| Paenitentiale Theodori | |
|---|---|
 Folio 2v from the Vienna manuscript, Lat. 2195, showing the decorative title and dedication of theUmbrense version of thePaenitentiale Theodori | |
| Also known as | Iudicia Theodori,Canones Theodori,Discipulus Umbrensium,Canones Gregorii,Capitula Dacheriana,Canones Cottoniani,Canones Basilienses |
| Audience | Catholic clergy |
| Language | medieval Latin |
| Date | ca. 700 |
| Genre | penitential,canon law collection |
| Subject | ecclesiastical and lay discipline; ecclesiastical and lay penance |
ThePaenitentiale Theodori (also known as theIudicia Theodori orCanones Theodori) is an earlymedievalpenitential handbook based on the judgements ofArchbishopTheodore ofCanterbury. It exists in multiple versions, the fullest and historically most important of which is theU orDiscipulus Umbrensium version (hereafter thePaenitentiale Umbrense), composed (probably) in Northumbria within approximately a decade or two after Theodore's death. Other early though far less popular versions are those known today as theCapitula Dacheriana, theCanones Gregorii, theCanones Basilienses, and theCanones Cottoniani, all of which were compiled before thePaenitentiale Umbrense probably in either Ireland and/or England during or shortly after Theodore's lifetime.
It is generally accepted by scholars today that Theodore himself is not responsible for any of the penitential works ascribed to him. Rather, a certain associate of Theodore's named Eoda is generally regarded as the point of dissemination of certain judgements proffered by Theodore in an unofficial context and in response to questions put to him by students at his Canterbury school regarding proper ecclesiastical organization and discipline.
Scholars have for some time accepted that theCapitula Dacheriana represents the earliest attempt to assemble together Theodorian penitential judgments.[1] The case for theCapitula Dacheriana as an Irish production has been argued most effectively by Thomas Charles-Edwards, who noticed, first, that theCapitula Dacheriana lacks any obvious structural framework. For Charles-Edwards, this feature (or rather lack of a feature) is symptomatic of the non-Roman character of theCapitula Dacheriana, and thus suggests its creation outside of Theodore's immediate circle, and perhaps even outside of the Rome-oriented Anglo-Saxon church.[2] Whether or not this is true, there are other, strong signs that theCapitula Dacheriana was produced in ecclesiastical circles that had rather less connection to Theodore's Canterbury than with Irish and Celtic centres. Specifically, theCapitula Dacheriana has both textual and literary connections with eighth-century Irish and/or Breton canonical activities.
TheCapitula Dacheriana is witnessed today by two tenth-century manuscripts produced in Brittany. Ludwig Bieler has shown that the copyists of both manuscripts derived their text of theCapitula Dacheriana from the same eighth-century collection of Irish materials that was still resident in Brittany in the tenth century — a collection that also included (or was at least closely associated with) theCollectio canonum Hibernensis.[3] The A-recension of theCollectio canonum Hibernensis, believed to have been compiled before 725,[4] is the earliest work known to have drawn on thePaenitentiale Theodori tradition, relying on none other than theCapitula Dacheriana version.[5] From this it appears that theCapitula Dacheriana was assembled perhaps as early as a decade after Theodore's death (in 690), and certainly no later than the first quarter of the eighth century. It was very possibly compiled in Ireland (though possibly instead in an Anglo-Irish or Breton milieux), and was used shortly after its creation as a source for theCollectio canonum Hibernensis, which would itself (even very soon after its creation) go on to influence powerfully the developing canon law and penitential traditions inFrancia.
ThePaenitentiale Umbrense is a selection of canons from the earlierCapitula Dacheriana,Canones Gregorii,Canones Cottoniani andCanones Basilienses, along with additional Theodorian judgments that were obtained by a mysterious figure named Eoda Christianus. As we learn in the preface to thePaenitentiale Umbrense, these latter judgments were proffered by the Archbishop in answer to questions raised by rulings found in a certain "Irish document" (libellus Scottorum), a work that is commonly believed to be thePaenitentiale Cummeani. All of this material has been arranged by the author of thePaenitentiale Umbrense according to topic, with occasional commentary and additional rulings added in by the author of thePaenitentiale Umbrense himself. ThePaenitentiale Umbrense is thus far more organized than its predecessors, and — owing to its contents derived from Eoda and thelibellus Scottorum — also includes more content that is strictly "penitential" in nature.
The identity of the author is controversial. In the prologue (or rather dedicatory letter) to thePaenitentiale Umbrense the author identifies himself as adiscipulus Umbrensium, "a student of the [North]umbrians". Whether this identifies the authors nationality, or merely his academic affiliation, is unclear, and several interpretations of its meaning have been advanced. Felix Liebermann believed that thediscipulus was an Irish disciple of Theodore,[6] while Paul Finsterwalder argued that thediscipulus was a man, Irish-born though trained in Anglo-Saxon schools, who worked on the Continent, probably within the context ofWillibrord's Continental mission.[7] A year after they were published Finsterwalder's conclusions were roundly rejected by Wilhelm Levison, who argued that thePaenitentiale Umbrense was the work of an Anglo-Saxon working in England.[8] Scholars since have generally sided with Levison in viewing thePaenitentiale Umbrense as the product of Anglo-Saxon England, and more specifically of a student working in Northumbria.
ThePaenitentiale Umbrense survives in two forms: aFull Form and aHalf Form. TheFull Form is clearly the more original work, theHalf Form being simply the last fourteen topics or chapters or theFull Form. TheFull Form itself survives in slightly different versions. In the earliest of these the work is divided into twenty-nine chapters (though theFulda Recension [discussed below] divides the work slightly differently and into twenty-eight chapters).[9] These are:
A later version of theFull Form has these twenty-nine chapters divided into two books, with chapters 1–15 comprising the first book and chapters 16–29 (renumbered as cc. 1–14) comprising the second. Up until recently, scholars had assumed that the two-book version of theFull Form was the original version of thePaenitentiale Umbrense. Accordingly all previous editors (Wasserschleben, Haddan–Stubbs and Finsterwalder) have printed the two-book version, and all previous scholarship has been predicated on the assumption that the author of thePaenitentiale Umbrense created a work divided into two books.[10] Several scholars even claim to have detected a generic division between the two books, noting that many of the subjects covered in the first book (drunkenness, fornication, pagan practices, etc.) are those typically associated with the penitential genre, while many of the subjects in the second book (church administration, ordination, baptism) are those typically dealt with incanon law collections.[11] It has been supposed that this is because the author of thePaenitentiale Umbrense wished to divide the chapters of his source material (i.e. theCapitula Dacheriana and theCanones Greogrii) into those of a penitential nature (= Book I) and those of a canonical nature (= Book II).[12] However, it now seems more likely that the more noticeably penitential nature of the first fifteen chapters is due not to the author's specific desire to front-load his work with exclusively penitential material, but rather to his decision to incorporate into pre-existing collections of Theodorian canons (= theCapitula Dacheriana and theCanones Greogrii) the newly acquired canons obtained from Eoda. As described above, the material that thediscipulus had managed to obtain (probably indirectly) from Eoda was based largely on Theodore's responses to rulings found in thePaenitentiale Cummeani. All such material from thePaenitentiale Cummeani is indeed found in chapters 2–14 (~ Book I) of thePaenitentiale Umbrense.[13] The highly "penitential" nature of chapters 2–14 is therefore merely an accident of thediscipulus’s decision to treat first those subjects touched on by his Eoda/Paenitentiale Cummeani material, namely the traditionally "penitential" subjects of fornication, theft, manslaughter and marriage. Beyond this there was apparently no attempt on the part of thediscipulus to treat "penitential" subjects in the first fifteen chapters and "canonical" ones in the last fourteen. Indeed, the last fifteen chapters (= Book II) treats several subjects aligned strongly with the "penitential" genre, for example food avoidance, marital relations and mental illness, while Book I contains chapters dealing with subjects more commonly associated with canon law collections, namely baptism, heresy, and ordination. Neither do the sources used by the author of thePaenitentiale Umbrense give any indication of a generic division between its first and second halves, for a great many canonical sources (i.e. papal decretals and ancient eastern conciliar canons) are drawn upon in the first half.
It now seems that in its original form thePaenitentiale Umbrense was a twenty-nine chapter work and that the two-book version was a later development.[14] The earliest manuscripts — which also happen to transmit the oldest textual variants — witness to a work divided into twenty-nine chapters, while it is only two later manuscripts — which also contain patently more recent textual variants — in which thePaenitentiale Umbrense appears as a work divided into two books. It is also now clear that the passage from the prologue commonly used to defend to idea that the work was originally divided into two works has been misinterpreted. The prologue runs as follows, with the relevant portion inbold:
A student in Northumbria, humbly, to all catholics in England, particularly to the doctors of souls: salutary redemption in Christ the lord. First of all, I have, dear [brothers], held it a worthy enough thing to lay bare to your Love’s blessedness whence I have gathered the poultices of this medicine which follows, lest (as often happens) through copyists’ decrepitude or carelessness that law [lex] should be left hideously confused which God once, in a figurative way, handed down through his first legislator and ultimately to the Fathers [de secundo patribus] in order that they might make it known to their sons, so that the following generation might learn [of it], namely penance, which the lord Jesus, after being baptized, proclaimed to us, having [as yet] no medicine, as above all the substance [prae omnibus ... instrumentum] of his teaching, saying, 'Do you all penance', etc.; who for the increase of your felicity deigned to guide — from the blessed seat of him [eius, i.e. Peter] to whom it is said 'Whichever things you set free upon the land will be set free also in the heavens' — him [eum, i.e. Theodore] by whom this most helpful salve for wounds would be concocted [temperetur]. 'For I', the apostle says, 'have received from the lord'; and I say, dear [brothers]: with the lord's favour I have received from you even that which I have given to you. Accordingly, the greater part of these [remedies] Eoda the priest, of blessed memory, known to some as 'Christianus', is said (by trustworthy report) to have received under instruction from the venerable master [antestite] Theodore. And these are buttressed [In istorum quoque adminiculum est] by what divine grace likewise delivered to our unworthy hands, [namely] things which the aforementioned man came to learn from a widely known Irish booklet, concerning which the elder [senex] is said to have given this opinion: [that] an ecclesiastic [ecclesiasticus homo] was the author of that book. Many others also, not only men but also women, enkindled by him with an inextinguishable passion for these [remedies], in order to slake their thirst hurried with burning desire to crowd round a person of undoubtedly singular knowledge in our age.Whence there has been found among diverse persons that diverse and confused digest of those rules, composed together with established causes of the second book [Unde et illa diversa confusaque degestio regularum illarum constitutis causis libri secundi conscripta inventa est apud diversos]. On account of which, brothers, through him who was crucified and who by the shedding of his blood confirmed what mighty things he had preached while living, I beg your Love's [pacis] most obliging kindness that, if I have herein perpetrated any misdeed of rashness or negligence, in consideration of the utility of this [work] you defend me before him with the merit of your intercessory prayer. I call upon as witness him, the maker of all things, that in so far as I know myself these things [I] have done for the sake of the kingdom about which he preached. And, as I truly fear, if I do something beyond my talents, yet may the good intentions [benevolentia] of so necessary a work [as this] seek from him pardon for my crimes, with you as [my] advocates — for all of whom equally and without jealousy I labor, insofar as I am able. And from all of those things I have been able to select [invenire] the more useful [topics] and compile them together, placing titles before each. For I trust that these things will draw the attention of those of good soul [bono animo], concerning whom it is said ‘Peace upon the land to people of good will'.
The context makes it obvious that thelibri secundi highlighted in bold above refers to nothing other than theScottorum libellus mentioned several times previously. There is thus no need to suppose, and no evidence to support, that thediscipulus composed his work in two books.
The two-book version most likely arose under the influence of the canon law collection known as theCollectio canonum vetus Gallica. As mentioned above, thePaenitentiale Umbrense survives in aFull Form, and in aHalf Form. So far as can be determined, theHalf Form first arose inCorbie between 725 and 750, when theVetus Gallica collection was undergoing revision and expansion. Those responsible for revising theVetus Gallica had not long before acquired a copy of thePaenitentiale Umbrense, which they decided to include in their revised collection. For whatever reason, the Corbie revisers were interested only in the final fourteen canons of thePaenitentiale Umbrense, and it was these canons alone that they included in the appendix to the Corbie redaction of theVetus Gallica. Thus began the tradition of theHalf Form version of thePaenitentiale Umbrense.[15] The Corbie redaction of theVetus Gallica was very successful and very soon after its creation it was enjoying wide circulation in France, Germany, Bavaria and northern Italy. As a result, far more copies of theHalf Form version of thePaenitentiale Umbrense were read and copied — either as part of theVetus Gallica appendix or as part of derivative canon law collections — than ever were of the stand-alone orFull Form version. The two-book version of theFull Form probably only developed after theHalf Form had achieved popularity, that is in the second half of the eighth century or first half of the ninth. Since by then most who knew thePaenitentiale Umbrense knew it only in itsHalf Form version, someone who happened upon theFull Form (which still circulated, though much less widely than theHalf) would likely come to believe that that had found a fuller version of thePaenitentiale Umbrense. And of course they would be right. However, so used would they be to viewing the last fourteen chapters as a discrete unit that they would insist on dividing the newly (re)discoveredFull Form into two books, with the first fifteen chapters comprising a welcome new (or seemingly new) addition to the Theodorian corpus, and the last fourteen chapters comprising the already familiarHalf Form. They would perhaps also have been helped along in their decision to introduce such division by the mention of alibri secuundi in the newly (re)discovered prologue. Future copies of the now-dividedFull Form would preserve the two-book format. Centuries later, similar assumptions would be made by nineteenth- and twentieth-century editors, who come to accept as original the two-book format over the twenty-nine chapter format. In 1851 Hermann Wasserschleben would be convinced by the large number of manuscripts containing theHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense, as well as by a single seventeenth centuryapograph of MSCb4 exhibiting the two-book format, that the work must have originally been composed with two distinct parts; he was therefore persuaded to ignore the evidence of his two earliest manuscripts (W7 andW9) and print thePaenitentiale Umbrense with a two-book format.[16] Subsequent editors would base their editions both on the two-book text as established by Wasserschleben and on those manuscripts that were closest or that seemed most ancient to them: these were (for Finsterwalder) MSV5 and (for Haddan–Stubbs) MSCb4, both of which happen to present thePaenitentiale Umbrense in two books. The textual tradition of thePaenitentiale Umbrense has not been studied closely since the work of Finsterwalder, and so the evidence (or rather the lack thereof) for their assumptions about priority of the two-book format have gone unexamined.
