1 00:00:13,270 --> 00:00:24,920 Thank you, Alex. Whether by writing or printing the transfer of a text from one physical object to another by means of an intervening human hand, 2 00:00:24,920 --> 00:00:31,280 an eye inevitably produces at some time or other copying errors. 3 00:00:31,280 --> 00:00:41,460 The study of such errors excuse me, I have my own glasses on. 4 00:00:41,460 --> 00:00:46,470 The study of such errors in the daily diet of those polygraphers bibliographer 5 00:00:46,470 --> 00:00:52,320 is textual critics who study the transmission of text for single error may be, 6 00:00:52,320 --> 00:01:03,120 in fact, almost always is more revealing of human processes than a long and wearying collection of invariably accurate sequences of words. 7 00:01:03,120 --> 00:01:14,520 We may think of these as pleasant or pretty or even delightful errors, they instruct us such incidents or expected incidents that did not happen, 8 00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:21,350 like dogs not barking in the night awakened the Holmesian chambers of our minds. 9 00:01:21,350 --> 00:01:33,080 In 1710, the Scollard lead off Kuester reedited and enlarge the 1767 Greek New Testament with variant readings of John Mitchell, 10 00:01:33,080 --> 00:01:37,560 who died very shortly after his magnum opus was completed. 11 00:01:37,560 --> 00:01:48,120 Custer, a correspondent of Bently, had been one of the editors of the Cambridge edition of the Byzantine Encyclopaedia called Soudas or Suda. 12 00:01:48,120 --> 00:01:54,210 In reworking Mills, Ed., the tireless customer found what he called a Lepidus error, 13 00:01:54,210 --> 00:02:05,720 a pretty mistake in an Appendix M. had printed a phrase from the birds of Aristophanes as a variant reading of Luke 16, verse three. 14 00:02:05,720 --> 00:02:08,360 The error must have arisen through some confusion, 15 00:02:08,360 --> 00:02:15,140 Emile's notes for his edition includes a large number of indirect parallel passages from Greek sources. 16 00:02:15,140 --> 00:02:19,520 And this is where the Aristophanes Salema obviously belonged. 17 00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:25,780 But, yes, errors can indeed be pretty. Of the errors we have seen so far, 18 00:02:25,780 --> 00:02:32,080 undoubtedly the prettiest is the one where the compositor of the 36 line Bible at four 19 00:02:32,080 --> 00:02:38,980 is a chapter to set text directly from the unreciprocated line of the Gutenberg Bible, 20 00:02:38,980 --> 00:02:47,830 thereby proving in just three position words that the Gutenberg Bible was his exemplar. 21 00:02:47,830 --> 00:02:58,000 Another pretty but considerably more complex error in the 14 62 Bibo of First Shiffer, a rather a pretty error in some copies of that edition. 22 00:02:58,000 --> 00:03:03,650 Is this one slide to please from least 74 recto of the first volume? 23 00:03:03,650 --> 00:03:07,480 This is the paper copy at the Library of Congress. Bequest of Lessoning. 24 00:03:07,480 --> 00:03:10,750 Rosenwald, the text of this column. 25 00:03:10,750 --> 00:03:22,440 If you look at line three, the text of this column, the first three words of line three at Lapidary Argumentum is Deuteronomy 29 17. 26 00:03:22,440 --> 00:03:34,110 The fourth word in after of line three, Moses, Joselo, etc., is Deuteronomy 31, verse 14, and so the remainder of the column continues. 27 00:03:34,110 --> 00:03:41,920 Thus, the compositor jumped over some 48 verses in a single line of his composing stick. 28 00:03:41,920 --> 00:03:48,490 But this error is not in all copies in the Bodleian copy, also on paper, we see slide three, 29 00:03:48,490 --> 00:03:54,760 please, the words of Deuteronomy 29 17 continue correctly instead of Moses. 30 00:03:54,760 --> 00:04:02,710 We have at our MacWhite Kaleigh. Aren't there idols of wood and stone, silver and gold, which they worshipped? 31 00:04:02,710 --> 00:04:14,800 And then the next slide we see the two of them, the one above the other Library of Congress and taught bodily below. 32 00:04:14,800 --> 00:04:19,480 The error is immediately explained when we examined the Gutenberg Bible and visualised 33 00:04:19,480 --> 00:04:25,240 the first in Shiffer compositor standing with it before him and copying it. 34 00:04:25,240 --> 00:04:31,720 He came to the end of the verse of one leaf of the Bible and set its last three words on what 35 00:04:31,720 --> 00:04:38,410 would become law in three of Columbia of the page he was creating at Lapidary Argenton. 36 00:04:38,410 --> 00:04:42,070 This was leifs 98, Versova, the Gutenberg Bible. 37 00:04:42,070 --> 00:04:49,930 He then continued setting with the recto of the next page, but the next page in front of them was not 999 recto as it ought to have been, 38 00:04:49,930 --> 00:04:59,020 but rather 100 directo, starting with the words Moisés at Yasushi in the midst of Deuteronomy Chapter 31. 39 00:04:59,020 --> 00:05:05,200 So Leaf 99 was skipped over entirely. As for at least 74 of the body copy, 40 00:05:05,200 --> 00:05:13,690 it is a corrected council leaf set after the original error of a skipped or misplaced leaf in the examplar was discovered. 41 00:05:13,690 --> 00:05:24,790 So there's a difference in time between Leaf 74 Recto Body and Leaf 74 Recto Library of Congress. 42 00:05:24,790 --> 00:05:31,900 This is the boiled down, simplified explanation of an unusually complicated accident, 43 00:05:31,900 --> 00:05:38,350 the first in Shiffer compositor did not himself mistakenly skip over a leaf of his examplar. 44 00:05:38,350 --> 00:05:42,880 Rather, that leaf he missed was a single turn and inserted leaf, 45 00:05:42,880 --> 00:05:48,220 and it was placed in the wrong position in the copy of the Gutenberg Bible he had in front of him. 46 00:05:48,220 --> 00:05:55,770 It was placed after rather than before Leaf 100. 47 00:05:55,770 --> 00:06:03,360 From an examination of 25 copies, including two single waist leaves preserved in Paris, 48 00:06:03,360 --> 00:06:08,910 it is possible to reconstruct the entire sequence by which interest in your first shop, 49 00:06:08,910 --> 00:06:18,750 the original accident was made, discovered and gradually corrected with a couple of missteps along the way. 50 00:06:18,750 --> 00:06:27,780 Over the course of composing four pages, 74 Recto and Verso and 75 Recto and Verso of each page, 51 00:06:27,780 --> 00:06:33,200 three different settings are recorded, making 12 page settings in all. 52 00:06:33,200 --> 00:06:42,920 Of one of the three settings of 74 Verso, there are two chronologically distinct states, and if one of the three settings of the last page, 75. 53 00:06:42,920 --> 00:06:54,480 So there are three chronologically distinct states. So amongst these 25 copies, there are eight different combinations of settings over four pages. 54 00:06:54,480 --> 00:07:03,810 We are reminded again of that fundamental distinction between a copy of an addition, a particular sample sheets and the additions itself, 55 00:07:03,810 --> 00:07:13,380 which is notional but once existed in all the sheets that were printed from which complete copies could be made up, 56 00:07:13,380 --> 00:07:21,690 some of those sheets being printed two or three years after other sheets of the same edition. 57 00:07:21,690 --> 00:07:30,980 Of the early Bible set from copies of the Gutenberg Bible, the 462 Bible was by far the most important in a sexual influence. 58 00:07:30,980 --> 00:07:38,570 Like all the other early Latin Bibles, leaving aside the experiment of the Krakow proof life using Imperial Paper, 59 00:07:38,570 --> 00:07:45,920 it was a royal folio, but in several respects it was considerably more ambitious and in conception than the others. 60 00:07:45,920 --> 00:07:54,060 We have mentioned the mental linen, 36 line Bibles and the three editions of Heinrich, Agustín and Strausberg. 61 00:07:54,060 --> 00:08:02,820 The Toyota edition run must have been significantly greater than that of the Gutenberg Bible and more copies were printed on vellum than on paper. 62 00:08:02,820 --> 00:08:12,390 There is no complete census. But of 82 pinned down copies that can be counted, 32 are paper and 50 are vellum. 63 00:08:12,390 --> 00:08:21,250 Thus, it is likely that roughly three fifths of the edition was offered on the significantly more expensive Vellum 251 paper. 64 00:08:21,250 --> 00:08:28,660 It may be recalled that other productions of the first in Shefer Shop, the 14, 57 and 14, 59 soldiers, 65 00:08:28,660 --> 00:08:37,120 the 14 59 Durand's, the 14 60 Constitución, so Klement the Fifth were printed entirely on vellum. 66 00:08:37,120 --> 00:08:43,210 The firm had experience and success in selling expensive books. 