Quaestiones MecfiiAevi Novae

vol. 13 +' 2008

PALATIUM, CASTLE, -RESIDENCE

Fundacja Centrum Badari Historycmych SOCIETAS VlSTULANA -

Warszawa 2008

QUAESTIONES MEDII AEVINOVAE (2008)

WOJCIECH BARAN- KOZtOWSKI POZNAN - PIOTRKÖW TRYBUNALSKI

CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS 1 - BE1WEEN COMPUTISllC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY • WORLD CHRONICLES AND THE SEARCH FOR A SUITABLE CHRONOLOGY OF HISTORY

~ One of the foundations of historical writings were Early :. ~ Christian world chronicles, it is works which intended to present ....., ~?'\..~ the history of mankind from the creation of the world or the

f ~. first man - Adam (later, from the birth of Christ) to the times .... of the chronicler, The essence of such a chronicle was a strictly chronological narration with particular emphasis on coordinating Biblical history with the tradition transmitted by classical authors', The early origin of this genre lies in the history of Christian Greco-Latin writings. Although Cbronograpbia written by Sextus Julius Africanus in 221 is regarded as the first Christian chronicle', it was Cbronographia by Eusebius of Caesarea (about 325)\ which became a model of a world chronicle imitated by consecutive generations in the whole of Latin Europe mainly thanks to Jerome of Stridon

1 This study was financed by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education (Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyiszego) as part of research project no. 1 H01G 014 26. The article is a summary of the first stage of investigations; at present, the author is working on a monographic study about Chronicon, conceived as a more detailed presentation both of the problems discussed in the article and a number of further aspects. 2 See: A.A. Mosshammer, The Chronicle of Eusebius and Greek chronographic tradition, London 1979; B. Croke, The Origins of the Christian World Chronicle, in: History and Historians in Late Antiquity, Sydney-Oxford 1983, pp. 116-131. 3 See: H. Gelzer, Sextus lulius Africanus und die byzantinische Chronographic, I-lI, Leipzig 1880-1885;Julius Africanu« und die christliche Weltchronistik, ed. by M. Wallraff, Berlin 2006 (especially: U. Roberto, Julius Africanus und die Tradition der hellenistischen Uniuersalgeschicbte, pp.3-16). . 4 Eusebii Chronicorum canonum quae supersunt, ed. by A. Schoene, Berlin 1866. 314 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZI:.OWSKI

(about 380)5, its translator into the Latin and continuator; at the same time, it proved to be the main source for learning about ancient history. Eusebius was emulated successively by such authors as Prosper of Aquitaine, Isidor of Seville, or Bede Venerabilis, to mention only the most outstanding. The popularity of this historiographie genre is evidenced by the fact that 180 world chronicles were written from the 3rd century to the early 16th century'', In a fundamental monographic work on the world chronicle as a historiographie genre from the 3rd century to the 1160s, Anna-Dorothee van den Brincken analysed 60 examples", Naturally, as it developed, the world chronicle underwent certain transformations. Some of the authors followed a well-trodden path by copying the scheme introduced by Eusebius-Jerome and their great continuers. This type of a chronicle, described by van den Brincken as series temporumi, dominated to the end of the 11th century and placed in the foreground a chronological arrangement, trying as precisely as possible not only to introduce order into the events but also to date them with the assistance of absolute chronology. The next variety of world chronicles, according to a typology proposed by this acclaimed expert on the genre, is the so-called mare bistoriarum, whose characteristic features include an annalistic account composed of larger narration fragments, preceded by an introduction, and divided into books and chapters. Excellent examples of such chronicles are Historiarum adversus paganos libri septem by Paulus Orosius? and Chronica siue Historia de duabus civitatibus by Otto of Freising". The third type is the so-called imago mundi, which assumed the form of an encyclopaedic work; its examples include Chronicon by Lambert of St. Omer!' and Didascalion by Hugo of St. Victor", A world chronicle served its author not only for transmitting a summa of knowledge about the history of mankind, but predominantly consisted of its

5 Die Chronik des Hieronymus, ed. by R. Helm, Berlin 1956; about the author see especially: ].N.D. Kelly, [erome. His Life, Writings and Controversies, London 1975. 6 P. Brezzi, Chroniques universelles du moyen age et bistoire du salut, in: L'historiographie medieuale en Europe, ed. by J.P. Genet, Paris 1991, p, 236 .. 7 A.D. von den Brincken, Studien zur lateinischen Weltchronistik bis in das Zeitalter Ottos von Freising, Düsseldorf 1957. 8 A.D. von den Brincken, Die lateinische Weltchronistik, in: Mensch und Weltgeschichte. Zur Geschichte der Universalgeschichtschreibung. 7. Forschungsgespräch des Internationalen Forschungszentrums für Grundfragen der Wissenschaften, ed. by A. Randa, Salzburg 1969, pp. 43-58. . 9 Paul us Orosius, Historiarum adversus paganos libri septem, ed. by K. Zangemeister, Lipsiae 1888. 10 Ottoni episcopi Frisingensis Chronica siue Historia de duabus ciuitatibus, ed. by W. Lammers, Berlin 1960. . 11 Lambert; Audomariensis Chronica, ed. by G.H. Pertz, in: Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores (henceforth: MGH SS), V, Hannoverae 1844, pp. 65-66. 12 Didascalion de studio legendi, ed. by Ch.H. Buttimer, Washington 1939. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTIJS _ BETWEEN COMPlITlSTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY... 315 appropriate placing in time. Chronology, both relative (a synchronistic arrangement of the history of contemporary monarchies, ancient history, or the history of the empire and the papacy) and absolute, was the very essence of this current in historiography. The majority of the authors, however, did not introduce a revolutionary breakthrough and limited themselves to the scheme of history proposed by Eusebius-Jerome. Others made smaller or further-going corrections, and shifted the moment of the creation of the world or/and the date of the birth of Christ. One of those revolutionaries was Marianus Scotus (1028-1082) an Iro-Scottish monk working on the Continent (chiefly in Fulda and Mainz). The period in which the Mainz-based chronicler witnessed computist discussions inspired by the approaching conclusion of the Easter table created several centuries earlier by Dionysius Exiguus and continued by Felix and Bede Venerabilis. The tables ended with the so-called great paschal cycle in 1063, the second cycle from the time of Christ. The need to conduct further calculations inclined certain chroniclers to delve into a problem - known already from the time of Bede but in practice "tactfully overlooked" , of the contradictions between the calculations made by Dionysius and the historical data conveyed by the Evangelists. The first to establish the imprecision and embark upon his own calculations was Abbon of Fleury, one of the greatest scholars of the period, who having created a new paschal table for the years 1064-1595, shifted the year of the Crucifixion of Christ to the 13th year in the Dionysian era 13. As a result, the date of the Nativity of the Saviour, and thus the beginning of our era, was placed in 21 B.C. The second scholar who considered this problem already in the 10th century was Heriger, the abbot of Lobbes Abbey in Belgium, who proposed to shift the dates of the birth and death of Christ by only 7 years!", Unfortunately, we know nothing about the details of his calculations, since the only extant source is a single letter containing very general views. Independently of the monk from Lobbes, the same datation of

13 In circulos beat; Cyrilli et Dionysii Romani ac Bedae studiosi cujusdam praefatio, in: Patrologia Latina (henceforth: PL), CXXXIX, Paris 1853, col. 573-577. About the author and his calculations see especially: A. van de Vyver, Les oeuvres inedites d'Abbon de Fleury, "Revue Benedictine" XLVII (1935), p. 150 ff; A. Cordiolani, Abbon de Fleury, Heriger de Lobbes et Gerland de Besanfon sur l'ere de l'lncamation de Denys le Petit, "Revue d'Histoire Ecclesiastique" XLIV (1949), p. 474 H.; J. Naumowicz, Geneza chrzesciianskiei rachuby lat, Tyniec 2000, p. 199 H.; compare with the most recent biography by P. Riche, Abbon de Fleury, Turnhout 2004 and a collection of articles: Abbon de Fleury. Philosophie, sciences et comput. Autor de l'an mil, ed. by B. Obrist, Paris 2006. 14 Herigeri abbatis Lobiensis epistola ad quemdam Hugonem monachum, in: PL, CXXXIX, col. 1129-1136; see: A. van de Vyver, op.cit., p. 158 ff.; A. Cordiolani, op.cit., p. 480 ff. (here also an edition of the text) and the newest biography by P. Verbist: Heriger van Lobbes (ea. 942 - t 1007) een laat-karolinger of een vroeg-scholasticus? Een historisch onderzoek naar de religieus-culturele wereid van Luik en Lobbes in de late tiende eeuw, http://www.ethesip.netlherigerlheriger_inhoud.htm. 316 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZI:.OWSKI

the birth of Christ was formulated almost 100 years later by Gerland of Besan~on, who in 1088 wrote that 1 081 years had passed from the Nativity of the Lord", These proposals went unnoticed by their contemporaries. The impact of the fourth polemist - Marianus Scotus - proved to be much greater. With the same premises as those of his predecessors as his point of departure, Marianus did not restrict himself to writing a small polemical work about the calculation of the date of Easter, but carried out a thorough computistic and historical analysis based on a meticulous approach to the whole heretofore Latin tradition, and created his own extremely cohesive chronological system, in which he transferred both the accepted date of the creation of the world and the date of the birth of Christ. The effect was an almost hundred fifty-pages long world chronicle, which in an annalistic arrangement listed events from the first day of the creation of the world to the times of the author. The point of departure was an era devised according to data from the Gospel (secundum evangelicam veritatem), and known as the evangelical era, which situated the birth of Christ 22 years earlier than the date proposed by Dionysius. At the same time, analysing sources for pre-Christian history, the author shifted the moment of the creation of the world to 4183 B.C.

EDmONS OF CHRONICON AND THE STATE OF PERTINENT RESEARCH

Up to now, Chronicon by Marianus Scotus has not been issued in a complete critical edition. The sixteenth-century edition by Johannes Basilius Herold", which does not meet any of the contemporary scientific requirements, was reprinted by Burchard Gotthelf Struve in the 18th century". This edition, based

15 A. Cordiolani, Abbon de Fleury, p. 486 ff.; J. Naumowicz, op.cit., p. 201. 16 Mariani Scoti, poetae, mathematid, philosophi et theologi eximii, monachi Fuldensis, historici probatissimi, Chronica: ad Euange/ij veritatem, post Hebraicae sacrosanctae scripturae et septuaginta interpretum uariationem, magno iudicio discussam et correctam, carta enumeratione temporum conscripta. Adiecimus Martini Poloni Archiepiscopi Consentini, eiusdem argumenti historiam: cuius in Ponti{icios scriptores, a multis iam annis ob singularis fidei opinionem magnus [uit usus, atque [requens memoria ..., Basileae: per Iacobum Parcum, expensis Ioannis Oporini, 1559. 17 Mariani Scoti, historiographi sui temp oris clarissimi, ac monachi {vldensis, chronicorvm libri Ill, in: Rervm Germanicarvm Scriptores a/iqvot insignes, qvi bistoriam et res gestas germanorvm medii potissimvm aeui inde a Carolo M. ad Carolvm V usque per annales literis consignarunt, primvm collectore Joanne Pistorio Nidano, tribvs tomis ..., editione tertia ..., cvrante Bvrcardo Gotthelff. Struvio, Ratisbonae 1726, pp. 441-544. A small fragment about the reign of Charlemagne was reprinted by Martin Bouquet, Recueil des Historiens des Gaules et de la France, V: Tome cinquieme, contenant ce qui s'est passe sous les regne de Charlemagne. c'est-ä-dire depuis l'an DCCLIl jusques a l'an DCCCXIV. auec les loix, les ordonnances, les dip/Omes de ces deux rois, et autres monumens historiques, par dom Martin Bouquet. pretre et religieux de la congregation de Saint-Maut, Paris 1741, pp. 368-370. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS Scorus - BElWEEN COMPlJTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 317 not on the autograph but on a fourteenth-century, rather considerably interpolated copy, kept today in Frankfurt on the Main, not only provided a sometimes different version of the chronicle but overlooked book 11.An even smaller fragment of Chronicon is to be found in a nineteenth-century edition by Georg Waitz. Although already based on the autograph, it contains only book III of the chronicle, that is 30 percent of the contents of the codex". Furthermore, even this book had not been published with suitable care - it features numerous striking inconsistencies of dates, mistaken deciphering and ascription of particular entries to certain years, and frequent omissions of the author's annotations on the margins. Consequently, I give all citations from the chronicle upon the basis of the autograph, with additional attempts at evoking the most important features of the manuscript", The absence of an edition of the whole chronicle certainly affected the state of research, since up to now no one has concentrated on all the works by Marianus Scotus", Only the computistic system-! and the Irish glosses+ have been partially edited. A general characteristic of the work and its author is

