‘Qui scripsit scripta, manus eius sit benedicta’: Scribes and Colophons from the Medieval Dioceses of Oradea and Transylvania

* The present research was supported through a grant from the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNCS-UEFISCDI (project PN-II-RUTE-2014-4-1795).

1. A. Papahagi, A. C. Dincă, with A. Mârza, Manuscrisele medievale occidentale din România: Census, Iaşi, 2016 (forthcoming).

2. A. Papahagi, ‘Lost Libraries and Surviving Manuscripts: The Case of Medieval Transylvania’, Library & Information History 31 (2015), 35-57. See also C. Dima-Drăgan, ‘Bibliothèques roumaines anciennes (XIIe-XVIIIe siècles)’, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 53 (1978), 347-57; G. Buluță, Scurtă istorie a bibliotecilor din România, Bucharest, 2000, 8-39; A. C. Dincă, ‘The Lost Libraries of Transylvania: Some Examples from the 15th and 16th Centuries’, paper presented at the 75th World Library and Information Congress, Milan, 23-27 August 2009, http://conference.ifla.org/pastwlic/2009/78-dinca-en.pdf.

3. For an example of a recent quantitative approach, see E. Buringh, Medieval Manuscript Production in the Latin West. Explorations with a Global Database, Leiden-Boston, 2011.

4. The most recent reference work on the places relevant for medieval book culture on the territory of Hungary and Romania is C. Dietl, A.-L. Liebermann (eds), Lexikon der regionalen Literaturgeschichte des Mittelalters: Ungarn und Rumänien, Berlin, 2015.

5. C. Rother, Siebenbürgen und der Buchdruck im 16. Jahrhundert, Wiesbaden, 2002, 28-30; I.-A. Pop, Th. Nägler (eds), Istoria Transilvaniei. Vol. I (până la 1541), Cluj, 2003, 329-30.

6. Rother, 11.

7. A. Dankanits, Lesestoffe des 16. Jahrhunderts in Siebenbürgen, Bucharest, 1982, 31.

8. For a recent example, see A. C. Dincă, ‘Medieval Literacy in Transylvania: Selective Evidence from Parish Churches’, Transylvanian Review 24 (2015), 109-21.

9. C. Csapodi, K. Csapodiné-Gárdonyi, Bibliotheca Hungarica: Kódexek és nyomtatott könyvek Magyarországon 1526 előtt, 3 vols., Budapest, 1988-1994. The work has 3419 entries, but some of these contain multiple items. Some appear to be lost books, or even ghosts.

10. To quote only one example, the catalogues of the Jagellonian University Library in Cracow used by BH, compiled by W. Wyslocki in 1877-1881, have been superseded by the publication of the Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum medii aevi latinorum qui in bibliotheca Jagellonica Cracoviae asservantur, Cracow, 10 vols., 1980-2012.

11. G. Valentinelli, Bibliotheca manuscripta ad S. Marci Venetiarum: Codices MSS. Latini, Venice, vol. II, 1869, 347, nr. 165; G. E. Ferrari (with F. M. Colasanti, S. Rossi Minutelli), ‘Esordio ad un contributo marciano sui manoscritti veneti d’interesse ungherese’, in Rapporti veneto-ungheresi all’epoca del Rinascimento, ed. T. Klaniczay, Budapest, 1975, 411, nr. 7. Ferrari and BH are either incomplete or mistaken as compared to Valentinelli, which seems to offer the best transcript. I have not yet been able to inspect the manuscript in situ.

12. V. Fraknói, ‘Vitéz János könyvtára’, Magyar Könyvszemle 3 (1878), 89-91; V. Fraknói, ‘Váradon írt Vitéz-kódex’, Magyar Könyvszemle 5 (1880), 244-47; K. Csapodi-Gárdonyi, Die Bibliothek des Johannes Vitéz, Budapest, 1984, 140-41, nr. 108, fig. 78; F. Földesi (ed.), A Star in the Raven’s Shadow. János Vitéz and the Beginnings of Humanism in Hungary, Budapest, 2008, nr. 21, fig. 53.