67 00:08:43,210 --> 00:08:48,340 Unlike the other Bibles of the early group that left spaces for replicators 68 00:08:48,340 --> 00:08:54,460 to supply book and prologue to Charlie chapter initials and chapter numbers, 69 00:08:54,460 --> 00:08:59,230 the 14 62 Bible printed these in red and in certain sections. 70 00:08:59,230 --> 00:09:05,480 The chapter, initials and numbers alternated between red and blue from one chapter to the next. 71 00:09:05,480 --> 00:09:14,800 But this is highly variable. The early quires of the Bible left spaces for chapter numbers, but then numbers began to be printed. 72 00:09:14,800 --> 00:09:22,090 Slide six, please. Not by setting individual characters of XVI from the typed case, 73 00:09:22,090 --> 00:09:30,040 but rather by making in advance small task blocks with the full number and Lombard characters on the block. 74 00:09:30,040 --> 00:09:40,740 So that, say, chapter number 18 is a single block containing XVI all on the same piece of metal. 75 00:09:40,740 --> 00:09:45,600 Like the other editions, composition was divided into four main composition units. 76 00:09:45,600 --> 00:09:50,790 Could we see slide seven, please? I'm sorry, this is handwritten. 77 00:09:50,790 --> 00:09:55,140 I just somehow couldn't do it any other way. 78 00:09:55,140 --> 00:10:05,080 And with a little bit of highlighter, the highlighter, if you can see it means these are the. 79 00:10:05,080 --> 00:10:14,050 Quires of the book of which I investigated, this was spent so much time in this of which there are duplicate settings, 80 00:10:14,050 --> 00:10:22,660 so there are two settings of each of those quires that's in yellow and the four composition units, 81 00:10:22,660 --> 00:10:30,220 as in all the other printed Bibles, variations in printing the Bible, 82 00:10:30,220 --> 00:10:34,900 such as the incomplete experiment with blue printing along with red, 83 00:10:34,900 --> 00:10:40,450 are all to be studied by coordinating the composition units, because in each of the composition units, 84 00:10:40,450 --> 00:10:51,910 they they show up for the first time at roughly the same time in the course of production because the composers were working at a pretty steady pace. 85 00:10:51,910 --> 00:10:56,350 Although her concentration is on the text of the 14th to Bible, 86 00:10:56,350 --> 00:11:02,200 this diagram of the composition units brings up two topics that should be mentioned briefly. 87 00:11:02,200 --> 00:11:07,720 First, as I just mentioned, there are six choirs that are recorded in duplicate settings. 88 00:11:07,720 --> 00:11:12,220 I would define them in detail in another publication and will not repeat here 89 00:11:12,220 --> 00:11:17,650 except to point out they come at the end of their respective composition units. 90 00:11:17,650 --> 00:11:25,720 Thus they are quite unlike the duplicate settings of the Gutenberg Bible and to a lesser degree, the 36 line Bible, 91 00:11:25,720 --> 00:11:33,450 where the settings were made to print additional pages in response to a decision to increase the addition run. 92 00:11:33,450 --> 00:11:43,500 In the first and Shiffer shop, with a duplicate settings coming near the end of production, our picture is has to be the two compositors. 93 00:11:43,500 --> 00:11:54,240 We're setting essentially identical pages, more or less side by side, each with a copy or Unbound Quas of a copy of the Gutenberg Bible to set from. 94 00:11:54,240 --> 00:12:02,220 And presumably the respective duplicate typed pages were sent to different presses. 95 00:12:02,220 --> 00:12:05,410 But we don't really know that. 96 00:12:05,410 --> 00:12:13,060 Several years after these duplicate sightings of quires at the end of the 14th Test-tube Bible were identified and published, 97 00:12:13,060 --> 00:12:18,010 Mayumi Ikeda studied two paper copies of the Gutenberg Bible, 98 00:12:18,010 --> 00:12:25,900 one at the Morgan Library containing the Old Testament only and one at the Bibliotheque, the prevention of Borgas. 99 00:12:25,900 --> 00:12:33,490 The copies had been illuminated to closely similar patterns by a mind artist known as the First Master. 100 00:12:33,490 --> 00:12:38,890 Dr Equador discovered that in both copies there were scattered marginal hash 101 00:12:38,890 --> 00:12:45,280 marks and vertical strokes within lines marking page endings of the 14 62 Bible. 102 00:12:45,280 --> 00:12:53,500 And these compositors marks were concentrated at the end of production that is in Psalms and in second Maccabees, 103 00:12:53,500 --> 00:13:00,060 where in fact there is a duplicate setting. None of these pages, however, contains any marked emendations, 104 00:13:00,060 --> 00:13:06,570 unlike the Cambridge Bible, thus at the time the 14th says the Bible was being produced, 105 00:13:06,570 --> 00:13:13,920 the remained at least two sets of sheets of the Gutenberg Bible still in the shop, unsold. 106 00:13:13,920 --> 00:13:20,310 And just as with the Gutenberg Bible at Cambridge, when it was in Heinrich Agustin's shop in Strasbourg, 107 00:13:20,310 --> 00:13:29,090 after these sheets had finished being handled by Frost and Chipper's Compositors, they were bound up and sold as viable copies. 108 00:13:29,090 --> 00:13:35,900 The sheets making up the Morgan Library, Old Testament, in fact, we're a little short of a full copy, 109 00:13:35,900 --> 00:13:43,610 22 pages were missing, some four sheets had been depleted, had already been sold, and there were no more in the shop. 110 00:13:43,610 --> 00:13:48,470 And in two cases, there was a sheet that had three of its four pages printing. 111 00:13:48,470 --> 00:13:52,760 But a fourth page had by mistake, never gone under the press. 112 00:13:52,760 --> 00:14:03,430 All these pages had to be uniquely reset and printed off to make a copy texturally complete and therefore saleable. 113 00:14:03,430 --> 00:14:10,000 As was pointed out nearly 60 years ago by two people, I'm happy to remember his old friends, William H. 114 00:14:10,000 --> 00:14:14,320 Qadi and his then Liberian miner Brian, a small, 115 00:14:14,320 --> 00:14:22,120 easily overlooked layout error in the Gutenberg Bible proves to be remarkably powerful in outlining the first draughts, 116 00:14:22,120 --> 00:14:29,920 so to speak, of the descent of Latin Bible printing from the Gutenberg Bible to the end of the 15th century. 117 00:14:29,920 --> 00:14:37,790 This, too, qualifies in my mind as a delightful a happy ER in large part because it is so minor, 118 00:14:37,790 --> 00:14:44,130 there is no textual error at all, only an absence of white space in one place. 119 00:14:44,130 --> 00:14:51,690 And setting the gospel of Matthew, the compositor, whether by oversight or a flaw and the examplar, 120 00:14:51,690 --> 00:15:00,910 did not set a two line initial space for Chapter 22. Could we see slide eight? 121 00:15:00,910 --> 00:15:09,280 This was. Noticed in the printing shop before all the sheets had gone out and the Munich copy, 122 00:15:09,280 --> 00:15:15,640 but not the Vienna copy of the printed lubrication guide has a handwritten annotation 123 00:15:15,640 --> 00:15:21,610 you see in the lower margin on the left instructing how to correct this error. 124 00:15:21,610 --> 00:15:33,270 And next slide is a close up. Of that instruction and it tells you a read paragraph mark was to be inserted before the chapters, 125 00:15:33,270 --> 00:15:45,350 first words at respondants uses Dixit, Yttrium in parabolas, etc. and the number XXIII was to be added in the margin. 126 00:15:45,350 --> 00:15:53,270 Slide 10, please. This instruction was carried out accurately by the rubric of a considerable number of copies, 127 00:15:53,270 --> 00:16:01,340 such as that at the Bodleian Library, which you see here, although no lubrication guards accompany any of these copies. 128 00:16:01,340 --> 00:16:13,410 We may presume that originally they had such cards with the same manuscript annotation we find on the Munich tabular rubric from. 129 00:16:13,410 --> 00:16:22,600 At least 14 copies of the Gutenberg Bible marked Matthew 22 in the manner prescribed by the minute copy and that you see here. 130 00:16:22,600 --> 00:16:28,810 Eight copies, slide 11, please, made no chapter division at this place, 131 00:16:28,810 --> 00:16:39,580 their copies of the tabula rubric of may have been copies issued before the mistake was discovered and the annotation was added for correcting. 132 00:16:39,580 --> 00:16:46,810 And then eight copies, Slide 12, including the Munich copy in the National Library of Scotland. 133 00:16:46,810 --> 00:16:53,050 Copy had a different place for Chapter 22. They started it one verse later today. 134 00:16:53,050 --> 00:17:03,240 It's Matthew 22, verse two beginning C.M.A. Factum est regnum Kyly to a king who prepares a wedding feast for his son. 135 00:17:03,240 --> 00:17:09,960 The Kopi copy, in fact, though, it preserves the tabula rubick did not follow it anywhere in any of its rubrics. 