Some copies of theFull Form contain a prologue, while others lack the prologue but contain an epilogue instead. No extant copy contains both the prologue and epilogue, a fact that led Finsterwalder to conclude that the epilogue was not original, but was only a later addition intended to replace the prologue.[17] Wilhelm Levison countered this argument by demonstrating that the prologue and epilogue share remarkably similar style, and therefore must have been composed by the same individual.[18] He also pointed out that the prologue is clearly an original part of thePaenitentiale Umbrense because c. 7.5 of the text refers to it directly; and there is also an oblique yet obvious reference to the prologue in the first sentence of the epilogue.[19] The presence of the prologue and epilogue in some witnesses and not in others can be explained without resorting to hypotheses about different authorship or about the priority of one and the posteriority of the other. Of the six witnesses to theFull Form (Cb4,V5,V6,W7,W9,Wz2), all have the prologue exceptW9 andV6.V6 is fragmentary and preserves no part of thePaenitentiale Umbrense except the epilogue fromeruditis illa onwards,[20] whileW9 (as Levison suggested) probably once contained the prologue on a folio (now lost) between fols 1v and 2r (i.e. between thecapitulatio and beginning of the text) and this folio has since been cut away.[21] (The copies of the prologue inCb4 andWz2 are incomplete:Cb4 due to the loss of a folio,Wz2 due to abbreviation.)W9 andV6 are also the only two witnesses to contain the epilogue; yet, in each of the other four witnesses the absence of the epilogue can be explained. BothWz2 andV5 are fragmentary at their ends, and so may have once contained the epilogue (it is impossible now to be sure either way); while bothCb4 andW7 have (as Levison pointed out)[22] simply replaced the prologue with copies of theLibellus responsionum so as to make the latter seem like part of the former. It has recently been argued by Michael Glatthaar that because the epilogue refers disparagingly to certain heretical beliefs associated with two ofBoniface's most hated opponents — Adalbert and Clemens — it is most likely a later addition byBoniface or someone in his circle.[23] While the very strong arguments put forward by Levison for the originality of the epilogue render Glatthaar's view of theentire epilogue as a Bonifatian document rather unconvincing, there is no reason that Glatthaar's argument could not apply specifically to those parts of the epilogue that discuss the heretical beliefs of Adalbert and Clemens; such discussions are confined entirely to the second half of the epilogue,[24] which in fact reads more like an epistolary dedication than an epilogue, and so may very well be a Bonifatian addition.[25]
There are numerous extant manuscripts that contain thePaenitentiale Theodori or parts thereof. The following tables divide the extant witnesses intoUmbrense versions, non-Umbrense versions, and excerpts.Umbrense versions are further divided intoFull Form andHalf Form. The sigla given below are based on those established by the Körntgen–Kottje Editionsprojekt for theCorpus Christianorum, Series Latina, vol. 156, a project whose goal is to produce scholarly editions for all major early medieval penitentials; sigla in parentheses are those used by Paul W. Finsterwalder in his 1929 edition.
| Siglum | Manuscript | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| V6 (Vat) | Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Pal. lat. 554, fols 1–4 (written first half of ninth century, probably in Lorsch) | Paenitentiale Umbrense (fragmentary: epilogue only); excerpts from Augustine, Jerome, Pope Gregory I and Basil (on penance, baptism and continence). |
| W7 (V) | Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Lat. 2195, fols 2v–46[permanent dead link] (written end of eighth century inSalzburg)[26] | Paenitentiale Umbrense with preface, prologue andcapitulatio but without epilogue (the whole ascribed to 'Pope Saint Gregory' in red uncials on fol. 3r);Libellus responsionum;Paenitentiale Cummeani (preface only) |
| W9 (W) | Vienna,Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Lat. 2223 (written beginning of ninth century in theMain river region) | Paenitentiale Umbrense without preface and prologue, but withcapitulatio and epilogue [which ends abruptly atinminentes]);Paenitentiale Bedae;Paenitentiale Cummeani (preface, excerpt);Capitula iudiciorum (previously known as thePoenitentiale XXXV capitulorum);Incipiunt capitula scarpsi de iudicio penitentiae beati Gregorii papae (= excerpts from theLibellus responsionum);Libellus responsionum;expositio consanguinitatis ("Auctore mei generis ...");Fulgentius of Ruspe,Epistula VIII (De fide ad Donatum);Fulgentius of Ruspe,De fide ad Petrum (cc. 47–87);expositiones fidei;Paenitentiale Ecgberhti |
| Wz2 (H) | Würzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M.p.th.q.32, fols 1–24 (written first half of ninth century in either Würzburg or Fulda) | Paenitentiale Umbrense (palimpsest;[27] fragmentary:capitulatio, abbreviated prologue, and cc. 1–12.3[28])[29] |
| Siglum | Manuscript | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| Cb4 (C) | Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 320, fols 117–70Archived 2014-04-19 at theWayback Machine (written second half of tenth century inCanterbury)[30] | Old English exhortations;Paenitentiale Umbrense in two-book form (fragmentary: begins partway through prologue; withoutcapitulatio and epilogue);Libellus responsionum; poem by Archbishop Theodore; note on alms;Paenitentiale Cantabrigiense (a.k.a.Sangermanense); miscellaneous notes |
| M17 (Wi) | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 22288, fols 1–81 (written first half of twelfth century possibly in Bamberg) | Excarpsus Cummeani;Paenitentiale Ecgberhti; unidentified penitential (including: [as Book 1]Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 1–2.16 and excerpts on penance from [among other things] theDecretum Burchardi,[31] thenPaenitentiale Umbrense cc. 10.1–15.2; [as Book 2]Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–25, 27–29 and theLibellus responsionum; and [as Book 3]Paenitentiale Cummeani [preface, cc. (8)9 and (11)12, and epilogue only]);Liber proemium veteris ac novi testamenti;De ortu et obitu patrum;Micrologus de ecclesiasticis observationibus;Admonitio synodalis |
| V5 (Pal) | Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Pal. lat. 485, fols 64–113 (written second half of ninth century inLorsch) | lections, prayers, a Gregoriansacramentary, canonical excerpts, acalendar, anecrology, and tracts on miscellaneous subjects, including weights and measures,confession, andastronomy;Paenitentiale Ecgberhti;Excarpsus Cummeani (excerpts); episcopal capitularies ofTheodulf,Gerbald andWaltcaud;Sonderrezension der Vorstufe des Paenitentiale additivum Pseudo-Bedae–Ecgberhti;Paenitentiale Cummeani;Paenitentiale Umbrense in two-book form (fragmentary:[32] preface, prologue, and cc. 1–15) |
| Siglum | Manuscript | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| B5 (Ha) | Berlin,Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Hamilton 132, fols 1–251 (written beginning of ninth century in Corbie) | Collectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana (with additions from theCollectio canonum Hispana Gallica Augustodunensis);Collectio canonum Sancti Amandi;Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory II,Epistula ad Bonifatium (Desiderabilem mihi);Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5–26.9) with c. 13 appended; canons of the council ofRome in 721; the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus); Alcuin (?),Epistula contra hereticos (tractate against Adoptionism) |
| Br7 (Ga) | Brussels, Bibliothèque royale Albert 1er, MS 10127–44 (363) (written end of eighth century, possibly in Belgium) | Collectio canonum vetus Gallica; Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXVII (second part: cc. 7–19);Synodus II Patricii;Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219 (excerpt); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (excerpt);Quattuor synodus principales;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5) with c. 13 appended;Paenitentiale Remense (fragmentary);[33]Caesarius,Ecce manifestissime; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (first part only); the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus); the canons of the council ofRome in 721;Ordo librorum qui in ecclesia Romana ponuntur;Computus;De ratione Paschatis;De officiis in noctibus a cena Domini usque in Pascha;De servitio domni episcopi et archidiachoni; antiphonary;Ordo ad infirmum caticuminum faciendum; sacramentary |
