Classical Canon Law‎ > ‎Gratian‎ > ‎

Σ-group (S-group)

A Discussion and List of Manuscripts Belonging to the ∑-group (S-group)

by John C. Wei

(The following information on ∑-group is taken from my article, "Gratian's Decretum in France and Halberstadt," which will be published in a conference volume on the legal manuscripts from the cathedral library of Halberstadt.)


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.


The first scholar to notice the existence of the -group was Emil Friedberg, the editor of the outdated though still standard edition of Gratian’s Decretum.[1] For his edition, Friedberg drew upon eight manuscripts which he happened to have access to in German libraries. (In the following list, the first siglum provided is the standard one employed in the modern literature; the second siglum, given in parentheses, is the siglum used by Friedberg.)[2]

1.     Ka (A) = Cologne, Dombibliothek, 127

2.     Kb (B) = Cologne, Dombibliothek, 128

3.     Mm (C) = Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 17161

4.     Mc (D) = Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4505

5.     Md (E) = Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10244

6.     Ld (F) = Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, Haenel 17

7.     Wo (G) = Wolfenbüttel, Landesbibliothek, Helmstedt 33

8.     [–] (H) = Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, lat. fol. 1

Based on his collation of these witnesses, Friedberg was able to divide his manuscripts into three families: (1) Ka, Kb, and Mm; (2) Mc and Ld; and (3) Md, Wo, and H. He noted that the manuscripts belonging to the first family (Ka, Kb, Mm) were the oldest and generally contained readings closest to what Gratian originally wrote, whereas manuscripts belonging to the second family (Mc, Ld) were more recent and contained readings closer to what ended up becoming the vulgate version of the Decretum. Manuscripts belonging to the third family were peculiar because, though relatively old, they contained many readings and interpolations found neither in other manuscripts of the Decretum nor in other canonical collections or the material sources, though they at times agreed with manuscripts of the first and best family (Ka, Kb, Mm) against manuscripts of the second family.[3]

Friedberg’s third family of manuscripts is identical to what Titus Lenherr dubbed the Σ-group[4] and Regula Gujer renamed the S-group.[5] It is of particular interest because it seems to have been the result of deliberate redactional activity and because many copies of it survive. In her research on D.16 of the Decretum, Gujer shows that some of the variants typical of the -group, such as erroneous numbers, misspellings, etc. are already present in Italian manuscripts containing earlier stages of the Decretum’s textual tradition, e.g. Bi = Biberach, Spitalsarchiv, B 3515 and Sb = Salzburg, Stiftsbibliothek St. Peter, a.XI.9.[6] The -group seems to have emerged when a redactor modified a manuscript belonging to this earlier stage by inserting short explanatory words and phrases as well as grammatical alterations (particularly the addition of prepositions). This redactor also seems to have occasionally corrected isolated readings against the material source or possible formal sources.

Based on their text of D.16,[7] the following manuscripts can be assigned to the -group.[8] I list first the manuscripts containing pre-Teutonicus gloss compositions, for which standard sigla largely exist, then the manuscripts without standard sigla, which are generally later.[9] An asterisk [*] signals that no standard siglum for a manuscript exists.

1.     Bk = Bernkastel-Kues, Hospital, 223[10]

The manuscript dates to the early thirteenth century. Its first gloss layer contains the second recension of the gloss apparatus Ordinaturus Magister; its second gloss layer contains a mixture of the Summa ‚Animal est substantia‘ (formerly the Summa Bambergensis) and the Glossa Cusana.

2.     Cd = Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Law School, 64[11]

The codex dates to the late twelfth century (according to Stephan Kuttner, more precisely to 1180) and may be from Reading Abbey.[12] Seymour de Ricci says that it is English in origin, whereas Kuttner and Rudolf Weigand both claim that it is Italian. The manuscript’s first gloss layer, which dates to the early thirteenth century, contains glosses that appear in a wide variety of manuscripts and does not correspond to any single gloss composition or apparatus. This manuscript was one of the three -group manuscripts used by Gujer in her study of D.16.

3.     Ck = Cambrai, Bibliothèque Municipale, 967[13]

Based on the initials and illumination, the codex has been dated to the period 1170–1190. It is of northern French origin, according to Carl Nordenfalk and Patricia Stirnemann the product of a Parisian lay workshop.[14] Its initials and illumination are closely related to those found in the -group manuscripts Di, Tz, and Friedberg’s H. According to Weigand, the glosses in the codex probably represent a preparatory stage for the first gloss composition rather than an abbreviation of it.

4.     Di = Douai, Bibliothèque Municipale, 590 (528)[15]

The codex comes from the abbey of Anchin. Based on the initials and illumination, it has been dated to the period 1170–1190. It is of northern French origin, according to Nordenfalk and Stirnemann the product of a Parisian lay workshop.[16] Its initials and illumination are closely related to those found in the -group manuscripts Ck, Tz, and Friedberg’s H. The codex contains the fifth gloss composition as its principal gloss layer. Fols. 1r–2v and 247r–248v contain the Collectio Duacensis. This fragmentary decretal collection is closely related to the Collectio Florianensis, which is found as an appendix to the -group manuscript Sf. Most of the decretals common to Di and Sf appear in the exact same order.[17]

5.     Es = Einsiedeln, Stiftsbibliothek, 193 (66)[18]

The codex dates to the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century and may have been copied in the Einsiedeln scriptorium. It entered the Stiftsbibliothek by the early fourteenth century at the latest. It contains several gloss layers, only the first of which Weigand dates to the twelfth century.