136 00:17:09,960 --> 00:17:16,350 The same is true of other copies marking Chapter 22 at similar Factum EST, 137 00:17:16,350 --> 00:17:23,160 such as the copies that Stuttgart, Yale Humanities Research and National Library of Scotland. 138 00:17:23,160 --> 00:17:28,350 The rubric nations are independent of the printed guide. 139 00:17:28,350 --> 00:17:35,520 It matters little whether Matthew, 22, is marked out and Jesus replied and spoke again in parables or at the parable, 140 00:17:35,520 --> 00:17:39,780 the kingdom of Heaven is like a king who prepared a marriage feast for his son. 141 00:17:39,780 --> 00:17:42,800 It is just a matter of tradition. 142 00:17:42,800 --> 00:17:53,240 Oddly, the two 13th century guides to Paris choppering or lanterne choppering, as they called it, mentioned in an earlier lecture, differ here. 143 00:17:53,240 --> 00:18:02,160 The guide in the Bibliotheque Nacionale Latin one four four one seven, Maqsood at 22, one at respondants Yeezus. 144 00:18:02,160 --> 00:18:12,080 We see the slide 13, please. And the guide here in Oxford at Modlin Latin one to 168 marks 22 to C.M.A. 145 00:18:12,080 --> 00:18:20,810 Factum est. And just pause for a minute to see if you can spot the Red 22 and then go over to the left. 146 00:18:20,810 --> 00:18:30,380 C.M.A Factum est Regnum Collura, one of the so-called crown witnesses to the Paris text. 147 00:18:30,380 --> 00:18:39,260 The Sanjak Bible at the Bibliotheque Masino does mark at 22 one the way the Gutenberg Bible annotation said to. 148 00:18:39,260 --> 00:18:50,060 But most of the Paris Bibles like the mean a copy of the Gutenberg Bible market in this way, similarly optimist. 149 00:18:50,060 --> 00:18:57,430 When the various shops of Mentalist and Strausberg Fister in Bamburgh of Fiston Schiffrin Mights and a Vegas 150 00:18:57,430 --> 00:19:04,670 Stein in Strasbourg were setting the respective editions from different copies of the Gutenberg Bible. 151 00:19:04,670 --> 00:19:13,520 None of those copies had been lubricated yet, and so none of the composers working on Matthew saw a chapter division were Chapter two would begin. 152 00:19:13,520 --> 00:19:19,130 They simply said text continuously at this place just as the exemplary stood slide. 153 00:19:19,130 --> 00:19:25,460 14, please. So this is the 36 line Bible, the copy at shyte library. 154 00:19:25,460 --> 00:19:28,850 You can see a later reader way over in the march. 155 00:19:28,850 --> 00:19:38,280 And there wrote a little on 22 and he treated it as similarly factum est. 156 00:19:38,280 --> 00:19:44,910 But in the first in Shefer Shop after the printing, but before the sheets were distributed for sale, 157 00:19:44,910 --> 00:19:55,350 this error of omission of a Chapter 22 was noticed. The page containing the error was hand corrected or a combination of hand and typed corrected. 158 00:19:55,350 --> 00:20:01,290 As you'll see, Chapter two being 22, being marked a 22 to similarly factum est. 159 00:20:01,290 --> 00:20:08,340 Again, the correction was carried out in two different ways, one less elegantly for the paper sheets. 160 00:20:08,340 --> 00:20:15,520 Slide 15. Bodily copy. 161 00:20:15,520 --> 00:20:24,070 They're the last word of the line simile was partially scratched out, and that allowed a blank, 162 00:20:24,070 --> 00:20:32,740 a little roughened blank piece of blank of paper where the S as a verbal letter could be written in red ink, 163 00:20:32,740 --> 00:20:37,360 thus not as a full two line chapter initials. So it broke the hierarchy. 164 00:20:37,360 --> 00:20:45,810 It wasn't elegant in the chapter. No, it was written in the entire column, which is, again, a slight inelegance. 165 00:20:45,810 --> 00:20:52,740 Printed text on vellum can be carefully scraped and washed away without seriously damaging the surface. 166 00:20:52,740 --> 00:20:56,430 So for the vellum sheets, you see the next slide, please. 167 00:20:56,430 --> 00:21:04,410 The entire final word simile was scraped away to make a place for the chapter number 22 to be written in. 168 00:21:04,410 --> 00:21:10,950 And then the following four lines of type were fully erased for new lines were set, 169 00:21:10,950 --> 00:21:17,550 including a two line indentation to put in the initial and those new lines were stamped or printed 170 00:21:17,550 --> 00:21:24,930 under the press in the correct position because these lines were not part of the original typed page. 171 00:21:24,930 --> 00:21:31,200 They can often be seen to be very slightly skewed with respect to the lines above and below them, 172 00:21:31,200 --> 00:21:37,890 varying from copy to copy, a pale iRace ghost of the original setting lies under them. 173 00:21:37,890 --> 00:21:47,950 So there are actually two strata at that point on that page of the First and Shefer Bible. 174 00:21:47,950 --> 00:21:57,010 William Shyte and miner Brian tracked the treatment of Matthew, 22, in all 15th century Latin editions, and they arranged the treatments and columns. 175 00:21:57,010 --> 00:22:02,920 They found that the additions that made no demarcation of Matthew, 22, died out rather quickly. 176 00:22:02,920 --> 00:22:11,890 Those early editions set from the Gutenberg Bible, followed by three Baso editions dying out in the mid 14th 70s. 177 00:22:11,890 --> 00:22:18,130 A relatively small number of additions marked it Matthew, 22 one at Respondants Yasu, 178 00:22:18,130 --> 00:22:26,920 starting with the Baso edition of 14 75 and all of Antonenko Burgers Mini Nurnberg editions followed that. 179 00:22:26,920 --> 00:22:36,550 This column also includes two editions unconnected with the Gutenberg Bible, one printed in Pugin's in 14 75, 180 00:22:36,550 --> 00:22:43,870 the other in Vicenza for 1876, both of which were set from independent manuscripts. 181 00:22:43,870 --> 00:22:48,940 So there that's what their exemplar had as choppering. 182 00:22:48,940 --> 00:22:55,210 But the major column is that with Matthew, 22 marked at 22, first to similarly Factum est, 183 00:22:55,210 --> 00:23:04,630 beginning with the 14 62 Forstchen Shefer Bible continuing to Sweetenham in Pantazis 14 Seventy-one Bible from there to Franciscus 184 00:23:04,630 --> 00:23:16,450 Renner's 14 75 Venis Bible and onward to all other Venice and Bazzel Bibles and then Bibles printed from other later shops in Naples. 185 00:23:16,450 --> 00:23:25,910 Liohn Cologne's Strausberg SPIA and Brushoff. This is our strong hint that the long term descent of the Gutenberg Bibles text, 186 00:23:25,910 --> 00:23:35,510 with whatever subsequent changes of readings in different places were made in later editions, was transmitted via the 14th 62 Bible. 187 00:23:35,510 --> 00:23:49,110 I have not seen a return to marking Chapter 22 at 22 one at Respondants Iesus until Robert attends 1028 edition. 188 00:23:49,110 --> 00:23:50,970 Although it has not been discussed as such, 189 00:23:50,970 --> 00:24:03,600 the 14 62 Bible at places consciously revised the Gutenberg Bible text on the basis of other sources or some other source that is beyond the textual 190 00:24:03,600 --> 00:24:14,250 profile of first and second settings in the copy or copies of the Gutenberg Bible used as examplar additional textual emendations were made. 191 00:24:14,250 --> 00:24:26,100 In his monograph, The Text People, Heinrich Schneider listed a half dozen scattered places where the reading of the 14 62 Carex the Gutenberg Bible. 192 00:24:26,100 --> 00:24:33,520 But he did not draw a general conclusion. The pathway toward a deepened picture of Emendations in the first inch of her 193 00:24:33,520 --> 00:24:40,000 Bible was laid by Gerhardt Pervert's in his 2009 study in the Gutenberg yearbook, 194 00:24:40,000 --> 00:24:45,640 where he examined manuscript emendations in several copies of the Gutenberg Bible, 195 00:24:45,640 --> 00:24:52,100 including the Chingon vellum copy whose Illuminations can be localised to meIt's. 196 00:24:52,100 --> 00:24:56,720 Profits did not examine the vellum copy at the Bibliotheque Nursing home to France, 197 00:24:56,720 --> 00:25:01,490 some of whose illuminations are related to those of the Leuchtenburg of the Gutenberg 198 00:25:01,490 --> 00:25:07,130 copy and whose original owner was the mine's Benedictine convent of St. James, 199 00:25:07,130 --> 00:25:12,030 the great one of the leading convents to the Bernfeld reform. 200 00:25:12,030 --> 00:25:17,370 Well, that copy also contains a sizeable number of emendations, 201 00:25:17,370 --> 00:25:23,880 often so carefully and neatly made by erasure on the vellum that they can be hard to spot. 202 00:25:23,880 --> 00:25:32,010 And there is a quite high but not invariable correlation between the emendations and the good Chingon and Paris copies, 203 00:25:32,010 --> 00:25:34,320 both originally in mines owned. 