Help needed: FFF-3

Latin after CDLXXVI
Post Reply
Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Help needed: FFF-3

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

Salvete!

I am currently winding down my latest transcription-project, the 3rd volume of Frater Fabri's Evagatorium, and need your help with a few passages. The images linked to do not belong to the original manuscript, but rather to another edition from 1508 by Hartmann Schedel.

Manuscript (p. 207, line 4)
"Siquidem dicitur, quod arbor illa numquam sit visa sine fructu,
et septies in anno successive fructificat. Accepimus etiam de lignis
ejus ramusculos parvos, quia Sarracenidicunt, quod febricitantibus
prosit, dum de eo bibunt, impositum vino vel
aqua."
Shouldn't this be "vino vel aquae" instead of "vino vel aqua"?


Manuscript (p. 235, line 1 after heading)
"Duodecima die, quae fuit XX post Trinitatis, more fidelium
missam audivimus in loco nostro et post missam ad mensam accessimus.
Porro intra prandia nostra venerunt in equis Mamaluci praefati de
Ungaria, cum propimis et muneribus, dominum Johannem et
nos omnes honorantes"
I am quite certain that "propimis" is wrong, but what could it be instead?


Manuscript (p. 248, line 15)
"Et quales fuerint, dum viverent, ostendit illa erectio, erant
enim in anima mortui, speciem tamen habentes ventium.
Contigit aevo nostro in dioecesi Coloniensi in quadam villa, in qua
rustici erant partiti et discordes, capitales inimicitias
gerentes."
Shouldn't this be "viventium" or according to the variant manuscript "virtutum"?


Manuscript (p. 279, line 7 after heading)
"Hoc enim, quod nos basilicas aut ecclesias vocamus, hoc
Sarraceni mesquitas vocant. De Ju. et Sar. Eccles. (?) in ele...
ubi vide 5to,
et invenies multa de sacerdotibus Sarracenorum
et de ritibus eorum."
This one is for lovers of puzzles. I have no idea what this is about, and the creators of the 1849-edition did not seem to either. Do you have any idea?


Manuscript (p. 281, line 3)
"venalem portant, eamque omnibus probandam exponunt. Alii ex eis
magnam praeferunt virtutem abstinentiae, quorum aliqui rarissime
comedunt aut bibunt. Aliqui autem, quod auditu horribile est, sine omni
cibo et potu corporali vivunt sicut frater Nicolaus in
Suecia:"
Couldn't this be "Switia" (for Switzerland)? See line 3 in the manuscript's page.


Manuscript (p. 344, line 17 from bottom of page)
"libertate privarentur et nudarentur. Domino ex tunc pronunciante
sacerdotes in omni gente liberos esse oportere inquit Gratianus XXIII.
a. VIII. §. quamvis etc."
Instead of "§" it should read "iiii", shouldn't it? But what about the character immediately after that?


Manuscript (p. 379, line 8)
"In civitate Oxiruito erant plurima monasteria, et ipsa civitas
intus et extra monachis erat plena, ita, quod etiam in turribus
civitatis residerent et super portarum fortalitia. Qer
quemcumque vicum quis ibat, undique voces psallentium
audiebat..."
"Qer" is obviously wrong, but looking at the manuscript page I cannot make out what it should be instead.


Manuscript (p. 496, line 13)
"Post cujus completionem venerunt in mentem duo
versus cujusdam sequentiae beatae Virginis ad propositum, quos ego ore,
alii mente, cantavimus:"
Shouldn't this be "contemplationem"?


Manuscript (p. 572, line 26)
"Cives honorabiles, at divitiis tenues, officiis vel retanrie
provisione sublevare curant."
I'm quite sure that "retanrie" is wrong, but I cannot make out what the other manuscript says, probably something beginning with "rect". What do you think?

Thank you for your help,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

Shenoute
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:23 pm

Re: Help needed: FFF-3

Post by Shenoute »

My two cents:

1) yes, dative: aque line 10 in the other manuscript

2) propinis line 10 in the other manuscript
For propina as a gift see http://ducange.enc.sorbonne.fr/PROPINA2

3) virtutum also it seems in the other manuscript, I haven't checked if that makes sense in context

4) de iud. et sarra. Cedit In cle. ubi vide glo. (see line 7 from bottom in the other manuscript for comparison).
Meaning, I think: de iudeis et sarracenis Cedit in Clementinis ubi vide glossam(?), that is "the chapter On Jews and Muslims, beginning with 'Cedit' in the Clementinae, in which see the glossa(?)" (not sure about glossa, maybe a commentary on the Clementinae?).

Maybe refering to this canon by Clement V on the Muslim call to prayer and starting with the words Cedit quidem in offensam divini nominis?

5) Swicia it seems line 10 from bottom in the other manuscript

6) I'd say xxiii .q. iiii §
q for questio, so "23th Question, 4th paragraph"?

7) per, p with stroke across leg (with punctuation sign before?)

8 ) complecionem line 7 in the other manuscript
"after completion of the antiphon/after having finished singing the antiphon"

9) rectorie provisione
Relevant entries in Niermeyer:
rectoria 'governorship'
provisio 'skill/wisdom; direction/gestion/guidance; measure/regulation; purveyance'

Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 583
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am
Contact:

Re: Help needed: FFF-3

Post by Carolus Raeticus »

Gratias tibi ago, Shenoute! That has dealt with the remaining issues (at least those I am willing/able to deal with).

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.

User avatar
seneca2008
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1809
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 1:48 pm
Location: Londinium

Re: Help needed: FFF-3

Post by seneca2008 »

Manuscript (p. 279, line 7 after heading)
"Hoc enim, quod nos basilicas aut ecclesias vocamus, hoc
Sarraceni mesquitas vocant. De Ju. et Sar. Eccles. (?) in ele...
ubi vide 5to, et invenies multa de sacerdotibus Sarracenorum
et de ritibus eorum."
Do I see an apud in the manuscript between quod and nos?
Persuade tibi hoc sic esse, ut scribo: quaedam tempora eripiuntur nobis, quaedam subducuntur, quaedam effluunt. Turpissima tamen est iactura, quae per neglegentiam fit. Et si volueris attendere, maxima pars vitae elabitur male agentibus, magna nihil agentibus, tota vita aliud agentibus.

Aetos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1041
Joined: Sat May 19, 2018 6:04 pm

Re: Help needed: FFF-3

Post by Aetos »

Seneca2008 wrote:
Do I see an apud in the manuscript between quod and nos?
It's definitely there in the manuscript Carolus refers to; however, it's not present in the manuscript that Shenoute is using. Hassler doesn't include it either in his edition (line 4 from the top):
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_vcgB ... 1/mode/2up

Post Reply