

apostolorum is found only after the sixth century, and outside conti-nental Gaul.12 Anglo-Saxon authors like Aldhelm (639-709) and Bede(673-735) certainly knew the narratives about the apostles, but we must

be cautious about equating their sources with the material we find incontinental manuscripts. The case of Aldhelm, in particular, showsclearly that the historiae or passiones apostolorum that inspired his poems deviate partly from the narratives we find on the continent fromthe eighth century onwards. This observation has received little atten-tion in the scholarly debate so far, which puts its trust in the early-modern idea that the Virtutes apostolorum constitute a fixed collection,attributable to a single author usually referred to as Pseudo-Abdias. 13 Ishall discuss this further below.

When I use the term Virtutes apostolorum, I refer to the phenome-

non whereby (1) separate Latin narratives on individual apostles, partlyrewritings of the ancient Apocryphal Acts, partly new compositions,occur in manuscripts as a more or less coherent series. This is not tosay that the individual sections did not circulate separately, or could notoccur scattered through a manuscript organized liturgically rather thanhierarchically – they did and abundantly so. 14 However, I am interestedin the transmission of the texts as a coherent series because of theinformation this kind of transmission yields vis-à-vis the status of andapproach to the apostles in the Middle Ages, more specifically in the practice of liturgical commemoration.

The series takes different shapes and has different contents in eachmanuscript, but my working definition of Virtutes apostolorum requiresthat (2) at least ‘the twelve’ be included, that is, Peter, Paul, Andrew,John, James the Greater, Thomas, Philip, James the Less, Bartholomew,Matthew, Simon and Jude. Simon and Jude share a section, as do Peterand Paul in some instances. To define the series on the grounds of a

12. Els R OSE, “Virtutes apostolorum : Origin, Aim, and Use”, forthcoming.13. In scholarly contributions on the theme, the series of Virtutes apostolo-

rum as it is found in continental manuscripts stemming from Frankish Gauland Bavaria is generally referred to as ‘the Collection of Pseudo-Abdias’, a

problematic notion which suggests far more unity than is accounted for in themanuscript tradition. The idea of a ‘Collection of Pseudo-Abdias’ as a uniformentity is persistent also among modern scholars studying the transmission of theapostle narratives in the insular world. See e.g. Charles WRIGHT, “ApocryphalActs”, in Frederick M. BIGGS e.a. (eds.), Sources of Anglo-Saxon Literary Cul-ture : A Trial Version, Binghamton NY, 1990, p. 48-63 ; cf. “Abdias”, in Wil-liam SMITH and Henry WACE, A Dictionary of Christian Biography, Literature,Sects and Doctrines, London, 1877-1887, vol. 1, p. 1-4. For an analysis of theattribution to Pseudo-Abdias and its unsuitability, see Els R OSE, “ Abdias scriptor

vitarum sanctorum apostolorum ? The ‘Collection of Pseudo-Abdias’ reconsid-ered”, Revue d’histoire des textes 8, 2013, p. 227-268.

14. The abundance of manuscripts becomes apparent when one checks thedossiers of individual apostles at the BHL-database at http ://bhlms.fltr.ucl.ac.be(last consulted 29 February 2012).

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

17/284


fixed list of protagonists is not without dif ficulties, as we shall see later.The transmission of these narratives is studied as (3) an uninterruptedseries (but there are exceptions to this rule, as we shall see below) in

manuscripts (4) from the first preserved witnesses (late eighth century)until the emergence of large hagiographic compilations in the thirteenthcentury, such as the Legenda aurea.15

Narrative accounts of the life and martyrdom of the apostles occurthroughout the medieval West, from Rome16 and Italy17 to Anglo-SaxonEngland, as we have seen in the previous section. (5) The oldest pre-served manuscripts, however, occur on the continent, more precisely inFrankish Gaul and Bavaria (perhaps West-Germany/Alsace 18). In orderto create a manageable corpus of manuscripts for our studies and for

15. This deadline is inspired by the hypothesis that the Legenda aurea became the most influential source in the later Middle Ages, also with regardto visual representations of the narratives on the life and martyrdom of theapostles. François Dolbeau, however, has come to the conclusion that the ‘tra-ditional’ legendaries did not fall into disuse after the composition of the thir-teenth-century narrative compilations. François DOLBEAU, “Typologie et forma-tion des collections hagiographiques d’après les recueils de l’abbaye de Saint-Thierry”, in Michel BUR (ed.), Saint-Thierry. Une abbaye du VI e au XX e siècle,Saint-Thierry, 1979, p. 159-182.

16. The earliest manuscripts used in Rome seem to stem from the twelfth

century. Famous are the codices Vat. lat. 5736 (from Santa Caecilia in Traste-vere) and Vat. reg. lat. 1272.

17. The earliest Italian manuscripts with a complete series known to me areStuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek HB XIV 14 (s. IX) and Vat. lat.5771 (s. IXfin or Xinc, from Bobbio). Cf. Klaus ZELZER (ed.), Die alten lateini-

schen Thomasakten, Berlin, 1977, p. xlix.18. The ‘Bavarian Group’ in my selection of manuscripts (see appendix 1)

includes a manuscript of which the Bavarian origin is not certain : WolfenbüttelWeissenburg 48. While Bischoff points to Weissenburg (Alsace) as the book’sorigin (unpublished correspondence ; see Éric JUNOD and Jean-Daniel K AESTLI,

Acta Iohannis, CCSA 1-2, Turnhout, 1983, p. 756), Butzmann doubts whether

the manuscript is from Weissenburg or from Sankt Gallen (Hans BUTZMANN,“Althochdeutsche Priscian-Glossen aus Weissenburg”, Beiträge zur Geschichteder deutschen Sprache und Literatur 86, 1964, p. 388-402, at p. 401-402). Forthe time being, I classify Wolfenbüttel Weissenburg 48 as Bavarian for threereasons. First, there is some doubt concerning its origin, and reason to thinkit is from Sankt Gallen. Second, there are important similarities between thismanuscript and the representatives of the core Bavarian Group, both textuallyand concerning matters of text presentation. Third, there are in general closeconnections between Weissenburg and Sankt Gallen. I thank Max Diesenbergerwho, in an e-mail d.d. 16 November 2011, underlines the strong political links

between Bavaria and Alsace, a.o. in the presence of Bavarian bishops at Louis

the German’s court, such as archchaplain Baturich of Regensburg, and arch-chaplain and chancellor Grimoald of Weissenburg, who also had strong linkswith Bavarian scriptoria through the collection and copying of many books.It is clear that Alsace is an important region for the early transmission of theVirtutes apostolorum ; see for example the eighth-century manuscript Würzburg

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

18/284

E. ROSE18

the new edition now under way for the Corpus Christianorum seriesApocryphorum, we concentrate on the further development of the trans-mission in these areas. 19 This has resulted in a selection of twenty-five

manuscripts, established with the help of earlier inventories and studies.20

The manuscripts that testify to the transmission of the Virtutes apos-tolorum as defined above are generally liturgical in character, contain-ing Passions and Lives of saints and martyrs. The texts were obviouslymeant to be read aloud during the liturgical of fice or ‘hours’ in cathe-dral and monastic communities, particularly during the night of fice(matins).21 Although the initial motive for rewriting the stories of theapostles was to collect and complete the knowledge about them, as anumber of prologues preceding different sections in the series declare,22 the further incentive must have been connected with the texts’ liturgical

use. This means that the texts were copied not to provide a standardreading form, but to offer a lively oral presentation for a performativecontext that played an important role in its transmission history. Thevariety that characterizes the manuscript transmission of the Virtutesapostolorum as a series demonstrates that the wish to have a completeoverview of the life and martyrdom of the twelve apostles did notinclude the desire to mould the separate narratives into a uniform col-lection. Efforts to streamline and unify the individual texts into a coher-ent series were rather limited. This allowed for the continued transmis-sion of a variety of all-inclusive ‘collections’ of texts on the apostles,which offered room for adaptation to local needs and preferences. 23

The specific character of the manuscript transmission of the Virtu-tes apostolorum, a composite tradition that takes different shapes andcontents in different manuscripts, demands the consideration of manykinds of variance. The method of the New Philology, aiming to ‘return

Mp. th.f.78 (not included in the selection because it does not contain a completeseries, missing sections for Peter, Paul, Andrew, and one of the two Jameses).