204 00:25:34,320 --> 00:25:44,580 It might finally, when these places of emendations are tracked down in the printed text of the first and Shiffer for 1862 Bible, 205 00:25:44,580 --> 00:25:49,350 we very frequently find that they were included also in that edition. 206 00:25:49,350 --> 00:25:54,960 Thus, notionally beyond the original exemplars for the Gutenberg Bible. 207 00:25:54,960 --> 00:26:00,750 We further see in minds a few years later a kind of pool of corrections. 208 00:26:00,750 --> 00:26:10,950 And we must suppose that there was some individual or small group of individuals who applied corrections to two local copies of the Gutenberg Bible, 209 00:26:10,950 --> 00:26:21,160 the ones now and getting in in Paris, and also communicated them to first and Shiffer when a new Bible was being printed in 14 63. 210 00:26:21,160 --> 00:26:26,750 So we have a triad of Bibles to study with regard to textual state. 211 00:26:26,750 --> 00:26:32,600 A good example amongst many is a place where the Gutenberg Bible text was correct and where the 212 00:26:32,600 --> 00:26:40,010 good can copy and the Paris vellum copy and the Paris vellum copy from the Convent of St. James, 213 00:26:40,010 --> 00:26:47,510 the Yakob Spag and the first and Shuford printed Bible all add an inauthentic interpellation. 214 00:26:47,510 --> 00:26:53,720 This is a wisdom. Chapter seven, verse nine, where we see the setting of the Gutenberg Bible. 215 00:26:53,720 --> 00:26:58,690 That's Slide 17, please. 216 00:26:58,690 --> 00:27:17,950 Last line is correct, and they can't say Nagant say victory marks the authentic end of that verse, the or the Paris vellum copy slide 18, please. 217 00:27:17,950 --> 00:27:28,030 Added a clause in manuscript which is not authentic, is not part of the Hebrew, it's not part of Jerome's translation. 218 00:27:28,030 --> 00:27:35,020 Well, no, I'm sorry Sapienza was not translated by Jerome, not part of the Greek text. 219 00:27:35,020 --> 00:27:46,810 So there it's added in manuscript and the point of interpellation shown then slide 19, the first and Shiffer Edition has the identical interpolation. 220 00:27:46,810 --> 00:27:49,540 The editors of the Rome Old Testament, 221 00:27:49,540 --> 00:28:00,100 the standard scholarly edition record this interpellation in the Theodore Feehan reception of the Carolingian period and then in the Paris Bible. 222 00:28:00,100 --> 00:28:10,910 So here again is a case where the Gutenberg Bible text is correct and is not that of the Paris Bible. 223 00:28:10,910 --> 00:28:21,110 A copy of the first and Shiffer Bible was used as the exemplar for the Royal Folio printed by Sweetenham in Pinots in Room 14, 1871, 224 00:28:21,110 --> 00:28:30,350 this Bible varied from the tradition of 15th century Bibles, both manuscript and printed to a degree that can almost be considered eccentric. 225 00:28:30,350 --> 00:28:38,410 It was printed with the presses and Tykwer, a Roman font in long lines which do not make for comfortable reading. 226 00:28:38,410 --> 00:28:47,320 As Preface was printed, a humanist Latin translation of the letter of Aristarchus, a Jewish Hellenistic Sude epigraph, 227 00:28:47,320 --> 00:28:53,740 which recounts in detail a miraculous legend emphasising the accuracy with within 228 00:28:53,740 --> 00:29:00,030 with with which the Septuagint Pentateuch have been translated from the Hebrew. 229 00:29:00,030 --> 00:29:05,620 Apart from this humanist signal, Sweetenham in penance or rather their literary editor, 230 00:29:05,620 --> 00:29:14,020 John Andreo Bussy consciously drew the addition closer to the tradition of the Paris Bible in several ways. 231 00:29:14,020 --> 00:29:19,840 First, apocryphal for Essar, it was emitted as it was never part of the Paris Bible tradition. 232 00:29:19,840 --> 00:29:26,080 Second, slide 20, please. Swaffham and Pantazis additions added for the first time, 233 00:29:26,080 --> 00:29:31,450 the supplementary index of Hebrew names in alphabetical index was symbolic 234 00:29:31,450 --> 00:29:36,910 etymology parsing of names that have been a standard feature of the Paris Bible. 235 00:29:36,910 --> 00:29:43,600 This index has recently been very revealingly studied by Al Peleg in our sample group, 236 00:29:43,600 --> 00:29:51,520 a 15th century manuscript, Bibles, 30 codices include the interpretations in 45 like it, 237 00:29:51,520 --> 00:30:03,280 but its reappearance in print in the Swinomish Pinots edition encouraged a revival for became a standard feature of most later printed FOLGATE Bibles, 238 00:30:03,280 --> 00:30:14,650 continuing well into the third decade of the 16th century. Third, slide 21, please. 239 00:30:14,650 --> 00:30:27,340 Could you go back to slide 20 for a second? Yeah, I got the slides in the wrong order. 240 00:30:27,340 --> 00:30:36,640 Go to the next slide, please. We're going to back up there is the index of Hebrew names could have sworn I put this in the right order. 241 00:30:36,640 --> 00:30:43,330 Let's go to the next slide. And this is the other feature of swine pinots. 242 00:30:43,330 --> 00:30:51,220 They added almost all of the standard Paris Bible prologues that were missing from the Gutenberg Bible and its immediate descendants, 243 00:30:51,220 --> 00:30:55,750 and particularly the large group attached to the 12th minor prophets. 244 00:30:55,750 --> 00:31:01,840 But also they added Paris Bible Prologues to Chronicles Wisdom, Matthew and Apocalypse. 245 00:31:01,840 --> 00:31:07,360 The only omissions from the Paris group were the two Maccabees prophecies of ravenous Malphrus, 246 00:31:07,360 --> 00:31:14,290 which thereby dropped out of sight in all later pure text editions of the Vulgate Bible. 247 00:31:14,290 --> 00:31:19,720 So a Paris Bible, something very like it must have been at hand when a copy of the First and Shefer 248 00:31:19,720 --> 00:31:26,770 Bible was being prepared a setting copy in the Swingman Pinots group shop. 249 00:31:26,770 --> 00:31:34,590 But if any significant editing of the text occurred. But in Rome it is not so far been noticed. 250 00:31:34,590 --> 00:31:42,810 As an edited text, then the first stage of the printed Latin Bible is the Gutenberg Bible, where signs of editing are especially strong. 251 00:31:42,810 --> 00:31:44,850 And for Ezra, 252 00:31:44,850 --> 00:31:55,050 the second stage is the first in Shefer Bible 14 62 with its emendations from what may be seen as a pool of variant readings gathered in minds, 253 00:31:55,050 --> 00:32:03,900 perhaps centred in the Ya'akov Spirit convent and entered also in the Paris and getting in copies of the Gutenberg Bible itself, 254 00:32:03,900 --> 00:32:12,930 the third stage and essentially the last until Robert Etienne's Paris Bible 1028 is the Bible printed in Venice. 255 00:32:12,930 --> 00:32:18,180 Fourteen seventy five by Franciscus Renner and Nicholas de Frank Fortia. 256 00:32:18,180 --> 00:32:28,550 See the next slide. Yes, that's it, unlike so in Pantazis Bible and all the northern European folgate bibles printed to date. 257 00:32:28,550 --> 00:32:34,300 This was a chancery, not Royal Folio. 258 00:32:34,300 --> 00:32:44,920 With leaf height of roughly 30 as against roughly 40 centimetres for a Royal Folio Royal Folio, Bibles continued to be produced in Germany until 1880. 259 00:32:44,920 --> 00:32:52,330 But apart from these starting in 14 75, typical Latin Bibles were chancery folio in size. 260 00:32:52,330 --> 00:32:55,690 A few were median folio, one printed by Jensen. 261 00:32:55,690 --> 00:33:04,120 Eventually they were printed an even smaller formats, as in Yohann Froben 14, 1891 Bazzel Octavo Bible. 262 00:33:04,120 --> 00:33:15,210 Larger paper was used only for Bibles with surrounding commentaries of the Glosser ordinary of Nickless to and a view of St. Share. 263 00:33:15,210 --> 00:33:27,570 Renner's, 14 75 people use the swine himan pinots 14 seventy-one edition as its exemplar, but made extensive changes in both contents and text. 264 00:33:27,570 --> 00:33:32,790 There needs to be a short side note here, for one good scholar has doubted this statement, 265 00:33:32,790 --> 00:33:40,850 which admittedly I first made in a rather offhand manner in an auction catalogue description 30 plus years ago. 266 00:33:40,850 --> 00:33:49,990 He has suggested forcefully, but without citing any textual evidence that Renner's Bible was set from a copy of the first in Shefer Bible. 267 00:33:49,990 --> 00:33:56,290 To avoid seeming epidemic, Dick, let me review quickly reasons to believe that the Swine Human Pinots edition, 268 00:33:56,290 --> 00:34:03,490 not Christian Shiffer, was the fundamental exemplar of the Renner Bible for 1875. 269 00:34:03,490 --> 00:34:09,100 In his 1922 memoir on the text of the Arctic Dome on Recontact, 270 00:34:09,100 --> 00:34:20,340 coalitions showed already three places in Genesis and numbers where swine himan pinots plus Renner shared readings against Western chauffeur. 271 00:34:20,340 --> 00:34:29,940 In three Regnum, that is First Kings, Chapter three, the Gutenberg Bible and Christian Chauffeur both omit verse 23, 272 00:34:29,940 --> 00:34:38,000 which has restored both in swingman pinots and in runner. Psalm 17, verse 14, 15, 273 00:34:38,000 --> 00:34:43,700 Shiffer follows the Gutenberg Bible when printing erroneously the verb intro Evett 274 00:34:43,700 --> 00:34:49,610 for in Tornoe it in both Twynam and pinots and render the verb is corrected. 275 00:34:49,610 --> 00:34:57,900 All of these create difficulties. If we suppose the Regner edition to have been set from Christian Shiffer four, we must hypothesise that Swinomish, 276 00:34:57,900 --> 00:35:09,000 Tanaz in 14, Seventy-one and Renren 14 75 independently and coincidentally made identical textual corrections in each place. 277 00:35:09,000 --> 00:35:17,550 Still, other passages can be cited where swingman pinots and Renner share readings that differ from Twistin Shiffer, and in every such case, 278 00:35:17,550 --> 00:35:26,660 the believer in Christian Shifter's Bible is the exemplar for Fariña must once more and once more again appeal to coincidence. 279 00:35:26,660 --> 00:35:28,280 Moreover, in general, 280 00:35:28,280 --> 00:35:37,190 in many dozens of places where the spelling of proper names differs between first and Shiffer and swingman pinots as they frequently do, 281 00:35:37,190 --> 00:35:42,110 Renner's orthography follows 100 pinots. And finally, 282 00:35:42,110 --> 00:35:52,850 it seems clear that the interpretations of Hebrew names in Renner's in Renner's edition copies that of swingman pinots hear the identify here. 283 00:35:52,850 --> 00:36:03,080 The identity of orthography is especially persuasive. I believe we may accept that the first interfer Bible is a child of the Gutenberg Bible. 284 00:36:03,080 --> 00:36:11,260 The Swinomish Independence Bible is a grandchild and the Bible is a great grandchild. 285 00:36:11,260 --> 00:36:18,250 Renner's edition restored for Ezra, whose text could have been supplied from any of the Northern FOLGATE editions, 286 00:36:18,250 --> 00:36:24,580 descended from the Gutenberg Bible, not excluding the first interfer Bible for four, 287 00:36:24,580 --> 00:36:32,830 for indeed, we know from localiser, Illuminations and early provenances that the 14th 62 Bible was marketed in Italy, 288 00:36:32,830 --> 00:36:37,640 as it was also in France and for that matter, in England. 289 00:36:37,640 --> 00:36:44,060 As mentioned, Renner included the interpretations of Hebrew names, but not the letter of Aristarchus. 290 00:36:44,060 --> 00:36:54,470 The letter stars appeared in just one more Bible that we know little in detail about the wider distribution of copies of Twynam and Pantazis Bible. 291 00:36:54,470 --> 00:36:57,320 Some copies were sold north of the Alps, 292 00:36:57,320 --> 00:37:06,330 as attested by the Bodleian copy of Volume two with its high quality South German two colour lubricated filigree initials. 293 00:37:06,330 --> 00:37:11,850 Which we saw misplaced and which makes me think that. 294 00:37:11,850 --> 00:37:20,030 The version of the PowerPoint we're looking at is not the latest version, but we will continue. 295 00:37:20,030 --> 00:37:27,560 One copy reached Nuremberg, where the first prisoner of the city, Johann Vincent Schmidt, used it as exemplar for a Latin Bible, 296 00:37:27,560 --> 00:37:38,420 completed the ninth of December 14th, 75, just three weeks after Koeberg completed the first of his numerous Latin Bibles in the same city, Zentan. 297 00:37:38,420 --> 00:37:45,800 Schmidt copied the swingman pennants edition and four, including the letter of Aristarchus and omitting for Ezra. 298 00:37:45,800 --> 00:37:53,510 His is a handsome book with headlines printed in Lombard capitals and with Read Printed Teacherly and Swinomish Pantazis Edition. 299 00:37:53,510 --> 00:37:54,770 They're black. 300 00:37:54,770 --> 00:38:05,340 And moreover, he printed his Bible on Imperial Paper significantly larger than royal with leaf height of a tall copy measuring some 47 centimetres. 301 00:38:05,340 --> 00:38:15,630 Could we see Slide 24 in? That's the often and printers devices of this Vincent Schmidt edition. 302 00:38:15,630 --> 00:38:22,110 The call often of Renner's edition contains no boasts, but it was an extensively edited production, 303 00:38:22,110 --> 00:38:29,790 the additional Paris Bible prologues of the Swinomish pennants editions were included with one noteworthy exception. 304 00:38:29,790 --> 00:38:34,980 But besides the Sun, 27 more prologues were supplied from older traditions. 305 00:38:34,980 --> 00:38:42,720 That is none of our recent compositions. The 12 minor prophets were almost buried within a matrix of 28 prologues. 306 00:38:42,720 --> 00:38:48,900 An argument to one change of prologue within the minor prophets provides an earmark by 307 00:38:48,900 --> 00:38:55,350 which one can easily see how many subsequent Latin editions descended from Renner's Bible, 308 00:38:55,350 --> 00:39:02,160 which was the link and by far the longest ascending chain from the Gutenberg Bible in Swinomish pinots. 309 00:39:02,160 --> 00:39:13,180 The second prologue to Jonah is the traditional parece one no by colourist 32 beginning Younus Colomba, we see slide 25. 310 00:39:13,180 --> 00:39:20,370 Yes. Its source was Isidore's tracked on the births and deaths of the church fathers. 311 00:39:20,370 --> 00:39:27,060 Renner's edition substituted for this a much briefer prologue, likewise beginning Younus Colomba, 312 00:39:27,060 --> 00:39:34,500 which is slightly modified from Jérome summary of Jonah in his long letter to Pollyannas Paul of NOLA, 313 00:39:34,500 --> 00:39:40,530 the lengthy letter which became an iconic Bibles, and then on into the Gutenberg Bible, 314 00:39:40,530 --> 00:39:48,510 the preface to the whole Bible prologue one thus far, the first few words we can immediately determine which prologue we have. 315 00:39:48,510 --> 00:39:57,930 Younus Colomba Shadowlands Izidor from the Paris Tradition or Youngness Colomba Pope Kareema, 316 00:39:57,930 --> 00:40:09,840 the most beautiful dive who in his shipwreck foretold the sacrifice of Jesus coming from Jarome. 317 00:40:09,840 --> 00:40:16,230 In fact, apart from that for 1976 Zentan Schmidt edition, the Paris prologue now disappears. 318 00:40:16,230 --> 00:40:21,750 Essentially, every succeeding edition uses the brief Jérome prologue of Renner's edition to 319 00:40:21,750 --> 00:40:28,460 the end of the 15th century and again well into the third decade of the 16th. 320 00:40:28,460 --> 00:40:36,320 The textural Emendations and Renner's Bible are extensive with many small corrections of textual errors, but the hidden, 321 00:40:36,320 --> 00:40:41,150 strong influence of Renner's edition on the Vulgate text extending down to the 322 00:40:41,150 --> 00:40:47,600 Clementine Folgate is perhaps more vividly seen in its errors than in its corrections. 323 00:40:47,600 --> 00:40:55,040 This leads us back to the generalisation with which we closed the first lecture generalisation approved by the major scholars 324 00:40:55,040 --> 00:41:04,460 of the history of the Vulgate that the Gutenberg Bible is in essence a descendant of the 13th century Paris Bible ascension. 325 00:41:04,460 --> 00:41:13,760 In the second lecture, I argued against overconfidence in this formulation, not by putting forward a particular alternate hypothesis, 326 00:41:13,760 --> 00:41:21,380 but only by emphasising that this generalisation needs to be tested by considering the evidence that goes against it. 327 00:41:21,380 --> 00:41:28,790 In any scholarly investigation, if we agree that certain evidence agreeable to a hypothesis counts in its favour, 328 00:41:28,790 --> 00:41:36,140 we must acknowledge the possibility of evidence that is not agreeable to the hypothesis and therefore weakens it. 329 00:41:36,140 --> 00:41:43,740 And we must judge all evidence by an equal standard. If we play favourites, we close our minds. 330 00:41:43,740 --> 00:41:51,720 The Paris Bible reception was heavily criticised for its errors in the 60s by the English Franciscan Roger Bacon, 331 00:41:51,720 --> 00:41:57,330 who in fact first asserted what we know from surviving Bibles to be the case, 332 00:41:57,330 --> 00:42:02,850 that there was in the 13th century such a concept as a Paris Bible, the exemplar, 333 00:42:02,850 --> 00:42:08,880 Parisians say, as he referred to it in his opus, Maia's address to comment. 