Pages from the Past

Medieval Writing Skills and Manuscript Books

M.B. Parkes, edited by P.R. Robinson

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351219600
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: European Medieval History
• Index: History

In the present collection of articles by Malcolm Parkes two overarching concerns emerge: the palaeography of manuscript books in relation to what Parkes has previously called the 'grammar of legibility'; and the importance of considering the circumstances in which medieval books were produced, copied and read. The individual studies discuss the handwriting of individual scribes, and the evidence script can provide of the circumstances of a book's production, the effect of punctuation and layout of text on the reader's interpretation of a work, and the provision and production of books for communities of readers, both clerical and academic. From a discussion of the scribe of the Hereford Mappa Mundi to a comprehensive study of book provision in the medieval University of Oxford, a wealth of information is conveyed in these articles, now conveniently accessible in one volume, about books and their histories by one of the most knowledgeable of manuscript scholars today.

PART 1

SCRIBES AND SCRIPTS

I


THE HEREFORD MAP

THE HANDWRITING AND COPYING OF THE TEXT

The following report on the handwriting on the map and the copying of the text was presented to the Conference on the Hereford map in June 1999. It is based on an examination of the map when it was taken out of its case the previous January as described by Christopher Clarkson.¹

THE SCRIBE

A single scribe copied the text of the entries within the map, those within the ruling of the circumference, and the inscriptions within the pentagonal frame (including those on the scrolls alongside the Virgin and the two angels above the map). He was also responsible for what have been regarded as additions, as described in detail below.

This scribe also copied texts, apparently on different occasions, on independent quires which were subsequently incorporated in Bodl, MS. Ashmole 399. This is a collection of medical texts and illustrations as well as other scientific texts, assembled from booklets, quires, and bifolia produced by different scribes and artists during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.² The scribe of the map copied five items. In one gathering (fols 13–17) he copied: (a) text from Muscio’s version of the Gynaecia to accompany illustrations representing different presentations of the foetus in the womb at birth (fols 14^r–15^r col. b); (b) a treatise on chiromancy (fols 16^v–17^r); and probably (c) the kalendarial table on fol.17^v. In a quire (fols 18–24) of different parchment and dimensions (subsequently cropped) he copied, in larger handwriting, (d) the commentary on fols 18^v (fig. 1), 19^v, 20^v, and 21^v to accompany full-page illustrations demonstrating aspects of human anatomy (‘Fünfbilderserie’) on the opposite recto pages.³ In another quire on different parchment again (fols 25–32) he copied in blue ink (e) tables of cycles of the moon, dominical letters, and Easter Days for the years 1001–29, 1118, and 1200, followed by a series for the years 1292–1531 (fols 25^v–29^v). Subsequently, in the early fourteenth century, three other scribes added different texts on these quires: either in columns which the original scribe had left blank (fols 15^r col. b-16^r), or in the margins and around the illustrations (fols 18–24).

The handwriting of this scribe is characterized by a distinctive personal ductus manifest particularly in the steep pen-angle of approximately 50 degrees, and the nature of the somewhat awkward rhythms with which he combined the different movements of the pen. The consequences of these rhythms are reflected in the irregularities in the sizes of the letters as well as their location on the line of writing,⁴ and in the sloping strokes (from top left to bottom right) most prominent in the stems of f, r, and s. The handwriting is also characterized by a particular combination of certain details. These include the treatment of c with t and of t with t in collocation, where the stem of t as second letter is very tall;⁵ the st ligature, confined within a space which would accommodate a single letter, and rising to a shallow point above the letter t;⁶ the position of the final stroke in the abbreviation symbol for –rum, which rarely intersects the horizontal stroke of the ‘2’-shaped r;⁷ and the use of two symbols for the abbreviation of ur, depending on the amount of space available.⁸ Although there may be minor discrepancies in the shapes of the letters g and q and the shorthand symbol for et, these shapes have been formed in the same ways in all the examples of this scribe’s handwriting,⁹ and the variant letter forms which appear consistently in his work (notably the two forms of a) are well within the limits of the repertory of a single scribe at this date.¹⁰ Apparent discrepancies in the equilibrium (and hence the aspect), module, slope, and proportions of the handwriting on the map reflect the problems faced by the scribe: the need to change posture,¹¹ and to adapt his handwriting to the space available (see below).