18 Mariani Scotti chronicon a. 1-1082, ed. by G. Waitz, in: MGH SS, V, Hannoverae 1844, pp. 481-564. 19 I cite the inconsistent text without introducing uniformity into ulv, e!f;/ae and the single and double letter s; nor did Icorrect grammar and spelling mistakes, marking the more essential dissimilarities [as in the original- W. B.-K.]. Ipreserve the spelling of proper names, characteristic for the period and starting with a small letter (the only exception being the abbreviation xpc = Christus, since it is composed of the Greek majuscule); Imark the initials by enclosing them in 1111, additions between the lines and on the margins are given in brackets { }, unambiguous abbreviations in ( ), and preserved gaps and erasures in [ ]. I also tried to preserve the original punctuation. In quotations on adjoining pages I mark the end of page 11 but not the ends of the verses. For the sake of the text's legibility I resigned from an exact reproduction of writing pronouns jointly and marking fragments written in differently coloured ink. In the future, Iintend to prepare a critical edition of the whole codex, with an autograph of the chronicle, which will render its palaeographic features even more precisely. 20 It would be difficult to regard as such the work by B. Mac Carthy, The Codex Palatino- -Vaticanus No 830 (Texts, Translations and Indices), Dublin 1892, pp. 1-36 and the several- -pages long fragment in the synthesis by A.D. von den Brincken, Studien zur lateinischen We!tchronistik, pp. 166-173. 21 A.D. von den Brincken, Marianus Scottus. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der nicht veröffentlichten Teile seiner Chronik, "Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters" XVII (1961), pp. 191-238; eadem, Marianus Scottus als Universalhistoriker iuxta veritatem Evangelii, in: Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, 11, Stuttgart 1982, pp. 970-1009; P. Verbist, Reconstructing the Past: the Chronicle of Marianus Scottus, "Peritia" XVI (2002), pp. 284-334. 22 H. Zimmer, Glossae Hibernicae, Berlin 1881, pp. XIII-XIV, 274-282; W. Stokes, Spicilegium Vaticanum, "The Academy" XXXV (1889), pp. 26-27; idem, Hibernica, "Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung" XXXI (1890), pp. 248-253; B. Güterbock, Aus irischen Handschriften in Turin und Rom, "Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung" XXXIII (1895), pp. 89-100; B.6. Cuiv, The Irish Margina/ia in Codex Palatino-Yaticanus No. 830, "Eigse. A Journal of Irish Studies" XXIV (1994), pp. 45-67. 318 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtOWSKI contained in assorted biogrammes in lexicons and syntheses of mediaeval literature". In Poland, in his synthesis on mediaeval Iro-Scottish culture on the Continent Jerzy Strzelczyk proposed a popular interpretation based on earlier research'",

THE AlITHOR OF CHRONICON

Thanks to the author of Chronicon we know quite a lot about him. In a manner untypical for a mediaeval man of letters, Marianus Scotus included a number of autobiographical entries, some of which he supplemented with dates of days. In this way, the chronicle informs us about the author's birth; under 1028 he noted: "Ego miser marianus in peccatis fui in hoc anno natus"2S. Similarly, we know when he abandoned worldly life and entered a monastery (probably the abbey in Magh-bile, it is Moville in the county of Devon), a fact confirmed by a note from 1052: "Ego marianus seculum reliqui">. After a four-years long stay, the future chronicler went on a pilgrimage to the Continent: "Ego marianus peregrinus factus pro regno celeste patriam motuaui et in colonia quinta feria kaI. aug, monachus efectus"?". The precise date of taking monastic vows (Thursday, 1 August) at the Iro-Scottish monastery of St. Martin in Köln is not an isolated case in the chronicle. The author noted his voyage to Fulda, undertaken together with Abbot Ekbert, where he decided to wall himself up in a cell (1058). Both men set off from Köln on 27 April, on a Monday after the octave of Easter: "Ipsis uero statim diebus feria 11post octauas pasche exiens de colonia causa claudendi cum abbate fuldense ad fuldam super mattam in clausola ipsius ubi supra eamdem mattam combustus et passus est ego oraui"28. Before Marianus Scotus enclosed himself in a cell in Fulda he went to Würzburg together with Siegfried, the local abbot; there, on Saturday, 13 March 1059 he took his holy orders, a fact just as eagerly recorded in the chronicle: "Ego marianus indignus cum sigfrido abbate fuldensi iuxta corpus sancti kiliani martiris uuirziburc consecratus ad presbiteratum sabbato medie

23 M. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 11,München 1923, pp. 388-394; ].F. Kenney, The Sources for the Early History of Ireland: Ecclesiastical. An Introduction and Guide, New York 1966, pp. 614-616; W. Wattenbach, R. Holtzmann, Deutschlands Geschichtsquel/en im Mittelalter. Die Zeit der Sachsen und Salier, 11,Weimar 1967, pp. 446-449; 0.6. Cröinin, Marianus Scot(t)us, in: LexMa, VI, München 1992, col. 285-286. 24 ]. Strzelczyk, lroszkoci w kulturze sredniowiecznej Europy, Warszawa 1987, pp. 364- -376. 25 Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Palatini latini 830 (henceforth: PaLlat. 830), f. 163. 26 Ibidem, f. 164. 27 Ibidem. 28 Ibidem. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 319

quadragesime III idus martii'v"; after his return to Fulda on 30 April he commenced the life of an inclusus: "et feria sexta post ascensionem domini, pridie idus maii inclusus in fulda per annos X"30. Marianus did not stay here for the rest of his life, and ten years later was summoned by Siegfried, who in the meantime became the archbishop of Mainz. On 3 April Scotus moved to Mainz, where on 10 June he enclosed himself in a cell at the monastery of St. Martin: "Ego miser marianus iusione episcopi mogontini et abbatis fuldensis, feria VI ante palmas III non. aprilis, post annos decem mee inclusionis, solutus de clausola in fulda ad mogontiam conductus":". Marianus Scotus died on 22 December, probably in 1082. We may deduce the date upon the basis of the last entry from that year in the chronicle; the day was also recorded in the Mainz necrologium", True, under AD 1087 the autograph features a handwritten entry made probably in the 15th century: "Obiit marianus inclusus":", but the reliability of this late source is slight; it is difficult to determine exactly the base upon which the scribe gave this particular date of the death of the chronicle's author.

CHRONICLE MANUSCRIPTS

The chronicle by Marianus Scotus survived to our times in the form of several mediaeval manuscripts, which include, first and foremost, the autograph, written by unidentified Iro-Scottish scribes, dictated by Marianus, and containing a supplement and corrections in his handwriting as well as additions by later continuers. The manuscript is kept at the Apostolic Library in the Vatican, and at least to the end of the Middle Ages it was in the library of the monastery of St. Martin in Mainz, it is the place of its origin>'. Another site of its storage, confirmed in the sources, was the library of the palatines of the Rhineland in Heidelberg, the largest German library at the turn of the 16th century, where the codex found itself prior to 1622. In the same year, during the Thirty Years' War, the armies of the Catholic League under Maximilian of Bavaria captured Heidelberg, and a year later the library collections were handed over

29 Ibidem. 30 Ibidem. 31 Pal.lat. 830, f. 165. 32 11 KaI. Ianuarii [...] Marianus inclusus, Necrologium ecclesiae Moguntinae, in: Bibliotheca rerum Germanicarum, III: Monumenta Moguntina, ed. by P. jaffe, Berolini 1866, p.728. 33 Pal.lat. 830, f. 166. Quite possibly this is the same handwiritng as the one which is found in the first inventory entry for AD 1419, although I am not certain about this assumption. 34 As evidenced by notes on leaf 1 of the codex: Iste liber pertinet ad librariam Sancti Martini ecclesie moguntine [...]1419 and 1479 lste liber pertinet ad Librariam P. Martini ecclesie moguntine - ibidem, f. 1. 320 WOJCIECH BARAN- KOZI:.OWSKI as war trophy to Pope Gregory XV, the spiritual superior of the Catholic forces". The collection remained at the Apostolic See until 1816 when Pius VII returned it major part. The Vatican kept almost one-quarter of the collection, introduced into the resources of the Vatican Library as a separate collection described in catalogue as palatinus. The codices contained also an autograph of the chronicle by Marianus Scotus, marked as number 830. The manuscript was written on two types of parchment (thinner, of superior quality: f. 26-73v and inferior, thicker, in places patched and with numerous holes: f. 1-25v, 74-170v). The whole codex was prepared in a Continental manner, evidenced by the interchangeable arrangement of their leafs. The present-day arrangement of the codex was made already after the completion of the chronicle: the beginning includes the lesser texts and "rough notes" made by Marianus both while working on the chronicle and after its completion. The manuscript starts with a brief computistic treaty entitled Tractatio sequentis eieli (f. Iv), The next pages features computistic tables (f. 2-3) followed by three synchronistic tables presenting the chronology of the most important events from the history of mankind, arranged according to a chronology accepted by Marianus in his chronicle. The first table (f. 4-10v) encompasses the first greater paschal cycle and historical information, spanning from the consulate of Lentulus and Marcellus to the year 554, according to the evangelical era established by Marianus (further as: AE), that is, the year 532 according to the Dionysian era (further as: AD), marking the beginning of the second great paschal cycle. In the column arrangement, the first column includes the dates of the era according to Marianus as well as the Roman consuls and emperors determined by him upon, for example, the basis of the New Testament. The second table contains key historical events (especially the deaths and successions of emperors and popes) as well as information about solar cycles and concurrents. The third table consists of years according to the Dionysian era and the imperial era, this time given according to the chronicle tradition (following the example of the chronicles of Eusebius and Bede), together with the already inconsistently applied era of the Olympics: "Reges romanorum sicut uere regnauerunt iuxta historiam sacri euangelii per annos uerisime incarnationis que mineio [as in the original- W. B.-K.] colore conscribitur":", The table ends with a concise justification of the accepted chronology: "IIEllxplicit magnus ciclus paschalis

35 This is demonstrated by a printed leaf placed before the binding prior to the first page of the codex and featuring, above an armorial shield with the coat of arms of Prince Maximilain I of Bavaria as the elector of the Palatinate and Archidapifer of the Reich, the following inscription: Sum de Bibliotheca, quam Heidelberga capta, Spolium fecit et P. M. Gregorio xv. trophaeum misit, Maximilianus Vtriusque Bauariae Dux et P.R.I. Archidapifer et Princeps Elector, and below: Anno Christi MDCXXIII. On the history of this library see: P.A. Metzger, Bibliotheca Palatina, "Journal of Library History" XIII (1978), pp. 57-59. 36 Pal. lat. 830, f. 4. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 321 quingentorum triginta duorum annorum in cuius secundo anno iuxta dionisium natus est dominus, sed secundum historiam sacri euangelii in quo nihil fallsitatis habetur teste etiam sic sancto augustino [...]37 in anno tertio decimo eiusdem cicli dominus noster Ihesus Christus octauo die kalendarum aprilium luna quinta decima passus est, atque etiam sexto die kalendas aprilis luna septima decima a mortuis resurrexit anno octauo decimo imperii tiberii cesaris secundum euangelium iohannis, hoc est in' anno duodecimo incarnationis iuxta dionisium":", followed by information about the onset of the second great paschal cycle. Table 2 (f. 1Qv-11v) j is a concordance of years according to the Marianus era, including the reigns of successive emperors. The table spans from 34 AE (= 12 AD) to 355 AE (= 333 AD), in other words, the third year of the reign of Constantine and Constance. Marianus tried to coordinate his computistic ascertainment with heretofore tradition, and thus to "lose" the difference of 22 years between the chronology of heretofore chroniclers and his own work: "Alia secundo uestigio emendatio annorum incarnationis juxta hieronimum qui dicit paulum post decem et septem annos conuersionis sue locutum fuisse in hierusalern cum petro et cassiodorum ponentem quattuor annos inter neronem et uespasianum et orosium dicentem decium tribus annis regnasse":". Finally, the third table (f. 11v-15), a variant of the first one, includes the period from the year 34 AE (= 12 AD) to 268 AE (= 246 AD), it is the end of the reign of Decius. As in the case of the first table, this is an arrangement of 3 columns with place for information about a given year according to AE and the consular era, historical events (already with less details) and a year according to AD and the reigns of emperors (in keeping with the tradition of heretofore chroniclers). The only change involved replacing the years of the reigns of emperors from the first column with the years of the papal pontificates and information about issued papal decrees: "Tertia emendacio annorum incarnationis tertio uestigio secundum martirologium et passiones paparum et decretales epistolas eorum quas ipsi pap~ predicti in certis kalendis miserunt et sub consulibus certis nominatis conscripserunt in quibus habetur decius per annos decem regnasse auctoritate ecclesiastica in unoquoque anno confirmante a fabiano papa qui passus est sub decio usque ad sanctum laurentium qui passus est sub decico":". The following codex leaf features a list of Iro-Scottish rulers with the years of their reigns (f. 15v): "Hi sunt flathi hibernie qui ex dimedia parte ei