334 00:42:08,880 --> 00:42:16,750 The fourth, Bakan gave an example of one such Paris error appearing at the end of Deuteronomy 27. 335 00:42:16,750 --> 00:42:27,490 This chapter ends with a series of malediction to be proclaimed by the Levites, to each of which the assembled people are to call out Amen. 336 00:42:27,490 --> 00:42:37,750 One of the malediction verse 24 is against he who shall have struck down his neighbour in secret kwi Klumb perquisite Proxicom sue him. 337 00:42:37,750 --> 00:42:43,510 And then the next authentic verse 25 is against he who accepts a bribe to take an innocent 338 00:42:43,510 --> 00:42:54,570 life kwi a chip it munira kutya animo sanguinis Innocenti slide 26 should show you the. 339 00:42:54,570 --> 00:43:06,930 Correct, reading in the Gutenberg Bible. In Paris, Bibles, let's go to slide 27, a verse is interpolated between those, 340 00:43:06,930 --> 00:43:16,260 it's a curse against he who sleeps with his neighbour's wife, KWI, Dormont Kormákur, approximately Sui and you should see it. 341 00:43:16,260 --> 00:43:28,950 The third line down, beginning with the word Dormont. The Gutenberg Bible did not have that Paris interpretation, 342 00:43:28,950 --> 00:43:36,150 nor was it included in the first in Shiffer Bible, nor in the swimming and pinots Bible set from Houston. 343 00:43:36,150 --> 00:43:40,740 Shiffer, this interpolated verse first appears in Renner's edition. 344 00:43:40,740 --> 00:43:49,770 The anonymous editor impending from a manuscript Bible at Sea Image 28, please, that had this Paris reading. 345 00:43:49,770 --> 00:43:57,360 As Bakan pointed out more than 750 years ago, this reading is indeed characteristic of the Paris Bible. 346 00:43:57,360 --> 00:44:05,250 It is present, for instance, in the manuscript we mentioned at the start, Bibliotheque 267, 347 00:44:05,250 --> 00:44:13,940 which Heinrich Schneider identified as having other readings significantly shared with the Gutenberg Bible in the Pentateuch portion. 348 00:44:13,940 --> 00:44:21,500 Amongst the sample group, a 15th century manuscript, Bibles, 46 of them have this Paris and interpellation, 349 00:44:21,500 --> 00:44:30,710 do not sleep with your neighbour's wife and 28 Lockette, although in two of the latter it was added marginally by a second hand. 350 00:44:30,710 --> 00:44:39,830 In his opus, Menas also addressed to Clement, the fourth Baker noted another Paris corruption occurring at the end of Chapter eight of Mark, 351 00:44:39,830 --> 00:44:44,570 where Jesus challenges his disciples for whoever is ashamed of me. 352 00:44:44,570 --> 00:44:52,010 In my words, then, when he comes before the glory of the father, the son of man will be ashamed of him. 353 00:44:52,010 --> 00:45:00,530 The operative words for this state of shame in Mark are confuses and confound later. 354 00:45:00,530 --> 00:45:08,420 But in the Paris Bible, the operative words or rather confesses at country to giving what really is an 355 00:45:08,420 --> 00:45:13,830 opposite meaning whoever acknowledges me will be at his death acknowledged. 356 00:45:13,830 --> 00:45:22,260 Completely backwards, this textile corruption of confesses Coffee-table Tabata is indeed an earmark of the Paris Bible. 357 00:45:22,260 --> 00:45:39,720 Could we see slide 29? It's the very end of the second line is con abbreviated and then fussiest, starting third line, continuing from their. 358 00:45:39,720 --> 00:45:47,220 The corrupt Paris reading was brought into print by the 14 75 Rennert Bible. 359 00:45:47,220 --> 00:45:58,730 See the next slide, please. We are missing that, so I go back one more, please. 360 00:45:58,730 --> 00:46:08,680 Charles. Yeah, I'm I'm sorry, this was my PowerPoint confusion. 361 00:46:08,680 --> 00:46:24,320 Go to the next one. Which is Gutenberg Bible, that same slide again in the sample group of 15th century manuscripts at Mark 838. 362 00:46:24,320 --> 00:46:34,730 This is a widespread error, 53 of the codices have incorrect confessors and only 12 joined the Gutenberg Bible and have incorrect 363 00:46:34,730 --> 00:46:43,220 confuses the two and Cleanable mentioned editions briefly mentioned already set from Italian manuscripts. 364 00:46:43,220 --> 00:46:46,910 Piacenza Vicenzo both have the incorrect Paris reading. 365 00:46:46,910 --> 00:46:55,650 And in fact, the misreading confesses also went to middle English, for it is reflected in both of the Wickliffe eight versions. 366 00:46:55,650 --> 00:46:59,610 Bacon was particularly scornful of this error in the Paris Bible, 367 00:46:59,610 --> 00:47:06,090 for the passage was correctly cited by a guston in his controversial system, the monarchy. 368 00:47:06,090 --> 00:47:12,360 He pointed out that the corresponding words of the Greek text clearly referred to shame. 369 00:47:12,360 --> 00:47:19,650 And finally, what he called a provocative Simmo. He noted that if the U.S. and canons had been consulted, 370 00:47:19,650 --> 00:47:26,760 readers would immediately have found the parallel passage in what we now identify as Luke 926, 371 00:47:26,760 --> 00:47:36,700 where the corresponding verb is arabesque to blush, to feel shame, thus giving the lie to can to your. 372 00:47:36,700 --> 00:47:46,330 But as he noticed, the Paris Bible had expunged the ECB and cannons from its text, so that useful tool was no longer available. 373 00:47:46,330 --> 00:47:58,080 But in this Shote copy of the. Gutenberg Bible, you can see at the top there that the UCB and Canon numbers were written in by hand, 374 00:47:58,080 --> 00:48:05,000 giving the cross references to the parallel passages in Luke and Matthew. 375 00:48:05,000 --> 00:48:09,980 Bacon's treatment of this passage in the Paris Bible was a model of clear thinking, 376 00:48:09,980 --> 00:48:17,240 and we may easily believe that he would not have been favourably impressed by the editors of the Vulgate Bible in the printing shops of the 377 00:48:17,240 --> 00:48:27,560 later 15th and 16th centuries who passed the error on faithfully from one edition to the next dozens of times over for more than a century, 378 00:48:27,560 --> 00:48:37,300 frequently in editions whose coliforms asserted that they had been dilettantism, amendatory or other words to like effect. 379 00:48:37,300 --> 00:48:43,480 The distinctive Paris readings in Deuteronomy 27 and Mark eight absent from the Gutenberg Bible, 380 00:48:43,480 --> 00:48:51,520 but entered into the printed tradition by an editor working for Renner and 14 75 provide further evidence. 381 00:48:51,520 --> 00:48:53,710 Although this is not a numbers game, 382 00:48:53,710 --> 00:49:01,070 that the characterisation of the Gutenberg Bible is a direct descendant of the Paris Bible is at least oversimplified. 383 00:49:01,070 --> 00:49:07,890 The fact is, we do not have enough information to draw any valid picture of the very paths of transmission, 384 00:49:07,890 --> 00:49:17,540 the Vulgate text in the 14th and 15th centuries. A first step might be to gather a much wider range of distinctive Paris Bible readings 385 00:49:17,540 --> 00:49:22,280 that would cover the books of both testaments with a well-made checklist of, 386 00:49:22,280 --> 00:49:23,780 say, 100 such readings. 387 00:49:23,780 --> 00:49:34,630 We could, as a first step, score each manuscript Bible with the 14th and 15th century and consider whether plausible groupings begin to emerge. 388 00:49:34,630 --> 00:49:40,480 It is only with the appearance of the Gutenberg Bible that we find again solid ground for its text, 389 00:49:40,480 --> 00:49:47,650 taking into account the relatively small group of substantive variance between the first and second settings, 390 00:49:47,650 --> 00:49:55,960 provides a measuring rod for nearly all subsequent Latin Bibles up to the establishment of the Clementine Vulgate, 391 00:49:55,960 --> 00:49:58,980 only three 15th century printed Bibles. 392 00:49:58,980 --> 00:50:05,590 The one of these, in addition of great importance, were set for manuscripts independently of the Gutenberg Bible. 393 00:50:05,590 --> 00:50:14,080 Two of these have been mentioned several times in passing. The first is the fourth 1875 Chancery Cordeaux Bible printed in Pinkins. 394 00:50:14,080 --> 00:50:26,100 We see slide 33. Yes, intended to be a truly portable Bible printed in a minute, but poorly made, 395 00:50:26,100 --> 00:50:32,640 scarcely legible type, its order of text differs dramatically from that of the Paris Bible. 396 00:50:32,640 --> 00:50:42,090 For instance, with Psalms following second chronicles in the New Testament, the Catholic epistles and acts both come after apocalypse. 