Thank you, Alex. Thank you. Thank you. Audience looking out at the audience, I feel I'm addressing a coven of bank robbers because of all the masks.
The first lecture closed with Heinrich Schneider's summation,
the text of the Gutenberg Bible is an only lightly corrected Paris text and with the gloss in this summary by another writer who
asserted it would indeed have been surprising if some other character of texts had been chosen as the basis of the Gutenberg Bible.
That writer was me, 1987 vintage in a study,
they concentrated on identifying and cleanable Bible editions that it used the Gutenberg Bible as exemplars.
My study was prefaced with a brief background survey of the Vulgate,
culminating in my remark on the Gutenberg Bible text that its foundation on the Paris Bible text was more or less inevitable.
Almost 30 years ago, I read those words again and felt embarrassed,
the confidence of 1987 was supply was replaced in 2016 by a feeling of fraudulence.
I did not know enough either then or on rereading to have the right to make such a statement,
even if it purported to do little more than restate the received opinion.
I began to look more closely at both the Paris text and the Gutenberg Bible text,
one approach was to learn more about the texts Vulgate Bibles written in the 15th century,
the matrix within which the Gutenberg Bible sat and from which it emerged.
As for the text of the Paris Bible and its investigation by Heinrich Schneider and Robert de Faber, several qualifications are necessary.
The Rome Old Testament, that is the scholarly Vatican edition of the Old Testament,
defined the Paris ascension by what Schneider called three Crown witnesses grouped under the single Omega.
First was Mazarin manuscript five. They called M. 2nd, a beautifully executed mid 13th century giant Bible excuse me,
in four volumes from the Dominican Convent of Sanjak in Paris, where J.
And third, a 170 dated Bible from the Library of the Sorbonne.
S. Of the three, the first Mahzarin five is not a Paris Bible at all, it was written at Canterbury, not after 12, 31 and probably Kirche 12 20.
Its order of books differ strikingly from that of the Paris Bible.
Its prologue set is not that of the Paris Bible with regard to both emissions and additions.
Although don't count at first treated it as a 14th century Paris Bible,
its English origin and date of not after 12 thirty one had already been documented in 1885
and the first volume of a simultaneous catalogue of the manuscripts in the Mahzarin Library.
In short, it is a bible of a different species from the Paris Bible.
Ultimately, this is to the good, the wrong old testaments inclusion of Mazarin five in its apparatus adds to our knowledge
of the Vulgate text in the 13th century beyond that of the Paris Bible proper.
But its readings must all be removed mentally from the omega class in which the Rome apparatus gathers them.
Mazarin readings were not shared with either the Sanjak or Serban Bible are not to be interpreted as Paris
Bible readings when its readings are shared with either of the other two so-called crown witnesses.
We know that the reading has a wider and probably older basis than the Paris Bible.
It was not confined to Paris Bibles by definition.
This reinterpretation affects also that quick Paris Bible test mentioned at the end of the last lecture
contains group of 13 characteristic Paris readings taken from five chapters within the Arctic Genesis 18,
Leviticus five numbers three Joshua two judges to.
Nine of these 13 places, that is Comtesse Passages four through 12, Mazarin five also has the Paris reading.
Thus, nine of the 13 earmarks do not uniquely define a Paris Bible text.
True, Paris Bibles will inevitably have high contact scores reproducing all or nearly all these readings.
But for non-porous Bibles, the appearance of these readings in their text does not point unambiguously to Paris influence,
just as Paris influence does not explain these readings in the English Bible.
Mazzarino five. Working from the textural apparatus of the room,
Old Testament magician Schneider made a list collating partially or fully some 80 sample chapters from Genesis through
job of places where the Gutenberg Bible is variant reading variant that is from the edited Vulgate of the Rome edition.
Was that of the Paris or make a group, but so far as recorded in the room apparatus of no earlier Bible witness.
He did not list these in for the many dozens of specific examples are cited in his notes,
his raw total was a 179 variant readings where the only witness besides the Gutenberg
Bible was any one of the three Paris crown witnesses or of some combination of them.
If we subtract from this, the 20 reading shared only with Mahzarin five and non Bible and 60 more readings where the
Sorbonne or Sanjak Bible shared the reading with Mahzarin five and thus are ambiguous,
the remaining essentially 100 variant readings in the sample where the Gutenberg Bible agrees with the Serbian Bible, Sanjak, Bible or both.
This is the evidential core of Schneider's view of the Gutenberg Bible as reflecting a lightly corrected version of the Paris Bible.
Because Schneider did not list his readings, we must laboriously excavate and arrange them from his footnotes.