37 Empty space left for about four marks. 38 Pal. lat. 830, f. 10v. 39 Ibidem. 40 Pal. lat. 830, f. llv. 322 WOJCIECH BARAN-KoZLOWSKI id est do leth chuinn regerunt 0 chunn cetchatach eo £land mac mail sechnaill "41. Further on, the chronicler included a list of popes with an exact establishment of the duration of their pontificates (years, months and days) (f. 16-16v). The list is written in 2 columns and encompasses popes from St. Peter to John XII (died 964) and a continuation, in different handwriting, from Benedict V (died 964) to Paschalis II (died 1118). The next leaf (f. 17-17v) is empty, and only at the bottom does it contain a note about the solar cycle; on the margin, a note in different handwriting presents calculations of years with the marked year of the birth and baptism of Christ. A successive part of the codex is a paschal table with 2 paschal cycles; on the margins, Marianus included certain historical entries, primarily about the deaths of emperors and popes (f. 18-25). The next leaf (f. 25v) is empty. The chronicle proper opens with a prologue starting with an ornamental initial "D" (f. 26-27v) and comprising a cornputistic treatise. The upper margin features the following words added in red ink: "IN nomine sancte divinitatis. Ressurrectionis Christi inquissitio incipit quam Marianus hibernensis ineIusus congregavit'r". In the prologue, Marianus deliberated why the date of the death of Christ established by Dionysius is at odds with data from the Gospel, and conducted his own calculations". A list of chapters from book I, which starts immediately afterwards (f. 27v- -28), II (f. 28-29v) and III (f. 29v-31), commences with a heading added in red ink right after the prologue: "Finit prologus. INcipit hinc Marianusi scoti cronica clara. Incipiunt capitula primi libri":". An analogous heading is found before the list of chapters in book II: "INcipiunt capitula libri secundi, qui est incarnationis usque in ascensionem domini"45; the list of chapters in book III does not have such a heading. Each title of a chapter is accompanied by its number, separate for every book. All the titles are identical and feature the initial "DE" in the form of an enclave, for instance: "lIDEIldisputatione dionissi exigui supra passionem et resurrectionem Christi; lIDEIlinquisitione capitis mundi et prime ebdomadae initii seculi'l'". Book I (f. 31 v-71) is composed of 22 chapters, in which Marianus presented the history of the world from its creation to the birth of Christ. On the left

41 Ibidem, f. 15v; cf. W. Stokes, Hibernica, "Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung" XXXI (1890), p. 248 ff. 42 Ibidem, f. 26, at present, this text is almost illegible. Compare with, however, Mariani Scotti chronicon, p. 489; B. Mac Carthy, The codex Palatino-Vaticanus, p. 8 (here: In nomine Sanctae Trinitatis [...]). 43 For a more extensive presentation see: A.D. von den Brincken, Marianus Scottus. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der nicht veröffentlichen Teile seiner Chronik, "Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters" XVII (1961), pp. 191-238 (published prologue: pp. 208-215). 44 Pal. lat. 830, f. 27v, at present, this text is almost illegible. 4S Ibidem, f. 28. 46 Ibidem, f. 27v. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BElWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 323

margin, next to the initials starting them, the majority of the chapters contains the numbers of chapters corresponding to numbers from the list of chapters. The book starts with an initial "D[omino)" in the shape of a dragon. Later on, a different hand added in red ink: "INcipit hinc Marianusi scoti cronica clara" and in the second verse: "INcipit epistola dionissi exigui ad petronium episcopum de ratione pascali'r". Then, on the upper margin to the left, a different hand noted in black ink below the initial: "IIPllrimus liber incipit ab adam vsque ad Christum"48. The contents of book I are divided into 2 parts, of which the first (chapters 1-8) contains theoretical computistic reflections, full of quotations and polemics with Dionysius Exiguus and Bede'". The second part, composed of the remaining 14 chapters, is a history of the world, arranged upon the basis of the Gospel, from the creation of the world, and successive generations of Old Testament patriarchs, to the time of Emperor Octavian'", Marianus introduced order into those events, arranged in successive generations from Adam, Seth, Amos, and Kainan and so forth, calculating the successive years of their lives, accompanied by information about lunar cycles and indictions, starting with the creation of the world, as well as - for the later period - historical events borrowed from the chronicle by Eusebius. Every calculation of the successive years of a given person is preceded by brief information about the duration of his life and heirs. The book ends with a summary determining the duration of consecutive epochs and the time between the creation of the world and the birth of Christ", In book 11(f. 71-100v), composed of 83 chapters, Marianus presented in detail the 30 years of Christ's presence on Earth. The first part of this book (chapter 1-8) analyses fragments of the New Testament to which heretofore computists referred while marking the death of the birth and death of Christ, and considers their arguments. In following fragments (chapter 9-19) Marianus reconstructed the life of Christ, inserting it into a continuum of ancient history dated with the reigns of emperors, the Olympics, and lunar cycles. Subsequently (chapter 20-26), he once again considered in detail the supremacy of Latin . tradition over its Greek counterpart, supporting the former, which he conceived as closer to the evangelical truth. Chapters 27-69 describe the activity of Christ until His last days on Earth (57-64), the Passion, and the Resurrection (65-69).

47 Ibidem, f. 31v. 48 Ibidem. 49 Pal. lat. 830, f. 31 v-36v; this fragment was published (without tables of concurrents, ibidem, f. 36) by A.D. von den Brincken, Marianus Scottus. Unter besonderer, pp. 215-231; here also an analysis of the contents (pp. 191-208). 50 Pal. lat. 830, f. 36v-70v; this book, together with numerous errors and omissions, was published in modern editions by J.B. Herold and J. Pistorius. 51 Pal.lat. 830, f. 70v-71. 324 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtOWSKI

The last 14 chapters (70-83) portray the life of the apostles after the death of Christ. Such a detailed presentation of history according to the New Testament was of great importance for the chronicler - it was analysis of the Gospel which, in his opinion, led him to a correct establishment of the year of the birth of the Son of God. The last leaf (f. 100-100v) of the book is empty. Book III (f. 101-166) features events from the time of Christ to that of Marianus. Originally, the chronicle was written up to AD 1073 (together with an adjoined note from AD 1076)52; later, its author added a continuation (further as: Continuation I) to AD 1082. Below this note, under AD 1083, a marginal gloss in modern handwriting (end of the 16th century?) informs that up to this spot Marianus' work appeared in print; this is a reference to the J.B. Harold edition". Further notes in the autograph were added already after the death of Marianus Scotus by his anonymous continuers. The first one (Continuation 11) was the author of notes from AD 1083-1101 (f. 166-166v), probably written in 2 stages. In AD 1095, or immediately afterwards, the continuer inserted nine notes for AD 1083-1095, which he borrowed from a lost annal written at Mainz cathedral; at the beginning of the 12th century, it was used also by the author of the so-called Annales Wirziburgense (also known as Annales Sancti A/bani). Several years later, in AD 1001, the author of Continuation Il (same handwriting) added his own note about the poisoning of Conrad and the deaths of the archbishops of Treves and Bremen: AE 1123 (= AD 1101): "Cuonradus filius imperatoris in longobardia ueneno periit. Obierunt archiepiscopi Engelbertus trevirensis et Liemarus premensis">'. After the year AD 1106, three successive entries with events from AD 1104-1106 (f. 166v) were inserted in handwriting different than Continuation 11 (further as: Continuation III). The next 3 leafs (f. 167-169v), prepared for the addition of further notes, contain an enumeration of successive dates according to AE and AD (the years 1108-1313), probably included into the codex at the time of the origin of Continuation 11. Some of the notes about solar and lunar cycles and indictions had already been added. An entry about a Sun eclipse was inserted under the year AE 1155 (= AD 1133): "In hoc anno IlIl Nonas Augusti hora diei quasi nona eclipsis solis facta est tanta ut stelle uideri possent in celo"!' .: The last page of the codex was later used for recording 2 fragments of papal decrees issued by Gregory the Great: "ut diaconi solum evangelicae lectionis officium inter missarum solemnia exsolvant" (f. 170) and Innocent I

52 Mariani Chronicon, p. 489. S3 Hucusque Marianus in impressis, Pal. lat. 830, f. 166. 54 Ibidem. 55 Pal.lat. 830, f. 167v. CHRONICON BYMARIANUSSCOTUS- BETWEENCOMPUTISTICANDHISTORIOGRAPHY... 325 and Gregory the. Great: "ne metropolitani sine pallio aliquem ordine praesumant" (f. 170v) .. The second manuscript of the chronicle by Marianus Scotus is a copy made in the monastery of St. Alban in Mainz"; This version differs slightly from the autograph - on the one hand, the copier used the available sources of the chronicle by the Mainz inclusus, and in certain places supplemented and expanded the original; on the other hand, he omitted some of the marginal glosses and, although much more rarely, whole notes. Furthermore, the copier added some strictly local information, such as the one about the burial at the monastery of St. Alban of persons mentioned in the Marianus chronicle. This particular codex also includes a totally different continuation of the chronicle (to 1082), proving that the copy must have been written between 1082 and the inclusion of the continuation into the autograph, which probably took place already in 1095. Taking into consideration the later fate of the codex, I believe that the copy in question was written at the latest before 1086. Such a conclusion may be derived from accepting that it was precisely this copy which was used by Robert Losinga of Lorraine, the bishop of Hereford (since 1079, died in 1095)57,the author of Excerptio de chronica Marianusi from 108658.Moreover, the continuation in the codex (for the 1083-1087 period)" is in different handwriting and includes information about the British Isles, for example the Domesday Book (1086)60.In this situation, we may accept that the continuation must have been inserted into the codex already in the Isles after 1086, most likely by Robert, the bishop of Hereford", Evidence of the fact that Robert Losinga owned the codex is found in, for example a marginal gloss in one of the Easter tables: "Obierunt uulstanus et rodbertus episcopi=", which refers to Wulfstan II, the bishop of Worcester (1062-1095), and Robert, the bishop of Hereford. Quite possibly, Robert Losinga obtained a copy of the chronicle . .