19. The reader, therefore, should keep in mind that my definition of the

Virtutes apostolorum does not include the complete tradition in the medievalWest, but concentrates on a geographically and chronologically defined wedgeof the cake.

20. Guy PHILIPPART, Les légendiers latins et autres manuscrits hagiographiques, Turnhout, Typologie des sources du Moyen Age occidental 24-25,1977, p. 16-18 ; Gisèle BESSON, “La collection dite du Pseudo-Abdias : un essaide définition à partir de l’étude des manuscrits”, Apocrypha 11, 2000, p. 181-194 ; LIPSIUS, Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden, vol. 1,

p. 117-178 ; JUNOD and K AESTLI (eds.), Acta Iohannis, p. 750-795 ; ZELZER (ed.), Die alten lateinischen Thomasakten, p. xlv-liv. For a brief description of theselected manuscripts, see R OSE, “ Abdias scriptor ?” appendix.

21. Cf. R OSE, “Virtutes apostolorum : Origin, Aim, and Use”, forthcoming.22. Els R OSE, “La réécriture des Actes apocryphes des Apôtres dans le

Moyen-Âge latin”, Apocrypha 22, 2011, p. 135-166.23. Cf. Els R OSE, “Paratexts in the Virtutes apostolorum”, Viator 44, 2013,

forthcoming.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

19/284


to the manuscripts’, often seems to concentrate mainly on the linguistic variance in the transmission of a work.24 In the present article, I shall present five different kinds of variance on different levels (from the

detailed level of individual readings to the more encompassing level ofvariation in the addition or omission of paratexts and whole passages)of the manuscript transmission of the Virtutes apostolorum. I shall alsoaddress the problems these kinds of variance present for the editorial presentation of these texts to a modern reader, and especially for a pre-sentation that would reflect the liturgical or, more broadly, performativeuse of these texts.

Virtutes apostolorum : Editorial Problems and Principles

The spectrum of variance in the Virtutes apostolorum embraces vari-ants brought about either by the initial process of composition andtransmission or by the later use of these texts. The main question ishow we can devise an edition-model that accounts for and reflects thesedifferent kinds of variance. While developing this model, I have a paperedition in mind. Although our project has availed itself of the digitaland online editorial tool eLaborate, developed by the institute HuygensING (former Huygens Institute) of the Royal Netherlands Academy ofArts and Sciences,25 the project is embedded in the apocryphal seriesof Corpus Christianorum, and therefore presupposes an edition in that

series. More fundamentally, however, the methodological challenge isto devise a new approach to text editing that would render the resultingedition more dynamic and multidimensional, regardless of its eventualmaterial or virtual form.

For the present discussion, I distinguish five main categories of vari-ants, with various subcategories :

1. Textual variants ;2. Variants concerning the presentation of the text at the level

of individual sections dedicated to one apostle, especially

the order of the apostles, the choice of protagonists, thechoice of text and redaction ;3. Variants involving the presence of paratexts, such as titles,

chapter titles, prologues and epilogues ;4. Variants through corrections and uncorrected errors ; though

generally included in the domain of textual variety, this cat-egory deserves special attention ;

5. Variants inserted in the course of use of the series, espe-cially semantic glosses (vernacular as well as Latin), mar-

24. See e.g. Cerquiglini’s own examples in Éloge de la variante, andFLEISCH MAN, “Philology, Linguistics, and the Discourse of the Medieval Text”.

25. eLaborate and other digital editorial tools are further introduced byMariken Teeuwen in her contribution to this issue. Some examples are acces-sible via www.e-laborate.nl.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

20/284

E. ROSE20

ginal glosses indicating liturgical use, and stress marks onwords for the benefit of oral performance.

Textual variantsTextual variety in the Virtutes apostolorum is the central topic of a

doctoral thesis prepared by Maarten Prot. 26 I use the term ‘textual vari-ance’ to refer to all variation in the different transmissions of the textafter it was initially written down. The term thus covers a huge numberof variants of different kinds and character, ranging from differences inspelling and morphology or word order and choice of lexeme, to theaddition or omission of words and phrases and the omission or additionof entire textual and paratextual passages. Strictly speaking, correctionsand uncorrected errors also belong to this category, but because of thespecial position these elements could have in a future edition, I shalldiscuss them separately as category (4).

I will not elaborate here on Prot’s methods and findings, but willconcentrate only on his conclusions concerning the charting of rela-tions between manuscripts. The analysis of textual variety has yieldedsome clear results, even if they are based on only two sections of theVirtutes apostolorum (Bartholomew, Philip). It proves convincingly thatthe transalpine continental transmission of the Virtutes apostolorum wasnot uniform, but can be divided into a number of different families

or traditions. While earlier scholarship distinguished two traditions, oneBavarian and one Frankish, 27 the analysis of textual variants enables afurther refinement, showing more multiformity than hitherto assumed.This is depicted in the following two tables, the first of which presentsthe Bavarian tradition :

Bavariantradition, core

Bavariantradition, closelyrelated to core

Bavariantradition, related

to core

Bavariantradition,

peripheral

Mixedtradition

Dublin TC 73728

Vienna ÖNBlat. 455Vienna ÖNBlat. 534WolfenbüttelWeissenburg 48

Bamberg Msc.Hist. 139Paris BnF lat.5563Paris BnF lat.12604

Munich Clm12641Vienna ÖNB 497Vienna ÖNB 560WolfenbüttelHelmst. 497

AngersBM 281Paris BnFlat. 12602

Paris BnFlat. 18298

Figure 1. Bavarian tradition (textual analysis) 29

26. This section is based on research performed by Maarten Prot and to be published in Maarten PROT : Textual Variety and Linguistic Context of theVirtutes apostolorum (PhD diss. Utrecht, forthcoming). The conclusions are pre-

sented here with the author’s consent.27. ZELZER (ed.), Die alten lateinischen Thomasakten ; JUNOD and K AESTLI

(ed.), Acta Iohannis.28 For an explanation of abbreviations in manuscript sigla, see appendix 1.29. Based on Prot, Textual Variety (forthcoming).

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

21/284


The table makes it clear that four ninth-century manuscripts formthe core of the Bavarian tradition textually, while two groups of manu-scripts remain in close or more distant relationship to this core. The

fourth column shows the occurrence of manuscripts that contain muchvariety in comparison with the core, while a fifth column accommo-dates one manuscript belonging not only to the Bavarian, but also tothe Frankish tradition.