By such spadework, we find 90 passages where the Paris reading appears in the Gutenberg Bible, 38 shared readings in Genesis,
the book from which he made the most extensive collections, 10 from Joshua, Judges, Ruth and so forth,
there is no way to get an accurate sense of the density, so to speak,
of characteristic Paris readings in different books of the Gutenberg Bible that when first and second chronicles were,
Schneider appears to have completed four chapters. He found only one distinctive Paris reading.
A second important part of Schneider's research was his investigation of about 40
manuscript Vulgate Bibles that belonged to the minus region broadly conceived.
These included several Bibles we cited in our first lecture, such as the giant Bible of mines in which Niger had almost no information.
It was in America and the 14 54 Bible of the Brethren of the Common Life of Woodstock, a decent university library.
Now let us change slide's. We must interrupt here for a moment to say a few more words about the Library of Congress, his Bible,
the giant Bible of mines, although in fact, it ends up having essentially nothing to do textually with the Gutenberg Bible.
Recent researches by Dr. John Jefferson, an authority on the career of a 15th century ecclesiastic, Rudolph and Rudy Seim,
eventual bishop of Breslau, have wonderfully clarified the early history and making of this Bible, which had long been a mystery.
It was called the giant Bible of mice, because in 1066, when it was more than a century old,
it was given to the cathedral chapter of mice by the cathedral's cantor Heinrich.
Stockholm Allied coats of arms of the original illumination had never been identified, but must refer to original ownership.
Dr. Jefferson has shown that one of the coat of arms, the one on the right is that of Rudolf Unreduced Heim,
himself an active and well-connected official in the Archdiocese of MIT.
At the time, the second arms is very probably that of Albert Emerich of the Abbey of Johannesburg,
located just outside the town of Rouda Seim on the Rhine, some ten miles west of mines.
At Rudolf's urging, Nicholas of CUSA on his reform travels, had given instructions for reform of U.
Huntingburg involving adding to its income by dissolving for its benefit several other local church properties, including a very reluctant nunnery.
This happened in 14, 52 at just the time the giant Bible, surely destined for the abbey, started to be written.
The owner's house was itself dissolved in 1865, suggesting that its treasured Bible then came into the hands of the Cantor of Mights Cathedral.
So it is now solidly located in mights. To return to Schneider's text investigations in his sample collection of some 80 chapters,
he found 228 other places where the Gutenberg Bible reading was otherwise untested in the
Old Rome Old Testament apparatus within the 40 meIt's Regent manuscripts that he examined,
he found 49 of these 200 28 unique readings in at least one other manuscript, occasionally in more than one very widely scattered.
Just one Bible, my Sydney Library manuscript 267, that is manuscript 67 of the second manuscript subtitling shared with the Gutenberg Bible.
A significant number of readings, 33. Minus 267 is a Paris Bible in shape and text, although it lacks the prayer of minus at the end of Chronicles.
It's possibly made in Paris in the mid 13th century. Schneider thought it was 14th century and Rhenish and thus minus region.
It's not at all clear that it's that it is minus region. Its provenance is unknown before 16 23,
when it was given to the Jesuit College and Holligan start by an ecclesiastical administrator, Gorgias or Londis.
Of those 33 shared readings, 28 appear in the Pentateuch four and judges are Ruth in a single shared reading in Second Chronicles.
Thus, there are strong hints of some texta relation between this manuscript and the Gutenberg Bible,
which would certain that the Hollander's Bible, to name it by 16 23 donor, was not a setting copy for the Gutenberg Bible.
Schneider's conclusion that the foundation of the Bible's text is the Paris Bible receives strong support from a great scholar,
Don Don Robert Veber, in his 1979 contribution to the commentary volume of the Berlin Gutenberg Bible Facsimile.
As noted in the first lecture, they were provided for Genesis Chapter 18 and then Isaiah one and two,
and Colossians went into a full apparatus of the readings of the Paris Bible crown witnesses,
the Gutenberg Bible and a selection of 16th century printing Bibles, culminating in the 16th and Clementine editions.
Weber's summarised his results in a table indicating that for the sample texts combined chapters combined,
there are 135 places where the Gutenberg Bibles reading is shared with some grouping of the Paris witnesses
as against just 14 places where the Gutenberg Bible reading is not found in any of the Paris witnesses.
Presented as pure numbers without analysis. This sounds like overwhelming evidence.
There is, however, a complicating factor that neither Schneider nor Faber dealt with,
and that leaves our picture of the Gutenberg Bible textual basis less clear,
the factor can be raised as a question what kind of evidence counts against the picture of the descent of the Gutenberg Bible from the Paris Bible?
And how should we assess that counter evidence against the positive evidence laid out by Schnieder?
Neither Schneider nor Veber posed the question at all.
But is it is a necessary one. Indeed, the question is difficult to quantify.
Take one example in third kings that first Kings and English translations, chapter one, verse eight,
the Gutenberg Bibles reading, as noted by Schneider, is that of the Sorbonne manuscript.