13. P. Radó, Libri liturgici manuscripti bibliothecarum Hungariae et limitropharum regionum, ed. L. Mezey, Budapest, 1973, 176; J. Szendrei, A magyar középkor hangjegyes forrásai, Budapest, 1981, C 21; E. Muckenhaupt, A csíksomlyói ferences könyvtár kincsei, Budapest/Cluj, 2000, nr. I.3, p. 96, fig. 64-65. BH ignores the present location of the manuscript. The book was bound in 1525 by friar ‘Matheus de Zathmar’ (fol. 181v). The medieval manuscripts now at the Museum of Miercurea Ciuc belonged to the Franciscan convent of Şumuleu Ciuc.

14. Radó, 123; Szendrei, C41; Muckenhaupt, 97, nr. I.4. BH ignores the present location of the manuscript.

15. ‘Medici cristianni per manus’ in reverse order.

16. G. A. Schuller, ‘Die älteren Handschriftenbände des Baron-Brukenthalischen-Museums’, Mitteilungen aus dem Baron-Brukenthalischen-Museum 4 (1934), 20-21, nr. 12. Manuscripts from Sibiu described by A. C. Dincă in Papahagi-Dincă, Manuscrisele medievale occidentale din România: Census. The date 1418 (‘Anno Millmo ccccmo 18mo’) appears on fol. 232r.

17. H. Finály, ‘A Beszterczei Szószedet. Latin-magyar nyelvemlék z XV. századból’ (1892), Értekezések a Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, Nyelv- és Széptudományi osztálya köréből XVI.1, Budapest, 1897, with full facsimile; C. Csapodi, A ‘Magyar Codexek’ Elnevezésű Gyűjtemény (K 31 – K 114) (A Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtára Kézirattárának Katalógusai/ Catalogi Collectionis Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 5), Budapest, 1973, 7-8. The manuscript was in Bistrița until 1895.

18. G. A. Schuller, ‘Die älteren Handschriftenbände des Baron-Brukenthalischen-Museums’, Mitteilungen aus dem Baron-Brukenthalischen-Museum 5 (1935), 47-49, nr. 29.

19. L. Fejérpataki, ‘A német-újvári sz. ferenczrendi zárda könyvtára’, Magyar Könyvszemle 8 (1883), 110-11; M. Mairold, Die datierten Handschriften in der Steiermark außerhalb der Universitätsbibliothek Graz bis zum Jahre 1600 (Katalog der datierten Handschriften in lateinischer Schrift in Österreich 7), Vienna, 1988, 101, nr. 158 and fig. 199. The date ‘1444’ quoted by Fejérpataki and BH is mistaken.

20. R. Szentiványi, Catalogus concinnus librorum manuscriptorum bibliothecae Batthyányanae, 4th edn., Szeged, 1958, nr. 379; J. Sopko, Codices latini medii aevi qui olim in bibliothecis Slovaciae asservabantur et nunc in Hungaria et Romania asservantur-Stredoveké latinské kódexy slovenskej proveniencie v Mad’arsku a v Rumunsku, Matica Slovenská, 1982, nr. 409. In the eighteenth century, the book belonged to Johannes Reych from Levoča, in Slovakia. Dietl, 242, suggests that the scribe may be identical with the painter of a fresco in the church of Sibiu.

21. L. Mezey, Codices latini medii aevi Bibliothecae Universitatis Budapestinensis, Budapest, 1973, nr. 71 and fig. 35. Mezey believes that MS 25, bearing the annotation ‘1474 Varadiensis’ (fol. 47r) was copied by the same scribe (nr. 25 and fig. 34). The hands of the two manuscripts are indeed very similar; if they are both Matheus’ production, this proves that the scribe was active in Oradea in 1474-1475, rather than somewhere else in Hungary.