A similar graph can be made of the Frankish manuscripts :

Frankish tradition,group I

Frankishtradition,group II

Frankishtradition, mixed

Frankish

Mixedtradition

Codexextravagans30

MontpellierUL 55

Ste Geneviève 557Paris BnFlat. 5273Paris BnFlat. 527431

Mainly Frankish I Ste Geneviève54732

Sankt GallenSB 561

Paris BnF lat.9737Graz UL 412

Paris BnFlat. 1175033

Ste Geneviève55834

Paris BnFlat. 18298

Munich Clm22020

Figure 2. Frankish tradition (textual analysis) 35

The analysis of textual variants enables us to distinguish variousclearly defined groups within the Frankish tradition, unknown to earlierscholars.36

The mixed tradition, indicated in both figures and best represented by Paris BnF lat. 18298, is potentially revealing. The analysis of thesection on Bartholomew places BnF lat. 18298 in Frankish tradition II,while the analysis of the section on Philip situates it in the Bavariantradition, closely related to core. Thus, the analysis of textual variants

30 A term coined by Rémi Gounelle ; see his contribution to this issue.31 The classification of Paris BnF lat. 5274 as Frankish tradition I is

based on the section on Philip, since the section on Bartholomew is missing.32 The classification of Ste Geneviève 547 as mainly Frankish tradition

I is based on the section on Bartholomew ; however, the section on Philipdoes not fit this category.

33 Textual analysis of Paris BnF lat. 11750 demonstrates that the textscontain elements of Frankish tradition I (Philip) as well as Frankish tradi-tion II (Bartholomew).

34 Textual analysis of Ste Gen. 558 demonstrates that the texts containelements of Frankish tradition I (Philip) as well as Frankish tradition II

(Bartholomew).35. Based on Prot : Textual Variety (forthcoming).36. It should be noted, however, that Zelzer has already remarked the

greater degree of variance in the Frankish tradition : ZELZER (ed.), Die lateinischen Thomasakten, p. xxxiv.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

22/284

E. ROSE22

makes it clear that, in the case of a composite tradition such as theVirtutes apostolorum, textual analysis alone cannot answer all ques-tions about manuscript relations. The tables indicate exactly where the

main obstacle is situated : the texts under consideration were not alwaystransmitted as an integral part of a coherent series. They could also be transmitted individually, in different kinds of manuscripts and fordifferent purposes. Prot’s analysis, further elaborated in his disserta-tion, reveals that the section on Bartholomew is much more fluid thanthe section on Philip. This seems to confirm what we know about thegeneral state of the different cults of Bartholomew and Philip. WhileBartholomew was highly popular in many areas of the medieval West,Philip, in contrast, remained a subdued saint, with few personal churchdedications and a liturgy that was hardly characteristic ( proprium).37 It

is not surprising to find such differences in the popularity and dissemi-nation of the apostles’ cults reflected in different degrees of stability inthe transmission of texts relating to them.

Variants concerning the presentation of the text

Variance concerning the presentation of the text at the level of theindividual sections comprises four kinds of variables. The first vari-able pertains to the presentation of the texts as a coherent series andconcerns the order in which the apostles appear. A second variable con-

cerns the choice of protagonists. One of the criteria used to select man-uscripts for our study involved, at the minimum, the presence of thetwelve apostles. In the following, we shall see that manuscripts vary inthe addition of other protagonists, closely related to the twelve apostles,such as the evangelists Mark and Luke or Paul’s disciples Barnabas andTimothy. The third variable is concerned with the presentation of thenarrative as such. I base my findings on a preliminary examination ofthe texts, indicated by the numbers of classification used in the Biblio-theca Hagiographica Latina (henceforth BHL). The fourth variable isthe specific redaction of individual sections at a more detailed level.

This will not be analysed here, simply because the extensive work ofcollation and comparison has not been completed yet. An analysis ofthe first three variables confirms the outcome of textual analysis, but italso identifies even more multiformity in the transmission of the Virtu-tes apostolorum as a series.

Both the order in which the apostles appear in the Virtutes apostolorum as a series and the choice of texts have been decisive issuesin the history of scholarship. Ever since Wolfgang Lazius published his

37. Cf. Els R OSE, Ritual Memory : The Apocryphal Acts and Liturgical Com-memoration in the Early Medieval West (c. 500-1215), Leiden-Boston, 2009,chapters two (Bartholomew) and four (Philip).

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

23/284


edition of the Virtutes apostolorum38 based on two ninth-century manu-scripts from the Bavarian tradition, the series has lived on under the(pseudo-) authorship of Abdias. Abdias plays a role in the final pas-

sages of the section on Simon and Jude as a follower of these twoapostles, as the first bishop of Babylon appointed by them, and as theauthor of the narrative relating their life, acts, and martyrdom. Laziusinterpreted the epilogue mentioning Abdias (Scripsit autem gesta)39 asa general epilogue to the series of Virtutes apostolorum as a whole. Hecomposed a new prologue to introduce his edition, in which he com- bined parts of Scripsit autem gesta with the prologue to Peter ( Licet plurima).40 In Licet plurima, the author expresses his wish to collectthe scattered knowledge about the acts and martyrdom (and not themartyrdom alone) of all individual apostles.

The idea of a ‘Collection of Pseudo-Abdias’ can only survive whenthe order of the apostles and the choice of texts meet a certain expecta-tion. The series must start with Peter, so that Licet plurima can functionas a general prologue to the collection, and it must end with Simonand Jude, so that the epilogue Scripsit autem gesta can act as a gen-eral epilogue. Apart from the fact that this is the situation in only oneof the two manuscripts Lazius used for his edition (Vienna ÖNB 455, but not 534 41), there is no reason, either of palaeographical nature ordictated by content, to consider Scripsit autem gesta as an epilogue tothe series as a whole, as I have argued elsewhere.42 Likewise, I havedoubts about the general function of the prologue Licet plurima, whichcan also be read as a prologue to the section on Peter or Peter and Paulalone.43 Moreover, as we shall see below, the manuscripts differ in theirchoice of a specific ‘BHL-text’ for one apostle. It is clear that Lazius’sidea of a ‘Collection of Pseudo-Abdias’ must be abandoned, just likethe assumption that a fixed list of specific BHL-texts, as well as onefixed order of apostles, is characteristic of the transalpine continentaltransmission of the Virtutes apostolorum as a series.

Order of apostles and choice of textsThe analysis of two aspects of text presentation (order of apostles

and choice of texts) confirms the outcome of the textual analysis and

38. Wolfgang LAZIUS, Abdiae Babyloniae episcopi et apostolorum discipulide historia certaminis apostolici libri decem, Basel, 1552.

39. Scripsit autem gesta sanctorum apostolorum Abdias episcopus Babylo-niae, qui ab ipsis ordinatus est, sermone Hebraico – BHL 7751.

40. Licet plurima de apostolicis signis sacra euangeliorum uel illa quae abipsis actibus nomen accepit narret historia – BHL 6663.

41. Cf. Ernst TRENKLER , “Wolfgang Lazius, Humanist und Büchersammler”, Biblos 27, 1978, p. 186-203. On the problems of order in ÖNB 534, see note44 below.