| K1 (Col) | Cologne, Erzbischöfliche Diözesan- und Dombibliothek, Cod. 91 (written around 800 in Burgundy) | Collectio canonum vetus Gallica; Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXVII (second part: cc. 7–19);Synodus II Patricii;Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (first part only); the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus);Caesarius,Ecce manifestissime; theIsidorianEpistula ad Massonam; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219 (excerpt); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (excerpt);Quattuor synodus principales;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5), with c. 13 appended;[34]Excarpsus Cummeani |
| P5 (Maz) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 1454 (written 850×875 in or around Paris [Saint-Denis?]) | De canonibus apostolorum seu de sex synodis principalibus ratio libelli primi breviter adnotata;Adnotatio libelli eiusdem synodis aliis XXIIII;Adnotatio eiusdem libelli de decretalibus apostolorum numero XXIIII;Isidore,Etymologiae (excerpt: on canon law);Scimus sciut quidam asserunt statutos esse canones ab apostolis L ... leguntur sub capitulis CCCXXVII;Nominatim scire cupio sex synodi principales ... Georgii Constantinopolitani condemnata heresi anathematizando scripserunt capitula VIIII (=Quattuor synodus principales?); list of Gallic councils; canons concerningNovatianists/Cathars; glossary of words from ancient canons; Osius of Cordova,De observatione disciplinae dominicae;Canones apostolorum; the canons of the council of Nicaea (versio Dionysiana II); the canons of the council of Laodicaea (versio Dionysiana II); the canons of the council of Antioch (versio Dionysiana II);Isidore,Etymologiae (excerpt: on canon law);Constitutum Sylvestri;Collectio canonum Quesnelliana;Differentia inter sacrificium et holocaustum; Pseudo-Silverius,Multis te transgressionibus; Pope Leo I,Epistula CXX;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5–26.9), with c. 13 appended; a text attributed toGregorius (Sunt nonnulli qui cultum ... speluncam latronum. Gregorius); Troianus,Epistula ad Eumerium;Caesarius,Ecce manifestissime;Gennadius of Massilia,Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum;Scintilla de canonibus vel ordinationibus episcoporum; a collection of Merovingian conciliar canons similar to theCollectio canonum Bellovacensis;[35] Polemius Silvius,Laterculus preceded byNotitia Galliarum; theIsidorianEpistula ad Massonam |
| P6 (Par) | Paris,Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 1455 (written second half of ninth century in Francia [Reims?]) | excerpts from theCollectio canonum Herovalliana, Cresconius'sConcordia canonum and Benedictus Levita'sCollectio capitularium;[36]Collectio canonum Colbertina;Decretum Gelasianum (cc. 3–5 only);Constitutum Constantini;Collectio canonum Sancti Amandi (expanded and corrected);[37]Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory II,Epistula ad Bonifatium (Desiderabilem mihi);Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5–26.9), with c. 13 appended; the canons of the council ofRome in 721; the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus);Gelasian Sacramentary cc. 35–6; the canons from the councils of Toledo in 646, Braga in 675 and Seville in 590. |
| P7 (m) | Paris,Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 1458, fols 64–87 (written first half of ninth century in northern France)[38] | Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29;[39] a collection of Merovingian conciliar canons similar to theCollectio canonum Bellovacensis;[40] †Collectio canonum Quesnelliana[41] |
| P10 (Germ) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 1603 (written about 800 in northeast Francia) | portion of the St-Amand sacramentary;Admonitio generalis of 789 (c. 81 only);Collectio canonum vetus Gallica; Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXVII (second part: cc. 7–19);Synodus II Patricii;Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219 (excerpt); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (excerpt);Quattuor synodus principales;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3),[42] with c. 13 appended;Missa pro deuoto (added by another hand);Paenitentiale Remense;De modis peñ qualitate (Inquisitio seniorum. Sciendum uero est quantum quis ... et de suo labore uel pretio hoc redimat);Caesarius,Ecce manifestissime; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (first part only); theIsidorianEpistula ad Massonam;Incipiunt sententias defloratibus diuersis (Homo pro quid dicitur? Resp. Homo dicitur ab humo ... nullatenus sunt recipienda); the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus); the canons of the council ofRome in 721;Pirmin,Scarapsus; portion of the St-Amand sacramentary |
| P25 (l) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 3842A (written middle of ninth century in northern France [Paris?]) | as Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 1454 (i.e. including theHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense),[39] but without theEpistula ad Massonam[43] |
| P26 (Reg) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 3846 (written beginning of ninth century in north Francia) | Collectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana;Collectio canonum Sancti Amandi; (*possibly a different section begins at this point*)Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory II,Epistula ad Bonifatium (Desiderabilem mihi);Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5–26.9), with c. 13 appended; the canons of the council ofRome in 721; the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus) |
| P39 (366) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 12445 (Sangerm. 366) (written 868×871[44] inReims) | Notitia Galliarum; prefatory material from theDecretales pseudo-Isidorianae (A-Class: preface,Ordo de celebrando concilio, Pseudo-Damasus I'sEpistula ad Aurelium [Scripta sanctitatis tuae], and Pseudo-Isidorian introduction to the council ofNicaea); series of excerpts on church organization; Pseudo-Isidorian introduction to aSonderrezension ("special recension") of theCollectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana; three canons and a glossary (contains several Old High German words);Collectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana; (*possibly a second section begins at this point*)[45]Decretum Gelasianum;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (lacking 16.1–3 and 25.5–26.9), with c. 13 appended; Martin of Braga,Capitula;[46]Capitula Angilramni;Collectio Danieliana cc. 131–33 (later additions);[47] (*possibly the third section begins at this point*)[45] excerpts from Pseudo-Isidore and theCollectio canonum Hispana Gallica Augustodunensis (Pope Symmachus'sEpistula ad Caesarium [Hortatur nos] and Carthaginian councils [Carthage I toCarthage VI c. 9]);Hincmar of Reims'sEhetraktat (Tractate on Marriage);[48]Collectio Paris lat. 12445 and Berlin Phill. 1741 (including excerpts fromCodex Theodosianus book XVI, theConstitutiones Sirmondianae, and theLex Romana Visigothorum [or theBreviary of Alaric]);Leges novellae (excerpts: Valentinian cc. 27 and 35 =Breviarium cc. 8 and 12); Pope Gelasius I,Epistula ad episcopos Sicilienses (Quomodo praesulum); Augustine,Tractatus in evangelium Iohannis (excerpts: cc. 6.26 and 7.11);Collectio canonum Dacheriana (excerpts: cc. 2. 19–20, 22, 29); Augustine,De adulteriniis coniugiis (excerpts);Letter of Leo of Bourges, Victorius of Le Mans, and Esutachius of Tours (later addition);[49] Hincmar of Reims,Rotula; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 12.10; Pope Hilarus,Epistula ad Leontium, Veranum et Victurum (Movemur ratione); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.202 (short form); Pope Hilarus,Epistula ad episcopos quinque provinciarum (Quamquam notitiam); Pope Leo I,Epistula ad Theodorum (‘Sollicitudinis quidem tuae); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 5.8; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 8.14; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 6.11 (conclusion only);Leges novellae (excerpts: Valentinian cc. 8.1 and 8.2); Pope Gelasius I,Epistula ad episcopos Dardaniae (Valde mirati sumus; short form); Pope Felix III,Epistula ad episcopos orientales (Post quingentos annos); the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus);Collectio canonum Sancti Amandi (excerpts);[50]Hincmar of Reims'sEhetraktat (Tractate on Marriage; third part only); canons from the council ofRome in 826 (cc. 13–15, 19–20 and 29);Leges novellae (excerpt: Valentinian c. 35 =Breviarium c. 12); Pope Gelasius I,Epistula ad Anastasium augustum (Famuli vestrae pietatis); Ambrose,Expositio de psalmo 118 (excerpts: cc. 8.25–30); Pope Celestine I,Epistula ad Nestorium (Aliquantis diebus); canons from the council ofRome in 853 (cc. 13–15, 18–23);Epitome Iuliani cc. 104 (366) and 119.6 (511); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 7.36 |