397 00:50:42,090 --> 00:50:48,690 Only about 15 copies survive, a surprising number of which have French prognoses. 398 00:50:48,690 --> 00:50:56,040 The second is a 14 76 chancellory folio printed in Vicenza by Leonardo Cicatrice. 399 00:50:56,040 --> 00:51:02,040 Its manuscript source presumably lacked both three and four Esraa, for they're included in the Bible. 400 00:51:02,040 --> 00:51:07,140 But in the text that followed the Gutenberg Bible tradition, 401 00:51:07,140 --> 00:51:24,880 both of these editions also Piacenza show their distance from the Paris Bible in their setting of the song of songs we see Slide 34, please. 402 00:51:24,880 --> 00:51:33,250 They include the christianising rubrics that can be referred to as vote chase, that is the allocation of different verses to the voice of Christ, 403 00:51:33,250 --> 00:51:43,420 voice of the church, voice of the spouse, etc. Ideally, the lubricator of this body copy would have underlined them in red for their text. 404 00:51:43,420 --> 00:51:53,770 And slide 35 is an Italian Bible showing the song of songs, the beautiful Albergotti Bible 14 28. 405 00:51:53,770 --> 00:52:01,120 And there you see all of the red rubrics added to the song of songs. 406 00:52:01,120 --> 00:52:07,840 The third Latin Bible, whose text is independent of the Gutenberg Bible is the so-called rush gloss Bible, 407 00:52:07,840 --> 00:52:10,480 a massive imperial folio of fourteen eighty, 408 00:52:10,480 --> 00:52:19,030 which is printed by Adolph Rush in Strasbourg, but whose costs were primarily underwritten by Anton Berger of Nuremberg. 409 00:52:19,030 --> 00:52:25,510 The addition must have been formed from multiple exemplars gathered from a variety of 13th and 410 00:52:25,510 --> 00:52:32,650 very possibly also 12th century codices assembled to produce setting copy for complete Bible. 411 00:52:32,650 --> 00:52:37,210 Essentially, nothing is known in detail about the Bible's exemplary, 412 00:52:37,210 --> 00:52:42,100 but a compilation of almost any passage from any of its books will show that the copy 413 00:52:42,100 --> 00:52:47,680 source for the Bible text itself was not taken from the Gutenberg Bible tradition. 414 00:52:47,680 --> 00:52:58,480 Not that the text form is strikingly different, but rather that numerous small deviations, such as transpositions of words, of word of are pervasive. 415 00:52:58,480 --> 00:53:03,040 On the other hand, three and four Esraa, which had no traditional glasses, 416 00:53:03,040 --> 00:53:11,730 were included in the Bible and drawn from the Gutenberg Bible tradition for the sake of completeness. 417 00:53:11,730 --> 00:53:14,730 We see the next slide. 418 00:53:14,730 --> 00:53:23,850 Yeah, a considerable number of Paris Bible readings appear also in the Bible text, which may reflect on the dates of its exemplary status. 419 00:53:23,850 --> 00:53:28,530 They may be more 13th century than 12th century. 420 00:53:28,530 --> 00:53:38,430 One of these, as illustrated here from the beginning of song of songs, verse seven, if thou no, not a lovely amongst woman, 421 00:53:38,430 --> 00:53:48,330 go and follow the path of the flocks the Volga text has oh lovely amongst woman oh poor care intermediaries. 422 00:53:48,330 --> 00:53:54,960 But in the Paris Bible this is Highton to Paul Kareema, who loveliest amongst woman, amongst women. 423 00:53:54,960 --> 00:53:58,590 And that's what we find in the Russian lost Bible. 424 00:53:58,590 --> 00:54:05,790 The late Mary Dov's edition of the last song of songs has pole care based on the manuscripts she used. 425 00:54:05,790 --> 00:54:16,990 But her apparatus notices the Rush Bibles variant of Paul Kareema, which is a Paris Bible reading. 426 00:54:16,990 --> 00:54:26,320 At the two readings we just reviewed in some detail, that interpretation and Deuteronomy 27, the false reading confesses at the end of March eight, 427 00:54:26,320 --> 00:54:36,910 the Rush Golos Bible leaves out the Deuteronomy interpellation, but reads, confesses and not confuses at Mach eight 38. 428 00:54:36,910 --> 00:54:43,840 This, however, is not to be seen as a reading necessarily introduced from the Paris Bible Bibliotheque 429 00:54:43,840 --> 00:54:50,650 you manuscript Lauten one four four eight is a mid 12th century glossed mark, 430 00:54:50,650 --> 00:54:54,340 part of a large group of early gloss books from the library of St. 431 00:54:54,340 --> 00:54:59,980 Victor of Paris. And it likewise reads, confesses and country Tabata. 432 00:54:59,980 --> 00:55:09,740 It seems likely that the reading of the early gloss texts of Mark subsequently entered the Paris Bible text in the 13th century. 433 00:55:09,740 --> 00:55:16,760 At this point, near the close of our final lecture, we take a long leap forward of more than a century and briefly reassert, 434 00:55:16,760 --> 00:55:23,690 but with some qualifying inflexions, what has been said before, most notably by Dawn on Recontact, 435 00:55:23,690 --> 00:55:33,440 early editor of the Rome Old Testament, a large number of readings of the Gutenberg Bible move on to and are embedded in the 16 Clementine 436 00:55:33,440 --> 00:55:41,720 official editions of the Roman Catholic Church of 1090 and 1092 and all subsequent reprints. 437 00:55:41,720 --> 00:55:48,650 The fundamental cause is the is that the base text, however corrected and modified by later editors, 438 00:55:48,650 --> 00:55:55,700 was always some earlier printed edition whose base text was another even earlier printed edition and so forth. 439 00:55:55,700 --> 00:56:00,710 Back to the Gutenberg Bible. It is rather like the 18th century. 440 00:56:00,710 --> 00:56:09,050 Editors of Shakespeare Nicholas Rowe used to 16 85 fourth folios the base text of his edition. 441 00:56:09,050 --> 00:56:13,490 Then Alexander Pope used Rose Edition as his base text. 442 00:56:13,490 --> 00:56:17,750 Then Lewis Tybalt used Pope's edition as his base text. 443 00:56:17,750 --> 00:56:29,480 However much each editor changed the text and perhaps castigated the recipients of his predecessor, portfolio readings persisted through all. 444 00:56:29,480 --> 00:56:38,090 The qualification to be made, however, is that our equivalent foundation in the 16 Clementine editions is not the Gutenberg Bible, 445 00:56:38,090 --> 00:56:45,180 just as the road to Shakespeare's did not have their foundation directly in the Shakespeare First Folio. 446 00:56:45,180 --> 00:56:50,910 Its foundation, rather, is a doubly amended reception of the Gutenberg Bible, 447 00:56:50,910 --> 00:56:56,670 the first group of emendations was made in the shop of Justin Shaffer and 14 62, 448 00:56:56,670 --> 00:57:02,670 drawing on what we have referred to as a pool of meit's variance readings, as noted. 449 00:57:02,670 --> 00:57:12,600 The basis may have been correction's corrections made at the Benitec Benedictine Convent of the Yakob spag for the first interfer emendations shohei, 450 00:57:12,600 --> 00:57:20,730 but not complete correlation with hand corrections entered in that convent's vellum copy. 451 00:57:20,730 --> 00:57:25,470 Then a second round of emendations, extensive but still not yet fully defined, 452 00:57:25,470 --> 00:57:33,210 was made at the printing shop of Franciscus Renner and Nicholas de Frank Fortia in Venice in 14 seventy five. 453 00:57:33,210 --> 00:57:43,960 And it is the text of this edition. This spread so widely from one addiction to another to the end of the 15th century and far beyond. 454 00:57:43,960 --> 00:57:52,810 A well-rounded account of the transmission of the Vulgate text in the 16th century, down to the 16 Clementine editions would require a six lecture, 455 00:57:52,810 --> 00:58:00,490 perhaps even a seventh lecture, which you would not get one of the most important chapters in the 16th century history. 456 00:58:00,490 --> 00:58:10,840 The text has never been investigated with anything like the fulness it deserves, namely the successive editions of Ruber in the room. 457 00:58:10,840 --> 00:58:20,830 Old Testament scholarly edition regularly gives the readings of Etienne's 15, 32 and 140 editions and its apparatus. 458 00:58:20,830 --> 00:58:25,970 But Eighteens work on the Latin texts cannot be understood without studying side by side. 459 00:58:25,970 --> 00:58:33,130 All three major editions 1028 15, 32 and 15 40. 460 00:58:33,130 --> 00:58:39,940 Moreover, the Rome Old Testament apparatus not infrequently records and unfavoured reading from HCN. 461 00:58:39,940 --> 00:58:57,270 Without Remarque, we see the next slide 37. Yes, look at the third line down, you see the word amen, and you see the little mark after it, 462 00:58:57,270 --> 00:59:02,190 18 mark readings with special symbols to indicate that they were dubious, 463 00:59:02,190 --> 00:59:08,070 such as Latin Interpolations and Old Testament in books that had no Hebrew equivalent. 