42. R OSE, “ Abdias scriptor ?’’43. R OSE, “La réécriture des Actes apocryphes’’, p. 148 s.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

24/284

E. ROSE24

enables a further classification of manuscripts in groups more preciselydefined and typified than the rough distinction between Bavarian andFrankish manuscripts.

Bavaria

The Bavarian Group, presented in appendix 2, counts thirteen manu-scripts, and is typified by seven main characteristics :

1. The series starts with Peter (BHL 6663, Licet plurima)and ends with Simon and Jude (BHL 7751 : epilogue onAbdias) ;

2. The section on Paul consists of BHL 6575 ;3. The hymn Praelata mundi culmina for Peter and Paul is

added to the section on Paul ;4. The section on Andrew has both Inclita sanctorum andConuersante et docente (BHL 430, 429) ;

5. The section on John is Tempore illo sancti apostoli (BHL4316) ;

6. The section on Thomas is Miracula Thomae (BHL 8140) ;7. The section on Matthew (BHL 5690) has no prologue or

epilogue.This Group is called ‘Bavarian’ because, although the origin of a

number of manuscripts is unknown, the Bavarian origin of two of the

oldest manuscripts (Dublin TC 737 from Regensburg, and Vienna ÖNB534 from Salzburg, both dated s. IX) can be ascertained. Moreover,Wolfenbüttel Weissenburg 48 is located by some in Skt Gallen (by oth-ers in the Alsatian Weissenburg, see footnote 18 above). A consider-able number of later manuscripts belonging to this Group are also madein Bavaria : Vienna ÖNB 560 (Abbey of Rein, Carinthia) ; BambergMsc. Hist. 139 (Skt Emmeram, Regensburg) ; Munich BSB Clm 12641(Abbey of Ranshofen, Bavaria). Angers BM 281, however, is copied inAngers, perhaps from a Bavarian model. The same may be valid forParis BnF lat. 5563, owned by St. Thierry in Reims, which is close toDublin TC 737.

The Bavarian Group consists of five subgroups. Bavarian 1.0 is itscore, and contains six manuscripts that meet all seven criteria. Of thiscore group, only Vienna ÖNB 560 and Paris BnF lat. 5563 are identical both in the order of the apostles and in the choice of texts. For the rest,even if the differences are minor, no two manuscripts are the same.Thus, Vienna ÖNB 534, belonging to core group 1.0, deviates only inits placement of Philip and Matthew.44 The manuscripts in subgroup 1a,

44. Despite this deviation in the order of the apostles, I classify ViennaÖNB 534 as a core group 1.0 manuscript, because of its close relation to theother manuscripts belonging to this group. The codicological situation of ViennaÖNB 534 in the final parts of the manuscript is complex. The sequence of nar-ratives (Bartholomew, Philip, Simon and Jude, Matthew) is irregular. In the sec-

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

25/284

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

26/284

E. ROSE26

occurring only in the Frankish tradition (Frankish characteristic 7, see below).

If we juxtapose the results of the analysis of text presentation in

the Bavarian manuscripts with the results of the analysis of textualvariants, we encounter a number of parallels, even though the relativedistance between manuscripts might differ. The classification of BnFlat. 18298 as belonging partly to the Bavarian, partly to the Frankishtransmission is the most interesting parallel. However, there are strik-ing deviations as well. The two Wolfenbüttel manuscripts, identical intheir text presentation, are at relatively great distance from one anotherin terms of textual variants. Obviously, the scribe(s) who copied theeleventh-century Wolfenbüttel Helmstädt 497 from the ninth-centuryWolfenbüttel Weissenburg 48 (or from a book very close to it) changedand adapted the language considerably. The most remarkable case ofcontradiction is Paris BnF lat. 12602. The textual analysis identifies thiscopy as peripheral in the Bavarian tradition, but it has no place at allin the Bavarian group when we consider the order of the apostles andthe choice of texts.

Francia

The second group defined on the basis of text presentation is calledFrankish, because the origin of its oldest representatives is known orassumed to be Frankish : Montpellier UL 55 (Autun, though perhapsMetz) ; Skt Gallen 561 (North-East France) ; Ste Gen. 558 (Ste Gene-viève in Paris ?). Paris BnF lat. 18298 stems from Paris, and may have been copied from a Bavarian model adapted to Frankish practice. Tofind Graz UL 412 in this group is surprising, given its origin (Aquileia/Bavaria). Like the Bavarian Group, the Frankish Group exhibits sevencharacteristic features :

1. The section on Peter does not contain the prologue Licet plu-rima, and is not BHL 6663 ;

2. The section on Paul (Peter and Paul) consists of BHL 6657 ;3. The section on Andrew is Passio Andreae Quam oculis nos-

tris (BHL 428) ;4. The section on James the Less is BHL 4093 or 4094 ;5. The section on John is the Melito-text (Secundam post Nero-

nem, BHL 4320) ;6. The section on Thomas is the Passio Thomae (Thomas qui et

Didimus, BHL 8136) ;7. The section on Matthew includes the prologue and epilogue

(BHL 5690).Based on these characteristics, we can distinguish three subgroups

(appendix 2). Subgroup 2a consists of four manuscripts that are veryclose, both in the order of the apostles and in choice of texts. There areminor differences, such as the position and choice of the text for James

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

27/284


the Less in Ste Geneviève 547 and 558, and the position of Philip inParis BnF lat. 5274. Moreover, Paris BnF lat. 5274 adds a text for Paul.

The representatives of the second subgroup, 2b, are even more

strongly related. This subgroup consists of Graz UL 412, Paris BnF lat.9737, and Skt Gallen SB 561. The only difference between the threeis the insertion of the Breviarium apostolorum into the section on Bar-tholomew in Paris BnF lat. 9737. This subgroup is similar to Frankishtradition II defined by Maarten Prot on the basis of his textual analysis.

The Frankish characteristics indicate that Ste Geneviève 557 andParis BnF lat. 5273 are also related to the Frankish Group, althoughthere are important deviations. I classify them as subgroup 2c, eventhough these two manuscripts differ in several respects. The order of

apostles in this subgroup differs importantly from subgroups 2a and2b. Differences in the choice of texts are found in the occurrence ofseparate sections for Peter and Paul, which both manuscripts have incommon. Ste Geneviève 557 gives BHL 6663 for Peter, not found any-where else in the Frankish subgroups. The explicit of BHL 428 ( Pas- sio Andreae quam oculis nostris) differs in Ste Geneviève 557, andthis manuscript adds a text on Mark (BHL 5281). Paris BnF lat. 5273shows many similarities with subgroup 2a in the choice of texts, butit also shows some differences : it alone among the twenty-five manu-scripts uses a different text for Peter and Paul, and adds the Translatio Bartholomaei (BHL 1004). The distance between these two manuscriptsand subgroups 2a and 2b in terms of text presentation is even morestriking given the proximity between both manuscripts and MontpellierUL 55 (subgroup 2a) in terms of textual variants.

Singular manuscripts

Three manuscripts are at much greater distance from both Group 1(Bavaria) and Group 2 (Francia) : Paris BnF lat. 11750 and 12602, and

Munich BSB Clm 22020. Paris BnF lat. 11750 is, despite many impor-tant differences, still related to Group 2 (Frankish) ; the other two standout as independent copies.