56 British Library, Cotton Nero C V (further as: Nero CV). 57 On Robert, the bishop of Hereford, see especially: English Episcopal Acta, VII: Hereford 1079-1234, ed. by J. Barrow, Oxford 1993, pp. XXXIII-XXXIV; J. Barrow, A Lotharingian in Hereford: Bishop Robert's Reorganisation of the Church of Hereford 1079-1095, in: Medieval Art, Architecture and Archeology at Hereford, "The British Archaeological Association Conference Transactions" XV (1995), pp. 29-49. 58 See: A. Cordoliani, L'activite computistique de Robert, eveque de Hereford, in: Melanges offerts a Rene Crozet 1, "Cahiers de civilisation medievale", Supplement (1966), p. 339 ff. 59 Nero CV, f. 1S8vb-1S9. 60 Ibidem, f. 1S8vb. Cf. W.H. Stevenson, A Contemporary Description of the Domesday Survey, "English Historical Review" XXII (1907), pp. 73-84. 61 The Continuation was written in the same handwriting as the manuscript of the status of Bishop Robert of Hereford (1085); Cf. M. Gullick, The English-owned Manuscripts of the Collectio-Lanfranci (p. xi/xii), in: The Legacy of M.R. lames, Papers from the 1995 Cambridge Symposium, ed. by L. Dennison, Lincolnshire 2001, pp. 99-117. 62 Nero CV, f. 19v. 326 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZI:.OWSKI

from Liege, with which he maintained close ties as a graduate of the local cathedral school'". Up to this day, the codex used by Robert is kept in the British Isles - the British Library in London", Next, it was probably this copy of the chronicle by Marianus Scotus (or a non-extant copy) that was used by John of Worcester (died about 1140), who in his own chronicle applied an analogous system of eras". The chronicle was known and appreciated also by later authors working in the British Isles: William of Malmesbury (died about 1143)66, Ordericus Vitalis (died about 1143)67, Gervase of Canterbury (died about 1210)68 and the authors of Annals from Lindisfarn and Durham (12th centuryls", and in Ireland - the Annals of Ulster (15th century}". Without analysing the particular works, we may add that the copy of the Scotus

63 The History of Hereford Cathedral, http://www.smr.herefordshire.gov.uk/ cathedral&librarylhrfd_cath.htm. 64 Nero C V, apart from the chronicle by Marianus Scotus (f. 3-161 v) the codex contains three leafs from a fourteenth-century psalter (f. 1-2v, 286), Historia Anglicana by Bartholomew Cotton from the 13th century (f. 162-253v), De arcbiepiscopis et episcopis Anglie by the same author (f. 255-281) and a bull issued by Pope Gregory X (f. 282-283). Cf.: T. Smith, Catalogus Librorum Manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Cottonianae, Oxford 1696, p. 54 (also a facsimile edition: Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Cottonian Library, 1696, ed. by C.G.c. Tite, Cambridge 1984, p. 54); J. Planta, Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Cottonian Library, deposited in the British Museum, London 1802, p. 234; C.G.C. Tite, The Early Records of Sir Robert Cotton's Library: Formation, Cataloguing, Use, London 2003, p. 134. 65 The Chronicle of lohn of Worcester, ed. by P. McGurk, Oxford 1998. 66 Erat tunc temporis monacbus Marianus apud Magontiam inclusus, qui longo solitudinis otio cbronographos scrutatus dissonantiam cyclorum Dionysii contra evangelicam ueritatem, vel primus vel solus animadvertit. Itaque ab initio saeculi annos singu/os recensens, XXII qui circulo deerant, superaddidit, magna m et diffusissimam chronicam facere adorsup. Eum librum Robertus miratus unice, aemulatus mirifice Angliae inuehendum curavit. Denique captus Mariani ingenio quidquid iIIe largius dixerat, in arctum contrahens defloravit. Adeo splendide, ut magis va/ere videatur defloratio, quam ingentis i/lius uoluminis diffusion _ Willelmus Malmesburiensis, De gestis pontificum Ang/orum, in: PL, CLXXIX, Paris 1899, col. 1600. 67 Marianus mim in coenobio Sancti A/bani martyris apud Maguntiam monachus [uit, ibique Caesariensem Eusebium et Hieronymum, aliosque historiographos pro modulo secutus, sese benigniter exercuit, et dulcem fructum /ongi studii, magnorumque laborum, quos in longinqua peregrinatione pertulit, filiis Ecclesiae tanta rimari per se non ualentibus charitative obtu/it. So/erter itaque perscrutatis veteribus et modernis codicibus chronographiam edidit, in qua ab initio mundi ex quo Deus Adam de limo terrae plasmauit, per omnes libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti, et Romanorum Graecorumque historias discurrens, optima quaeque collegit, et enumeratis annis per regum et consu/um tempera usque in diem mortis suae anna/em historiam /audabiliter distinxit - Ordericus Vitalis, Historia ecclesiastica, in: PL, CLXXXVIII, Paris 1890, col. 302. 68 The Historical Works of Gervase of Canterbury, I: The Chronicle of the Reigns of Stepben, Henry Il and Richard 1, ed. by W. Stubbs, Rolls Series, LXXIII, 1, London 1879. 69 W. Levison, H.E. Mayer, Die Anna/es Lindisfarnenses et Dune/menses kritisch untersucht und neu herausgegeben, "Deutsches Archiv" XVII (1961), pp. 447-506. 70 See: P. Verbist, Reconstructing the Past, p. 334. In a separate publication I shall deal more extensively with the reception of the work by the inclusus from Mainz in mediaeval Europe. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 327 chronicle written in the monastery of St. Alban in 1082-1086, and fortunately preserved to our times, found itself in the British Isles at the latest in 1086; there, it inaugurated a local manuscript tradition. Another copy which survived to our times originated in the mid-fourteenth century in the monastery in Disibodenberg near Mainz; today: at a library in Frankfurt". The Frankfurt codex is a much-interpolated copy of the Marianus chronicle, with a continuation to the year 1200. Together with several notes added under earlier dates, it functions in literature on the subject as Annales Disibodenbergenses and encompasses the years 891-1200 (1204)72. Another fifteenth-century manuscript is a copy of an unidentified provenance, today at a library in Liege", We also have at our disposal direct traces of the existence of other, non- -extant manuscripts of the chronicle. Yet another eleventh-century copy, written upon the basis of the autograph or the codex from St. Alban's, found itself in Gembloux already prior to the end of the century. Distinct familiarity with the work of the inclusus from Mainz is to be found in Liber decennalis by 74 Sigbert of Gembloux from 1092 • Sigbert referred to the Marianus Scotus also in his later works: Chronica uniuersalis" and Catalogus de viris illustrious", Such a rapid appearance of the chronicle in Gembloux could have been possible

71 Frankfurt/Men, Stadt- und Universitätsbibliothek, Ms. Barth. 104. For a description of the codex see: G. Powitz, H. Buck, Die Handschriften des Bartholomaeusstifts und des Karmeliterklosters in Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main 1974, pp. 240-244. 72 Codex Barth. 104, f. 93-114; Annales Sancti Disibodi, ed. by G. Waitz, in: MGH SS, XVII, Hannoverae 1861, pp. 4-30; Annales Disibodenbergenses, ed. by J.F. Böhmer, in: Martyrium Arnold archiepiscopi Moguntini und andere Geschichtsquellen Deutschlands im zwälftenJahrhundert, Fontes Rerum Germanicarum, 1Il, Stuttgart 1853, pp. 173-217 (here the years 743-1200). 73 Liege, Bibliotheque de l'Universite, codex no. 242. See: Mariani Chronicon, p. 483. Up to now I have not examined this codex. 74 Sigbert von Gembloux, Liber decennalis, ed. by J. Wiesenbach, in: MGH. Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, XII, Weimar 1986, p. 259. 75 Sigbert van Gembloux, Chronica universalis, in: PL, CLX, Paris 1880, col. 221: 1082 [...] Marianus Scottus chronicam suam a Christi nativitate inchoatam usque ad hunc annum perduxit, qui erat aetatis suae annus 56, multum laborans corrigere errorem de annis Domini, qui invenitur in ciclo Dionisii; quod facile est videre, hinc positis ab eo annis Domini secundum ciclum Dionisii, altrinsecus autem secundum veritatem evangelii. 76 Sigbert von Gembloux, Catalogus de viris illustribus, cap. 159, in: PL, CLX, col. 584: Marianus Scottus, peregrinans pro Christo in Gallias, et factus monachus apud Moguntiam, multis annis inclusus, scripsit Chronicam a nativitate Christi usque ad annum nati Christi millesimum octogesimum secundum, mira subtilitate ostendens errorem priorum Chronographorum, ita ponentium nativitatem Christi, ut annus passionis ejus, quantum ad raiionem computi, non concordet veritati evange/icae. Unde ipse apponens XXIII annos illi anno ubi priores scribunt fuisse natum Christum, ponit in margine paginae alternatim hinc annos evangelicae ueritatis, illinc annos falsae priorum computationis, ut non so/um intel/ectu, sed etiam visu possit discerni veritas et falsitas. 328 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtOWSKI

- as M. Chazan correctly noted - thanks to Siegfried, the archbishop of Mainz (died 1084)'7.

SCRIBES AND THE TIME OF THE ORIGIN OF THE AUfOGRAPH

All researchers dealing with the Vatican codex agreed that it had been written by several scribes, one of whom can be with a great dose of probability identified as Marianus Scotus himself. Bruno Güterbock, who until now has devoted the greatest amount of attention to this question, distinguished four handwritings in the basic part of the codex, two handwritings of twelfth-century continuers, and few individual notes by later users", The German researcher claims that the whole fundamental text of the chronicle was written by 2 scribes - one used an Irish ductus (in Güterbock: handwriting 1), and the other - a Continental ductus (handwriting 3), with Marianus Scotus dictating. Subsequently, another unidentified monk made several additions at the monastery of St. Martin (handwriting 2). Finally, the whole codex was in several places corrected and supplemented by Marianus Scotus (handwriting 4). I cannot totally agree with the analysis conducted by Güterbock. Already at first glance, we are forced to ask why Marianus supposedly introduced only several corrections and supplements, while hundreds of others were written by a person described by Güterbock as handwriting 3? As a rule, authors who dictated their works made such corrections by themselves, even more so considering that an analysis of the distribution of the amendments, changes of the ink, and certain deviations of the ductus indicate clearly that they came into being in numerous stages and during a long period of time. We could have accepted the suggested approach while trying to explain the difficulties with writing experienced by the aged inclusus, but cannot understand why a number of smaller texts on the first leafs of the codex, prior to the chronicle", is in a different handwriting; the same applies to the list of popes and Irish rulers, which reveals traces of "rough copies" made in the course of work on the chronicle. Taking this into account as well as the fact that the differences between handwriting 3 and 4 are very slight, while the system of abbreviations is uniform, I would be inclined to combine both handwritings into one. Marianus Scotus appears to have been the author of a large part of the manuscript, and the Vatican codex would have been a partial autograph. As I have mentioned, the whole fundamental text of the chronicle was written by 2 scribes, whom I shall call R 1 (the same as handwriting 1 according to

. . 77 M. Chazan, L'empire et l'bistoire universelle de Sigebert de Gembloux a Jean de Saint- -Victor (XII-XIV siedest, "Etudes d'histoire medievale" III (1999), p. 131 ff. 78 B. Güterbock, op.cit., p. 90 ff. 79 See:the sub-chapter below on the contents of the codex. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BElWEEN COMPUTlSTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 329

Güterbock) and R 2 (handwritings 3 and 4 according to Güterbock). R 1, a skilful scribe using an elegant Irish ductus, wrote the preface, the table of contents, books I and 11,and part of book III (to AD 532, and thus to the end of the first great paschal cycle after Christ) (f. 26-149v). Let us note that from AD 202 he left empty spaces for including rubro the names of Roman consuls, dates AE and AD (the latter nigro), and notes about the pontificates of consecutive popes, later supplemented by scribe R 280. Nonetheless, not all the notes rubro in this part of the text were written by R 2. Scribe R 1 independently wrote all the notes, with the exception of a single one'", about the succession and duration of the reigns of emperors. To the year AD 202, the whole main text, both the one in black and the one in red ink, was written by R 1. The striking feature characteristic for scribe R 1 is that he committed relatively frequent mistakes, which consisted of repeating one/or several last words, which then were erased by him or perhaps even by Marianus Scotus while correcting the manuscript. Such errors could have appeared only in the course of copying the text from the rough version to a clean one by a professional scribe who performed this task mechanically, without thinking about the meaning of the sentences. Consequently, I believe that the whole part written by R 1 is a clean copy of the chronicle based on an earlier rough copy. From the viewpoint of spelling, R 1 was a typical representative of his time: he write prepositions jointly with nouns, and consistently used small letters for proper names, including nomina sacra. There is no consistency in words with "u" and "v", in which both letters appear interchangeably, even in the same word. A similar inconsistency can be seen in the case of "ae", "~" and "e". The second handwriting (R 2) features a rather unskilled Continental ductus, albeit containing certain insular features (spelling, Irish glosses) and thus betraying an unprofessional scribe, a person who only sporadically reached for a pen. The ductus also lacks uniformity and discloses rather considerable deviations, sometimes even on a single page. These features encouraged Güterbock to distinguish two separate scribes. In my opinion, we are dealing with one person, and can at best speak about several stages in his work, probably at times separated by longer intervals (for example Continuation I and particular supplementary glosses in the chronicle). More, I maintain that in the first phase R 2 wrote the remaining part of book III to AD 107311076 (f. 150-165v), adding in red the names of consuls, notes about popes, and dates