6.     In = Innsbruck, Universitätsbibliothek, 90[19]

The codex was probably written in France rather than southern Germany, as has often been assumed.[20] According to Weigand, it dates to around 1180. Its first main gloss layer contains the fifth gloss composition. Fols. 273r–277r contain an appendix to the Decretum (called the Collectio Oenipontana by Kuttner) with much pre-Gratian material, particularly excerpts from Burchard’s Decretum.[21] In is one of the three -group manuscripts studied by Gujer.

7.     La = London, British Library, Arundel 490[22]

The codex dates to the last quarter of the twelfth century. It bears a thirteenth-century ex-libris from the Cistercian abbey of Eberbach in Austria, but is of northern French origin—probably Sens rather than Paris, as has sometimes been argued.[23] The codex was probably imported to Eberbach from Clairvaux, its mother house.[24] The principal gloss layer contains a French gloss composition also found in the -group manuscripts Sf and Tz. Fols. 210r–221r contain the Collectio Eberbacensis.[25]

8.     Lp = Malibu, J. Paul Getty Museum, Ludwig XIV.2[26]

Based on the illumination, the codex has been dated to the period 1170–1180. It is of northern French origin—according to Stirnemann, probably Sens rather than Paris as has sometimes been argued.[27] The codex contains the fifth gloss composition as its principal gloss layer. This gloss layer also contains many Cardinalis glosses.

9.     Md = Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 10244[28] (Friedberg’s E)

The codex dates to the thirteenth century, according to Elisabeth Remak-Hoffe and Hermann Hauke to the middle of this period, although Weigand believed it was probably produced more towards the beginning of this period. Modern scholars have suggested that the codex is of Italian origin, but it is more likely French. The hand responsible for the main text displays some Italian features, but also many non-Italian ones. The closing shaft of the d’s, for instance, is not horizontal, as one would expect from an Italian manuscript dating to the mid-thirteenth century, and the scribe deliberately avoids triple fusions, which became mandatory in Italian Gothic script from around the mid-thirteenth century onwards.[29] In addition, the positioning of the rubrics is also in the French style. The first and only gloss layer contains the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister.

10.  Mi = Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 27337[30]

The codex dates to the end of the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century. Although traditionally said to be of Italian origin, it is French. The positioning of the rubrics in the manuscript is French, as is the use of dark rather than light blue in the ornamentation. In addition, the Glossa ordinaria, added to Mi in the fourteenth century, is French and employs the French style for connecting gloss and text.[31] The main gloss layer contains a combination of the first and second recensions of Ordinaturus Magister.

11.  Oe = Oxford, Bodleian Library, Lyell 41[32]

The codex is French and dates to the early thirteenth century. In the late thirteenth century it belonged to a canon of Lisieux named Master Guillelmus de Gisorcio. Sometime thereafter it changed hands, since in 1406 the Parisian bookseller Denisot Cortillier sold the manuscript to Beraudus de Leuthonio, a canon of St.-Julien de Brioude.[33] The first gloss layer of the codex contains the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister. However, much of it was later erased to make way for the Glossa ordinaria.

12.  Pn = Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, lat. 14316[34]

The codex dates to the last quarter of the twelfth century. According to François Avril and Patricia Stirnemann, it is of insular origin, whereas according to François Gasparri it was copied in the scriptorium of the Parisian abbey of St. Victor.[35] On fol. 1v is found an ex-libris from St. Victor dating to the first quarter of the thirteenth century. The codex used to contain two different pre-Glossa ordinaria gloss layers, the first of which probably used to contain the first gloss composition or an abbreviation of it. Fols. 286rb–288ra contain an appendix to the Decretum largely identical to the one found in Hk = Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibliothek, 44 and somewhat related to the two appendices to the Decretum found in Po = Pommersfelden, Bibliothek des Grafen Schönborn, 142.[36] Neither Hk nor Po belong to the -group.

13.  Sa = Salzburg, Stiftsbliothek St. Peter, a. XII.9[37]

The codex dates to the late twelfth century. According to Titus Lenherr, it is of south German provenance.[38] Its first main gloss layer, which dates to the early thirteenth century, contains the seventh gloss composition. It is one of the three manuscripts belonging to the -group studied by Gujer.

14.  Sf = St. Florian, Stiftsbibliothek, III 5[39]

The codex dates to the late twelfth century and, though once thought to be of Italian origin, is in fact northern French.[40] In the early thirteenth century it was known to and used by Altmann of St. Florian, who probably taught at Passau or St. Florian in the early thirteenth century.[41] The main gloss layer of Sf contains a French gloss composition also found in the -group manuscripts La and Tz. Written in a different hand on fols. 173r–183r is the Collectio Florianensis, the oldest member of the (probably erroneously named) Italian primitive family of decretal collections. The Collectio Florianensis is closely related to the Collectio Duacensis found in the -group manuscript Di.[42]

15.  Tz = Troyes, Bibliothèque Municipale, 103[43]

The codex dates to the period 1170–1190 and is from northern France. According to Nordenfalk and Stirnemann, it was produced in a Parisian lay workshop.[44] Confirming its northern French origin is the presence of three decretal letters of Alexander III to northern French clergy.[45] The codex was already in the possession of the Cistercian abbey of Clairvaux by the end of the twelfth century.[46] Its initials and illumination are closely related to the -group manuscripts Ck, Di, and Friedberg’s H. Tz contains two gloss layers. The glosses in the second layer belong to a French gloss composition also found in the -group manuscripts La and Sf. Fols. 2r and 265v–266r contain an appendix to the Decretum, several of whose items are also found in the appendix to the Decretum in the -group manuscript In.[47]

16.  Vd = Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. lat. 3529[48]

The codex dates to the end of the twelfth century and, according to Susan L’Engle, is of French origin. Its first gloss layer contains glosses from the first gloss composition.