Paris BnF lat. 11750The manuscript shares six of the seven characteristics with Group

2 (Frankish), but the order of the apostles is singular. In this respect,the manuscript does not resemble any other. Moreover, the choice oftexts for Peter and Paul is rather unusual (even though the differences between BHL 6663-6665 are minor). In its choice for BHL 6665, ParisBnF lat. 11750 is alone, while it shares its choice of BHL 6664 withMunich BSB Clm 12641, Ste Geneviève 557, and Paris BnF lat. 12604.Finally, it includes BHL 6574, also found in the later addition (s. XII)to Dublin TC 737.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

28/284

E. ROSE28

Paris BnF lat. 12602Paris BnF lat. 12602 exhibits a mix of Bavarian and Frankish char-

acteristics, together with some striking singularities. It lacks BHL

6663 (contra Bavarian characteristic 1) and the hymn for Peter andPaul (contra Bavarian characteristic 3). However, it has the MiraculaThomae (BHL 8140, Bavarian characteristic 6). It includes, on the otherhand, BHL 6657 for (Peter &) Paul (Frankish characteristic 2), the Pas- sio Andreae quam oculis nostris (BHL 428, Frankish characteristic 3)and the Melito-text for John (BHL 4320, Frankish characteristic 5). Itstands alone in giving the prologue for Matthew (Frankish character-istic 7) but without giving the epilogue. It is the only witness in theselection that has a deviant incipit for the text on Philip (BHL 6813 –minor difference), and is likewise unique in its addition of an important

series of sermons for Peter & Paul. Finally, it deviates greatly in theorder of the apostles, except for the final three (Bartholomew, Matthew,Simon & Jude).

Munich BSB Clm 22020Munich BSB Clm 22020 combines characteristics of Group 1 and

2. In its choice of BHL 6663 (Peter ; Bavarian characteristic 1) andthe Miracula Thomae (BHL 8140 ; Bavarian characteristic 6), it fol-lows the Bavarian tradition. In its choice for the Melito-text on John(BHL 4320 ; Frankish characteristic 5) and the inclusion of the pro-

logue and epilogue of Matthew (Frankish characteristic 7), it is similarto the manuscripts belonging to the Frankish tradition. In the order ofthe apostles, the manuscript is singular ; even though an epilogue toMatthew is included, and announces the section on Simon and Jude(‘the following libellus’), this section does not follow immediately.

The position of Paris BnF lat. 11750 and Munich BSB Clm 22020in the analysis of text presentation (order of apostles, choice of texts)is not surprising given the results of the textual analysis. In the latter,Paris BnF lat. 11750 is part of the Frankish tradition, while MunichBSB Clm 22020 stands alone, though still on the periphery of theFrankish Group. The outcome is much more remarkable in the case ofParis BnF lat. 12602.

From the preceding analyses follows principle 1, which stipulatesthat, based on the analyses of textual variance and of variance in the presentation of the texts as a series, the future edition will distinguishtwo main parts. Part one will present the Bavarian transmission and itssubdivisions, part two the Frankish transmission and its subdivisions.Together, the two parts will present a comprehensive picture of theVirtutes apostolorum. A third part will accommodate editions of sin-gular manuscripts that occupy a special position as witnesses either in between the groups, like Paris BnF lat. 18298, or outside the groups,like Munich BSB Clm 22020.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

29/284


Choice of protagonists

While the order of the apostles and the choice of texts are, likethe textual analysis, helpful instruments to show the variability of thetransalpine continental transmission of the Virtutes apostolorum andto refine the earlier rough distinction between the two traditions, thematter of protagonists in the textual series is much more complex and problematic. For even if we approach the transmission of the Virtu-tes apostolorum as a process of constant flux, the question here is notso much ‘how do we recognize and acknowledge the diversity of theVirtutes apostolorum ?’, but ‘how far can we stretch the concept ofVirtutes apostolorum ?’ Moreover, the variance in the choice of textsenables us to classify the manuscripts into groups, while the variance

in the selection of protagonists, together with the addition or omissionof other elements incidental to the series, such as hymns, sermons, andadditional texts about the twelve apostles or other protagonists, is char-acteristic of individual manuscripts.

Appendix 3 shows the variance in protagonists, and the differentdegrees to which additional elements are integrated in the series. Theoverview highlights the following phenomena :

(1) Additional texts on the main protagonists, the twelve apostles,are integrated or added in individual manuscripts, e.g. sermonson Peter and Paul (BnF 12602) ; the Translatio Bartholomaei (BnF 5273), the Acta et Obitus Iohannis (Graz UL 412) ; Breuiarium apostolorum, Divisio apostolorum (BnF 12604) ;

(2) Texts on other biblical saints than the main protagonists areadded or integrated ; some of them are presented as apostles(Mathias, Barnabas – BnF 12602) ; others are evangelists(Mark, integrated in Angers BM 281 and Ste Gen 557 andadded to BnF 12604 ; Mark and Luke in BnF 12602) ;

(3) Texts associated with the main protagonists are added or inte-grated (Lucan Acts – ÖNB 497, Apocalypse of John – ÖNB

455) ;(4) Texts on other, non-biblical saints are added.The texts not belonging to the Virtutes apostolorum according to

the working-definition I formulated at the beginning of this article areinserted in different ways. Sometimes, they are fully integrated, num- bered consecutively, and placed between two texts belonging to the Vir-tutes apostolorum in the strictest sense. This is the case, for example,in the Bavarian sub-group 1.0, where the Hymn on Peter and Paul isincorporated after Peter and Paul and before James the Less. Some-times, added elements follow the Virtutes apostolorum directly, and insome cases, the numbering is likewise consecutive. Thus in Graz UL412, the Acta et Obitus Iohannis follows directly on the section devotedto John. In some cases, they are at greater distance, for instance the Breuiarium and Diuisio apostolorum in BnF 12604.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

30/284

E. ROSE30

The examples raise the question whether we should reconsider theinitial definition of Virtutes apostolorum based on the assumption thatthe twelve form a collegium. It is dif ficult to formulate firm principles

in response to this problem. Here follows an attempt :

1. We include those texts that are integrated into the seriesof sections on the twelve apostles, as well as those addedwithout the interruption of one or more other texts at the beginning or at the end when a rubric indicates that they belong to the Virtutes apostolorum. On the other hand, weexclude texts not fully integrated but added at the begin-ning or the end when a rubric indicates that they do not belong to the Virtutes apostolorum.48

This implies that we include in the edition the Hymnon Peter and Paul in various manuscripts ; the addi-tional Latin Virtutes Petri in BnF 5273 ; the Translatio Bartholomaei in BnF 5273 ; the Passio Marci (BHL5276/5281) in Angers BM 281 and Ste Geneviève

48. In many cases, the rubricator helps us by explicitly marking the begin-ning (and sometimes the end) of the series of Virtutes apostolorum. This isthe case in BnF 12604, where a clear line is drawn between the Vita of Greg-

ory the Great and the Virtutes apostolorum, the latter being titled as the Liberde miraculis apostolorum (f. 3v). Conversely, a rubric (explicit ) at the end ofthe Acta et obitus Iohannis in Graz UL 412 includes this text in the Virtu-tes apostolorum : Expliciunt gesta sanctorum apostolorum et martirum Christi.