80 A depiction of the ductus of R 1 is given in a textbook on palaeography by G. Battelli, Lezioni di paleografia, Cirrä del Vaticano 2002, p. 170. See also: Mariani Scotti chronicon, in: MGH SS, V, table 4, with tracings of the ductus of both handwritings from the autograph, made by Wilhelm von Giesebrecht, but without their description. 81 Under AD 207, Pal.lat. 830, f. 118. This is even more puzzling since the note was not written on an erasure. 330 WOJCIECH BARAN-KoZlOWSKI

AE and AD to AD 202 (f. 118); this is also the handwriting on some of the first 241eafs of the codex - a computistic table (f. 2-3), the first synchronistic table (f. 4-10v), a paschal table (f. 18-24v) and on the last leaf (f. 170) a fragment of a treaty by Gregory the Great. Furthermore, R 2 wrote the major part of the margin glosses (including the Irish ones) and numerous interlinear supplements throughout the whole codex in several phases. In a separate phase/phases R 1 wrote Tractatio sequentis cieli (f. 1v), which precedes the computistic fragment, the second and third synchronistic tables (f. 10v-15), and the lists of Irish rulers (f. 15v) and popes to John XII (f. 16). The handwriting of a single extensive supplement in book I, added on a sewn-on leaf (f. 80-80v), also that of R 2. Then, in a distinctly separate phase, R 2 wrote down Continuation I (from AD 1074-1082) (f. 165v-166) and further supplementary notes found in the whole codex, among others at the end of book Ill: under AD 1023: "Eclipsis solis hora nona uerno tempore" (f. 163), AD 1028: "Ego miser Marianus in peccatis fui in hoc anno natus" (f. 163) and AD 1076, together with a rhymed acrostic, a sui generis colophon of the chronicle (f. 165v). The character of the last three notes is an additional argument in favour of recognising R 2 as Marianus Scorus", It also testifies to the very large number of supplements in R 2 and the fact that this is the handwriting of all the "rough versions" which later became the first components of the Vatican codex. Marianus Scotus, just as scribe R 1, wrote prepositions jointly and was inconsistent in "u/v", "ae", "~" and "e". In lodowicus the letter "w" appears upon several occasion although also inconsistently and with a parallel usage of "uu" or "vv" . Further handwritings were those of the readers and continuers. In this manner, R 3 (the same as handwriting 2 in Güterbock), characterised by a heavy and unskilful Continental script, is the author of several Irish margin glosses, referring to Irish saints (f. 38-48, 138-148), and notes about St. Patrick and St. Brigid, included into the basic text of the chronicle. Quite possibly, this is the handwriting of one of the first readers of the chronicle, who stayed at the monastery of St. Martin in Mainz at the end of the 11th century. Scribes active at the beginning of the 12th century - R 4 and R 5 - introduced successive supplements. The former was the author of Continuation 11(f. 166v), several glosses on the margins, including those under the years: AD 337 (f. 133v), AD 351 (f. 134v), AD 386 (f. 138), and most probably a fragment of a treatise by Innocent I and Gregory the Great (f. 170v); R 5 wrote Continuation III (f. 166v), finished the list of popes to Urban II and Paschalis II (f. 16v), and under the year 1075 - a note about the death of Widrad, the abbot of Fulda

(f. 165v). < ••

82 Cf. B. Güterbock, op.cir., p. 98, who also attributed these notes to Marianus Scotus (handwriting 4). CHRONICON BY MARlANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTlSTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 331

Additionally, the Vatican codex includes several fifteenth-century notes in two or three different handwritings: two inventory e-ntries (by two different authors) on the first leaf of the autograph, originating from 1419 and 1479 (f. 1), and an entry about the death of Marianus Scotus under AD 1087 (f. 166). Finally, the last entries in the codex were by an anonymous reader, most likely from the end of the 16th century! the beginning of the 17th century. This 'was the author of several archival glosses, designating, for example the beginning of the first book (f. 36v) and the place to which Marianus' work had been published by Johannes Basilius Herold in 1559 (f. 166). When did Marianus Scotus start writing the chronicle? It is difficult to establish when the Mainz inclusus became interested in computing, but this must have taken place already prior to work on the chronicle. He was probably inspired by the works of Bede Venerabilis, who indicated certain imprecision in findings by Dionysius Exiguus. Quite possibly, his own observations connected with the creation of a new paschal table and the calculation of the dates of Easter could have exerted a certain impact -let us recall that the table by Bede ended on AD 1064, and that it was necessary to carry out new combinations for the consecutive years. In all likelihood, Marianus commenced the chronicle after he moved to Mainz. Presumably, an additional impulse was the local library with its numerous computistic treatises and historiographie works. We cannot establish when exactly Marianus began the first variant. An analysis of the Vatican manuscript allows us to say that the original edition encompassed a text from the prologue to AD 532, and thus from the creation of the world to the end of the first great paschal cycle after Christ. It edition must have been completed before the middle of 1072, since in June of that year anonymous scribe R 1 began copying the text of the chronicle. This is the conclusion drawn from a gloss on the margin of one of the first leafs, written by R 1 partly in Iro-Scottish and partly in Latin: "It is pleasant for us today, o Mael Brigte the inclusus, in the enclosure in Magantia on the Thursday before the feast of Peter in the first year of the legate, that is, in the year in which was killed Diarmait, the king of Leinster. And that is the same year that I came out of Scotland on my pilgrimage. And I have written this book because of friendship for you and for all Scots, that is, for Irishmen, for I am myself an Irishman" 83.

83 Pal. tat. 830, f. 33, upper margin: IS oemenn dun indiu, a maelbrigte clüsendir isin clüsail in magantia isin dard6en ria {ei petair isin cetbliadain dend legdid id est isin bliadain i rromarbat diarmait ri lagen. Et isiside cetna bliadain tänasca a albain in perigrinitate mea. Et scripsi hunc librum pro caritate tibi et scotis omnibus id est hibernensibus, quia sum ipse hibernensis; Irish text quoted with slight changes after: B.6. Cuiv, The Irish marginalia in codex Palatine- Vaticanus No 830, "Eigse. A Journal of Irish Studies" XXIV (1994), p. 50 ff.; English translation in: ibidem. 332 WOjCIECH BARAN- KOZI:.OWSKI

We find out that the Irish scribe wrote on a Thursday before the day of St. Peter in the year of the death of Diarmait mac Mail na mB6, the king of Leinster. Correlating this information with book Ill, we may say that the event took place in AD 1072 (= AE 1094)84.Taking into consideration the fact that the day of St. Peter and Paul is 29 June, which in 1072 was a Friday, then the final date is 28 June 1072. The successive datation premise was the mentioned first year of the legation of Siegfried, the archbishop of Mainz, who in 1071 was appointed a papal legate and chaired the debates of a synod discussing a charge of simony launched against the bishop of Constance'". When did R 1 begin the clean copy? I assume that this must have taken place around the above-mentioned 26 June, since in the second part of the gloss the scribe admitted that he had arrived on the Continent quite recently, and thus could not have been staying in Mainz for long. The place in which the gloss had been added - page 4 from the beginning of book I - entitles us to deduce that the Irish author started his work not much earlier, and quite possibly on the day of the origin of the gloss. The assumption that the scribe included this information on that particular day appears to be confirmed by the end phrase: "Et scripsi hunc librum pro caritate tibi et scotis omnibus id est hibernensibus, quia sum ipse hibernensi", in which the author expressed his motives for assisting Marianus. The annual date of the origin of a clean copy of this part of the chronicle is confirmed also a few pages later on, where Marianus listed all the great cycles from the time of Adam: "Undecimus magnus ciclus in cuius anno Xlll" sumus modo indictione decima?". The 13th year of the 11th great cycle is the year 1076 which should, however, have indict ion 14. With this fact in mind, von den Brincken corrected it in her edition from 9 to 1487• On theother hand, one might have just as well replaced the 13th year by the 9th, and leave indiction 10, which would give the year 1072. Such an amendment is even more probable

84 AE 1094 (= AD 1072) Diarmait rex lagen VIII idus feb. feria secunda occissus - Pal. tat. 830, f. 165. 85 AE 1093 (= AD 1071) Vnus clericorum [carolus nomine} more simonis magi qui donum spirituale pro precio rogauit ab apostolis, a rege heinrico comparauit episcopatum ciuitatis constantie. Qui in conuenticulo episcoporum et abbatum in monasterio sancti martini mogontie in assumptione sanae marie facto a sigfrido archiepiscopo mogontino coram rege heinrico culpatus quia per ostium domini non intrauit, absque baculo a conuenticulo exiuit, deinde post annum non uixit - ibidem. 86 Pal. lat. 830, f. 36v. 87 11. magnus ciclus, in cuius anno 13. sumus, modo indictione 14. - A.D. van den Brincken, Marianus Scottus. Unter besonderer, p. 230; an addditional argument in favori of such an amendment was to have been the text of the London manuscript, which includes indiction 14 (Nero CV, f. 33v). A correction by the author of the London manuscript cannot be, however, a decisive argument since he could have just as well left indiction 9 and corrected the year of the cycle, CHRONICON BY MARlANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 333 since it corresponds best to a gloss mentioning the time of the origin of book I. Moreover, in this chapter, dating with the help of an indiction held prime importance for Marianus and his chronological findings", An additional argument can be the fact that the figure XIII was written (although in the same handwriting) on an erasure, although it is impossible to say whether originally this was IX or another figure. A palaeographic-codicological analysis makes it possible to ascertain that Marianus Scotus wrote his chronicle in a number of periods. First, he prepared the rough copy of books I and 11and part of book III (to AD 532, it is the end of the great paschal cycle), to which he then added a prologue and a list of chapters. Then, in the second half of AD 1072 and with the assistance of scribe R 1, he used this base for a clean copy. After a short interval or immediately afterwards, at any rate before the end of AD 1073, he finished book III, which pauses on events from that year. Premises for establishing the closing date of work on this part of the chronicle are provided by a note under AD 1076, placed probably in a advance in 1073 as the last note of the first edition" Apart from the calculated computistic information - "In hoc anno dominica passio secundum cursum solis et lune tertio habetur, hoc est a passione Christi 11°magni eicli, id est MLXIIII anni" - Scotus included a rhymed seven-verse text in his own handwriting (R 2): "Octoginta ducenti necnon milia quinque Constant omnes anni tempus usque hoc adam. I Multum ob excerptos legimus barbaricos Reges iustificandos gestaque turbida egenos. I . Collige litteram anteriorem {paruum} uoluito summam, Existat numeratus auctor, intra require, I Rectus omnes me tulit in nouum {id est librum} ordinem laudis'l'". The first sentence of the poem refers to computistic notes and informs that 5280 years had passed from the creation of Adam to the present moment, in other words, the year AE 1098 (= AD 1076) is AM 5280. Marianus calculated this date upon the basis of his earlier findings, from which it followed that Christ was born in AM 4183. If we add: 4183 (the number of years from Adam to Christ) and 1098 (the number of years from Christ to the present) and then subtract minus 1 we shall get 5280. Not by chance was this information