17.  Wo = Wolfenbüttel, Landesbibliothek, Helmstedt 33[49] (Friedberg’s G)

The layout, colors used, and ornamentation make it clear that the codex was written in France. The text of the Decretum dates to the end of the twelfth century. The two main gloss layers stem principally from two hands, the earlier one belonging to the Umfeld of Ordinaturus Magister, the later one containing the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister. In the judgment of the newest catalog, both of these gloss layers were entered before 1210.

18.  * Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz, lat. fol. 1 (Friedberg’s H)[50]

Based on the initials and illumination, the codex has been dated to the period 1170–1190. It is of northern French origin, according to Nordenfalk and Stirnemann the product of a Parisian lay workshop.[51] Its initials and illumination are closely related to those found in the -group anuscripts Ck, Di, and Tz. The main gloss layer, which was added sometime in the thirteenth century, contains the Glossa ordinaria in the version revised by Bartholomew of Brescia.

19.  * Halle, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek, Ye 2° 51[52]

Contrary to the opinion of Schipke and Heydeck, the codex was written in France, not Italy. The text of the Decretum may date to the first half of the thirteenth century. The margins contain the version of the Glossa ordinaria revised by Bartholomew of Brescia. The gloss was entered considerably later than the text of the Decretum by a different, French hand in the late thirteenth century.

20.  * Liège, Bibliothèque de l’Université, 127 E (cat. 499)[53]

The codex, which is missing a number of gatherings, comes from one of the libraries of the order of Croisiers (Liège or Huy) and dates to the thirteenth century. The main gloss layer contains the decretist summa ‚Animal est substantia‘ in a hand probably only slightly later than that of the text of the Decretum.

21.  * Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 12690[54]

The codex is written in a German book cursive of the fifteenth century. Two hands can be discerned in the manuscript. It came to the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek from the regular canons of Ranshofen, but belonged before that to the monastery of Schamhaupten. It is unglossed.

22.  * Seo de Urgel, Biblioteca de la Catedral, 2009 (formerly No. 113, Aranzel fol. 76r–v, Costa p. 301)[55]

The text of the Decretum probably dates to the early thirteenth century. The margin contains the gloss of Alanus Anglicus for Pars prima and the causae and a different gloss apparatus for the De consecratione. The gloss hand, which according to the catalogue is seguramente italiana, is different from but contemporary with the hand responsible for the main text. The initials are in alternating red and blue and the rubrics are in red. There is space for miniatures, which have not been executed. The manuscript may have been copied in Italy.

23.  * Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. lat. 977[56]

The codex dates to the first half of the thirteenth century and, according to Susan L’Engle, is French in origin. The gloss layer contains the Glossa Palatina. 

Centers of Production

Production of -group manuscripts seems to have occurred mainly in northern France, more specifically at Paris and Sens. As the main center for the study of canon law in northern France, Paris was also the center of a thriving book trade.[57] Art historians and paleographers have been able to identify numerous manuscripts produced in Parisian scriptoria and workshops, including the -group manuscripts Ck, Di, Pn, Tz, and Friedberg’s H. Ck, Di, Tz, and Friedberg’s H employ a Parisian form of the so-called „channel style“ and are closely related stylistically. They date to the period 1170–1190 and were probably produced in the same Parisian lay workshop.[58] Pn, on the other hand, may have been copied in the scriptorium of the Parisian abbey of St. Victor, although Avril and Stirnemann judge it to be of insular origin. From the ex-libris, it is clear that Pn was at St. Victor by the first quarter of the thirteenth century at the latest.[59]

Sens was the main residence of Pope Alexander III (1159–1181) during the years 1164–1165 and of Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterbury (1162–1170) during the period 1166–1170. The legal activities of these ecclesiastics—Alexander’s constant issuing of decretals and Becket’s litigation—would have greatly increased the need for canon law books, a need which Paris’s still nascent book market would not have been able to fulfill completely until the early thirteenth century. Patricia Stirnemann provides compelling arguments for attributing a whole host of late twelfth-century manuscripts to workshops active in Sens, among them the -group manuscripts La and Lp. These manuscripts are closely related to the Parisian -group manuscripts Ck, Di, Tz, and Friedberg’s H, but nevertheless contain stylistic features more consonant with having been produced in Sens.[60]

Other -group manuscripts cannot be securely attributed to either Paris or Sens, but might well have been produced in either city, since they share unique textual features with manuscripts that are known to have been produced in these cities. Aside from Di (Paris) and Lp (Sens), for instance, In (France) is the only manuscript to preserve the fifth gloss composition (which Weigand believed to be of French origin) in its principal gloss layer. Similarly, Sf (from northern France) is the only manuscript aside from La (Sens) and Tz (Paris) to preserve a French gloss composition deriving in part from the Frenchman Stephen of Tournai’s Summa (c. 1165–1166).[61] And the decretal collection preserved in Sf (the Collectio Florianensis, the oldest member of the probably misnamed Italian primitive family) contains many decretals in the exact same form and order as the Collectio Duacensis (another member of the so-called Italian primitive family) found in Di (Paris).[62]

Also of possible northern French origin are the -group manuscripts containing the gloss apparatus Ordinaturus Magister. First, most of these manuscripts are of definite French origin, and at least three contain clear evidence of classroom use, presumably by students in Paris or some other northern French center of canon law studies like Reims.[63] The French -group manuscripts Md, Mi, and Wo all contain early marginal glosses made in dry point or done with a pencil that were later erased. These glosses predate the extant gloss layers, which were written over them and which contain glosses belonging to what Weigand has termed the „Umfeld“ of Ordinaturus Magister as well as glosses belonging to the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister. The dry point/erased pencil glosses cannot be made out on microfilm but are visible to the naked eye. They appear to have consisted largely of allegations.[64] But in Wo at least there were also some longer glosses.[65]

Second, although generally considered a Bolognese work, the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister (as opposed to the first recension) may in fact be the product of a French canon law school, presumably Paris, but conceivably Reims or some other northern French center of canon law studies. While studying Ordinaturus Magister, Weigand drew attention to the fact that many manuscripts containing the first recension of this work include more or less the same set of paleae and that the number of paleae in these manuscripts greatly exceeds the number found in almost all other manuscripts of the Decretum, in particular manuscripts containing the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister.[66] This contrast Weigand interpreted not only as evidence for the great receptiveness to paleae in Bologna in the 1180s, when the first recension of Ordinaturus Magister was compiled and when presumably the exemplar of these paleae-rich manuscripts was produced, but also as evidence for the rise of a new „Paleae-feindliche Tendenz“ after the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister was revised around 1190, which led scribes and readers to eliminate paleae from their manuscripts. Weigand hypothesized that the acceptance of paleae in the 1180s was connected with Huguccio, who in contrast to other canonists commented extensively on paleae in his teaching.[67] Rejection of paleae he linked to Huguccio’s election to the see of Ferrara in 1190, but even more so to the compilation of Bernard of Pavia’s Breviarium extravagantium during this same period, which became received in the schools as Compilatio I. By including the most important paleae in his Breviarium, Weigand hypothesized, Bernard rendered their inclusion in manuscripts of the Decretum largely superfluous.

A closer examination of the manuscripts containing Ordinaturus Magister suggests an alternative explanation for the textual features noted by Weigand. For contrary to what he believed, the number of paleae in Bolognese manuscripts does not seem to have declined after 1190.[68] First, the Glossa ordinaria of Johannes Teutonicus, compiled around 1216, glosses few paleae, but almost all of the twenty-odd ones that it does comment on are not found in manuscripts containing only a low to moderate number. Instead, the paleae it mentions are found mainly in manuscripts containing the first recension of Ordinaturus Magister or those containing the same set of paleae as these manuscripts.[69] Second, many Bolognese/north Italian manuscripts dating to the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries also contain a large number of paleae. Several of the manuscripts on which Weigand based his argument, for instance, date to the thirteenth century.[70] And at least some late thirteenth-/early fourteenth-century manuscripts of the Decretum produced under the pecia system, presumably in Bologna, also have roughly the same extensive set of paleae as the manuscripts containing the first recension of Ordinaturus Magister.[71] Finally, the small number of paleae in manuscripts containing the second recension of Ordinaturus Magister—at least for the manuscripts singled out by Weigand (Bk, Md, Oe, and Wo, but also Mi, which contains a mixed recension of Ordinaturus Magister, and Li and Pr, which contain the first recension)—cannot be due to events that occurred in the 1190s. For with the possible exception of Li and Pr, which I have not been able to examine, all of these belong to the -group, which probably originated in the 1170s. No systematic elimination of paleae has occurred in these manuscripts, which simply contain the same general set as other -group manuscripts.

Instead, I would suggest, the differences noted by Weigand are regional. Canonists active outside of Bologna, including the French one(s) responsible for creating and disseminating the -group, never incorporated large amounts of paleae into their manuscripts of the Decretum. In contrast, Bolognese canonists in the 1180s made it a point to add large numbers of paleae. Manuscripts containing the first recension of Ordinaturus Magister frequently contain large numbers of paleae because the first recension was compiled in Bologna and added to many of the manuscripts produced there. Manuscripts containing the second recension, on the other hand, contain few paleae because this version was produced in northern France, possibly Paris, where the manuscripts of the Decretum to which it could be added contained few paleae.

In closing this section, two last indications of the northern French diffusion and possible northern French origin of the -group should be mentioned. First, two of the four manuscripts containing the highly romanistic Parisian gloss apparatus/summa Animal est substantia‘ belong to the -group (Bk, Liège 127 E).[72] In Bk the apparatus was added at a later time. In the Liège manuscript, the apparatus was also added at a later time, but probably not much later than the text of the Decretum.

