![]() The status of the Częstochowa MS and the Kielce MS is unclear. ![]() They, too, contain an abridged version of the Constitution of Courts from Group I, supplementary material from the ortyle, and additional provisions characteristic of the Gniezno MS Gn. The formal features of the Tomasz of Bydgoszcz’s MS ( BN 3068) and the Leipzig MS (951b) leave no doubt that they belong to Group I and Group II, respectively. The claim that it belongs to the class of compilations will be reinforced in the subsequent discussion. This is testified by the recurrence of the provision on the gerada in places that match its position in the manuscripts of Groups I and II. Although formally the St Florian MS (Flor.) is not much different from MS Gn., it is in fact a compilation. III) Group III comprises manuscripts that show some features characteristic of the Gniezno MS and of Group II. However, the two manuscripts have some formal features in common with the German text of the Wawel MS. IV) and the Warsaw MS (Warsz.), which also include the Sachsenspiegel in its Sandomierz version ( versio Sandomiriensis II according to Zygfryd Rymaszewski’s classification), do not contain any ortyle. The texts of the Działyńscy Codex IV (Dział. In particular, they contain additions from the ortyle, as does the German text in the Baworowscy MS and the Żagań MS. The compliance of the Baworowscy MS ( BN 12607), the Opatów MS (Oss.), and the Żagań MS ( II Q 4) with the Gniezno manuscript is limited exclusively to the inclusion of provisions that are omitted in the Wawel manuscript. II) Group II includes texts that lack a number of the features that are characteristic of the Gniezno MS. It is also worth noting that the author of the Pleszew MS copied less than half of the complete set of provisions. The texts of this group form the Sandomierz version of the Latin Silesian-Małopolska compilation of the Weichbild, produced originally by Konrad of Sandomierz. The texts in this group do not contain any additions from the ortyle, and in those cases where they do include an extract from the Constitution of Courts after the Jewish oath, it is its abridged version. It is no coincidence that some of them (and certainly the Gniezno MS and the Działyńscy Codex I) are present in manuscripts which include the Sachsenspiegel in its Sandomierz version ( versio Sandomiriensis I according to Zygfryd Rymaszewski’s classification). I, BJ 4405, Przem., BOZ, Q II 157 (1), Q II 157 (2) and BN 12600 show either all or a clear majority of the features indicated in Table 8. In effect, taking their formal features as the only criterion, the extant Latin texts can be divided into the following groups: The distribution of features discussed above are presented in Table 8. The order in which the articles are arranged is naturally not an argument with the same strength as the presence or absence of an article. The change of order also concerns Articles 96 and 97, as well as Articles 102 and 103 of the Gniezno MS. 1 In many Latin manuscripts, they were included next to each other. Notable among the differences are two provisions concerning the gerada and hergewet (in the Gniezno MS, Articles 60 and 61). Fourth, the Constitution of Courts, which, as a rule, follows the Jewish oath, can appear either in an abridged or an extended form, or can be left out altogether.įifth, only a portion of the Latin texts reproduces the articles from the Cracow MS or the Wawel MS ( BJ 168) consistently in the same order. The omission can only be detected when the translation is compared to the German text, as in the case of Article 76 (according to the numbering scheme of the Cracow MS BJ 169). Third, some Latin texts skip a provision. Second, some Latin texts leave out the same articles as does the Wawel manuscript, even though they are included in the Cracow manuscript (Articles 56 and 81, according to the numbering scheme of the Gniezno MS). ![]() ![]() the Gniezno MS Articles 55, 57, 76 § 1, 3 and 77), the corpus of the Magdeburg ortyle is a source of important supplementary passages in provisions that echo the German text of the Baworowscy MS ( BN 12607) and the Żagań MS ( II Q 4). While additions taken over from the German texts are present in the earliest Latin texts (e.g. First, some of them contain additional regulations in the form of separate provisions or extensive supplements. There is a distinct set of formal features that recurs, although not in its entirety, in all Latin texts. 1.1 The Ordering of Articles in the Latin Texts
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |