Overview Facsimile
Description
Show TEI/XML Download TEI/XML Print Description

Summa on Canon Law

l. 2, tit. 5 et 33, cap. 60-74, 115-141.

F-v7h3

Stams, Stiftsarchiv, Frg. 262

William Duba, Fragmentarium, 2024 (Born Digital)

General Information

Title Commentary on the Digest
Shelfmarks Fragm. 262
Material Parchment
Date of Origin fourteenth century
Script, Hands

Gothic cursive

Original Condition

Page Height 120 – 180 mm
Page Width 100 – 110 mm
Height of Written Area 110 – 115 mm
Width of Written Area 64 mm
Number of Columns 2
Width of Columns at least 31 mm
Number of Lines 45
Line Height 2 – 3 mm
Numbering

Numbers, indicated question, article, or chapter, appear in rubric in the text, and have been used in naming the reconstructed leaves.

  • Leaf 60
    • ra: 60
    • rb: de restitutione spoliorum [?]
    • vb: 66
  • Leaf 69
    • ra: 69, 70
    • rb: 71, 72
    • vb: 74
  • Leaf 115
    • rb: 115
    • vb?: 123
  • Leaf 125
    • ra: 125, 126, 127, 128, 129
    • rb: 130, 132(?)
    • va: 133, 135
    • vb: 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141
Collation

Judging by the division numbers, it is likely that leaves 60-69 and 115-125 were consecutive pairs. It is therefore possible that 60-125 and 69-115 were bifolia, and the fourth- and third-outermost in the gathering.
More about the Condition

Line height measured at between 2.4 and 2.5 mm/line

Current Condition

Extent 4 partial leaves
Dimensions 53 x 47 mm

Book Decoration and Musical Notation

Description

Running titles across the top read ti[tulus] and l[iber] on the verso (60v, 115v: just titulus, 125v), and the numbers on the recto (60r: v iius, 115r: just vus, 125r: 33 iius). The articles or chapters are marked wtih two-line red lombards.

Content

  • Content Item
    • Persons Guilelmus de Pagula (?)
    • Text Language Latin
    • Title Summa Summarum
    • Content Description

      A text discussing canon law issues, perticularly restitution, divided into a division that could be questions, articles, or chapters, which are further coordinated to a running division into titulus and liber. While the text is not entirely legible, references to Hostiensis can be found (most notably, the last word of 69rb), as well as to a Wil. (Guillaume Durand), (69ra). The hypothesis of being William of Pagula's Summa Summarum is based on the weakest evidence: in a passage treating usury, Pagula writes: "Quid de hiis qui <annonam> veterem mutuant ut recipiant novam? Nunquid comittant usuram?" [Lorenc, p. 163, transcribing Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 293, f. 190va]. What would be question 69 here beings "Quid de hiis qui" (69ra). There are other cases of "quid de hiis qui" being used as the incipit of a question (e.g., Greifswald, Bibliothek des Geistlichen Ministeriums 9.B.IV, f. 403r-v: "Quid de hiis qui in civitatibus incole vel cives subducentes solutionem schoth quando teneantur in foro conscientie ad restitutuionem et an peccant mortaliter") [Scheibe, p. 45].

      Moreover, no copy of Pagula's Summa is attested outside of the United Kingdom. The scribe did not write in an anglicana.

History

Origin

The script appears to be a fourteenth-century Gothic cursive. The limited samples and the degradation of the copy make further observations questionable, but I would tend towards the second quarter of the fourteenth century and a German-speaking area. 
Provenance

The original manuscript was almost certainly cut up and used as binding material, by the looks of it, for spine linings. At some point, the pieces were detached.

Bibliography

Back to top