Finally, Leena Löfstedt’s studies show that the Old French translation of Gratian’s Decretum contains many readings found in manuscripts of the -group.[73] The sole manuscript containing this translation dates to the end of the thirteenth century, and one of the scribes seems to have been Parisian. But Löfstedt argues that the translation itself was produced much earlier, in the period 1160–1180 in the French domains of King Henry II of England, possibly by Thomas Becket himself.[74] If her dating of the translation is correct, then the Old French text of the Decretum provides yet another argument in favor of the French (though not necessarily northern French) origin of the -group  If incorrect, then the translation simply testifies to the fact that manuscripts of the -group continued to be used around Paris into the late thirteenth century.


[1] Emil Friedberg (ed.): Corpus iuris canonici. Editio Lipsiensis secunda post Aemilii Ludovici Richteri, vol. 1: Decretum Magistri Gratiani, Leipzig 1879.

[2] Ibid., p. XCV–XCVIII describes the manuscripts used and their interrelationship.

[3] Ibid., p. XCVII–XCVIII: „contextum eorum vetustum esse, multa tamen peculiaria habere, quae neque in alio codice neque in canonum collectione, neque in fonte ullo inveniuntur; ideoque eam familiam ad textum Gratianeum constituendum nihil conferre posse: quod autem saepe cum ABC codicum lectionibus concineret, mirifice eo has lectiones commendari.“

[4] Titus Lenherr: Die Summarien zu den Texten des 2. Laterankonzils von 1139 in Gratians Dekret, in: Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 150 (1981), p. 528–551, at p. 543-544.

[5] Regula Gujer: Concordia discordantium codicum manuscriptorum? Die Textentwicklung von 18 Handschriften anhand der D.16 des Decretum Gratiani, Cologne 2004, p. 357–362.

[6] Ibid., p. 233–234, 331–333, and 357–362.

[7] Since I have not collated these manuscripts in their entirety and since at least some of them may derive from multiple exemplars, some sections of the manuscripts in the following list may not belong to the -group.

[8] Based on their close relationship to manuscripts that I have investigated, there is a good chance that the following manuscripts, which I have not been able to examine, belong to the-group as well: Da = Darmstadt, Hessische Landes- und Universitätsbibliothek, 907; Li = Lilienfeld, Stiftsbibliothek, 222; Ms = Milan, Biblioteca Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore/Archivio capitolare di Sant’Ambrogio, M. 57; Pr = Prague, Knihovna Metropolitní Kapituly, I.19. Based on their summaria, Lenherr, Die Summarien, p. 543 reckons the following manuscripts of the Bibliothèque nationale de France in Paris to the -group  Pc = lat. 3905 B; Ph = lat. 3886A; Pi = lat. 3887; and Pl = lat. 11712. I have not had the opportunity to check these manuscripts.

[9] See Rudolf Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret Gratians. Studien zu den frühen Glossen und Glossenkompositionen, in: Studia Gratiana 25–26, Rome 1991, p. XXI–XXIV for the list of sigla and p. 661–1004 for descriptions of the individual manuscripts.

[10] Description in Jakob Marx: Verzeichnis der Handschriften-Sammlung des Hospitals zu Cues bei Bernkastel a. Mosel, Trier 1905, p. 220; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 691–692.

[11] Description in Seymour de Ricci: Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States and Canada, 3 vols., New York 1935–1940, vol. 1, p. 1035; Stephan Kuttner: Manuscripts and Incunabula exhibited at the Inauguration of the Institute in May 1956, in: Traditio 12 (1956), p. 611–615, at p. 612; Rudolf Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret Gratians. Studien zu den frühen Glossen und Glossenkompositionen, in: Studia Gratiana 25–26, Rome 1991, p. 721–722; Gujer: Concordia discordantium codicum, p. 249–250; Carlos Larrainzar: El manuscrito Cd del Decreto de Graciano (= Cambridge Mass., Harvard Law School Library Ms 64), in: Kenneth Pennington, Stanley Chodorow, Keith H. Kendall (ed.): Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Vatican City 2001, p. 81109.

[12] Gujer: Concordia discordantium codicum, p. 249: „Sowohl St. Kuttner als auch R. Weigand datieren die Handschrift Cd ins späte 12. Jahrhundert, St. Kuttner genauer um 1180.“ In fn. 231 Gujer writes, „Es sei an dieser Stelle St. Kuttner für seine mündliche Auskunft herzlich gedankt.“

[13] Description in Walter Cahn: Romanesque Manuscripts. The Twelfth Century, 2 vols., London 1996, vol. 2, p. 110–111; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 710–712. I would like to thank Cédric Giraud for verifying the presence of -group variants in this manuscript.

[14] Carl Nordenfalk: Review of Anthony Melnikas: The Corpus of Miniatures in the Manuscripts of the Decretum Gratiani, in: Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 43 (1980), p. 318–337, at p. 326–28; Patricia Stirnemann: Fils de la vierge. L’initiale à filigranes parisiennes, 1140–1314, in: Revue de l’Art 90 (1990), p. 58–73, at p. 72.

[15] Description in Hippolyte-Romain Duthillœul: Catalogue descriptif et raisonné des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de Douai, Douai 1846, p. 156; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 727–728. I would like to thank Cédric Giraud for verifying the presence of -group variants in this manuscript.

[16] Nordenfalk: Review of The Corpus of Miniatures, p. 326–328; Stirnemann: Fils de la vierge, p. 72.