| St2 (Stu) | Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, HB. VI. 109 (written first quarter of ninth century in southwest Germany) | Collectio canonum vetus Gallica; Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXVII (second part: cc. 7–19);Synodus II Patricii;Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219 (excerpt); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (excerpt);Quattuor synodus principales;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (fragmentary: lacking 16.1–3 [? and 25.5]) with c. 13 appended;[51]Fructuosus,Regula c. 16 (second part only) (later addition); Latin and Old High German glosses on words from conciliar canons (later addition) |
| St3 (Stutt) | Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, HB. VI. 112, fols 1–124 (written in second half of tenth century inLake Constance region) | canons from theCapitulare Wormatiense of 829 cc. 1–4 (later addition); Apostles’ creed;Collectio canonum vetus Gallica (up to c. 64.23, and including as part of the text:Caesarius'sEcce manifestissime, Pope Gregory I'sEpistula 9.219 and first part ofEpistula 9.214, along with 78 additional canons);[52] the canons of the council of Nicaea (versio Attici);Hrabanus Maurus,Poenitentiale ad Heribaldum c. 10 (later addition); a small selection of canons possibly deriving fromRegino of Prüm'sLibri duo de synodalibus causis;[53] mixed form of thePaenitentiale Remense and theExcarpsus Cummeani;[54] theIsidorianEpistula ad Massonam; the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus);Synodus II Patricii;Libellus responsionum; the canons of the council ofRome in 721;Collectio canonum vetus Gallica cc. 64.24–30;[55]Poenitentiale ad Heribaldum c. 20 (excerpt); Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXVII (second part: cc. 7–19);Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (fragmentary: beginning partway through 16.10)[56] with c. 13 appended; a small selection of canons;[57] Ansegis,Collectio capitularium;Lex Alamannorum (B) cc. 6.1-4 and 8.1–2; canons from theCapitulare Wormatiense of 829 cc. 1–4 and 6 (later addition) |
| Sg1 (S) | St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 150, pp. 323–84 (written between 820 and 840 inSt. Gallen) | Paenitentiale Sangallense tripartitum (including excerpts from first half ofPaenitentiale Umbrense);[58]Ordo Romanus VII (incomplete);Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 16–29 (incomplete: begins partway through 27.11, and continues to end [29.14]), with c. 13 appended;[59]Paenitentiale Sangallense simplex;PaenitentialeVinniani; Pseudo-Augustine,Sermo ad fratres in eremo |
| Vs1 | Vesoul, Bibliothèque municipale, MS 79 (73) (written around 1000 in France) | a penitential combining the Half Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense andExcarpsus Cummeani;[60]Paenitentiale additivum Pseudo-Bedae–Ecgberhti;[61]Libellus responsionum c. 9;[62]Institutio canonum (in 91 chapters);Decretum Compendiense from 757 (cc. 1–4);Decretum Vermeriense from 756 (cc. 1–2); tractate on baptism; commentary byVenantius Fortunatus on the creed; commentaries on the mass and thePater noster; commentary on the creed; Theodulf,Capitulare I; canonical and patristic excerpts |
| Siglum | Manuscript | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| Ba2 | Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, N. I 1 no. 3c (written around 800 in Fulda)[63] | Canones Basilienses |
| Le1 | Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, Vulc. 108/12[64] (written ninth or tenth century in northeastern Francia)[65] | Paenitentiale Ecgberhti (fragmentary: prologue + cc. 4.8–5.1);[66] fragments of an unidentified penitential (including theEdictio Bonifatii);[67]Canones Basilienses (fragmentary: cc. 1–4a)[68] |
| L11 (Co) | London,British Library,CottonVespasian D. XV, fols 68–101 (written middle of tenth century in England) | among other things theCanones Cottoniani |
| Mc1 | Monte Cassino, Archivio e Biblioteca dell’Abbazia, Cod. 372 (ext. 372 et 340; int. 553) (written beginning of eleventh century atSt Nicola della Cicogna) | Canones Gregorii; xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| M14 (E) | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 14780, fols 1–53 (written end of eighth century in France) | Canones Gregorii;Libellus responsionum; canons of the council ofRome in 743;ordo librorum veteris et novi testamenti; commutations |
| O2 | Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodley 311 (2122), (written second half of tenth century in north or northeastern Francia)[69] | capitulationes for theCanones Gregorii (213 titles) and theLibellus responsionum (18 titles);Canones Gregorii;Libellus responsionum;Poenitentiale 223 capitulorum (including:Paenitentiale Cummeani;Paenitentiale Remense [excerpts];Paenitentiale Umbrense [excerpt: 20.1–4 and 20.6–10 only];Paenitentiale Oxoniense I); Pseudo-Jerome,Epistula 12 c. 6 (ad Damasum papam; ‘'De septem ordinibus ecclesiae’');Paenitentiale Oxoniense II |
| P12 (Par) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 2123 (written around 815 in Flavigny) | canons from the council ofEphesus (cc. 1–4 only;versio Isidoriana); canons of theLateran council of 649 (incomplete);Gennadius of Massilia,Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum; Pseudo-Augustine,Sermones de Symbolo; Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXV (testimonia only);Liber pontificalis (abridged); Polemius Silvius,Laterculus followed byNotitia Galliarum;Canones Gregorii;Collectio canonum Herovalliana (large excerpt); a canon from the council ofCarthage in 418 (c. 1 only); chronology of the ages of the world, up toCharlemagne; Marculfus,Formulae;Isidore,Etymologiae (excerpts) |
| P22 (B) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 3182 (written second half of tenth century, probably in Brittany) | A collection of chapters (mostly canonical and penitential) entitled "Incipiunt uerba pauca tam de episcopo quam de presbitero aut de omnibus ecclesię gradibus et de regibus et de mundo et terra", more commonly known as theCollectio canonum Fiscani or theFécamp collection. The contents are as follows:Liber ex lege Moysi;[70] notes on chronology;[71] a brief note on Bishop Narcissus of Jerusalem (Narcisus Hierosolimorum episcopus qui fecit oleum de aqua ... orbaretur et euenit illis ut iurauerunt);Incipiunt remissiones peccatorum quas sanctus in collatione sua Penuffius per sanctas construxit scripturas (= large excerpt fromCassian’sCollationes c. 20.8); more notes on chronology;[72]Pastor Hermae cc. 4.1.4–4.4.2 (versio Palatina); scriptural excerpts on chastity, marriage and the oaths of one's wife;Incipiunt uirtutes quas Dominus omni die fecit (chapters on Sunday, the days of Creation, and the Last Judgment);Collectio canonum Hibernensis cc 1.22.b–c (on the murder of priests, and bishops' duty to persist in their own dioceses);Collectio canonum Hibernensis (A version, complete copy);Excerpta de libris Romanorum et Francorum (a.k.a.CanonesWallici);CanonesAdomnani (cc. 1–7 only), with an extra chapter appended (Equus aut pecus si percusserit ... in agro suo non reditur pro eo);
Isidore,Etymologiae (excerpts on consanguinity); commentary on the Book of Numbers (on oaths);Isidore,Etymologiae (excerpts on consanguinity and heirs);Institutio ęclesiasticae auctoritatis, qua hi qui proueniendi sunt ad sacerdotium, profiteri debent se obseruaturos, et si ab his postea deuiauerint canonica auctoritate plectentur (excerpts on ordination);[76]Collectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana (ending with canons of the council ofRome in 721);Quattuor synodus principales;Isidore,Etymologiae (excerpts on the ancient councils);Hii sunt subterscripti heretici contra quos factae sunt istę synodi: Arrius ... Purus, Stephanus;De ieiunio IIII temporum anni (In mense Martio ... nulli presbiterorum liceat uirginem consecrare);Libellus responsionum; Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.219 (excerpt); Pope Gregory I,Epistula 9.214 (excerpt);[77]De decimis et primogenitis et primitiuis in lege (excerpts on tithes);[78]Canones Hibernenses III (on tithes);PaenitentialeGildae;Synodus Aquilonis Britanniae;Synodus Luci Victoriae;Ex libro Davidis;Capitula Dacheriana (c. 21 [first part] only);CanonesAdomnani (cc. 19–20 only);Capitula Dacheriana (cc. 21 [second part, withsi mortui inueniantur uel in rebus strangulati appended] and 168 only); excerpts from St Paul (on food); excerpts on hours and the order of prayer;[79]De pęnitentia infirmorum (Paenitentiale Cummeani c. [8]9.28 +Paenitentiale Columbani A c. 1 [first part]);De recitentibus aliorum peccata (Paenitentiale Cummeani c. [8]9.19);De oratione facienda etiam pro peccatoribus (Scriptura dicit in commoratione mortuorum: etiam si peccavit, tamen patrem ... dum angeli Dei faciunt);Paenitentiale Bigotianum; Theodulf,Capitulare I ("Kurzfassung");[80]Isidore,De ecclesiasticis officiis (excerpt:De officiis ad fidem venientium primo de symbolo apostolico quo inbuuntur competentes, with commentary on Deuteronomy 22–3 appended);Canones Hibernenses IV; excerpts on marriage (mainly from Augustine and Jerome, but also includingSynodus II Patricii c. 28); excerpts on kings;[81] excerpts on sons and their debts;[82]Collectio canonum Hibernensis c. 38.17;Patricius dicit (=Canones Hibernenses IV c. 9),Item synodus Hibernensis (=Canones Hibernenses IV c. 1–8);[83]De iectione ęclesie graduum ab ospicio (=Canones Hibernenses V); chapters from Exodus and Deuteronomy (excerpts on virgins and adulterers); on theordo missae (excerpt from Isidore'sDe ecclesiasticis officiis);Liber pontificalis (Linus natione italus ... Bonifacius LXVIII natione romanus hic qui obtinuit ... se omnium eclesiarum scribebat);De duodecim sacrificiis (excerpt from Pseudo-Jerome'sDisputatio de sollempnitatibus paschae);[84] the ten commandments (Decim precepta legis in prima tabula ... rem proximi tui mundi cupiditatem); excerpts on hours and song (includingPro quibus uirtutibus cantatur omnis cursus,De pullorum cantu,De matudinis, etc.); a brief tract explaining the reason for the flood;[85]De eo quod non nocet ministerium ministrantis sacerdotis contagium uitę (=Collectio canonum Hibernensis [B version] c. 2.12);[86]Canones Hibernenses VI;Capitulare legibus addenda a. 803;Lex Salica emendata; two forged letters purporting to represent a discussion between Pope Gregory I and Bishop Felix of Messina (on consanguinity, the Anglo-Saxons, and the nature of the Pope'sLibellus responsionum);[87] Theodulf,Capitulare I (fragmentary);[88]Paenitentiale Ecgberhti (fragmentary: beginning partway through c. 2); Pseudo-Jerome,De duodecim triduanis |
| P27 (A) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 3848B (written end of eighth or beginning of ninth century in Flavigny) | Canones Gregorii;Ex opusculis sancti Augustini et sancti Ysidoru de diuersis heresibus (Quidam heredici ex nominibus suorum auctorum ... tamen heredicus appellari potest);Gennadius of Massilia,Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum; Pseudo-Augustine,Sermo 242 (de symbolo); Pseudo-Augustine,Sermo 244 (expositio fidei); Pope Leo I,Epistula CLXV (testimonia only);[89] Pope Leo I,Epistula XXVIII (=Tomus Leonis); Cyril,Epistula ad Nestorium;[90] Cyril,Epistula ad Iohannem episcopum Antiochiae;[91] excerpts from theacta of the council of Chalcedon;[92]De fide trinitatis (excerpts from the InsularLiber de ordine creaturarum andIsidorian'sDe differentiis rerum);Collectio canonum Herovalliana; chapters on heretics ascribed to Augustine and Isidore; an excerpt from Rufinus's translation of Eusebius'sHistoria ecclesiastica (on the council of Nicaea);Gennadius of Massilia,Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum |
| P36 (Sg) | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 12021 (Sangerm. 121), fols 33r–356 (written third quarter of the ninth century in Brittany) | Collectio canonum Hibernensis;Capitula Dacheriana;CanonesAdomnani (complete copy); excerpts from the councils of Ancyra and Neocaesarea and also from thePaenitentialeVinniani (as inP22);Canones Hibernenses II (on commutations), withSynodus Luci Victorie cc. 7–9 appended; excerpts from Isidore'sEtymologiae on consanguinity and relatives; excerpts from Cresconius'sConcordia canonum;Collectio canonum Dionysio-Hadriana; ***** |
| Pr1 | Prague,Knihovna metropolitní kapitulyArchived 2014-04-26 at theWayback Machine, O. 83 (1668), fols 131–45 (written second half of eighth century[93] in either Bavaria or northern Italy) | Canones Gregorii (fragmentary: cc. 174–end);[94]Libellus responsionum (fragmentary)[95] |
Note that reports of the presence ofPaenitentiale Umbrense and/orCanones Gregorii excerpts in the tenth-centuryCollectio 77 capitulorum as found in Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibliothek, MS 217 andMunich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 3853 are in error.[96] What such reports are actually referring to is the penitential known as theCapitula iudiciorum (previously known as thePoenitentiale XXXV capitulorum).[97]
| Siglum | Manuscript | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| K5 (Kol) | Cologne, Erzbischöfliche Diözesan- und Dombibliothek, Cod. 210[98] (written second half of eighth century in northeastFrancia, possible the region around Cambrai[99]) | a "truncated" and interpolated A version of theCollectio canonum Hibernensis;[100] a systematically arranged penitential known as theCollectio 2 librorum (including [in the second book only] extensive excerpts from the Full Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense[101]) |
| Kw1 | Kynžvart,Zámecká KnihovnaArchived 2009-02-13 at theWayback Machine, 75 (20 K 20), fols 1–78 (written first half of twelfth century in [Saint Blaise Abbey]) | Quotienscumque instruction;[102]Decretum Burchardi (excerpts on commutations);Paenitentiale Pseudo-Romanum (= Book VI of Halitgar'sPaenitentiale);Hrabanus Maurus,Poenitentiale ad Heribaldum (Sonderrezension);Canones Gregorii though here ascribed to Theodore (cc. 1–8, 12–16, 21–5, and 29–31);Capitula iudiciorum (previously known as thePoenitentiale XXXV capitulorum); an unidentified penitential canon law collection (in 58 chapters);[103]Regino of Prüm,Libri duo de synodalibus causis (excerpts) |
| L1 (L) | London,British Library, Add. 8873 (written first half of twelfth century in Italy) | Collectio canonum Britannica xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| L2 | London, British Library, Add. 16413 (written beginning of eleventh century in southern Italy) | two unique fragments of the council ofRome in 769;[104] Pseudo-Damasus,Epistula ad Hieronymum de hora sacrificii (JK †246) (excerpt);Admonitio generalis of 789 (cc. 81 and 78 only); Pseudo-Clement I,Epistula ad Iacobum (JK †11) (with some possibly unique additions); canons of the council ofRome in 721 (cc. 1–12 only); several conciliar canons and excerpts from decretals and patristic texts concerning clerical offices;ordo missae; prologue to a sacramentary; chapters from Augustine;Edictio Bonifatii (from thePaenitentiale mixtum Pseudo-Bedae–Ecgberhti ?);De consolatione Origenis defunctorum;[105]De his qui vexantur et seipso interficitunt (=Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 25.1–2);expositiones fidei;expositio symboli; commentary on clerical grades;expositio baptismatis;liturgica;Sermo de paenitentia;[106]Quotienscumque instruction;Paenitentiale Remenese (? Redemptionstexte);[107]Paenitentiale Cummeani (prologue only); a penitential in 38 chapters (including: [as cc. 1–35]theCapitula iudiciorum [previously known as thePoenitentiale XXXV capitulorum]; and [as cc. 36–8]Iudicium Gregorii de penitentia ad Augustinum [= excerpts from theLibellus responsionum]);Libellus responsionum (incorporating as its third question c. I.20 ofJulianus Pomerius’sDe vita contemplativa;Julianus Pomerius,De vita contemplativa (c. I.21); Pope Celestine I,Epistula ad universos episcopos per Apuliam et Calabriam constitutos (JK 371) (c. 1 only);Epitome Hispana (excerpts);Canones Gregorii though here ascribed to Theodore (cc. 30, 41–2, 61, 70–1, 72 [first part], 75–6, 77 [partial], 130 [partial] 134, and 159);[108]Collectio canonum vetus Gallica (excerpts);[109] sermons; Pope Gregory I,Epistula ad Secundinum (beginning only, with interpolationDe reparatione lapsi);[110] statutes from a south Italian council[111] |
| Me1 (M) | Merseburg, Dombibliothek, MS 103 (written first half of ninth century in northern Italy) | xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Mc3 | Monte Cassino, Archivio e Biblioteca dell’Abbazia, Cod. 554 (ext. 554, 508) (written second half of tenth century in Italy) | xxxxxxxxxxxxx;Canones Gregorii (excerpts);[112] xxxxxxxx |
| M2 (Aug) | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 3852, fols 54–end (written eleventh century in southern Germany) | xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| M6 (Fris) | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6241 (written end of tenth century in Freising) | fols 33v–35r contain a series of canons ascribed to Theodore and based on theCanones Gregorii[113] |
| –[114] | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 6245 (written second half of the tenth century in Freising) | Canones Gregorii cc. 1–4 (here ascribed tosancti Gregorii, though this ascription later corrected tosancti Theodori), as the last in a short series of canons added to fols 1r–2v by an early eleventh-century hand[115] |
| – | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 14468 (written 821 in Regensburg) | xxxxxx;Paenitential Umbrense cc. 5.3 and 14.4 (though possibly insteadCanones Gregorii cc. 48a and 68); xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| – | Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 21587 (written between about 1025–1035 in Freising) | the second volume of the pontifical of Bishop Egilbert of Freising[116] (contains on fol. 20r–vCanones Gregorii cc. 1–4, here ascribed to Theodore)[117] |
| O2* | Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodley 311 (2122), (written tenth century in north or northeastern Francia) | as in the table above (i.e. including excerpts from thePaenitentiale Umbrense (eitherFull orHalf Form) |
| – | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 13658 (written twelfth century in Saint-Germain-des-Près) | Collectio of Paris lat. 13658 (including "capitulum XXVII" of thePaenitentiale Umbrense, which is introduced by a rubric borrowed from theUmbrense preface) |
| P46 | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, nouv. acq. lat. 281, fols 92–4, 99–101, 110, 119 (written ca. 1000 in either northern Italy or southern Francia) | John Cassian,Collationes 5.2 and 5.16;[118]Paenitentiale Columbani B (prologue only);Quotienscumque instruction;[119]Paenitentiale Oxoniense II (first part of prologue only);[120]Capitula iudiciorum (fragmentary);Canones Gregorii (cc. 4–12, 14–21, 23–28); tractate on penance (beginning: "Penitentiae modus non unus esse debet") |
| P22* | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 3182 (written second half of tenth century, probably in Brittany) | as in the table above (i.e. including excerpts from theCapitula Dacheriana) |
| P38[121] | Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Lat. 12444 (Sangerm. 938) (written end of eighth or beginning of ninth century probably in Fleury)[122] | Collectio Sangermanensis XXI titulorum (including excerpts from among others theCollectio canonum Hibernensis,Isidore'sEtymologiae, ancient Eastern, African and Gallic conciliar canons [in various versions, some of which are otherwise unknown],[123]Collectio canonum Pithouensis, theStatuta ecclesiae antiqua, decretals from Siricius to Gregory I, theLibellus responsionum, theHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense, Basil'sRegula,Gennadius of Massilia’sLiber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum,Caesarius's letterEcce manifestissime, and the writings of Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Cassian, and Cyril); a long and (as it currently stands) incomplete[124] series of excerpts from theCollectio canonum Hibernensis, possibly meant as a continuation of theCollectio Sangermanensis[125] |
| Sg1* | St Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. 150, pp. 323–84 (written between 820 and 840 inSt. Gallen) | as in the table above (i.e. including excerpts from the first half ofPaenitentiale Umbrense) |
| St6+Da1+Do1 | Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, Cod. Fragm. 100 A, w, x, y and z + Darmstadt, Hessische Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek, MS 895 fragm. + Donaueschingen, Hofbibliothek, MS 925 Fragm.[126] (written about 800 probably in northern Italy) | Epitome Hispana (fragmentary; excerpts);[127]Paenitentiale Oxoniense II (fragmentary);Paenitentiale Ecgberhti (prologue and c. 4.15 only, possibly once followed by furtherPaenitentiale Ecgberhti material); a series of penitential excerpts[128] (fragmentary; including excerpts from the earlier chapters ofPaenitentiale Umbrense,Paenitentiale Cummeani, andPaenitentiale Burgundense);[129]Paenitentiale Bedae[130] (first preface and first sentence of second preface[131] only, possibly once followed by furtherPaenitentiale Bedae material) |
| St1 | Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek, HB. VI. 107[permanent dead link][132] (written end of the eleventh century in southwest Germany) | Collectio 74 titulorum (Swabian recension);Decretum Gelasianum;De ecclesiis (a collection of canons in 47 chapters);[133]Bernold of Constance,Collectio de excommunicatione (incomplete);De illicitis coniunctionibus (a collection of canons in 24chapters);[134]Brevis denotatio VI principalium sinodorum (a.k.k.Adnotatio I);[135]De auctoritate IIIIor principalium conciliorum (excerpt Pope Gregory I,Epistula ad Iohannem Constantinopolitanum); canons from the councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon;Sciendum quod plures orientalium conciliorum ediciones ... per beatum Adrianum papam occidentalibus ęcclesiis directa probatur;Brevis denotatio canonum subter annexorum ... (a.k.a.Adnotatio II);[136]Collectio 98 capitulorum (cc. 8 and 24 only); canon 27 of thecouncil of Mainz in 847; excerpts from theCollectio 98 capitulorum;Augustinus contra Novatum;Paenitentiale Umbrense cc. 14.20, 2.16 (first part), 2.17 (first part), 2.3 (second part), 2.1 (first part), 8.1, xxxxx |
| V23+Mb2 | Vatican, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. lat. 5751, fols 1–54 + Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, G. 58 sup., fols 41–64[137] (written end of ninth century in Bobbio) | Collectio canonum Dacheriana (preface only, without the final paragraph describing the structure of the collection proper);[138]Pseudo-Chrysostom,Sermo de penitentia (Provida mente, short form);[139]Octo sunt vitia principalia (=Cassian'sCollationes cc. 5.2 and 5.16, and the prologue of thePaenitentiale Columbani B );Paenitentiale Oxoniense (prologue only, and in shortened form);[140] an unidentified penitential text (Incipit de sacrificiis et remissione fratrum. Sed fortasse dicant ... per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum);Paenitentiale Cummeani (prologue only);Halitgar'sPaenitentiale (preface and books I–II only); Pope Gregory I,Epistula ad Secundinum (beginning only, with interpolationDe reparatione lapsi);[141] theIsidorianEpistula ad Massonam; canons of the council of Agde (506);Paenitentiale Pseudo-Romanum (= Book VI of Halitgar'sPaenitentiale); a short collection of Gallic canons;[142]Epitome Hispana (excerpts);Canones Gregorii though here ascribed to Theodore (excerpts: cc. 1–8, 12–16, 21–5, 29–31);[143]Capitula iudiciorum (variant version, withExcarpsus Cummeani cc. 7-15 and 20); Pseudo-Clemens I,Epistula ad Iacobum; a penitentialordo with two prayers;Paenitentiale Merseburgense a (with a Columbanian prologue);[144] the canons of theAdmonitio generalis of 789 (incomplete);[145]Isidore,De ecclesiasticis officiis, cc. 42–3;Paenitentiale Cummeani (without prologue);‘Inquisitio sancti Hieronomi’ (commutations);Paenitentiale Ambrosianum;Vorstufe des Paenitentiale additivum Pseudo-Bedae–Ecgberhti;Excarpsus Cummeani (excerpts: cc. 3.21, 3.23-24, 3.42, 3.36, 3.38);Gennadius of Massilia,Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum;Tertullian,De oratione cc. 9–end; the canons from the council ofEphesus (versio Isidori); the canons from the council ofGangra (fragmentary: title only) |
| W11 | Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Cod. Lat. 2231 (s. ix/x, Italy or south Francia) | xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
The following table summarizes the manuscript distribution of the several versions of thePaenitentiale Theodori (not including small excerpts):
| Version | No. of witnesses | Sigla of witnesses |
|---|---|---|
| Canones Basilienses | 2 | Ba2,Le1 |
| Canones Cottoniani | 1 | L11 |
| Capitula Dacheriana | 2 | P22,P36 |
| Canones Gregorii | 5 | M14,O2,P12,P27,Pr1 |
| Paenitentiale UmbrenseFull Form | 7 | Cb4,M17,V5,V6,W7,W9,Wz2 (+ the extensive excerpts inK5) |
| Paenitentiale UmbrenseHalf Form | numerous | Sg1,Collectio canonum Quesnelliana witnesses (P5,P7,P25),Collectio canonum vetus Gallica witnesses (Br7,K1,P10,St2 [= 'North French' class];St3 [= 'South German' class]),Collectio canonum Sancti Amandi witnesses (B5,P6/P26,[146]P39[147]) (+ the extensive excerpts inP38) |
Finsterwalder further divided the witnesses of thePaenitentiale Umbrense into two classes ...[148]
Of the earliest manuscript witnesses, namely those dating to the end of the eighth or beginning of the ninth centuries, none originate in England, the supposed place of origin of thePaenitentiale Theodori; this is not unusual, however, since many early Insular texts survive today exclusively in Continental witnesses. The majority of extant manuscripts of thePaenitentiale Theodori originate in either Burgundy, northeastern France, and theregion of the Rhine and Main rivers. This is significant, as it is these areas in which the Anglo-Saxon mission, specifically that part directed byBoniface, operated in during the first half of the eighth century. The manuscript evidence may thus reflect an early transmission within the scribal centres in the area of this mission, and so may indicate Anglo-Saxon involvement in thePaententiale Theodori's early dissemination throughout and/or its introduction to the Continent.