Thus, we can call it a Paris reading.
In verse nine, it has a reading of the accepted Vulgate that is of the edited room Testament and not Paris and not noted by Schneider.
In verse 12, it has the reading of both the Sanjak and the Sorbonne manuscripts.
So, again, a Paris reading. In versus 19 and 20, the readings are those of the accepted Vulgate and not Paris.
And again, not noted by Schneider. In other words, in the short passage of Three Kings,
Schneider highlights two Paris readings in the Gutenberg Bible in a silent about three readings that stand against the Paris Bible.
We can hardly form an accurate picture of the relation between the two texts if we
count only the positive results for Paris readings and ignore the counterexamples.
In Weber's study with the sample correlations from Genesis, Isaiah Colossians,
the counter evidence is hidden and it seems that Vapour himself did not understand this.
He presented another table showing that on Izia chapters one and two,
the Gutenberg Bible reading agrees with Paris readings 46 times and differs from them only five times.
Again, it sounds like overwhelming evidence.
Unstaged here is that in most of these instances, the Gutenberg Bible reading agrees not simply with the Paris witness,
but also with a considerable number of older witnesses omitted from Weber's apparatus.
So they're invisible.
Therefore, the evidence that the Gutenberg Bible readings to send specifically from the Paris text is, in each such case, uncertain.
For instance, there are 25 cases where both the Paris Bible and the Gutenberg Bible agreed with the edited FOLGATE.
This tells us precisely nothing, for obviously the readings are from a tradition much older than the Paris Bible.
Of the 21 variant or negative readings showing agreement between the Gutenberg Bible and the Paris witnesses in 12 of those cases,
the reading is similarly attested also in older witnesses, but not shown in his apparatus.
The survivors, 46, in Gothenburg, Paris agreement's.
Reduced to nine potentially indicative agreements and to this attaches a silent assumption that Schneider specifically warned against the assumption
that a seemingly Paris specific reading from the Sanjak or Sorbent Bible really does have no earthly witnesses outside the Paris tradition.
In some cases, we know that they did.
And in every case, we must remember that the Rome Old Testament textual apparatus is limited to a small selection,
especially amongst later manuscripts, Italian giant Bibles.
Excuse me, Italian giant Bibles of the 11th and 12th centuries are represented in the apparatus by one or more codices,
English and French Romanesque Bibles are not represented at all, nor are 12th century Glossop books of the Bible,
which we know had an influence on the formation of the Paris Bible.
One more countertrend indication can be mentioned, further complicating the view that the Gutenberg Bible is a,
quote, lightly edited version of the Paris Bible.
Consider that already mentioned contact score, those 13 characteristic Paris readings within the Arctic that can't be used as a test for Paris Bibles.
Paris Bible, strictly speaking, of which it will be recalled there easily, several hundred, perhaps 300 surviving,
perhaps more than that, all have high contact scores, typically of 11 or 12 or 13 of the 13 possible readings.
The Gutenberg Bibles contain score, on the other hand, is only three, it has a single parents reading from Genesis 18,
another from Leviticus five and one other from the second chapter of Joshua.
If the underlying text of the Gutenberg Bibles exemplar for the Arctic was directly descended from a Paris Bible, we would not expect this take.
The Yolanda's Bible just mentioned a significant number of whose anomalous Pentateuch readings that is,
readings not found in the Rome Old Testament apparatus are shared with the Gutenberg Bible.
The contact score of the oldest Bible is indeed characteristic of Paris Bibles.
It is 12 13. To summarise, there is no doubt that the Gutenberg Bible contains a significant number of Paris Bible readings,
but we have only a limited picture of the range and distribution.
The question of how to judge the instances where the Gutenberg Bible presents a Paris reading
against the instances where it presents an older Vulgate reading instead of the newer Paris reading,
has not been raised in detail by any investigator. As learnt as the studies of the Gutenberg Bible texts by Heinrich Schneider and Robert Faber are,
there seems to be an element of unconscious confirmation bias in the results, particularly in those of vapour Paris readings count.
Non-porous readings are neglected. At her present state of knowledge, we cannot, in fact,
usefully draw a picture of the textual dissent of Bibles written in the 13th to 15th centuries beyond
recognising that the Paris Bible group forms one relatively coherent section amongst this unstudied,
large collection of Bibles.
That characteristic Paris Bible readings littered the text of later manuscripts to varying degrees is certain, but all the paths remain mysterious.
We do not have enough information to judge confidently is the Gutenberg Bible text.
Schneider summarised it lightly, corrected Paris text, or is it some other class of all gay texts that is accreted a number of later Paris readings?
And finally, is there one answer for the Gutenberg Bible overall, or does the answer vary by groups of books within the Bible?