464 00:59:08,070 --> 00:59:25,590 And this is that same interpretation at Latin at Deuteronomy 27 24, where HCN put a little more long line in front of it and two dots after it. 465 00:59:25,590 --> 00:59:33,360 And that was his way of saying that it isn't really authentic. But he's putting it there because it's part of the tradition. 466 00:59:33,360 --> 00:59:38,400 But his own knowledge tells him it shouldn't be there. 467 00:59:38,400 --> 00:59:48,900 And so in the apparatus of the room, Old Testament, they really should have indicated when Actaeon made an editorial remark, 468 00:59:48,900 --> 00:59:57,610 they should have had a way of distinguishing between that. Eighteens engagement with the Latin Bible text can, in fact, 469 00:59:57,610 --> 01:00:07,180 only be studied from his physical editions and not from the text your apparatus of either the Rome Old Testament or of the Oxford New Testament. 470 01:00:07,180 --> 01:00:15,460 The latter citing only the 1046 reprint of a 1040 royal edition. 471 01:00:15,460 --> 01:00:29,890 See the next slide, please. We'll look briefly at two early 16th century editions to confirm that the influence of the Renner texts was wide ranging. 472 01:00:29,890 --> 01:00:37,880 The first of these is the famous Complutense polyglot, the great multilingual Bible printed at great cost at uncoloured day, 473 01:00:37,880 --> 01:00:49,420 anatase between 15, 13 and 15 17 under the patronage of Cardinal Cisneros, archbishop of Toledo, sometime region of Spain. 474 01:00:49,420 --> 01:00:54,370 Amongst the manuscripts in various languages assembled for consultation on the project 475 01:00:54,370 --> 01:01:00,570 were two major 10th century Bibles in Visigoth script referred to as Complutense, 476 01:01:00,570 --> 01:01:10,300 this one and two. It has repeatedly been stated that these ancient manuscripts were used in establishing the Vulgate text printed in the polyglot, 477 01:01:10,300 --> 01:01:15,270 which thereby was improved beyond the then current standard. 478 01:01:15,270 --> 01:01:22,350 There is no evidence for this, and it could be said with some confidence that for its Latin text, the Complutense, in addition, 479 01:01:22,350 --> 01:01:29,340 simply copied from one of any number of printed of printed Vulgate Bibles of the Renner 480 01:01:29,340 --> 01:01:35,640 kind through a dozen or more editions would have been available in the early 16th century. 481 01:01:35,640 --> 01:01:44,770 All of this type we see this at the passage we have examined and other editions, Mark 838. 482 01:01:44,770 --> 01:01:55,370 Do you see the word confess? It's the eighth line down and it start to me, confesses Furat. 483 01:01:55,370 --> 01:02:08,300 And in front of confessors is a little superscript in that superscript m is to match it up with the corresponding Greek word in column A. 484 01:02:08,300 --> 01:02:20,600 Well, that Greek word in Column A, which has the M is by Shinsei ashamed, and so they matched them up, but they have opposite meanings. 485 01:02:20,600 --> 01:02:28,550 There was no thinking, whatever, no correspondence, whatever, in terms of a mental process. 486 01:02:28,550 --> 01:02:34,010 They just put the superscripts in and kept on going. 487 01:02:34,010 --> 01:02:39,560 And there was a similar dissonance later on at Coffee-table to the compositor set 488 01:02:39,560 --> 01:02:46,850 the Latin text from a random printed Vulgate Bible without any regard to the Greek. 489 01:02:46,850 --> 01:02:52,410 Those fine ancient manuscripts never come into the picture at all. 490 01:02:52,410 --> 01:02:59,020 The second edition to look out briefly, go see the next slide. 491 01:02:59,020 --> 01:03:10,180 Yes is a Corto Bible published by Janta in Venice in 15 11, edited by Venetian Dominican Alberto Castellano. 492 01:03:10,180 --> 01:03:14,590 It was mentioned briefly by Kantai in his 1922 memoir. 493 01:03:14,590 --> 01:03:22,420 It's the first printed edition to include variant readings. And indeed, these variants are advertised on the title page of the book. 494 01:03:22,420 --> 01:03:27,400 It says, with the addition in the margin of diverse variant texts, 495 01:03:27,400 --> 01:03:36,790 an excellent recent study by toonies Fun Lockpick has made a detailed analysis of Castellano sources for the various readings he has added, 496 01:03:36,790 --> 01:03:46,030 showing that he made extensive use of the printed editions of the massive pastilla of U.S. share and also the gloss of ordinary. 497 01:03:46,030 --> 01:03:52,660 And here to we may consider the treatment of Mark 838 and it's at the very top. 498 01:03:52,660 --> 01:04:07,080 There could be a name May and then a kind of a Maltese cross confesses and then in the margin is a well alias found elsewhere. 499 01:04:07,080 --> 01:04:20,380 Confuses. So marked out, no preference is indicated, it should be noted that in the early 14th century, in his widely read Pastilla on the Gospels, 500 01:04:20,380 --> 01:04:27,850 Nicholas Steelier had already identified confesses and contrary to voters, corrupt readings like Roger Bacon. 501 01:04:27,850 --> 01:04:34,960 He pointed to both the Greek text and the parallel passage in Luke, where the verb Arabised Skari was used. 502 01:04:34,960 --> 01:04:44,260 The basis of Castellanos addition was a runner derived edition for it shows the characteristic Grinner earmark in the second prologue to Joona, 503 01:04:44,260 --> 01:04:50,630 that short prologue, which is not the Paris Bible prologue. 504 01:04:50,630 --> 01:04:58,600 Let us conclude and let's go to the final slide. Good one very small place, 505 01:04:58,600 --> 01:05:04,150 two words only where we can say with some confidence that the Gutenberg Bible workshop 506 01:05:04,150 --> 01:05:10,870 invented text that has now become part of the standard modern edition of the Vulgate Bible, 507 01:05:10,870 --> 01:05:19,160 two words that before the Gutenberg Bible was set in time, had no place at all in the Vulgate Bible tradition. 508 01:05:19,160 --> 01:05:28,060 This insertion occurs in four Ezri at what by modern numbering is chapter seven, verse 113. 509 01:05:28,060 --> 01:05:34,150 At this place in the Sangamon manuscript, the source of all later for Ezra TEKS, 510 01:05:34,150 --> 01:05:43,720 there is a statement the day of judgement will be the end of present time and then the immediately following words after that fatuity immortalise. 511 01:05:43,720 --> 01:05:54,060 Temporaries seem to be somewhat untethered syntactically. The 19th century Cambridge editor Robert Bensley found these following words 512 01:05:54,060 --> 01:06:00,930 preceded by a Nissim and the 1092 Clementine Edition producing a smooth reading. 513 01:06:00,930 --> 01:06:10,270 So we have the day of judgement will be the end of this time and the beginning at an axiom of immortal time to come. 514 01:06:10,270 --> 01:06:14,680 He did not find those words at the Newseum and any of the manuscripts he had seen, 515 01:06:14,680 --> 01:06:20,230 and he suggested that the words may have been added in the early years of printing, 516 01:06:20,230 --> 01:06:27,610 his instincts were very good, having consulted many more late manuscripts for Ezra than Bensley saw. 517 01:06:27,610 --> 01:06:36,010 We can confirm that the words and Nissim are, to the best of our knowledge, absent from the four Azrael manuscript tradition, 518 01:06:36,010 --> 01:06:42,460 the modern edition of the Latin Bible, which you see below noon as the Stuttgart Folgate, 519 01:06:42,460 --> 01:06:51,100 a revised readmission of the Rome Old Testament and the Oxford New Testament retained at the Newseum in its for Ezra, 520 01:06:51,100 --> 01:07:01,430 and it's sourced in its apparatus to the Clementina Folgate. But the Clementine Vulgate inherited those words from the Gutenberg Bible. 521 01:07:01,430 --> 01:07:06,240 Here, it is reasonable to think that an unknown editor in mines in the early 40s, 522 01:07:06,240 --> 01:07:14,750 50s preparing for Azu for composition by removing the reference to Asira at the beginning of Chapter three, 523 01:07:14,750 --> 01:07:19,670 making other scattered small changes again not in the manuscript tradition, 524 01:07:19,670 --> 01:07:25,880 and imposing a new 16 chapter structure on the text, which it never had before. 525 01:07:25,880 --> 01:07:34,460 Here, neaten the passage in question by adding inanition and so made an original but very late contribution 526 01:07:34,460 --> 01:07:40,130 to what we call the Folgate Bible more than a thousand years after the death of Jerome. 527 01:07:40,130 --> 01:07:46,964 Thank you.