88 P. Verbist, Reconstructing the Past, p. 286, n. 23. 89 We infer that notes from AD 1074 and 1075 were written in a slightly different ductus, identical with the one in notes starting from AD 1077. On the other hand, the note from AD 1076 is in the same handwriting as notes to AD 1073. Hence the note from AD 1076 must have been written prior to notes relating to AD 1074-1075. 90 Pal. lat. 830, f. 165v. I use brackets for words added between verses, and vertical lines for marking the ends of verses in the manuscript. 334 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtoWSKI placed at the end of the chronicle - it is a sui generis chronological clamp fastening together the whole work which, after all, starts with the creation. Despite the fact that in book 11he did not use the anno mundi era, Marianus intentionally stressed the time which passed from the very first day in the history of mankind. The fact that the chronicle ends on the year AD 1076 (= AE 1098) is just as intended since - as it is accentuated in the first part of the note - that year was the end of the 2nd great paschal cyele after Christ; thus, Easter took place on the same day of the year and the week as at the time of the Saviour. Even more interesting are the Slast verses of the poem in which the Mainz inclusus teased the readers by giving his Irish name. By following the author's directives the reader may compose the first letters of these verses (apart from words intentionally written in between) into an Irish sentence: "Moelbrigte c1ausenair romtinol", which means" Moelbrigte, the incluse, collected me"?'. We are dealing, therefore, with a so-called acrostic used rather often in antiquity, and more rarely in the Middle Ages, for concealing the name of the author of a given work. The encoding of an Irish name, together with a whole expression in that language, with the help of a Latin poem reflects the personality of the great chronicler, capable of making excellent use of the accomplishments of both cultures: Latin and Iro-Scottish. The fact that such information was given also proves that in 1073 Marianus did not foresee that the chronicle was to be continued further than AD 1076. This decision becomes logical if we become aware of the essence of the author's intention. After all, the chronicler from Mainz wished to set right heretofore computistic calculations and devise a proper chronological frame for the history of the world from its creation to his own times. An ideal moment for ending the chronological arrangement was the year in which a successive great paschal cycle came to an end. In this manner, Marianus completed his work at a moment when the computistic circle closed itself - from that time on, his efforts were to have been continued by conscientious annalists. Next, Marianus introduced a number of supplements and corrections, written both in his own hand (R 2) and that of yet another Irish scribe (R 3), quite possibly a local reader. It became apparent that this was not the definite end of his activity as a chronicler - in 1082 he added Continuation I, encompassing the years AD 1073-1082. The reason for this return to work were the events which transpired in the course of the investiture controversy; hence, in this fragment Marianus described developments from the beginning of the pontificate of Gregory VII to the year of his death. Summing up the above arguments, we are entitled to assert that the Vatican manuscript of the chronicle by Marianus Scotus was written in the years

91 Translation after: B. Mac earthy, The Codex Palatino-Vaticanus, p. 9. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTlSTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 335

AD 1072-1073 by 2 scribes: an anonymous Irish scribe (R 1), who upon the basis of a rough copy in the handwriting of Marianus Scotus, made a clean copy of the almost the whole chronicle, and by the author himself (R 2). A few years later, the scribe returned to the chronicle, and in AD 1082 added Continuation I. In the meantime, Marianus Scotus added corrections and supplements, a task carried out in several phases. These supplements were continued also by later readers from the end of the 11th century and the early 12th century.

THE SOURCES OF CHRONICON

Marianus Scotus used several sources, which can be divided into 4 basic groups. The first includes computistic treatises, with whose majority Scotus was familiar from the so-called Wilhelm codex, kept today at Bibliotheque National in Paris and in the 11th century the property of the archbishops of Mainz'". Apart from the works of Dionysius Exiguus and Bede Venerabilis, Marianus also referred to De ratione paschali by Pseudo-Morinus of Alexandria, Acta synodi by Pseudo-Theophilus of Caesarea, the anonymous Prima dies seculi, De anno magno by Düngal of St. Denis, Liber de computo by Hraban Maurus, Liber rotarum by Isidor of Seville, Cyclus paschalis, sive de ratione paschali by Victor of Aquitaine, and the correspondence of Pope Leo I the Great and Paschasius, the bishop of Lilibeum (Siciily) (Epistola ad Leonem papam de ratione Paschae and Epistola quarta ad Marcianum augustum). True, he mistakenly ascribed some of these works to Bede, but at the time this was by no means an isolated error. The second group is composed of historiography, predominated by the fundamental world chronicles - from Eusebius-Jerome, Orosius, Prosper, Cassiodorus, Jordanes, Isidor of Seville,and Bede to Reginon of Prüm. Moreover, Marianus also benefited from a number of annals, the most important being Annales Saneti Bonifaei, Annales Saneti Albani (known also as Annales Wirziburgenses) and Annales Augienses. Indubitably, he was also acquainted with annals and an annalistic compilation (today lost) written in Mainz by combining the Annal from Augiense with notes from Fulda and Hersfeld'".

92 Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale, Latin 4860 (henceforth: BN lat. 4860). 93 On this question see: G. Waitz, Varlorene Maineer Annalen, Nachrichten von der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften und der Georg-Augusts Universität 1873, pp. 388- -391; J. Werra, Über den Continuator Reginonis, Disp. Leipzig 1883, p. 74 ff.; W. Erben, Zu der Fortsetzung des Regino von Prüm, "Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde" XVI (1891), p. 614 ff.;].R. Dieterich, Die Geschichtsquellen des Klosters Reichenau bis zur Mitte des elften Jahrhunderts, Giessen 1897, p. 189 ff.; and recently especially: T. jasiriski, Zagadnienie autorstwa rocznika obcego. Przyczynek do dziejoto historiografii niemieckiej X stulecia, "Roczniki Historyczne" LXVIII (2002), p. 7 ff.; idem, Rola Rocznika 336 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtOWSKI

Finally, the chronicler reached for hagiography: Martyrologium Hieronymianum, Martyrologium by Ado of Vienne and several vita (Vita sancti Martini by Sulpicius Sever, Vita sanctae Paulae by Jerome, Vita sancti Mauri by Odo of Glanfeuil, Vita Gregorii Magni by John Hymonides, Vita sancti Columbani and Gesta sancti Patricii). The third group is composed of the oft-cited Holy Scripture and numerous works by the Fathers of the Church, with pride of place given to St. Augustine (De doctrina Christiana, De consensu evangelistarum, De Trinitate, De Civitate Dei, Questions of the Heptatech and Contra mendacium); references were made also to Ambrose of Milan, Jerome, Bede and Gregory the Great. The last, fourth category of sources includes the author's own information which served him for presenting the most important moments in his life and the course of contemporary events, especially those relating to the investiture controversy. Information about the localities where he stayed while on the Continent (Köln, Würzburg, Fulda, Mainz) came most probably from his own observations and local oral tradition. It is interesting to note that some of the sources used by the author of Chronicon can be directly derived from the preserved copy, which was once used by Scotus and which today is known as the Wilhelm codex". Here we come across the majority of the computistic treatises used by Marianus as well as chronicles by Jerome, Prosper, Cassiodorus, Jordanes, Bede and chronicles from Würzburg and Augiense. A number of other sources can be established indirectly: a codex containing copies written by the fifteenth-century chronicler Dietrich Engelhus contains the lives of Charlemagne and Louis the Pious, based on a lost codex from Mainz, indubitably affiliated with or even identical with the one used by Marianus Scorns".

THE PURPOSE OF CHRONICON AND ITS COMPUTISTIC SYSTEM

What reason urged the Mainz inclusus to write his work? Without doubt, the chronicle was inspired by computistic questions - Marianus Scotus discovered that familiarity with the Gospel was insufficient for setting right augiiskiego w rozu.oju annalistyki polskiej i niemieckiej, "Roczniki Historyczne" LXIX (2003), p. 75 ff. 94 BN lat. 4860. 95 Hannower, Niedersächsisches Landesbibliothek, XIII 859, f. 26-36 (Einhard, Vita Caroli Magni), 36v-40v (Thegan, Gesta Hludoioici imperatoris); cf.: a description of the codex by H. Hartel, F. Ekowski, Handschriften der Niedersächsischen Landesbibliothek Hannover, 11: Mp. I 176a-Mp. Novisp. 64, Hannover 1982, p. 203 H.; and analyses of the manuscript tradition of the two lifes: M.M. Tischler, Einhans Vita Karoll. Studien zur Entstehung, Überlieferung und Rezeption, 1-11,Hannover 2001, p. 377 ff., 588 ff.; E. Tremp, Studien zu den Gesta Hludotoici imperatoris des Trierer Chorbischofs Thegan, in: MGH. Schriften, XXXII, CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTlSTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 337 the errors committed by Dionysius. It became obvious that the chosen target could be attained only by correlating Biblical history with sources created by historians, and that a suitable path led via extremely meticulous recreation upon the basis of all accessible sources of world history, and subsequently its arrangement into a sequence of events occurring year after year. The next objective was, apart from conducting own calculations, the establishment of a chronologically correct - in the author's opinion - compendium of world history from the creation to his times. Such a compendium was to take into consideration all the applied methods of datation (eras), including calculations by Eusebius or Dionysius, regarded as erroneous. The outcome was a copious combination of a computistic treatise with a world history, introducing a new periodisation of history both before the birth of Christ and after His Incarnation. Completed computistic calculations and historical investigations inspired Marianus to correct two fundamental eras: the Jewish era of the creation by 230 years (the birth of Christ in AM 4183 instead of AM 3952) and the Dionysian era by 22 years (AE 1 = AD 22 B.C.)96.In turn, an analysis of the Bible and historical sources made it possible to fill the 230-years long gap in the chronology of Old Testament history (Scotus added 230 years in the second epoch of the history of mankind: a 100 years during the reign of Arfaxad and 130 years at the time of Kainan 11)and an eighteen-years long gap in the history of the Roman Empire (16 years during the reign of Decius and two under Galerius). A detailed analysis and painstaking argumentation in favour of those 2 periods occupy a large fragment of books I and 11;a summary of the arguments proposed by the author from Mainz was included in the prologue- -treatise Resurrectio Christi inquisitio, added at the end of his chronicle. How did Marianus Scotus arrive at his calculations? First of all, in book I he analysed in great detail the whole heretofore computistic tradition starting with (chapter 1) the views of Dionysius Exiguus (upon the basis of his Letter to Petronius and Letter to Baniface and Bonus and the treatise De ratione paschali, mistakenly attributed to him and actually written

Hannover 1988, p. 197 H., 200. About the author see especially: A. Baumann, Weltchronistik im ausgehenden Mittelalter. Heinrich von Herford, Gobelinus Person, Dietrich Engelhus, Frankfurt am Main 1995, p. 219 H. 96 Below I present an extremely concise course of the computistic argumentation by Marianus Scotus; due to insufficient space I have resigned almost entirely from citing suitable fragments of the chronicle. This question will be thoroughly analysed in my future monographic study on the Scotus chronicle. Compare also with: A.D. von den Brincken, Marianus Scottus. Unter besonderer, p. 199 H.; eadem, Marianus Scottus als Universalhistoriker, p. 990 H.; and particularly: P. Verbist, Reconstructing the Past, p. 287 H., on whose findings I have based my presentation of the computistic sytem of Marianus Scotus; for this reason, I shall not cite this study upon each occasion. 338 WOJCIECH BARAN-KoztOWSKI by Pseudo Morinus of Alexandria'")?", Then, in chapter 2 Scotus confronted the theories ascribed to Dionysius with data from the Holy Scripture, indicating several errors: he noticed that the calculations made by Dionysius refer not to the year of the death of Christ accepted by him (AD 34), but to the Nativity (AD 1), and that the Last Supper was placed on a Sunday preceding Easter Sunday instead of a Thursday", Chapter 2 and 4 present the views of Pseudo- -Theophilus of Caesarea, voiced in his Acta synodir", according to which both the creation of the world and the Resurrection took place on the day of the spring equinox, it is on 25 March'?'. Next (chapter 5) Scotus confronted the ascertainment made by Pseudo-Theophilus with the views of Bede Venerabilis, who recognised, for example that the spring equinox occurs on 21 March and that Easter Sunday falls on the first Sunday after the first spring full moon. By referring to works by the Anglo-Saxon scholar, Marianus rejected the findings of Pseudo-Theophilus'P, Chapter 6 analyses De ratione computir", according to which the creation of the world was to have taken place on 18 March and the first spring equinox - on the fourth day of creation, that is 21 Marchl?'. In the next chapter, Marianus combined the theory about the correlation of the spring equinox and the creation of the world with the so-called great paschal cycle!", In this case, the inclusus used a treatise, once again mistakenly ascribed to Bede - De anno magna by Düngal of St. Denis, an Irish computist from the 9'h century!", Dungal established the first day of the creation of the world as Sunday, 18 March in the 54,h year of the great cycle. With this assumption as his point of departure, and taking into consideration the fact that the first