15TH century manuscript Bibles. It may be useful to approach the question from a different direction,
instead of attempting to look forward to the 15th century from the standpoint of the 13th century Paris Bible,
we may look backward from the 15th century Vulgate Bible to to try to see what traces of the 13th century Bible persist in it.
We are now in the age of digitisation, and it has been possible by squinting for many hours at a computer screen to examine closely
more than 80 15th century handwritten Bibles that we may see surrounding the Gutenberg Bible,
some older contemporary, some even younger. To refer to the 15th century Vulgate Bible is in itself.
So we immediately find misleading, we have no way of determining how randomly select selected this group of 85
Bibles are within the uncounted corpus of all handwritten 15th century Bibles.
One might better say that we look at a swarm of 15th century folgate bibles, each one stubbornly individual, not a sample in any statistical sense.
The group includes no English made Bibles,
and it may be recalled that New Yorkers mediaeval manuscripts in British libraries does not include any English Bible of the 15th century.
One early 15th century English Bible has been intentionally left out.
This is the massive British Library Royal 189, measuring 63 by 43 centimetres,
which was clearly copied directly from a 13th century English Bible, quite separate from the Paris tradition.
Nor, curiously and frustratingly, does our group include any French made Bibles again,
curse catalogue did not have any 15th century French example and a provisional list of 15th century Bible
manuscript Bible manuscripts made by Samuel Bergey contains a few that are clearly of French origin.
Most are German. At the Bibliotheque National de France, but here excluded.
There are too large and luxurious illuminated manuscript Bibles Latson, 25,
and Latin 43, which are plausibly dated from their illumination to tour about 14.
Seventy one was made for presentation to Lewis the 11th,
but these are apparently copied from Carolingian Bibles and so stand entirely apart from the Paris Bible tradition.
The largest share of our 15th century group comes from Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Bohemia.
There are seven Bibles from Italy and four from the Netherlands.
Of course, many earlier manuscript bibles continued to be used in the 15th century, and even after including widely available 13th century Bibles,
one example may be mentioned here,
discovered by chance while browsing in the online continuation of newcomer's mediaeval manuscripts in British libraries.
MGB three. Probably at the time of its foundation and for 1896 by John Alcock, bishop of Ely,
Jesus College, Cambridge, received by gift from that eminent ecclesiastic John Gunn Thorpe,
English diplomat, humanist and longtime dean of Wells, a small format about 15 by 11 centimetres, 13th century English Bible.
An inscription which unfortunately calls him William instead of John,
states the condition of the gift it was for the use of any preacher in the college would then pass it on for use to his successor and so on,
remaining always in the hands of a fellow of the college.
In fact, it migrated a few hundred yards to Cambridge University library.
There is a hint in a race for 1853 cultured note that this Bible had been Ingunn Thorpe's
possession in the early 40s and 50s when he was an M.A. and student of theology at Cambridge Gun.
Thorpe, of course, was fully immersed in the new world of printed books and earned many,
including a collection of three Louvain Cicero editions that he had specially bound in queer Sicily with his name on the cover.
And by the late 1990s, many dozens of printed folgate bibles had been marketed and were widely available,
but a 13th century handwritten Bible could still be solemnly given in use for a worthy purpose.
The 85 manuscript Bibles of our sample give a wide variety of answers to, amongst other questions,
if one wanted to make a new Vulgate Bible in the 15th century, what would its textual profile be for each such Bible?
We can consistently draw two comparisons its shape or profile against that of the Paris Bible model,
which had been embodied in hundreds of order codices and against that of the Gutenberg Bible.
And you have a one page handout summary of the Gutenberg Bible, both its contents and in notes at the bottom.
The ways in which this contents vary from that of the Paris Bible formula.
The 15th century is the time when paper came heavily into use in the making of books alongside vellum or parchment.
Our 15th century group of Bibles divides evenly between paper and vellum codices.
The earliest paper codex dating to 14 11. It was written at the lower Cistercian Abbey of Svetozar by a wandering scribe who also signed
manuscripts in 14 and 14 26 at the shot and stuffed in Vienna and may have also worked at Lombok.
Four of the paper codices acquired without her by folia of vellum.
Only six Bibles in the group of vellum are what would naturally be called portable incise, specifically with Levites between 19 and 23 centimetres.
They all belong to the first half of the 15th century.
One of the stated 14, 28 and probably executed in Bologna is a true luxury Bible with an abundance, even superabundance of illumination.
It was commissioned by the Cardinal Archbishop of Bologna and Carthusian, Nicolo Albergotti, who bequeathed it to the car.
Thousands of Val, Daymo, Florence, the other portable Bibles are all professionally and handsomely made.
One Italian, one Swiss, one probably Westphalian, too Bohemian.
Two of this group were written with page length lines rather than, as always, elsewhere, double columns.