Deo gratias. Amen. Obviously, the copyist of this manuscript considered the Acta et obitus Iohannis as part of the series of texts on apostles. Sometimes,however, the rubricator makes it more dif ficult to decide what does and whatdoes not belong to the Virtutes apostolorum. This is the case in BnF 12602,where a general incipit above the capitula indicates the codex as a book con-taining ‘the passions of the apostles together with sermons of the Fathers andthe commemorations of martyrs and holy virgins’ ( passiones apostolorum cum

quibus[dam] patrum sermonibus. Deinde monimenta kalendarum diue[rsorum]martirum sanctarum quoque uirg[inum], fol. 1v). Here, it is dif ficult to excludeBarnabas from the Virtutes apostolorum, as the incipit of his text identifies himas apostolus, although his section does not follow immediately on ‘the twelve’.It is even more dif ficult to exclude Barnabas in Paris BnF lat. 12604, an almost

pure apostle codex (with the exception of the Vita Gregorii Magni). The authorof the Passio Barnabae asserts that in the context of the celebration of theapostles, the apostle Barnabas may not fail : Ergo cum sanctorum apostolorumnatalitia celebramus, dignum equidem atque salutare uidetur, ut beati Barnabenatalicia deuotissime celebremus, quemquidem, et non est in ordine apostolatuseorum, non tamen deest de cathalogo praedicationis, quia excellentiam miracu-

lorum sicut Lucas euangelista refert in actibus apostolorum mirabiliter patrauit. Nam eo fere tempore quo sancta aecclesia gratiam sancti spiritus suscepit, ter-tio uidelicet post passionem domini anno, cum Paulo apostolo, ad apostola-tus celsitudinem, et praedicationem diuinitas electus est. Paris BnF lat. 12604,f. 89r.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

31/284


557 ; the Acta et Obitus Iohannis in Graz UL 412.The position of the Passio Marci in BnF 12602 isless integrated, as Mark is not presented as an apos-

tle here. At the same time, we exclude the additionaltext on Peter and the sermo on Mathias in BnF 9737 because they are added separately from the sectionson the twelve. We exclude further the Acta apostolo-rum in ÖNB 497 because this text is separate fromthe sections on the twelve. The in- or exclusion of the Passio Barnabae in BnF 12602 and 12604 is dubious.

2. We exclude those texts that are attributed to the protago-nists as authors.

This implies that we exclude the Apocalypse of Johnin ÖNB 455.

3. We include those texts that put forward the protagonistsas subjects (Hymn on Peter and Paul, Translatio Bartholo-meae), but exclude those that deal with the protagonists asobjects (sermons on Peter).

a. This implies that we exclude the Sermones in ParisBnF lat. 12604 and the text Cathedra sancti Petri, asthey are sermons on the apostles, not narratives withthe apostles as subjects.

b. The person of Mathias is a dif ficult matter in thecontext of the Virtutes apostolorum. There are twotexts concerning this apostle in the manuscriptsunder consideration. The first, an anonymous sermon In natale Mathiae apostoli (inc. Cum praeclara)appears in BnF 9737, 12602 and 12604, and must be excluded from the edition since it is not a text onthe apostle as a subject but rather a general sermonfor the occasion of his feast-day. The Vita Mathiae

(BHL 5700-5701) appears in the late Bavarian man-uscripts ÖNB 497 and 560. It is a twelfth-centurylocal tradition from Treves, created at the occasion ofthe inventio of his relics during the reign of Henry IIand the episcopate of Eberhard. Given the late dateof this tradition compared to the Virtutes apostolo-rum proper, it is not opportune to include it in theedition.

c. Finally, inclusion or not of the additional texts Breui-arium apostolorum and Diuisio apostolorum in the

apostle codex BnF 12604 is uncertain. These textshave the apostles as protagonists but they are notexactly covered by the incipit Liber de miraculis apostolorum, and they do not follow without inter-ruption on the sections on the twelve.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

32/284

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

33/284


prologues, and epilogues.49 To begin with the latter, we have seen thatthe prologue and epilogue accompanying the section on Matthew is acharacteristic feature of the Frankish Group. 50 Likewise, the addition

of capitula or chapter titles at the beginning of each section is charac-teristic of the Bavarian tradition, even if not all sections are preceded by capitula. The analysis of this paratextual element makes clear thatthe presence of capitula depends on the geographical rather than thechronological origin of the manuscript51 and is, therefore, a helpfulinstrument for classifying the manuscripts in a certain tradition.

Thus, principle 3 demands that the future edition of the Virtutesapostolorum take into account the presence or absence of paratexts bydistinguishing between a Bavarian and a Frankish transmission.

Variants arising from corrections and uncorrected errors

The first three kinds of variants, described above, are dictated bythe initial setup of the texts as a series, which differs per manuscript orgroup of manuscripts. The fourth category is related to the particulari-ties of their transmission, and follows from the simple fact that we aredealing here with a handwritten tradition, for as Marco Mostert pointedout, ‘Not one copy of any handwritten text is identical to any othersingle copy’.52 One of the characteristics of a handwritten text is the

presence of a corrector’s hand, applying corrections either immediatelyafter the completion of the manuscript or at various later stages. Cor-rections are a kind of variance that normally takes much space in amanuscript, but which in a modern edition, when it is made visible atall, is often hidden in an apparatus. This is unfortunate, because cor-rections in a Latin text often tell us a lot about the development of thelanguage, if both the corrected and the uncorrected layers are visible.

Textual corrections can take different forms. Some give insight intothe development of the Latin language, but others do not. In the follow-ing example from Ste Gen. 558 (f. 33r), a super fluous a at the end of

the second line is erased to correct a scribal, not a grammatical error :

49. I elaborated on titles and intertitles (chapter titles) in R OSE, “Paratexts”,forthcoming.

50. The text is not marked in the BHL as a separate item, but it should be,for given the fact that it is lacking in the Bavarian manuscripts, it is not an

integral part of the section.51. Cf. R OSE, “Paratexts”, forthcoming.52. Marco MOSTERT, “Forgery and trust”, in Petra SCHULTE et al. (eds.),

Strategies of Writing : Studies on Text and Trust in the Middle Ages, Turnhout,2008 (Utrecht Studies in Medieval Literacy 13), p. 37-59, at p. 55.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

34/284

E. ROSE34

Example 1. BSG Ms 558, f. 33r. © Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, Paris

et ipse aduolens se pedibus eius ueniam postulabat. Dicit eis [aerased] apostolus : Multum uobis praestitit dominus meus Ihesus Chris-

tus, ut osten…

This correction is not of the same order as the one found in Skt Gal-len SB 561, p. 24, where the correcting hand(s) show a complex trans-formation in the gender of the word dolor , in the sentence Et si dolorestimendi sunt, illi sunt utique formidandi qui sic incipiunt ut numquam finiantur. Isti enim dolores aut leue sunt et tollerare possunt, aut graue sunt et cito anima eiciunt. Illi autem dolores eterni sunt…