As discussed above (Authorship), theCapitula Dacheriana was perhaps the earliest of the several versions. Based on the close connection between theCapitula Dacheriana and theCollectio Hibernensis, Charles-Edwards has argued that theCapitula Dacheriana were produced, perhaps in conjunction with theHibernensis, in Ireland, whence the text was imported along with theHibernensis to Brittany and subsequently Francia.[149]
The most likely candidate for the introduction of thePaenitentiale Umbrense to the Continent isBoniface, an Anglo-Saxon missionary and a competent canonist who work tirelessly to reform the Frankish, German and Bavarian churches in the first half of the eighth century. Boniface knew thePaenitentiale Umbrense, for quotations of it pepper several canonical works that are attributed to him. Boniface also knew, and worked closely with, the papal document known as theLibellus responsionum. It is no surprise, then, that the earliest manuscript witnesses of thePaenitentiale Umbrense transmit this text in close proximity with theLibellus responsionum. It was also probably Boniface who was responsible for introducing thePaenitentiale Umbrense to the Corbie redaction of theCollectio canonum vetus Gallica, in whose creation he seems to have played some part.
TheCanones Gregorii is quoted twice in c. 19 ofPirmin'sScarapsus,[150] and on this basis Eckhard Hauswald, the most recent editor of theScarapsus, was able to date this text to between 725 and 750[151] ThePaenitentiale Umbrense was also used as a source for two early eighth-century Continental penitentials, namely theExcarpsus Cummeani and theCapitula iudiciorum.[152] And several chapters from theHalf Form were added to the text of theCorbie redaction of theCollectio canonum vetus Gallica, produced in the second quarter of the eighth century — this in addition to the inclusion of nearly the entire latter half (= Book II orHalf Form) of thePaenitentiale Umbrense in theVetus Gallica appendix.[153] Altogether, these four works demonstrate that thePaenitentiale Umbrense was available for use on the Continent well before the year 750. TheCollectio Sangermanensis, dating to the second half of the eighth century and probably also produced at Corbie, also draws on thePaenitentiale Umbrense ...
Towards the end of the eighth century,Paul the deacon, in hisHistoria Langobardorum c. 5.30, testified to Theodore's reputation as a promulgator of penitential canons.[152]
It is perhaps significant that four of the fiveCollectio canonum vetus Gallica witnesses that contain an appended copy of theHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense —Br7,K1,P10,St2 — are those from Mordek's 'North French' class. Moreover,Br7,K1,P10,St2 are the only copies of theCollectio canonum vetus Gallica to contain a series of chapters drawn from the monastic rules of Columban, Macarius, Basil and Benedict (Collectio canonum vetus Gallica cc. 46.26–37).[154] These are the only chapters in the entireCollectio canonum vetus Gallica tradition to draw on monastic sources. The fifthCollectio canonum vetus Gallica witness that contains a copy of theHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense —St3 — is from Mordek's 'South German' class, a class that represents a tradition about as old as the 'North French' one (i.e. the 740's; both traditions stem ultimately from a mid-eighth-century Corbie redaction).[155] However, whereas the manuscripts of the 'North French' tradition preserve more or less intact the series of mainly penitential texts appended to theCollectio canonum vetus Gallica (Synodus II Patricii,Paenitentiale Umbrense, etc.), most of the manuscripts of the 'South German' class have modified greatly the arrangement and constituent texts of this appended series. The 'South German' manuscriptSt3 is exceptional, however. As Mordek has shown, it is not only the most faithful witness to the 'South German'Vetus Gallica tradition, it is also the witness with an appendix most resembling that of the 'North French' tradition.[156] It is, for example, the only manuscript from outside the 'North French' group to contain in its appendix theSynodus II Patricii, theIsidorianEpistula ad Massonam, the canons of the council ofRome in 595 (Pope Gregory I'sLibellus synodicus), and thePaenitentiale Umbrense. What might therefore have seemed like an anomaly in the tradition of thePaenitentiale Umbrense +Collectio canonum vetus Gallica combination — namely that an apparently distinctive feature of the 'North French' tradition (the presence of thePaenitentiale Umbrense in the appendix) is also shared by a single 'South German' manuscript — in fact is only evidence that thePaenitentiale Umbrense was part of the original series of texts appended to the Corbie redaction of theCollectio canonum vetus Gallica in the mid-eighth century.
According to Mordek,[157] fols 80–195 ofP6 (which contain theCollectio canonum Sancti Amandi, theLibellus responsionum, Pope Gregory II's letter for Boniface beginningDesiderabilem mihi, theHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense, the canons of the council ofRome in 721, and the canons of the council ofRome in 595) are likely a copy — modified with the help of aCollectio Hispana of either the Gallican or Pseudo-Isidorian form — of fols 128–266 ofP26.
AlthoughP39 is above classified as aCollectio canonum Sancti Amandi witness, and although it exhibits the samePaenitentiale Umbrense omissions that are characteristic of allSancti Amandi witnesses (namely omission of 16.1–3 and 25.5–26.9), there are nevertheless reasonsnot to associate theP39 copy of thePaenitentiale Umbrense with theSancti Amandi tradition. First, it has long been recognized that the contents ofP39 are very similar to those of Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Phill. 1741, copied in the same place and time asP39 (ca 850×875 in Reims).[158] However, the section ofP39 that contains thePaenitentiale Umbrense (fols 151–166 = Böhringer's "Teil II") is not duplicated in Phill. 1741. What is more, this section ofP39, which is self-contained on two gatherings (gatherings 21–22), may very well have once been separate from the rest of the manuscript, for it begins with a change of scribal hand, and the text on the last page ends imperfectly (fol 166v:Si quis metropolitanus episcopus nisi quod ad suam solummodo propriam pertinet parrochiam sine concilio). Fols 151–166 ofP39 may therefore have originated as a stand-alone dossier of materials, and only been joined with the rest of the codex (i.e. the part of the codex with theSancti Amandi excerpts) at a later time.[159]
TheCanones Basilienses has been edited once:
TheCanones Cottoniani has been edited once:
TheCapitula Dacheriana has been edited three times and reprinted three times:
TheCanones Gregorii has been edited five times and reprinted once:
TheFull Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense has been edited eight times and reprinted once:
TheHalf Form of thePaenitentiale Umbrense (= cc. 16.4–25.4 + cc. 26(27)–29 + c. 13) has been edited twice and reprinted twice:
Canones Basilienses
Canones Cottoniani
Capitula Dacheriana
Canones Gregorii
Paenitentiale Umbrense
Paenitentiale Umbrense (Half Form)