Apart from these six, the Bibles are at least chancellory Foleo in size,
many of them being indeed paper chancellory folios with leaf heights of about 30 centimetres.
Another group are either paper royal folios with Levites of about 40 centimetres or vellum of about the same size.
Some of them just a bit shorter. Finally, there is a group of 10 all naturally on vellum,
for we go beyond the limits of paper size that could be seen as giant Bibles with Levites of 48 to almost 60 centimetres.
Four of these are Prague or Bohemian Bibles of the late 14th and early 15th centuries.
Another is the already mentioned giant Bible of mines, the largest of all with a leaf height of just under 60 centimetres,
is the densely illuminated Bible of Federico Dumont of military commission through Vespasian domestically and written in humanist script,
very unusually in 14 77 to 14 78.
Despite his relatively late date being created at a time when at least 20 printed Bible editions had been published, it was copied from manuscripts.
And we're going to look at slowly it just a few more of the 15th century manuscript Bibles in the group I've been studying.
It is not always easy to draw a line between Bibles that were professionally
written on commission and those that were personally written by their owners.
Likewise, it is not always easy to draw a distinction between book hands and more coercive hands.
In general, Bibles written on prepared line ruled pages may be presumed to represent bookends,
but some of the three dozen plus Bibles written without line rulings are still carefully written and sometimes have added illumination.
To personally written Bibles, maybe briefly noticed as they reveal something of the personalities or mentalities of their makers.
At Vodafone Butel, there's a Chancery Folio paper manuscript containing the OCTA two and four Books of Kings, which was written over a year.
November 14, 55 to November 14, 56 by one.
Andreas Zotov Flesche, student at the University of Airport.
At the end of each book, he wrote a long subscription,
recording the exact day and begging comfort and assistance from the saint of the nearest major feast.
A second chance, three Foleo paper Old Testament leader belonging to the Carmelites of Mines was written in two volumes
the books not presented in Paris Bible Order a Decade Apart by Andreas Fitial Monk of Tegernsee.
He began writing his first volume in 14 57 and completed it on the Feast of Saint and 26 July 14 58.
Then a decade later, as parish priest of Brook in Bavaria, he began his second volume,
finishing with finishing Jobe, the first in that volume on the Feast of St.
Luke, 18, October 14 66 and completing the volume with the last of the minor profits on 22 January 14 68.
The Feast of St. Vincent Martta.
A curiosity of this Old Testament is that fishless exemplar for the Book of Esther presented its first two chapters in the old Latin version,
a remarkable persistence into the 15th century of an ancient and long submerged text.
It is impossible with our time frame to discuss in detail any one of these 80 plus manuscript Bibles,
so we will simply summarise a few of the features that have links to the Paris Bible that we use as a basis of comparison.
The first feature is Order of Texas, which of the group follow Perry's Bible order and which have different orders of the biblical books,
two thirds of the group, almost 60, do follow Perry's order,
which became increasingly common for Bibles in general even by the end of the 13th century.
But the one third that do not follow Perry's order, some 28 Bibles make for a substantial group which cannot easily be characterised except for a few.
Three of the Bibles follow Vinda Seim order.
This is the order of books in the Bible written by Thomas Compass, it's vola in five volumes over the years, 14, 27 to 14, 39.
This Bible is number 84 on my group and No.
70 and 71 of the same group are also going to sign Bibles written in the same order.
You see the one here in the shade library with regard to book order prologues and text readings,
Vinda signed Bibles occupy a channel of transmission separate from both the Paris Bible and the Gutenberg Bible.
However, for all the fame of Thomas Acanthus, Bible Bibles written in Vinda same order seem to be the rare.
One of the Bibles written in order, radically different from that of the Paris Bible.
I wish I had a good picture of it, but I've only seen it in microfilm formally in the cathedral.
Library of Augsburg must have been made for an unidentified Bavarian Carthusian house.
It arranges the books of the Bible in the order of their texts were read as part of the Divine Office over the course of the liturgical year.
The late Peter Gombert described a similarly ordered four volume Bible of the Utrecht Carthaginians, written in 14 02 to 14 03.
The New Yorker described another in four volumes at Malmesbury Parish Church, but written in 14 57 for the Carthusian of a run.
It referred to this type as a Biblio de Tempora. A second rough assessment of the 15th century Bibles could be made by comparing the prologue sets,
which include the Paris set of curves 64 prologues, and which vary from this.
And in what ways? About 20 of the Bibles omit none or only one or two prologues.
But some of these are partial Bibles. We cannot be sure of the full Parisot.
Moreover, most of these add non-porous prologues and sometimes in substantial numbers.
The giant Bible of meIt's, for instance, contains all the Paris prologues and then 47 more.