Fig. 1. Bodl, MS. Ashmole 399, fol. 18^v.

For the document held by Augustus Caesar in the bottom left-hand corner of the map the scribe adopted a smaller module, and produced a set hand with extended ascenders, tall round-backed d, and elaborated versions of abbreviation marks, which are characteristic features of formal handwriting in contemporary documents.¹² At the beginnings of entries on the map the scribe occasionally employed penwork litterae notabiliores (more noticeable letters) which at this date are found more frequently in documents than in books.¹³

THE PRODUCTION OF THE MAP

When this scribe copied the table of the cycles of the moon, dominical letters, and Easter Days for 1292–1531 in MS. Ashmole 399, he added an extra point in the same blue ink after the year number for 1299.¹⁴ It was not uncommon for a scribe copying such a series to indicate in this way the Easter Day next following, and the extra point therefore signifies that he copied these tables some time in the latter part of 1298 or early in 1299.¹⁵ Although this date applies only to the production of this item, it gives strong support to the general impression of the date of the scribe’s handwriting in the rest of his surviving work. Comparison with other dated and datable manuscripts indicates that the basic ductus of the script (a version of textura), the nature of the variant letter shapes (in particular those of a), and especially the ratios of the frequency with which they appear, are appropriate to a presumed date within the parameters of c.1290–c.1300. The text of the map was, therefore, copied during this period, but, to judge from the increase in the ratio of the variant forms, probably later than the texts in the Ashmole manuscript.

The map was produced on a sheet of parchment trimmed from a single skin to the dimensions of approximately 1.58 × 1.33 m (5 ft 2 in. × 4 ft 4 in.). Although it was carefully prepared to produce a high-quality writing surface, the size of the sheet must have presented the scribe with unusual difficulties. The area of the surface on which he was writing would have had to have been at an angle of 45 degrees, to enable him to control the flow of ink from the pen. Different entries on the map have been written in both opposite horizontal and opposite vertical directions, and the accounts of the winds within the circumference of the map had to follow the direction of the ruling. The scribe, therefore, would have had to reposition this unusually large sheet at different angles, as well as change his own position, to allow him access to the map from each of the five sides, and to adjust his posture in order to write in these different directions. Since he was copying a difficult text which required close attention to the exemplar (see below), he would have had to reposition that too. The exemplar would have had to be in a convenient format: perhaps a roll or, given the predominance of short entries, more probably schedulae (small sheets of parchment tacked together at one corner). He may have had to prepare these himself from another exemplar.

The scribe copied the text of the map after the artist had completed the illustrations, and relied upon them to indicate where the different texts were to be inserted in this unusually complicated commission. (It is tempting to speculate that the now relaxed early fold, flesh to flesh along the spine of the animal, was made to protect the decorated surface when the unfinished map was conveyed from the artist to the scribe.) The scribe appears to have ruled only for four of the longer entries, without prickings to guide the ruling: Solinus on the eale, and on the rhinoceros, Isidore on the unicorn (monoceros), and the entry beginning ‘hic congregatus’ referring to the assembly point for the people of Israel on their departure from Egypt. The number of lines ruled for this last entry is greater than the number required, whereas those ruled for the other three are less than the appropriate number. I suspect that the ruling for these entries was intended only to assist the scribe to position and align these long entries in the space available, since the descenders of letters were accommodated within the ruling, and do not descend below the ruled line. There is no trace of ruling for the long entry on Babylon.¹⁶ Instead the scribe adjusted the horizontal levels of the lines of writing in relation to horizontal lines in the surrounding drawings – most obviously in the last line of the entry. Elsewhere the position and alignment were, for the most part, determined by the spaces left by the artist.

THE WORK OF COPYING

When copying a text a scribe had to divide his attention between reading the exemplar and reproducing the text on the sheet before him...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Abbreviations and Conventions
• Part 1: Scribes and Scripts
• Part 2: Punctuation
• Part 3: Readers
• Part 4: Book Provision
• Index of Manuscripts
• General Index