[17] On this decretal collection, see Christopher R. Cheney, Mary G. Cheney, from the papers of Walter Holtzmann: Studies in the Collections of Twelfth-Century Decretals, Vatican City 1979, p. 64–65; Charles Duggan: Decretal Collections from Gratian’s Decretum to the Compilationes antiquae. The Making of the New Case Law, in: Wilfried Hartmann, Kenneth Pennington (ed.): The History of Medieval Canon Law in the Classical Period, 11401234. From Gratian to the Decretals of Pope Gregory IX, Washington D.C. 2008, p. 246–292, at p. 268–269.

[18] Description in Gabriel Meier: Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum qui in bibliotheca monasterii Einsidlensis O.S.B. servantur, Leipzig 1899, p. 152; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 737–740.  I would like to thank P. Odo Lang, O.S.B. and F. Justinus Pagnamenta for providing me with a copy of the still unprinted description for the new manuscript catalog.

[19] Description in Fritz Eheim: Die Handschriften des Decretum Gratiani in Österreich, in: Studia Gratiana 7 (1959), p. 125–173, at p. 140; Walter Neuhauser, Katalog der Handschriften der Universitätsbibliothek Innsbruck, Teil 1: Cod. 1–100, Vienna 1987, p. 247–250; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 776; Gujer: Concordia discordantium codicum, p. 262–263.

[20] Lenherr: Die Summarien, p. 533. Cf. Gujer: Concordia discordantium canonum, p. 262.

[21] Stephan Kuttner: Repertorium der Kanonistik (1140–1234). Prodromus corporis glossarum, Vatican City 1937, p. 286; Rudolf Weigand: Burchardauszüge in Dekrethandschriften und ihre Verwendung bei Rufin und als Paleae im Dekret Gratians, in: Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 158 (1989), p. 429–451.

[22] Description in Catalogue of Manuscripts in The British Museum, New Series, 1 vol. in 2 parts, London 1834–1840, vol. 1, part 1: The Arundel Manuscripts, p. 134–136; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 810–812.

[23] Patricia Stirnemann: En quête de Sens, in: Mara Hofmann, Eberhard Koënig, Caroline Zöhl (ed.): Quand la peintures était dans les livres. Mélanges en l’honneur de François Avril, Turnhout 2007, p. 303–311, esp. p. 305 and 307–310.

[24] N. F. Palmer: Zisterzienzer und ihre Bücher. Die mittelalterliche Bibliotheksgeschichte von Kloster Eberbach im Rheingau, Regensburg 1998, p. 72, 74–75, 246, and 283–294, plates 54–55 and 169; Peter Landau: Zisterzienserbibliotheken und Kanonisches Recht. In memoriam Mary G. Cheney, in: Tom Graber, Martina Schattkowsky (ed.): Buchbesitz und Schriftgebrauch des Klosters Altzelle im europäischen Vergleich, Leipzig 2008, p. 291–306, at p. 298. Cf. Duggan: Decretal Collections, p. 263.

[25] Duggan: Decretal Collections, p. 263.

[26] Description in Anton von Euw, Joachim M. Plotzek: Die Handschriften der Sammlung Ludwig, 4 vols., Cologne 1979–1985, vol. 4, p. 41–48; Weigand, Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 834–835. I would like to thank Elizabeth Morrison and Jennifer Tucker of the Getty Museum for helping me confirm that Lp belongs to the -group.

[27] Stirnemann: En quête de Sens, p. 305 and 307–311. Cf. Jacqueline Perry Turcheck: A Neglected Manuscript of Peter Lombard’s Liber sententiarum and Parisian Illumination of the Late Twelfth Century, in: The Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 44 (1986), p. 48–69, at p. 63–64.

[28] Description in Jürgen Sydow: Die Dekret-Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek in München, in: Studia Gratiana 7 (1959), p. 175–232, at p. 188–192; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 847; Elisabeth Remak-Honeff, Hermann Hauke: Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, tomus IV, series nova, pars 1 = Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Die Handschriften der ehemaligen Mannheimer Hofbibliothek, Clm 10001–10930, Wiesbaden 1991, p. 135–136.

[29] I would like to thank Eric Knibbs for his help in assessing this manuscript.

[30] Description in Hermann Hauke: Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, tomus IV, pars V = Katalog der lateinischen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Clm 27270–27499, Wiesbaden 1975, p. 81–82; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 856–857; Ulrike Bauer-Eberhardt: Die illuminierten Handschriften italienischer Herkunft in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, Teil 1: Vom 10. bis zur Mitte des 14. Jahrhunderts. Textband, Wiesbaden 2011, p. 127–128.

[31] I would like to thank Eric Knibbs for his help in assessing this manuscript.

[32] Description in Stephan Kuttner: Some Gratian Manuscripts with Early Glosses, in: Traditio 19 (1963), p. 532–536, at p. 534–535; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 874–875. I would like to thank Danica Summerlin for verifying the presence of variants characteristic of the -group in this manuscript.

[33] Richard H. Rouse, Mary A. Rouse: Illiterati et uxorati. Manuscripts and Their Makers. Commercial Book Producers in Medieval Paris 1200–1500, 2 vols., Turnhout 2000, vol. 2, p. 23.

[34] Description in François Avril, Patricia Stirnemann: Manuscrits enluminés d’origine insulaire VIIe–XXe siècle, Paris 1987, p. 38, no. 62, plates XVIII–XIX; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 896–897.

[35] François Gasparri: Bibliothèque et archives de l’abbaye de Saint-Victor de Paris au XIIe siècle, in: Scriptorium 55 (2001), p. 275–284.