The appearance and later Bibles of prologues outside the Parisot is not new to the 15th century,
surveys of 13th and 14th century Bibles by Laura Light,
Chiara Rootsier and Sabrina Mogherini have all noted that many Bibles have additional prologues outside the norm of the Paris Bible,
drawn from the complicated tradition of pre 13th century Bibles.
The combined total of prologues and our group of 85 15th century Bibles comes to more than 270.
A third rough assessment of the group can be made by looking at their contact scores.
That's that number we've already mentioned several times, the number of up to 13 characteristic Paris Bible readings.
Of 74, manuscript's fully recorded for the Arctic.
Only five have contact scores characteristic of Paris Bibles, that is 11 to 13.
Or you could say six. If you count the one with ten Paris readings, 13 of them have no Paris reading, including the giant Bible of mines,
though it has all the Paris prologues, 20 have between one and three Paris readings.
The rest have between four and nine Paris readings.
But even when two manuscripts have the same contact score, say six in almost every instance, they differ.
In the specific readings, they manifest the contact score of the Gutenberg Bible, it will be recalled, is three in the entire group of 85 manuscripts.
There is only one that, by a variety of tests, looks plausibly as if it was copied directly or by one intermediary from a Paris Bible.
This is, let's see, the next slide. This is number 65 of the group, Vatican, Palestina, Latin one, a beautiful large format,
Bible local Ausable to Prague in the first decade of the 15th century with illuminations by a noon Prague artist.
It is written in Paris Bible order and has all the Paris Prologues plus one brief additional prologue to Obediah.
The Prayer of Manasa is incorporated in the last chapter of Second Chronicles.
It has three of its contest score is 11 and in more than a dozen scattered other
indicative places that I've studied its readings are all those of Paris Vivos.
A final remark should be made about this group of 15th century manuscript Bibles.
The omission of capitulation was a defining feature of the Paris Bible.
Yet 20 of the 15th century group retain capitulates for one or more books,
suggesting that at least in part, they descend from pre 13th century traditions.
And likewise, 18 of the group omit the prayer of Manizha, another of the defining features of the Paris Bible.
And there is in fact a high correlation between manuscripts containing Capitola and those lacking the prayer of Monalisa.
In summary, the group of IndusInd Bibles apart, almost every Bible in this group has an individual text profile,
none identical with that of the Bible and very few of them close to the Paris Bible profile as the Paris Bible readings,
of which a few more examples will be reviewed in the next lecture. It seems that for most of these Bibles,
the occurrence of any one Paris reading at any one place does not closely predict that another place will also have a Paris reading.
The great variety of patterns of contests, scores from one Bible to the next,
gives us a first approximation of what one would be tempted to call randomness in the pattern of Paris Bible readings in 15th century Bibles.
Jerome's statement in his prologue to Joshua can be treated as a prophecy for the millennium after his death amongst the Latins,
there is many versions as there are manuscripts tote exemplary a quote,
codices everyone either adding or subtracting what he likes according to his own taste.
Finally, the Gutenberg Bible workshop, we turn now to the workshop that created the Gutenberg Bible,
the fundamental differing features of that Bible compared with its many 15th century Bible companions,
or first, that its text was not produced by the ancient craft of handwriting.
And second, it was made in a large number of essentially identical copies.
The figure we will use is 180. The larger of two figures supplied to us by the contemporary report of a near Silvius picolo many.
Those copies otherwise identical, we postpone discussion of the many ways in which, in fact they are not identical might be either vellum or paper.
About one quarter having been printed on vellum and three quarters on paper,
all those copies would have been completed and in principle available for sale on the same day.
It is if 180 scribe's in mines had all been writing Bibles at the respective desks,
some writing on good royal paper and some in vellum sheets of the same size each day, entering on each page, the same text,
the same number of lines and double columns all under the eye of some celestial scriptorium master until the day
came when they all wrote Amen at the end of apocalypse and hence weary and eyes bleary laid down their pens.
We can say as if because those finished copies of the Gutenberg Bible, once that is there, thousands of sheets had been gathered into discrete copies,
would have looked remarkably like Scott scribal work apart from the deep black sheen of the ink.
More precisely, they would have looked like handwritten Bibles in an advanced stage of preparation with all the text written but
still awaiting the final stage of RUBICK and possible illumination that would supply book and prologue initials,
chapter initials, chapter numbers to in rubrics, headlines,
as I call running titles and thousands of personal letters to complete the verses
of the Psalms which without which without them would look pockmarked with holes.
The new craft that enabled this book, Multiplication Without Handwriting, was European typography,
the invention by common acknowledgement of the earliest testimonies of Johann Gutenberg of MIT's.
In the first half of the 15th century, Gutenberg lived for many years in exile,
and Strausberg and legal records show him there involved in teaching several crafts,
including the production of Pilgram Mirrors for the Orkan pilgrimage.
