Bern, Burgerbibliothek, 425

Collectio Dacheriana, preface

Collectio Dacheriana, Book 1, register

Collectio Dacheriana, Book 1

Collectio Dacheriana, Book 2, register

Collectio Dacheriana, Book 2

Collectio Dacheriana, Book 3, register

Collectio Dacheriana, Book 3

Caesarius, Expositio in apocalypsim (excerpt from ch. 13)

Ordo iudicii

saec. IX 2/2, Rheims (source: Kéry, Canonical Collections, p. 88)

Proofread status: 
This transcription has not been proofread yet.
Year transcribed: 
2011
Transcription information: 
Michael D. Elliot
1) raised punctus transcribed as \':\' 2) abbreviation for \'prae\' is transcribed as such, except in words like \'presbiter\', \'deprehensus\', etc. 2) abbreviation for \'epistola\' has been expanded with an \'o\' (not a \'u\'); the scribe seems not to have had a preference for \'o\' as opposed to \'u\' in this word.
Catalogue description: 
1) O. Homburger, Die illustrierten Handschriften der Burgerbibliothek Bern. Die vorkarolingischen und karolingischen Handschriften (Bern, 1962), 124–25. 2) B. Bischoff, Katalog der festländischen Handschriften des neunten Jahrhunderts mit Ausnahme der wisigotischen, 2 vols (Wiesbaden, 1998–2004), I, no. 593.
Transcribed from: 
Images (digital or microfilm)
Quality of Images: 
Good
Transcriber information: 
Not a published editor of medieval text, but experienced in manuscript research.
Best description: 
1) F. M., Carey, \'The scriptorium of Reims during the archbishopric of Hincmar\', in Classical and medieval studies in honor of E. K. Rand, ed. L. W. Jones (New York, 1938), 41-60, at 58. 2) G. Haenni, \'Note sur la Dacheriana\', Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Kirchengeschichte 50 (1956), 277-81.
Image available: 
Homburger, Die illustrierten Handschriften, plate 104
Description Updates: 
The tenth-century additions on fols 1r, 45v and 70v are blessings for the ordeals of hot water and bread and cheese; see Formulae Merowingici et Karolini aevi. Ordines iudiciorum Dei, ed. K. Zeumer, MGH, Leg. 5, Formulae (Hanover, 1886), p. 688 (a), and pp. 690-91 (b–f).
Scribal practices: 
1) \'e\' often written with a short upward, right-leaning stroke (about 60 degress) leaving the top of the lobe 2) Dotted \'y\'s. 3) At least instance of \'open-a\' (\'subiacebunt\', fol. 21r). 4) Punctuation limited to the punctus, used sparingly. Occasionally at the end of a period the punctus is placed above the line (at the headline) and is followed by a majuscule or enlarged minuscule character; in my transcription I have rendered the raised punctus as \':\'. Use of the raised punctus is thus distinguished from the regular (baseline) punctus, which is usually used at clause-end, for lists, etc., and is rarely followed by a majuscule. Interestingly, the raised punctus is used almost exclusively in the Dacheriana prologue; elsehwere in the text the scribe predominantly used the baseline punctus (with or without a following majuscule). Special care was thus taken in punctuating the Dacheriana’s prologue, perhaos because of the prologue’s more difficult Augustinian prose. Canons towards the end of Book 3, especially c. 125, also receive more elaborate punctuation and capitalization. This is particularly interesting in the case of III.125 (one of the longer can! ons in the Dacheriana) as it deals with theological/doctrinal matters, as in the preface. 5) Occasional use of \'&\' ligature between words, as in \'qua&ua\' for \'quae tua\', \'d&alibus\' for \'de talibus\', and \'quid&uae\' (with macron over \'&\') for \'quidem tuae\'. 6) Preference for \'in\' + acc. constructions where one would expect \'in\' + abl.; e.g. \'in finem accipiant communionem\' and \'commemoratio in oblationem\'.. 7) Orthograhical remarks: \'ae\' diphthong preferred to \'e\', \'ę\', and \'æ\'; \'paenitentia\' beside \'poenitentia\'; \'exanime\' often for \'examine\'; \'husurus\' once for \'usurus\'; \'hostiarius\' beside \'ostiarius\'; \'karissimi\' and \'kalendas\' with \'k\'; \'epistola\' beside \'epistula\'; \'u\' for \'b\' in some instances, e.g. \'exaceruationem\', \'acerua\', \'deuitam\', \'prouitatem\', \'inprouitas\', and \'heliuerritano\'; \'subma\' once for \'summa\' and \'obtime\' twice for \'optime\'; words compounded on prefixes retain the full form of the prefix, e.g. \'inp-\', \'inm-\', \'inr-\', \'ads-\', \'adt-\', and \'conp-\'; \'ci\' occasionally for \'ti\', e.g. in \'porcio\', \'negocia\', \'pasciones\', \'quociens\', \'hospicium\', and \'pacientibus\'; \'spalense\'/\'spaniam\' for \'hispalense\'/\'hispaniam\'; unusual uses of \'e\' \'for \'i\' (\'defenitione\', \'plenitudenem\') usually corrected by a contemporary hand; \'quoessentialem et consubstantialem et qu! oaeternalem et quomnipotentem\', but \'colibet\' for \'quolibet\'; \'psalmysta\'; \'ecclesia\' beside \'eclesia\'; \'presbiter\' beside (occasionally) \'presbyter\'; \'eocaristia\' (once); \'synodus\' preferred to \'sinodus, \'mysterium\' to \'misteria\', \'Syricii\' to \'Siricii\' (but cf. \'mistica\'); \'propheta\', \'paranimphis\', \'blasphemiae\', but \'gazofilatio\' and \'filacteria\'; \'cimiterium\', never \'cemeterium\'; \'caticuminus\', never \'catechumenus\'; \'ch\' in words like \'inchoare\', \'archangelus\', \'monachus\', \'parrochia\', \'moechor\', \'pascha\', \'sepulchra\', \'eucharistia\', \'ptochium\', and (once) \'clerichorum\'.
Change of hands: 
1) Bischoff noticed the presence of several hands; the Dacheriana, however, has been copied by a single scribe. 2) Corrections usually made by erasure and overwriting. A contemporary hand makes small corrections, like changing \'e\' to \'i\' (see orthographical discussion, above). 3) Main scribe occasionally adds material he skipped at the bottom of the page and keys it to the appropriate place in the text via a signe de renvoi (e.g. fols 20v and 42v, where the sign used in an arabic ‘2’; fols 29r, 41v and 45r, where the sign used is a ‘z’). 4) expunctuation with dots *above* the offending character (e.g. fol. 53v, last line; fol. 55r, line 16).