[36] Rudolf Weigand: Die Dekretanhänge in den Handschriften Heiligenkreuz 44, Pommersfelden 142 und München 28175, in: Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, n. s. 13 (1983), p. 1–25, at p. 25.

[37] Description in Eheim: Die Handschriften des Decretum Gratiani, p. 154; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 936; Gujer: Concordia discordantium codicum, p. 326–327.

[38] Titus Lenherr: Die Summarien zu den Texten des 2. Laterankonzils von 1139 in Gratians Dekret, in: Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 150 (1981), p. 528–551, at p. 535. Lenherr uses siglum Sb to denote this manuscript rather than Sa, as Weigand and later scholars have done.

[39] Description in Albin Czerny: Die Handschriften des Stiftsbibliothek St. Florian, Linz 1871, p. 239–240; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 923–925.

[40] Kurt Holter: Cimilien aus der Stiftsbibliothek von St. Florian, in: Kurt Holter, Georg Heilingsetzer, Winfried Stelzer (ed.): Buchkunst, Handschriften, Bibliotheken. Beiträge zur mitteleuropäischen Buchkultur vom Frühmittelalter bis zur Renaissance, Linz 1996, p. 941–948, at p. 943–944.

[41] Winfried Stelzer: Gelehrtes Recht in Österreich. Von den Anfängen bis zum frühen 14. Jahrhundert, Vienna 1982, p. 117–118.

[42] On the Collectio Florianensis, see Cheney, Cheney: Studies in the Collections of Twelfth-Century Decretals, p. 43–63; Duggan: Decretal Collections, p. 268–269.

[43] Description in Catalogue général des manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques des départements, tom. 2, Paris 1855, p. 59–60; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 959–960.

[44] Nordenfalk: Review of The Corpus of Miniatures, p. 326–328; Stirnemann: Fils de la vierge, p. 72.

[45] Duggan: Decretal Collections, p. 255.

[46] Landau: Zisterzienserbibliotheken und Kanonisches Recht, p. 293.

[47] Kuttner: Repertorium der Kanonistik, p. 287.

[48] Description in Gaetana Scano: I manoscritti del decreto di Graziano conservati nella Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, in: Studia Gratiana 7 (1959), p. 1–68, at p. 67–68; Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 979–980.

[49] Description in Weigand: Die Glossen zum Dekret, p. 999–1001.

[50] Description in Andreas Fingernagel: Die illuminierten lateinischen Handschriften süd-, west- und nordeuropäischer Provenienz der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin Preussischer Kulturbesitz 4.–12. Jahrhundert, Teil 1: Text, Wiesbaden 1999, p. 97–101, no. 90. I would like to thank Anders Winroth for verifying that this manuscript belongs to the -group.

[51] Nordenfalk: Review of The Corpus of Miniatures, p. 326–328; Stirnemann: Fils de la vierge, p. 72.

[52] Description in Adolf Diestelkamp: Geschichte der Halberstädter Dombibliothek im Mittelalter, in: Sachsen und Anhalt 3 (1927), p. 177–225, at p. 219-220; Renate Schipke, Kurt Heydeck (ed.): Handschriftencensus der kleineren Sammlungen in den östlichen Bundesländern Deutschlands, Wiesbaden 2000, p. 137.

[53] Description in Bibliothèque de l’université de Liège. Catalogue des manuscrits, Liège 1875, p. 276; Gerard Fransen: Manuscrits de décrétistes dans les bibliothèques liégeoises, in: Studia Gratiana 1 (1953), p. 291–302, at p. 298–300.

[54] Description in Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum bibliothecae regiae Monacensis, tomus IV, pars II, Codices latinos (Clm) 11001–15028 complectens, Munich 1876, p. 85; Sydow: Die Dekret-Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek in München, p. 222–223.

[55] Description in Antonio García: Los manuscritos del Decreto de Graciano en las bibliotecas y archivos de España, in: Studia Gratiana 8 (1962), p. 159–193, at p. 168–169; Antonio García y García, Martin Bertram, Paolo Maffei, Benigne Marquès, Marta Pavón Ramírez: Catálogo de los manuscritos jurídicos de la biblioteca capitular de la Seu d’Urgell, La Seu d’Urgell 2009, p. 11–13.

[56] Description in Scano: I manoscritti del decreto, p. 29–30.

[57] On the Paris school of canon law, see Stephan Kuttner: Les débuts de l’école canoniste française, in: Studia et documenta historiae et iuris 4 (1938), p. 139–204, repr. in Stephan Kuttner: Gratian and the Schools of Law, 1140–1234, London 1983, no. VI; André Gouron: Une école ou des écoles? Sur les canonistes français (vers 1150 – vers 1210), in: Stephan Kuttner, Kenneth Pennington (ed.): Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Vatican City 1985, p. 223–240; André Gouron: Une école de canonistes anglais à Paris. Maître Walter et ses disciples (vers 1170), in: Journal des savants (2000), p. 47–72; Anne Lefebvre-Teillard: Sur quelques aspects de l’enseignement du droit canonique à Paris au début du XIIIe siècle, in: Revue historique de droit français et étranger 79 (2001), p. 153–178; Anne Lefebvre-Teillard: L’école parisienne et la formation ‘politique’ des clercs au début du XIIIe siècle, in: Jacques Krynen, Michael Stolleis (ed.): Science politique et droit public dans les facultés de droit européennes (XIIIe–XVIIIe siècle), Frankfurt am Main 2008, p. 23–40. On Parisian scriptoria and the Paris book trade, see Christopher de Hamel: Glossed Books of the Bible and the Paris Book Trade, Woodbridge 1984; Rouse, Rouse: Illiterati.