We do not know if he experimented with typography and Strausberg, but the records do not require us to believe that he did.
By 14, 48, he had returned to mights and within the next five years,
probably the earliest productions of the new typographic process had been created and were being sold.
What appear to be from the crudity of their impressions, the earliest printed survival's are all fragmentary,
a partial paper Cordeaux Leaf of a 14th century German prophetic book and rhymed couplets known as the sibilant book.
And you see the image. And vellum leaves of four distinguishable editions of the standard school grammar,
the R's minor or minor of Donatos, the grammarian who had been Jerome's teacher in fourth century Rome.
This first printing font is most clearly seen in this sibilant book fragment,
but various special characters in it show that it was primarily intended for printing Latin text and specifically the Donatos.
These earliest fragments were found in meIt's itself in binding wastes from the
monastery of Zayla Cantal near Darmstadt and from the monastery of Holligan,
start in Thuringia, where the archbishops of mind said substantial properties.
All the fragments were lubricated, indicating that they are the remains of sold and used copies, not unsold waste from a printing shop.
Even if only these five editions had been made with this early printing font, each one happily preserved and scraps by a benign providence,
we would have good reason to suppose that there was a successful small trade in typographically
produced books in mines several years before the Gutenberg Bible came into being,
say, about 14, 52 to 48, 53, maybe even a year early, earlier.
We may see this as Gutenberg's own shop. The font used which in later production site is by 14 54 is in a much improved state,
is commonly called the decay standing for Donatos in calendar type.
The separate Latin Bible project was many times larger in scale and ambition, we know nothing about how the idea arose and how it was planned,
only that the chief investor in the project was a citizen of Mitsue on first.
In a legal deposition or summation of November 14, 55, perhaps filed soon after completed copies of the Bible, had begun to be sold,
first summed up claims he had been making against Gutenberg based on two separate
loans to the ladder of 800 Gulden each regarding what he called the work of the books.
Victor Bouker.
Gutenberg's partial reply, embodied in the same document, referred to the costs of constructing and preparing the necessary printing equipment.
And that was paid out of the first loan and then of wages for workers,
rented workspace and cost of paper, parchment ink and a capacious, etc. paid out of the second loan.
First said subsidised these expenses, it was said, at the rate of 300 Gulden per year.
The implication is that the work of the books, which must be the production of the Latin Bible, covered a period of year, say three or more.
Another implication is that Gutenberg was the master responsible for carrying out the project first rule rule being that of investor.
Various analysts of the document known as the Helmut's Berger instrument,
after the name of its Notari have tried to break down costs into a number of workmen, current wages, prices of bread and beer and so forth.
But this is a fool's errand. A new type fund was created for the Bible project, slightly smaller than Gutenberg's DOCTYPE,
but of the same script style texture, a quadrotor format,
it marked a notable advance on the decay type and better reproducing in metal, the subtle rules of Gothic script,
including changes in shapes of letters according to what letters followed them.
A new feature of the Gutenberg Bible font was the series of characters corresponding to fused letters in Gothic writings such as B plus A,
B and E, B and O DNA. DNA d.
A. h. H. H. A. and so on.
Joining both letters on the same piece of type. It is necessary to say something here about the making of the decay and Gutenberg Bible types,
but that something will be said briefly to allow us to move rapidly from the making of types to the setting of text.
The general consensus of the 19th and 20th centuries was that these earliest types were made according to a system of engraving steel letter punches,
sinking them into copper matrices and casting multiple types from the matrices by pouring molten type metal into a hand mould,
holding the matrix at its base, resulting in a rectangular shaft or piece of tape with a reverse letter form at the top.
This was a system of type making that certainly existed in Europe from the 14th 70s, well into the 19th century, maybe even in the 40s and 50s.
And it was seen as the core of Gutenberg's invention. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Blaise Aguirre,
Arcus and I investigated both the decay and the Gutenberg Bible funds by means of high resolution
digital photography and automated shape analysis software developed and refined by equerry Yarkas.
We found that by this analysis, no individual letter form in multiple appearances would coalesce within the boundaries of a single letter shape.
Each one, to our surprise, appeared to be slightly different from the others.
Our default explanation was that the types were cast from temporary matrices of a malleable material build up of individual small shaping elements,
such a matrix would allow one or maybe a few castings, but not a large number.
And so new matrices of the same general shape would be constructed using more types of that general shape.
We call this cuneiform typography. Only a single brief publication outlined our argument, Aguirre, AKA, has moved on to other software projects,
and he is now a very major figure in the field of artificial intelligence.
Our conclusions have been doubted and the necessary research to provide fuller evidence is admittedly very incomplete.
It may be noted, however, that this year a small study was made of the Gutenberg Bible font by Murree interrogator
based on digital images at lower resolution than what we'd worked out of a single character.