97 The mistaken atribution of this work to Dionysius was the result of the fact that Marianus used the copy preserved in BN lat. 4860 (f. 150-150v), which in this codex succeeds letters by Dionysius (f. 148v-150). On the authorship of the treatise see: A. Cordoliani, Les computistes insulaires et fes ecrits pseudo-alexandrine, "Bibliotheque de I'Ecole des Chartes" CVI (1945-1946), p. 30 H. 98 Pal. lat. 830, f. 31 v-32. 99 Ibidem, f. 32-32v. 100 Marianus was familiar with this treatise from the Wilhe1m codex (BN lat. 4860, f. 144-144v). Cf. an edition which does not take this manuscript into consideration: B. Krusch, Studien zur christlich-mittelalterlichen Chronologie. Der 84-jährigen Ostercyclus und seine Quellen, Leipzig 1880, p. 304 ff. 101 Pal. lat. 830, f. 32v-34. 102 Ibidem, f. 34. 103 As in the case of the work by Pseudo- Theophilus, Marianus knew this treatise from the Wilhe1m Codex, BN lat. 4860, f. 111v-117. 104 Pal. lat. 830, f. 34-34v. 105 Ibidem, f. 35-36. 106 We are not familiar with the copy of this treaty used by Marianus Scotus. The oldest manuscript (9th century) from St. Denis is part of the codex in Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, Reginensi Iatini 309 (f. 63v-64v). See: a description of Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae codices manuscripti, Codices Reginenses latini, 11,ed. by A. Wilmart, Cittä del Vaticano 1945, p. 164. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 339 spring equinox after creation took place 4 days later (which he accepted in the previous chapter), Marianus calculated the day of the first spring full moon and concurrents counted for 24 March in the years of the birth and death of Christ, established according to 3 different eras of the creation of the world: Hebrew, Eusebius-Jerome and Greek. Upon this basis, Marianus was capable of placing each of these years within the great paschal cycle. Chapter 7 ends with a table containing concurrents for the 532-years long great paschal cycle'?'. Thanks to this arrangement of the concurrents, Marianus noticed that none of the 3 eras of creation corresponds to data from the Gospel. In chapter 8 he added to his reflections yet another computistic element, next to the years of the great cycle and concurrents, namely, indictions':". The inclusus of Mainz recalled the findings made by Bede, who declared that the year of the birth of Christ coincided with indication 4. Upon this basis, Marianus was able to establish that the year of the creation of the world coincided with indiction 15. Taking this into consideration, he then could determine that the creation of the world occurred in the 54th year of the great paschal cycle (the 16th year of the third lunar cycle), since three other possible dates (with concurrent 7 and Easter on 21 March) had other indictions (149 - indiction 5, 396 - indiction 12,491 - indiction 2). Finally, Marianus calculated the time which had passed from the creation of the world to the beginning of the Dionysian great cycle, claiming that there were eight 530-years long cycles; in other words, he established the beginning of the Dionysian cycle as the 4204th year from the creation of the world. In this manner, the chronicler created a computistic- -chronological frame composed of successive great paschal cycles, in which he gave the indictions which occurred in the years initiating consecutive paschal cycles from the creation of the world to his own times. In chapter 9, Marianus returned to the day of the creation of the world. First, he recalled the theory that the universe had been created on Sunday, 18 March and that 3 days later, on 21 March, that is the day of the spring equinox, God created celestial bodies, and on the sixth day - Friday, 23 March - He created Adam and 109 Eve • Marianus summed up his computistic views in chapter 10110 and in an abbreviated form recalled the course of his reasoning. First, he corrected the Hebrew era of the creation by shifting the moment of the creation by 23 years, thus determining that Christ was born not 3952 years after the creation of the world but 4182 years: "Hinc vsque in mens em marti in anno XLo secundo octaviani cesaris avgusti in cuius fine natus est dominus teste avctoritate, sunt

107 Pal. fat. 830, f. 36. 108 Ibidem, f. 36-36v. 109 Ibidem, f. 36v-37. 110 Ibidem, f. 37. 340 WOJCIECH BARAN-KoZlOWSKI anni nimirum quatuor milia centum octoginta dvo, id est CCXXX annis plus quam summa ebreorurn"!!'. In other words, the first year of the new era was 4183 from the creation of the world. He then calculated that 4203 years had passed from the creation to the first year of the Dionysian great cycle, in whose second year Christ was born: "Usque autem ad magnvin ciclvm paschalern in cuius secundo anno ivxta dionissivm natus est {dominus} hoc est in anno uigessimo tertio dorninice natiuitatis secundum historiam evangelii, sunt anni 1111milia dvcenti 111"112. The year of the birth of Christ estimated by Dionysius is thus actually the 23rd year of the new era according to data from the Gospel (AD 1 = AE 23). In turn, according to the calculations presented by Marianus, Christ died in the 4216th year from the creation of the world: "Usque vero in passionem Christi VIII kaI. apr. feria sexta lvna quintadecima ivxta historiam sancti euangelii cui contradicunt cunctae cronice sunt anni qvatuor milia ducenti sex, et decem"113. The second part of book one (chapters 11-22) is of an entirely different character!", In it, Marianus evolved from purely computistic reflections to a presentation of chronological sequences of the first epochs in the history of the world (from Adam to Christ). The prime intention of this fragment was to discover the 230 missing years in the Hebrew era of creation. Scotus finally found them in the second epoch of the history of mankind (from the Flood to the birth of Abraham), during the reign of Kainan 11 (130 years) and Arfaxad (100 years): "Svbtracta itaque generatione arfaxat secundum ebreos, id est annis XXXV de etate secunda etiam secundum ebreos, et postea introdvcta generatione eiusdem arfaxat secundum LXX interpretes, id est CXXXV necnon etiam generatione cainan secundum LXXa 11 interpretes, id est CXXX, assumuntur dvcenti triginta quinque {anni}pro annis LX quinque et fit secunda etas annis DXXII"lls. In turn, book II of the chronicle is devoted totally to a computistic- -chronological analysis of the presence of Christ on Earth!". By referring to the New Testament and the works of Christian authors, Marianus Scotus embarked upon a thorough presentation of the chronology of events and their precise dating. The point of departure for his reflections was the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. Then, he consistently showed the differences between dating events from the life of the Saviour according to the years of His life (anni aetatis) and the years from His birth (ann; nativitatis). Seeking further

111 Ibidem. 112 Ibidem. 113 Ibidem. 114 Ibidem, f. 37v-71. 115 Ibidem, f. 41-41v. 116 Ibidem, f. 70v-99v. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTlSTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 341 support, the learned computist resorted to evidence from assorted sources. Alongside universally known two traditions - Greek and Latin, and their different dates of Christ's death, Marianus cited a third one, based on the chronicles of Eusebius and Bede. Having conducted a more profound analysis, he was, however, compelled to reject this tradition since it could not be coordinated with the computistic parameters occurring in the year of the death of Jesus. The only selection left was, therefore, between the Greek ands Latin tradition, although Marianus decided to accept as a point of departure the erroneous third tradition, located between the other two. By calculating the number of years which, according to this tradition, had passed from the date of the Passion (AD 30) to his own times, Scotus found that he had obtained a figure smaller than it would follow from calculations conducted according to the solar era. Hence he concluded that the year of the death of the Saviour concurs rather with the Latin tradition (Ad 12) than the Greek one (AD 42). According to the latter, the year of the Passion was the 3rd year of the reign of Claudius, which directly contradicts data from the Gospel according to St. Luke and St. John. Similarly, purely computistic arguments spoke in favour of the Latin tradition - making it easier to explain the absence of certain years than to eliminate the already existing historiographic notes. The work performed by Marianus consisted of filling the gaps produced by one of the Evangelists by resorting to data from another Gospel. In this fashion, the chronicler recreated a sequence of historical events from the life of Christ which he connected with ancient history. He additionally supported his findings by referring to the authority of Jerome, Augustine and Bede. Upon the basis of computistic, historiographic and other arguments, Marianus agreed with the Latin tradition, which dated the death of Christ as 25 March AD 12 (luna XV). Naturally, in accordance with his own findings, in book I the chronicler corrected the Dionysian era by 22 years, accepting that according Dionysius year 1 coincided with year 23 of the correct era calculated upon the basis of data from the Gospel (AD 1 = AE 23). In this way, Marianus created a lucid chronological system from the creation of the world to his own time, whose central point was the Nativity of Christ: AM 4183 = AD 22 B.C. = AE 1.

THE HlSTORIOGRAPHIC METHOD OF MARIANUS SCOTUS

An analysis of the method applied by the chronicler-computist offers extremely interesting conclusions. The dominating feature of the narration is a scrupulous account of the accomplishments of his great predecessors; Scotus often cited their opinions and compared them with his most important source - the Holy Scripture. This procedure may be best observed in the first 8 chapters of the chronicle's first book, in which Marianus Scotus conducted a meticulous analysis of all heretofore achievements of assorted computists, supplementing 342 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtOWSKI his reflections with copious quotations from the sources'F. He acted in this way throughout book 11,which frequently compares different sources about the same moments in the life of Christ - texts by particular Fathers of the Church and all four Evangelists. Obviously, Marianus Scotus regarded the Holy Scripture to be his greatest authority. Consequently, whenever he came across contradictions, he tried to find a logical explanation. An excellent example of such an approach could be the age of Christ at the time of His death. Analysing assorted contradictory sources, Marianus declared that they all contain truth: "Hec omnia vera atque idem sunt, quam uis sibi in divers urn uenire uidentur"!", The key to explaining this question was to be a distinction of the calendar year of the Crucifixion (AD 34) and the age of Christ at that moment (30 and a half years): "IISllciendum est igitur dvobus modis dominicos annos nvmerari nee non etiam nominari, primo modo secundum annos solares, secundo {ivxta}id quod complevit pleniter XII mensibus sve etatis annum. ITaque anni nativitatis qui sunt secundum cvrsum solarem XXXIIIla atque etatis anni qui sunt XXXII ac demedius [as in the original- W.B.-K.] annus, domini nominantur anni"!", Taking into account the fact that Christ was born on 25 December of the first year (AD 1) - Scotus continued - the solar year (AD 2) began when He was only 7 days old: "Primus enim est annus nativitatis domini secundum cvrsum solarem ipse in cuius fine VIIIo die kaI. ian. natus sit de quo non habvit ivxta etatem, nisi tantum dies VII"120.Hence, Christ ended the first year of His life immediately before the end of the second solar year (AD 2): "Etatis autem annum mensivm XII in fine anni secundi natiuitatis complevit. Et ita annos dvos natiuitatis secundum solem pene in prim urn annum etatis sue consummavit"!", In this fashion, Marianus explained the differences between various sources, claiming that Christ died in the 34th calendar year from His birth (annus natiuitatis - AD 34), and in the 33rd year of His life (annusetatis), it is at the age of 32 and a half: "IN anno itaque XXX 111°etatis hoc est in XXXIIIIo nativitatis sve dominus passus sit"122. A successive feature is the introduction of precise quotations with reference to a given author and even cl concrete work or chapter and sub-chapter. By way of example, let us mention only several of the more interesting source references: Marianus described his source as the chronicle by Eusebius, translated by Jerome ("secundum cronicam evsebii quam sanctus hiero~imus transtullit" [f. 35v],