[58] Nordenfalk: Review of The Corpus of Miniatures, p.326–328; Stirnemann: Fils de la vierge, p. 72.

[59] Avril, Stirnemann: Manuscrits enluminés, p. 38, no. 62; Gasparri: Bibliothèque et archives, p. 277, fn. 4.

[60] Stirnemann: En quête de Sens, p. 305. At least one of the Decretum manuscripts produced in Sens during this period (Tr = Trier, Stadtbibliothek, 906 [1141]) does not belong to the -group.

[61] Weigand: The Development of the Glossa ordinaria, in: The History of Medieval Canon Law, p. 55–97, at p. 62–64. Herbert Kalb: Studien zur Summa Stephans von Tournai. Ein Beitrag zur kanonistischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte des späten 12. Jahrhunderts, Innsbruck 1983, p. 108–112 proposes 1166 as the date for Stephan’s Summa; André Gouron: Sur les sources civilistes et la datation des Sommes de Rufin et d’Étienne de Tournai, in: Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, n. s. 16 (1986), p. 55–70, at p. 69 proposes 1165.

[62] Cheney, Cheney: Studies in the Collections of Twelfth-Century Decretals, p. 43–65.

[63] Waclaw Uruszczak: Enseignants du droit à Reims au XIIe siècle, in: Bernard Durand, Laurent Mayali (ed.): Excerptiones iuris. Studies in Honor of André Gouron, Berkeley Calif. 2000, p. 741-758.

[64] See, e.g., in Md the right margin of fol. 14r, the bottom margin of fol. 15r, the bottom margin of fols. 75r–v, and the right margin of fol. 206r; and in Mi fols. 149r–v and the left margin of fol. 173v.

[65] See, e.g., the bottom margin on fols. 131v–135r.

[66] Rudolf Weigand: Paleae und andere Zusätze in Dekrethandschriften mit dem Glossenapparat Ordinaturus Magister, in: Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 159 (1990), p. 448–463.

[67] For the paleae in Huguccio’s Summa, see Franz Gillmann: Paucapalea und Paleae bei Huguccio, in: Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 88 (1908), p. 3–17.

[68] Ibid., p. 463: „Diese, wenn man so will, Paleae-feindliche Tendenz in Bologna am Ende des 12. Jahrhunderts fand ihre Fortsetzung bei Johannes Teutonicus, der in seinem Glossenapparat, der späteren Glossa ordinaria, die Paleae nicht kommentierte. Erst später wurden viele dieser Paleae in zahlreichen Handschriften am Rande nachgetragen, vielfach erst im 14. Jahrhundert.“

[69] For the list of possible paleae in the Glossa ordinaria, see Johann Friedrich von Schulte: Die Paleae im Decret Gratians, in: Sitzungsberichte der phil.-hist. Classe der kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften 78 (1874), p. 287–312, at p. 305.

[70] For instance, Gc = Graz, Universitätsbibliothek, III 80 (s. XIII1/2); Kr = Kremsmünster, Stiftsbibliothek, 364 (s. XIIImed.); and Mx = Melk, Stiftsbibliothek, 259 (olim 698) (s. XIIIex.). On the dates of these manuscripts, see Eheim: Die Handschriften des Decretum Gratiani, p. 137, 145, and 151.

[71] I have confirmed this for Cologny, Fondation Martin Bodmer, Cod. Bodmer 75 and Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 14005. For descriptions, see Elisabeth Pellegrin: Manuscrits latins de la Bodmerina, Cologny–Geneva 1982, p. 127–130; Bauer-Eberhardt: Die illuminierten Handschriften italienischer Herkunft, p. 199–202.

[72] For a description of ‘Animal est substantia,’ see Kuttner: Repertorium der Kanonistik, p. 64–66; E.M. de Groot: Doctrina de iure naturali et positivo humano in summa Bambergensi (DD. 1–20), Nijmegen 1970; A.M. Stickler: Ergänzungen zur Traditionsgeschichte der Dekretistik. 1. Zum Apparat ‘Animal est substantia’, in: Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, n. s. 1 (1971), p. 73–75.

[73] Leena Löfstedt (ed.): Gratiani Decretum. La traduction en ancien français du Décret de Gratien, 5 vols., Helsinki 1992–2001; Leena Löfstedt: La traduction française du Decretum Gratiani et la tradition manuscrite latine de ce texte, in: Louis Callebat (ed.): Latin vulgaire et tardis, vol. 4: Actes du 4e colloque international sur le latin vulgaire et tardif, Hildesheim 1995, p. 521–531; Leena Löfstedt: Sur le manuscrit de référence de la traduction médiévale française du Décret de Gratien, in: Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94 (1993), p. 195–198.

[74] Leena Löfstedt: La vie de S. Thomas Becket par Garnier de Pont-Sainte-Maxence et la traduction en ancien français du Décret de Gratien, in: Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 99 (1998), p. 161–177; Leena Löfstedt: La loi canonique, les Plantagenêts et S. Thomas Becket, in: Medioevo romanzo 15 (1990), p. 3–16.

Comments