DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.15918#0013
The (Early) Lorsch scriptorium
7
nos. 107 and 108) that it was written in Alcuin's time. Anglo-
saxon script at Tours before Alcuin's arrival seemed im-
possible. Why impossible ? To me it appears that the script
cannot be later than the middle of the eighth century. The
other MS. is that mentioned in Palae. Lat. II 28, the 74 leaves
distributed among no fewer than a score of scribes, Cologne
106 Alcuin Miscellanea. This must be the MS. hurriedly pre-
pared for Arn by Alcuin in 802. It is a milestone for the
Alcuin-stage of Tours minuscule, and I wish that Prof. W. Meyer
had carried out his intention of publishing all its twenty va-
riations of hand, Anglosaxon and Continental.
When a calligraphic type has finally been evolved at a
scriptorium — the Tours minuscule of Alcuin and his succes-
sors, the Verona minuscule of Pacifico, the Cologne minuscule
of Hildebald — localisation is easy. But the earlier products
of the scriptorium, written before this happy consummation
had been reached, do not proclaim their birth-place so unmist-
akeably. We can claim the British Museum MS. just men-
tioned, Egerton 2831 (of " saec. viii med. "), and the Tours
Eugippius (Paris, nouv. acq. 1575, of " saec. viii in. ") for the
library of St Martin. But if we claim them for the St Martin
scriptorium, there is a risk of our claim being challenged.
That is a difficulty which threatens any investigation of a
scriptorium's history. Take for exemple the Lorsch MSS. in
the Palatine collection at the Vatican Library. A large num-
ber, belonging to the ninth century, shew a type which we
are ready to call the Lorsch type of minuscule, but the earlier
specimens, written before this type had been evolved, do not
so clearly announce their origin. It is possible that, as palaeo-
graphical knowledge increases, we may be able to detect,
some birth-mark even in those earlier specimens. At present,
we must treat them with due caution, although the balance
of probability is always in favour of the Lorsch origin of any
MS. of the Lorsch library.
The abbreviation-symbols current at each great writing-
centre should be collected; and I must point out some diffi-
culties in the way. A full collection is necessary. The short
lists which accompany the plates of Chroust or the Palaeo-
graphical Society are inadequate. For example, Liebaert, in
7
nos. 107 and 108) that it was written in Alcuin's time. Anglo-
saxon script at Tours before Alcuin's arrival seemed im-
possible. Why impossible ? To me it appears that the script
cannot be later than the middle of the eighth century. The
other MS. is that mentioned in Palae. Lat. II 28, the 74 leaves
distributed among no fewer than a score of scribes, Cologne
106 Alcuin Miscellanea. This must be the MS. hurriedly pre-
pared for Arn by Alcuin in 802. It is a milestone for the
Alcuin-stage of Tours minuscule, and I wish that Prof. W. Meyer
had carried out his intention of publishing all its twenty va-
riations of hand, Anglosaxon and Continental.
When a calligraphic type has finally been evolved at a
scriptorium — the Tours minuscule of Alcuin and his succes-
sors, the Verona minuscule of Pacifico, the Cologne minuscule
of Hildebald — localisation is easy. But the earlier products
of the scriptorium, written before this happy consummation
had been reached, do not proclaim their birth-place so unmist-
akeably. We can claim the British Museum MS. just men-
tioned, Egerton 2831 (of " saec. viii med. "), and the Tours
Eugippius (Paris, nouv. acq. 1575, of " saec. viii in. ") for the
library of St Martin. But if we claim them for the St Martin
scriptorium, there is a risk of our claim being challenged.
That is a difficulty which threatens any investigation of a
scriptorium's history. Take for exemple the Lorsch MSS. in
the Palatine collection at the Vatican Library. A large num-
ber, belonging to the ninth century, shew a type which we
are ready to call the Lorsch type of minuscule, but the earlier
specimens, written before this type had been evolved, do not
so clearly announce their origin. It is possible that, as palaeo-
graphical knowledge increases, we may be able to detect,
some birth-mark even in those earlier specimens. At present,
we must treat them with due caution, although the balance
of probability is always in favour of the Lorsch origin of any
MS. of the Lorsch library.
The abbreviation-symbols current at each great writing-
centre should be collected; and I must point out some diffi-
culties in the way. A full collection is necessary. The short
lists which accompany the plates of Chroust or the Palaeo-
graphical Society are inadequate. For example, Liebaert, in