Example 2. Cod. Sang. 561, p. 24 © Stiftsbibliothek St. Gallen

In the first line of the fragment, the gerundive timende has beencorrected to timendi and again back to timende ; the pronoun illi to ille,the second gerundive formidandi to formidande. In the second line, the pronoun isti is corrected into iste ; the adjectives leue and graue (line3) already have feminine endings. In the third line, the pronoun illi iscorrected into ille, and the adjective aeterni into aeterne. While theinitial scribe alternated –i and –e (ae) in the endings of gerundives,adjectives and pronouns attributed to the noun dolor[es], the correctorwas sure that the gender of dolor is feminine and corrected the formsaccordingly. The example in Skt Gallen SB 561 is informative aboutthe development of the Latin language (morphology, orthography), but

the example in Ste Gen. 558 is not. It would, therefore, be useful toinclude in the edition corrections like the ones in Skt Gallen in orderto show transformation of the Latin language, but it is not necessary toshow corrections of the kind found in Ste Gen.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

35/284


Furthermore, a choice must be made as to which layer be made vis-ible in the edition, the first, uncorrected layer (option 1), or the layerwith corrections (option 2). It is in almost every case very dif ficult

to date the corrections. In certain cases, other palaeographical featuresmay offer some help. In Ste Gen. 558, for instance, a great number ofinterlinear corrections are in the same ink colour (lighter than the maintext) as the stress marks and the marginal notes indicating a division inlessons, which might be datable (cf. example 3). Much more frequently,however, corrections are not datable. Although they may still inform usabout the development of the Latin language, that information cannot be anchored in a specific historical period.

Example 3. BSG Ms 558, f. 29r : One hand corrects, adds stress marks,and inserts (datable ?) liturgical notes in the margin. © BibliothèqueSainte-Geneviève, Paris

If the edition presents the uncorrected layer (option 1) with the cor-

rections added in the text itself between the lines or in the margin, weget an impression of the state of Latin on the date of copying (whichwe can establish approximately). At the same time, the edition givesus an idea of the use of the manuscripts, made visible in the need toinsert corrections for a proper performance of the texts. If, on the otherhand, the edition gives the correction layer (option 2) and collects thelayer ante correctionem either in the margin or in an apparatus, the textis presented as it was used, even though it is dif ficult to date that use.This would be the most practical solution, because the corrected layeris usually the most correct version. Previous readings can be added inthe margin with a code per manuscript. An exception will be made forthe manuscripts with many layers of corrections, such as Skt Gallen561, Montpellier UL 55, and Paris BnF lat. 18298, which deserve aspecial position in the edition.

Another issue relating to the choice between a corrected and anuncorrected layer is the management of ‘obvious errors’. In the tradi-tion of text editing, Bédier’s plea for the choice of the best text is anaccepted practice. However, if we want to edit a text from the point ofview of its use, the best text is not necessarily the most obvious choice.

Two examples may illustrate this.In the first place, the section on Simon and Jude illustrates the cultof the sun and the moon by presenting two four-horse teams in thetemple of the sun that carry the statues of the sun and the moon. Onefour-horse team is made of gold, in which the shining sun of cast gold

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

36/284

E. ROSE36

rests ; the other one is of silver and carries the moon of cast silver. Inmost manuscripts of the early Bavarian transmission, through an obvi-ous error both the sun and the moon teams are described as fusilis

ex argento. This is the case in the two Wolfenbüttel manuscripts (sub-group 1b) and in all manuscripts belonging to the Bavarian core (sub-group 1.0), apart from BnF 5563, where the corrector is confused andchanges luna fusilis ex argento into fusilis ex auro. Manuscripts fur-ther removed from the Bavarian core (BnF 18298 and the three ‘OtherBavarian’ witnesses) and the thirteenth-century ms. Vienna ÖNB 497render the passage as expected, with a golden sun-four and a silvermoon-four. The latter version is also found in all Frankish manuscriptswithout exception. Figure 4 shows the two variants as represented by aBavarian and a Frankish witness, both from the ninth century :

Vienna ÖNB 455 Graz UL 412

(145r) Stabat autem in una ede templi aboriente quadriga solis fusilis ex argento,in alia autem ede stabat luna fusilis exargento, habens quadrigam similiter

bonam fusilem ex argento.

(57r) Stabant autem in una aede templiab oriente quadriga equorum fusilis exauro in qua raditus sol adaeque ex aurofusilis consistebat. In alia autem aedestabat fusilis ex argento, habens bigam

biuum fusiles, similiter ex argento.

Figure 4. The statues of sun and moon in the section on Simon andJude, as represented by Vienna ÖNB 455 (Bavarian subgroup 1.0) andGraz UL 412 (Frankish subgroup 2b).

Even if ‘the Frankish’ version is obviously the ‘better text’, the usersof a large part of the Bavarian tradition lived with a depiction of thesun horses in silver as if they were equal to the moon horses. If wewant an edition to represent a living tradition as it circulated in cer-tain (important) parts of the medieval transmission, rather than a recon-structed ‘Ur-text’, the better choice would be to include this obviouserror in the edition.

The second example is taken from the Virtutes Iohannis. Atticus andEugenius, two young men born wealthy but converted to the vita apos-

tolica by John, have sold their properties to follow the apostle. Whenthey see their servants in splendid attire, they regret their decision to be poor. John, aware of this change of mind, transforms pieces ofwood into gold staves and simple stones into precious stones in orderto enable the youngsters to return to their previous luxury, even if theylose the riches of eternal life and run the risk of eternal damnation. Inthe next scene, a deceased friend, Stacteus, is raised to life and urged by John to tell his visions of heaven to Atticus and Eugenius. Stacteusreports on the regret of the angels and the triumph of the devils aboutthe twosome’s fearful destiny. Atticus and Eugenius hereupon ask Johnfor forgiveness, which he grants if they fulfil a thirty day’s penance,after which the precious stones and the gold bars will return to their proper natures. The majority of manuscripts reports that the gold barsand precious stones change after the penance as John has foretold :

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

37/284


(1) Factum est autem ut .XXX. dierum transacto spatio, cum uirgaemutarentur et petre, uenientes Atticus et Eugenius dicerent apostolo… 53

The narrative continues with a lament of the two young men that

they have not been forgiven. The apostle responds by promising againthat the young men will be forgiven and the magic articles will returnto their proper natures. The narrative is not fluent here. Why would thetwo young men interpret the change of virgae and petrae as a sign oflack of forgiveness ? Scattered through the Bavarian and the FrankishGroups we find several witnesses that solve the problem : ÖNB 497,BnF 18298, Graz UL 412, BnF 9737, and Munich BSB Clm 22020 54 give a reading with a negation attached to the verb mutarentur , whichexplains the agitated reaction of the two young men :

(2) Factum est autem ut triginta dierum spatio transacto cum nequeuirge mutarentur in lignum, neque gemme mutarentur in lapides, ueni-entes Atticus et Eugenius, dixerunt apostolo…55

If we consider the edition as a representation of the medieval userather than of the Ur-text, it appears that, again, presenting only textversion (2) as ‘the best text’ is not helpful. The majority of manu-scripts, including the entire early Bavarian transmission, but also large parts of the Frankish transmission, give a version that is obviously lesscorrect, but with which the medieval users could live. Elsewhere in this

issue, Rémi Gounelle argues along similar lines to retain obvious errorsin transmission when these ‘errors’ are found in several manuscripts,and thus obviously suf ficed for contemporary users.56

Thus, principle 4 stipulates that the edition makes visible those cor-rections that inform us about the development of the Latin language ;corrections that do not have this function are not made visible in theedition. The edition will also show an uncorrected error when this errordominates an important part of the transmission in a certain group,even if a ‘better text’ is presented by other witnesses in the same group

or by another group.