The letter you with a suspension, Stroker macaron above it.
This enabled us a statistical analysis of whether 140 current 143 occurrences of this letter and 12 12 scattered pages of
the Gutenberg Bible could coalesce into the product of a single matrix with a constant distance between the shape of the U.
And the stroke above it. The Akitas concluded, quote, that there were multiple matrices in parallel for this letter form,
which is what the Aguado Iraqis and Edam hypothesis requires.
A different result would have seriously challenged our hypothesis. The question becomes, are approaches,
how many matrices would be necessary to explain all the occurrences of this one character and then how many
matrices would need to underline each of the several hundred other characters of the Gutenberg Bible font?
At some point, the received opinion about how the tapes were made may be forced to hypothesise the laborious
engraving of one thousand and more steel punches to create the Gutenberg Bible font.
And at some point after that, even the most committed typographical traditionalists may begin to sense that their position is becoming awkward.
We do not have an answer now, but we have all the technology eventually to find an answer,
and I'm showing just one slide to indicate why there might be reason to question
the received opinion that the Gutenberg Bible font was created by the steal,
steal, punch copper matrix system. And this slide shows.
From. Scanning by blazoned eye 80 consecutive pages of a single composition unit in
the Gutenberg Bible and pulling out the character PEH with a understructure,
standing for prayer and in the top row, you find a selection of the 207 shapes we found.
And then. The line below, you find all six single examples scattered amongst those 207 pages of a pair of a different shape,
so with six over 80 pages, it's clearly a single piece of type.
And so the idea one would have to maintain is that some punch cutter.
Very laboriously. Created a punch that had the stroke in the long position, finish the punch Foley correctly.
Cast it into a matrix and then made one type and one type only.
And. This is not a proof, I find it implausible.
The scale of the Latin Bible project was dozens of times greater than that of Gutenberg's Dekay shop,
producing primarily editions of Donatos, it represented a new order of challenge and ambition.
The simplest way to measure the extent of a printed text is by EMS, the number of notional square pieces of type that the pages contain.
The Latin Bible can be assessed as a text of about one million, 300000, Ms.
The Ares miner of Donatos of about fourteen thousand five hundred Ms.
Thus, the Latin Bible project in terms of text setting, was the equivalent of creating 90 editions of Donato's.
We have no reason to suppose that Gutenberg's DKA shop ever possessed more than a single case of type,
and that must have been a somewhat sparse case for in various Donatos editions.
There are signs that at the foot of certain pages, the needed sorts were no longer available.
And so various Ayres's had to be used to substitute for them.
The Latin Bible project, the Gutenberg Bible project, was set up at the very beginning.
As for composition units, each with its own case of type,
and those cases needed many more sorts than the DICTATE did for more types had to be set on each page.
In the earliest state of the Bible type, 20 lines of the type measure to a height of 147 millimetres,
showing the upper terminations of various capital letters and undamaged form.
Only the first 16 pages were set in the state of the type after which was reduced
in size by filing it across the Taub's and perhaps a little at the bottom.
So the types reducing that 20 line measure to 140 millimetres, the difference in state is especially evident in the capital letter A.
Could we have the next slide, please? Which in its first state has a sharply peaked top filed down in the second state to around the top,
you see, you see three of the unfiled azz towards the right hand side and top of this slide.
Two fragmentary Donatos editions survived that were printed in this first state of the Gutenberg Bible,
type one is in the shade library at Princeton and one is in the Juggy L'Union Library in Krakow.
These two editions must have been finished and sold several years before the Bible itself was completed.
And their copy histories give us an important clue to the beginning of the Latin Bible project.
The Chardy Donatos was recovered is finding ways from a 14 79 Bazzel addition of Augustine's City of God.
It's binding now in the Londis Bibliotheque Stuttgart was made by a recognised but
unnamed binder who worked for various Abbe's in the Danube Valley of Austria.
Thus, it appears that this early months, Donatos was marketed and used in Austria, far from mines where it eventually became waste material.
The Krakow Donatos fragment is still kept alongside its source,
a Leipzig binding covering a set of chants recorded Tractatus written between 14, 17, 14, 73 by a Leipzig student.
And then in the 14 A.D., the volume migrated to Krakow,
thus here to the second typographic to notice a different edition from the shyte fragment very handsomely
printed in the first state of the Gutenberg Bible type was marketed well outside the meIt's region.
We see in these shyte in Krakow fragments, long distance sales of the.
They're not just grammar, unlike the DKA editions moving along trade channels for which we have no documentation,
but the same channels that certain copies of the Gutenberg Bible followed several years later when it was finished from early in its planning.
A wide sale of this new kind of book,
a type printed Bible of stately size must have been contemplated and perhaps even advertised by these elegantly printed two notices.
Thank you.