117 See:previous chapter. 118 Pal. lat. 830, f. 74v. . 119 Ibidem. 120 Ibidem. 121 Ibidem. 122 Ibidem. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ... 343 or "sanctus hieronimus qui transtulit cronicam evsebii secundum ipsam sic" [f. 78]); gave the exact places from Augustine's De civitate Dei and De consensu evangelistarum ("beatus augustinus in libro de ciuitate dei XVI capitula X sic conclusit" [f. 41], "sanctus augustinus in concordia Illl" evangelizarum capitula XII mvltum ita dicit" [f. 41]); refered to the prologue in the chronicle by Jerome ("sanctus hieronimus in prologo cronice evsebii sic" [f. 81]); Prologus ad Hilarum archidiaconum by Victor of Aquitaine ("Uictorius etiam ad hilarivm papam sic" [f. 148v]), or the chronicle by Cassiodorus ("Cassiodorus quoque senator expossitorque sacri psalteri in sva cronica sic" [f. 148v]). Apart from historical works and computistic treatises Marianus very often cited the Holy Scripture, for which he used a number of expressions: "sancta scriptura teste" (f. 36v), "secundum LXX interpretes" (f. 38), or to individual Gospels. The chronicle contains frequent traces of comparisons and selections of the sources with which Scotus was familiar. Upon certain occasions, especially as regards the calculation of the beginning of our era, which remains the very essence of his work, Scotus pointed out mistakes committed by other authors. Such a critical approach to sources is one of the best aspects of his historiographie method. Let us take the example of the first 2leafs containing a preface!", in which the inclusus from Mainz compared the views of Augustine, Eusebius- -Jerome, Dionysius and Bede in order to define the beginning of the new era, confronting them with data provided by the four Evangelists. Marianus cited particular data with great precision; the same holds true for quotations from the works of his predecessors, which every time are supplemented with, for example: "iuxta cronicam eusebii vel bede presbiteri" (f. 26), "sanctus beda contestatur dicens" (f. 26), "hec beda dixit" (f. 26), "secundum cronicam eusebii vel bede iuxta sacram euangelii historiam non convenit" (f. 26v), "Quia autem teste sancta hieronimo secundum cronicam eusebii et hoc est etiam iuxta cronicam bede" (f. 27), "secundum bedam vel theophilurn" (f. 27v), "iuxta historiam evangelii hieronimique atque avgustini testificatione" (f. 27v), "Interposuimus etiam aliqua verba dispvtationis dionisii atque epistolam theophili" (f. 27v). The author is just as meticulous while using the Holy Scripture - cited descriptions of the Resurrection by the four Evangelists are preceded by: "sic secundum matheum habetur, marcus sic, lucas sic" and "iohannes sic" (f. 26v-27). Furthermore, while removing certain superfluous fragments, unessential for the sense of his presentation, Marianus indicated the places of his omissions, as in the case of the words of St. Matthew: "Qualiter vero resurrectio Christi in euangelio confirmatur sic secundum Matheum habetur: Scitis quia post biduum pascha fiat et filis hominis tradetur vt crucifigatur!", et infra: Prima

123 Ibidem, f. 26-27v. 124 Cf. Matthew 26, 2. 344 WOJCIECH BARAN-KoZlOWSKI autem die azemorum accesserunt ad iesum discipvli eius dicentes: Ubi uis, paremus tibi comedere pascha. At iesus dixit: Ite in ciuitatem ad quendam et dicite ei. Magister dicit: Tempus meum prope est, apud te facio pascha cum discipulis meis. Et fecerunt discipvli, sicut constituit illis dominus, et parauervnt pascha. Uespere autem facto discumbebat cum XII discipulis suis. Et edentibus 12S illis dixit: Amen dico uobis quia unus uestrum me traditurus est • Et post: {Omnes vos} scandalvm patiemini in me in ista nocre!", Et ait Petro: Amen dico tibi, quia in hac nocte antequam gallus cantet ter me negabis"127 (f. 26v). Frequently, omissions are also marked at the end of a given fragment with the words "et reliqua" (f. 26 v, here fragments cited after St. Mark and St. Luke). Since Chronicon was supposed to not only resolve the correct date of the birth of Christ but also to compile all heretofore knowledge about the history of mankind according to a new, correct periodisation, Marianus was compelled to employ numerous parallel manners of datation. For instance, the main eras used by him in the first 2 books are the era of creation, which he corrected (anno mundis, datation according to the years of successive Biblical generations from Adam onwards, the era of the Olympics (consistently from the I to the CLX Olympic games, and then sporadically to the end of book I). Moreover, he also used the ab urbe condita datation and the eightfold retrospective era of the Incarnation, thus establishing dates by means of years before the birth of Christ, for example "in annum CCXXXV. ante incarnationem iuxta Dionisium". It is worth noting that this is actually the first more extensive use of the date of the birth of Christ as a point of reference for giving years before His Nativity!", True, we come across "ante incarnationis Dominicae tempus" already in Historia Ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, but not until Scotus was this method applied more extensively'?". In turn, book III uses three basic eras: the Evangelical era - AE (in other words, a calculation of the course of years from the correctly established date of the birth of Christ), the erroneous Dionysian era - ASD, and the imperial era. In this particular book, every event recorded in an annalistic scheme is defined with the help of all three eras, thanks to which the reader could correlate the presented chronology with earlier works by other historians. In addition, up to the year AD 532 Marianus consistently employed the consular era, and for the AD 297-306 period - also the era of martyrs (it is the Dioc1etian era). Auxiliary significance is attached to dates of the beginning and duration of pontificates, written in red. Throughout

125 Cf. ibidem, 17-21. . 126 Cf. ibidem, 31. 127 Cf. ibidem, 34. 128 A.D. von den Brincken, Beobachtungen zum Aufkommen der retrospektiven Incarnationsdra, "Archiv für Diplomatik" XXV (1979), pp. 8-20. 129 J. Naumowicz, Geneza chrzeiciianskie] racbuby lat. Historyczno-teologiczne podstawy systemu Dionizego Mniejszego, Krak6w 2000, p. 210 ff. .. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOTUS - BETWEEN COMPUTISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 345 the whole chronicle Marianus carefully recorded other "essential computistic details: the beginnings of solar cycles (for instance, under AE 974: ."eiclus solis incipit"130) and lunar cycles (for example under AE 972: "Ciclus XXIII decennouennalis incipit indictione octava'"!') as well as indications (in book I the beginning of every new fifteen-years long period was marked with the sign ".,", while in book III the author each time mentioned which indication occurred at the beginning of successive lunar cycles, as well as giving indictions with certain dates; for example, under AE 978: "indictio XIIII"132).At times, the computist from Mainz mentioned also the concurrent or the golden number in a given year. The historiographic part of the work by Marianus is a typical example of a chronicle of the period. Similarly to his predecessors, Scotus made a compilation of available writings, trying to create the fullest possible synthesis of history from the creation of the world to the time when the chronicle was written-P, Analysing Cbronicon, we notice the way in which consecutive parts are based to a large extent on particular works by Marianus' great predecessors. By way of example, the oldest period - to the year AD 325 - refers predominantly to Jerome's translation of the chronicle by Eusebius, the next one - to 379 - to the ending by Jerome, and further on - from 380 t0452 - to Prosper, from 453 to 518 -to Cassiodorus, and from 519 to 736 - mainly to Bede and Isidor of Sevilleand to a lesser extent to Paulus Diaconus. The onset of the Carolingian era signified an increased number of sources used by the chronicler from Mainz. The period from AD 737 to 906 is based to a considerable measure on several annals (Annales Sancti Bonifaci, Annales Augienses, Annales Hersfeldenses), the chronicle by Reginon, and works by Einhard and Thegan of Treves. In turn, Scotus recreated history from AD 907 to 973 by resorting to annals from Auginse and Hersfeld. Finally, for the period from AD 974 he obtained information primarily from local tradition, both oral and written (from Fulda and Mainz, including a catalogue of the archbishops of Mainz and lists of abbots) as well as his own observations . ..As a rule, Marianus borrowed whole phrases, changing little or, as in the case of the lives of Charlemagne or Louis the Pious, adapting only suitable fragments to annalistic narration by abbreviating the notes, dividing them into particular years, or shifting the subject to the beginning of a sentence. By way of example, here is a comparison of three consecutive notes about the reign of Charlemagne in Cbronicon and a life by Einhard:

130 Pal. lat. 830, f. 161, 161v. 131 Ibidem, f. 161v. 132 Ibidem, f. 162. 133 Cf. on the world chronicle: K.H. Krüger, Die Universa/chroniken, Turnhout 1976, p. 13 ff. 346 WOJCIECH BARAN-KOZtoWSKI

Year AE Marianus Scotus Chronicon Einhard Vita Karoli Magni and (AD) AE 816 [...] Fastrada regina de gene re [... ] Defuncta Fastrada Liutgardam (= AD 794) germanorum obiit, post quam Alamannam duxit, de qua nihil karolus Iiudgardam duxit liberorum tu tit. Post cui us mortem alamanniam!". tres habuit concubinas, [...)135 AE 821 Karolus lcgendi et psallendi [...] Legendi atque psallendi (= AD 799) disciplinam diligentissime disciplinam diligentissime ernendauit!". emendavit. [...]137 AE 825 Karolus pontem quingentorum [...] Inter quae praecipua fere non (= AD 803) passuum longitudinis trans renum inmerito videri possunt basilica mogontiacum construxit. Tanta enim sanctae Dei genitricis Aquisgrani ibi est fluminis latitude!". opere mirabili constructa et pons apud Mogontiacum in Rheno quingentorum passuum longitudinis - nam tanta est ibi fluminis latitudo; [...]139

Scotus acted in a similar manner also while referring to other sources forming the base of his work. Writing about current events, Marianus Scotus tried to be objective and maintain a certain distance. We may surmise his political sympathies only from an omission of certain facts - especially at the time of the investiture controversy - with which he must have been familiar and which would have depicted the legitimate ruler Henry IV in an unfavourable light (penance in Canossa); the chronicler also consistently used the pope's lay name of Hildebrand, and, characteristically, kept silent about Siegfried, the archbishop of Mainz, by resorting to such devices, Marianus remained at peace with his own conscience - on the one hand, as an adherent of the preservation of an uninterrupted reign of the ninety-fifth king of Rome140, he supported Henry IV, while, on the other hand, as a pious monk he did not want to criticise either the head of the Church or his direct superior in the diocese. In this respect, Marianus differed

134 Pal. lat. 830, f. 157. 135 Einhardi Vita Karoli Magni, in: Monumenta Germaniae Historica. Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum (henceforth: MGH SRG), Hannoverae-Lipsiae 1911, cap. XVIII, pp. 22-23. 136 Pal. lat. 830, f. 157. 137 Einhard, Vita Karoli Magni, cap. XXVI, p. 31. 138 Pal. lat. 830, f. 157. 139 Einhard, Vita Karoli Magni, cap. XVII, p. 20. 140 The chronological conception discernible in the pages of the chronicle in the form of a third way of dating according to the imperial era (alongside AE and AD) undoubtedly affected Marianus' historiographie views. CHRONICON BY MARIANUS SCOWS - BETWEEN COMPlITISTIC AND HISTORIOGRAPHY ••• 347 essentially from such authors as Lambert of Herzfeld or, later, Ekkehard of Aury, who did not conceal their convictions, demonstrating a negative attitude towards the emperor':",

SUMMARY

Chronicon by Marianus Scotus is an extraordinarily interesting testimony of Iro-Scottish culture and computistic-historiographic erudition on the Continent during the 11th century. The exceptional rank of the work by the author from Mainz consists not only in the rejection of calculations by Dionysius Exiguus and a striving to establish the date of the beginning of our era (concurrent with the Gospel), but predominantly in unusual research consistence, which generated a unique synthesis of computistic and historiography. Another noteworthy feature is the author's great erudition; Scotus used not only all the computistic treatises of his predecessors but also almost the entire canon of Christian historiography. The manner in which he benefited from those works must evoke the admiration of even present-day historians - Marianus Scotus referred with precision to particular authors, concrete titles and even chapters. Whenever he considered it suitable he did not waver from including extensive quotations, and as a rule clearly noted this decision; in those instances when he regarded complete quotations as not essential he was capable of skilfully abbreviating them and inserting the result into his own text. Without doubt, the inclusus of Mainz was one of the most interesting and, at the same time, least appreciated eleventh-century chroniclers. His uniqueness was certainly perceived already by his contemporaries, as evidenced by the opinion of a copier of the London codex who noted at the beginning his work: "Nulla enim cronica conservat diem mens is solaris resurrectionis Christi iuxta historiam evangelii nisi ista sola"142.

translated by Aleksandra Rodziriska-Choinowska

141 See: Lamperti Hersfeldensis Annales, in: Lamperti monacht Hersfeldensis opera, ed. by O. Holder-Egger, in: MGH SRG, Hannoverae-Lipsiae 1894, pp. 181,224; Ekkehardus Uraugiensis, Chronica, in: Frutol{iet Ekkehardi Chronica necnon Anonymi Chronica imperatorum, ed. by F.J. Schmale, I. Schmale-Ort, Darmstadt 1972, p. 132. 142 Nero CV, f. 2v.