22. Szentiványi, nr. 352; Sopko, vol. II, nr. 407; Dietl, 258. The manuscript was made for use in Hungary. An inscription on fol. 1r (‘Iste liber est testamentalis (1)486 ecclesie Omnium sanctorum in Budamer’) shows that the manuscript was in Budimir, Slovakia in the decades following its production. Budimir is not far from the town of Levoča, whose library was bought by Ignatius Batthyány – this is how the manuscript ended up in Transylvania. Nothing supports C. Dima-Drăgan’s statement that ‘le fermier des salines transylvaines, Nicolas de Turda, possédait une riche bibliothèque’ (‘Bibliothèques roumaines anciennes (XIIeXVIIIe siècles)’, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 53 (1978), 352).

23. A. Fingernagel, K. Hranitzky, V. Pirker-Aurenhammer, M. Roland, F. Simader, Mitteleuropäische Schulen II (ca. 1350-1410): Österreich, Deutschland, Schweiz (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.hist. Klasse, Denkschriften 305 = Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Schrift- und Buchwesen des Mittelalters I, 11), Vienna, 2002, nr. 156, plate XLII.

24. F. W. Seraphin, ‘Eine Kronstädter Handschrift des Jacobus de Voragine’, Programm des evangelischen Gymnasiums A. B. zu Kronstadt 1901, 3-14 and MS facsimile (fig. 7); Dietl, 223 (entry by B. J. Nemes). BH ignores the current location and shelfmark of the manuscript fragment.

25. F. Unterkircher, Die datierten Handschriften der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek von 1451 bis 1500 (Katalog der datierten Handschriften in lateinischer Schrift in Österreich 3), Vienna, 1974, 21 and fig. 14.

26. The erasure seems to have contained the same name in the Accusative.

27. BH did not consult the manuscript, and thus ignored its date (1466). I would like to thank Mag. Bernadette Kalteis from the Stiftsbibliothek Melk, who was kind enough to send me a picture of the manuscript.

28. J. Sopko, Codices Latini medii aevi bibliothecarum Slovaciae-Stredoveké latinské kódexy v slovenských knižniciach, Matica Slovenská, 1981, nr. 170.

29. The manuscript came to France from Naples, through the victories of Charles VIII (1470-98), or purchased by the Cardinal d’Amboise (1460-1510). See L. Delisle, Le Cabinet des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Impériale, Paris, vol. I, 1868, 238-240; T. de Marinis, La biblioteca napoletana dei Re d’Aragona. Supplemento, Verona, 1969, vol. I, 121 and vol. II, plate 101; G. Toscano, Les Rois bibliophiles. Enlumineurs à la cour d’Aragon à Naples (1442-1495): les manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris, diss. Paris IV-Sorbonne, 1992, vol. II, 508.

30. C. Csapodi, Catalogus collectionis codicum latinorum et graecorum K 393-K 500 (Catalogi collectionis manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 16), Budapest, 1985, 125-26; Szendrei, C 131.

31. K. Reinerth, Missale Cibiniense: Gestalt, Ursprung und Entwicklung des Meßritus der siebebürgisch-sächsischen Kirche im Mittelalter, Cologne-Vienna, 1972, 10 (and illustration of fol. 12r on frontispiece); Dietl, 193-194 (entry by L. Gross, R. Windisch). Both references date the manuscript mistakenly to 1390; Reinerth does not quote a shelfmark, and Dietl considers the manuscript lost. The current shelfmark was identified by A. C. Dincă.

32. BH ignores the present location of the manuscript. It attributes two other books to this scribe: ‘Summa Pisana’ (BH 3362) and ‘Tractatus canonistici’ (BH 3377). While the latter cannot be identified, the former seems to point at Sibiu, Brukenthal Library, MS 649, containing Bartholomew of Pisa’s Summa de casibus conscientiae and other canon law texts. However, this manuscript bears no identification of the scribe in the colophon on fol. 169v.

33. BH ignores the manuscript’s shelfmark, and also lists it under 2045a, with conflicting indications about scribe, date and number of folios.

34. Dietl, 233 (entry by L. Gross, R. Windisch, C. Dietl).

35. Cf. A. C. Dincă’s entry in Papahagi-Dincă, Manuscrisele medievale occidentale din România: Census.

36. A. Hübl, Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum qui in Bibliotheca Monasterii B.M.V. ad Scotos Vindobonae servantur, Vienna-Leipzig, 1899, nr. 225; F. Unterkircher, H. Horninger, F. Lackner, Die datierten Handschriften in Wien außerhalb der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek bis zum Jahre 1600 (Katalog der datierten Handschriften in lateinischer Schrift in Österreich 5), Vienna, 1981, nr. 286.

37. Mezey argues that Matheus from Stara copied two books at the University Library, Budapest, but the scribe identified himself only in one manuscript, so that this must remain a conjecture. Cf. supra, note 21.

38. Földesi is thus wrong to label the script ‘Humanistic book script with Gothic features’ (146); Csapodi-Gárdonyi’s ‘gothico-antiqua’ is more adequate (Die Bibliothek des Johannes Vitéz, 140).

39. Papahagi, ‘Lost Libraries and Surviving Manuscripts…’, 47-49.

40. A. Dincă, ‘Formen und Funktionen der Schriftlichkeit im spätmittelalterlichen Hermannstadt. Zum Schriftgebrauch in einer vormodernen Rechtsgemeinschaft’, Jahrbuch des Bundesinstituts für Kultur und Geschichte der Deutschen im Östlichen Europa 19 (2011), 294.

41. Schuller, 20-21, nr. 12.

42. Papahagi, ‘Lost Libraries and Surviving Manuscripts…’, 39-41.

43. Csapodi-Gárdonyi believes Briccius from Polanka to be Hungarian, and affirms that places called Polanka exist ‘in various counties of Hungary’ (Die Bibliothek des Johannes Vitéz, 141). Yet, this Turkish name meaning ‘city’ is also attested in Poland, near Cracow, in several parts of Serbia, and even in Moldavia (Co. Bacău); thus, Briccius could come from any of these areas. The Briccius custos, attested one decade later in Oradea (Földesi, 146), may be the same person or not.

44. Csapodi, Catalogus, 125.

45. The three boroughs of medieval Braşov were Bartholomä, Martinsberg (Vetus Civitas-Altstadt), and Corona (Innenstadt), cf. Dietl, 218.

46. Bénédictins du Bouveret, Colophons de manuscrits occidentaux des origines au XVIe siècle, Fribourg, 6 vols., 1965-1982; L. Reynhout, Formules latines de colophons (Bibliologia 25), Turnhout, 2006. See also Scribi e colofoni. Le sottoscrizioni di copisti dalle origini all’avvento della stampa. Atti del seminario di Erice — X Colloquio del Comité international de paléographie latine (23-28 ottobre 1993), ed. E. Condello, G. de Gregorio, Spoleto, 1995.

47. Cf. B. Bischoff, ‘Übersicht über die nichtdiplomatischen Geheimschriften des Mittelalters’, Mittelalterliche Studien. Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur Schriftkunde und Literaturgeschichte, vol. III, Stuttgart, 1981, pp. 120-48. We are dealing here with Bischoff’s type 11.a, p. 124 (‘Ersetzung der Vokale durch den folgenden Konsonanten […]. Wurde dem karolingischen (hrabanischen?) Traktat «De inventione linguarum» zufolge von Bonifatius gelehrt […]. Anwendung äußerst häufig, besonders in Glossen, auch althochdeutschen…’).

48. Dietl, 194.

49. Reynhout, vol. I, 97.

50. ibid., 116.

51. ibid., 166.

52. ibid., 151.

53. ibid., 144.