Variants inserted in the course of use of the series

Textual corrections are a characteristic feature of handwritten trans-mission. They are at the same time indications of use, particularly whenthey are inserted at a later stage. The present section deals exclusivelywith additions to the text at a stage after the completion of the man-

53. Vienna ÖNB 455, fol. 82v.

54. There is a lacuna in Munich BSB Clm 12641. Moreover, I was not ableto check the readings in Ste Gen. 547.

55. Paris BnF lat. 18298, fol. 48r.56. Rémi GOUNELLE, “Editing a fluid and unstable Text : The Example of the

Acts of Pilate (of Gospel of Nicodemus)”, p. 88.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

38/284

E. ROSE38

uscript, that is, additions providing indications of use of a particularmanuscript or text. Since I discussed this phenomenon more elaboratelyelsewhere,57 I will concentrate here on the implications of users’ addi-

tions (particularly semantic glosses, liturgical glosses, and stress marks)for a future edition.Some of the Bavarian manuscripts (Dublin TC 737, Vienna ÖNB

534, and Wolfenbüttel Weissenburg 48) contain semantic glosses,explaining the meaning of a word either in Latin or in Old High Ger-man. Mariël Urbanus, who studied the Viennese codex 534 as a traineein the project, observes a certain pattern in the 34 interlinear glossesadded to the Virtutes apostolorum in this codex, showing a particularconcern for clarifying words from non-Latin (Greek or Hebrew) ori-gin, and uncommon Latin words.58 The same goes for the Dublin and

Wolfenbüttel codices, though these codices give only a few glosses forthe Virtutes apostolorum.

Much more numerous are the manuscripts containing liturgicalglosses, marginal additions of a later date indicating the division ofthe texts into pericopes to be read during the liturgy of hours. Dur-ing the night of fice ( Matins), one of the vigils was filled with readingsfrom the passio or vita of the saint celebrated on that day. The liturgi-cal glosses give a clear indication of the particular use of these texts,namely in a liturgical context, and a closer analysis shows that, for themost part, each community applied its own divisions and selected itsown readings.59

Finally, a clear trace of use is found in stress marks, added above theline to indicate the accentuated syllable in a word, obviously insertedfor the benefit of oral performance.

Principle 5 therefore stipulates that the edition reflect the particu-lar uses of the texts in a performative, liturgical setting, and thereforemakes visible the additions informing us about this use as much as pos-sible. The semantic glosses are added between the lines, while liturgical

glosses are inserted in the margins of the edited text, with a code permanuscript. It seems to be less feasible to give account of word stressesin all manuscripts, given the large number of these accents in some ofthe manuscripts (e.g. Ste Gen. 558).

57. R OSE, “Virtutes apostolorum : Origin, Aim, and Use”, forthcoming.58. Mariël URBANUS, unpublished internship report, March 2012. Urbanus

adds to the existing literature (part. Arend QUAK , “Unveröffentliche Althoch-deutsche Glossen aus dem Codex Vindobonensis 534”, in Cola MINIS (ed.),

Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 4, 1973, p. 113-128) by discus-sing the Latin glosses next to the vernacular ones.

59. Cf. R OSE, “Virtutes apostolorum : Origin, Aim, and Use”, forthcoming.

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

39/284


Summary and Conclusions

In the foregoing, I have presented the different kinds of variancethat characterize the medieval transmission of the

Virtutes apostolorum

and the problems they present regarding a future edition. I have formu-lated five editorial principles that aim to make visible the variance ofthe Virtutes apostolorum in the edition, with regard to both transmis-sion and use. The principles acknowledge (1) that the transmission ofthe Virtutes apostolorum all over Europe, but also in the limited area ofthe transalpine continent, is multiform. They respond to the fact (2) thatthe Virtutes apostolorum as a series are a composite tradition, consist-ing of individual sections put together but not edited into a streamlinedcollection. They accept the fact (3) that different manuscripts classify

different protagonists as belonging to ‘the apostles’ provided that ‘thetwelve’ are among them. They admit (4) that sometimes a reading ina certain passage is obviously less correct but dominates nonethelessin an important part of the manuscript tradition. Finally, they take intoaccount (5) that the Virtutes apostolorum were transmitted in a contextof performative use, more specifically liturgical services in which thetexts were recited in public, and that hence individual manuscripts havesingular characteristics with regard to traces of use and additions forthe benefit of this performative use. With the help of the formulated principles, an edition is pursued which helps the reader to study the

Virtutes apostolorum as a whole, while at the same time enables one tofollow the specificities of one particular manuscript or group of manu-scripts. This edition visualizes the multiform and composite characterof the Virtutes apostolorum as transmitted in the form of a series, giv-ing insight into its diversity in terms of transmission and use ratherthan straightjacketing it into a fixed and solidified collection.

Appendices

Appendix 1 : List of manuscripts

Montpellier UL 55 s. VIIIfin/IXinc (Metz ? North Burgundy ?Property of Autun, St. Étienne)

Dublin Trinity College 737 s. IX (additions s. XII, XIII) (Regensburg)Sankt Gallen Stiftsbibliothek561

s. IX2 (additions s. X, XI) (North-EastFrance ; possession of Skt Gallen)

Vienna ÖNB 455 s. IX2 (West-Germany ; possession of Abbeyof Trudpert, Schwarzwald)

Graz UL 412 s. IXiii (Aquileia/Burgundy ?)Vienna ÖNB 534 s. IX (Salzburg)

Paris, BNF lat. 18298 s. IXfin/Xinc (Paris ; possession of Paris, NotreDame)

8/19/2019 Apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

40/284

E. ROSE40

Wolfenbüttel Weissenburg 48 s. IX2/3 (Weissenburg/Skt Gallen, possessionof Weissenburg)

Wolfenbüttel Helmstädt 497 s. XI (unknown ; possession of Abbey of St

John, Bergen, Magdeburg)Angers BM 281 s. XI (Angers, St Aubin)Paris, BNF lat. 5563 s. XI (unknown, property of St Thierry,

Reims)Paris, BNF lat. 11750 s. XI (unknown)Paris, Ste Geneviève 557 s. XIfin/XIIinc (unknown)Paris, BNF lat. 9737 s. XII (unknown ; Lorraine ?)Paris, BNF lat. 12602 s. XII (unknown ; possession of Corbie)Paris, BNF lat. 12604 s. XII (unknown ; possession of Corbie)

Bamberg Msc. Hist. 139 s. XII (Regensburg)Munich Clm 12641 s. XII (Abbey of Ranshofen, Bavaria)Munich Clm 22020 s. XII (Bavaria, property of Abbey of Wes-

sobrunn)Paris, Ste Geneviève 547 s. XII (unknown)Vienna ÖNB 560 s. XIIii (Abbey of Rein, Carinthia)Paris, BNF lat. 5274 s. XII (Limoges ? Metz ?)Paris, Ste Geneviève 558 s. XIII (Paris, property of Ste Geneviève ?)Paris, BNF lat. 5273 s. XIII (unknown)Vienna ÖNB 497 s. XIII (unknown)

Appendix 2 : The division of the continental transalpine transmis-

sion in Bavarian and Frankish Groups and sub-groups based on text

presentation (order of apostles, choice of texts)

Group 1 (Bavarian) (numbers accom

apocrypha 23, 2012.pdf

Documents