This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ The script of Matthew Paris and his collaborators A digital approach Munoz Garcia, Manuel Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 07. Oct. 2021 The script of Matthew Paris and his collaborators: a digital approach Manuel Muñoz García A thesis presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 2018 Department of History Faculty of Arts & Humanities King’s College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. ii Acknowledgements This journey could not have been completed without the assistance and support of many. First and foremost, I would like to thank Julia Crick for her support, understanding and infinite patience through all the ups and downs of these almost five years. I am no doubt immensely privileged to have been supervised by her. Peter Stokes has been a generous and attentive second supervisor who has continuously nurtured my knowledge of Archetype and Digital Humanities. Also, the early-on advice by Daniel Hadas and Serena Ferente as part of my upgrade helped this dissertation take shape. There are many people I would like to thank for their continued support and for helping me communicate my work: James Clark, Björn Weiler, Sarah Laseke, Deborah Thorpe, James Sargan and CLAMS; Stewart Brookes and Dominique Stutzmann for their Digital Humanities support; Edward Mills for a concise masterclass in Anglo-Norman; and Laura Cleaver for her generosity and insight. I would also like to thank Fergus Wilde (Chetham’s Library, Manchester), Harriet Patrick (Corpus Christi College, Oxford) and the Manuscripts & Archives Research Library (Trinity College, Dublin) for their kind support. During these years of research, I have encountered many difficulties. Through them, however, I have unexpectedly received an outpouring of kindness: Kenneth F. Duggan, Leon Jackson, Erin Tilley, Pippa Ovenden, Colleen Curran, Lois Lane and Luke Bancroft have, at one time or another encouraged me with their advice, shared rants and memes. I would like to particularly acknowledge Ainoa Castro for her encouragement, support and advice, which have made this journey a little less solitary and much more rewarding. I owe the existence of this thesis to my husband Alexis. There are no words to describe what his selfless and relentless optimism and his loving understanding have meant to me. This thesis is his as much as mine. 愛してるよ. I would like to thank my parents and brothers, and my friends in London (Emma, Mariño), in Gran Canaria (Patricia, Ana, Laura, Leticia, María) and beyond (Raquel, Diego), for your love, energy, honesty, laughter and understanding, and for believing in me every step of the way. I am forever grateful. Lastly, Prince and Percy, the Cats, deserve too an acknowledgment, for making our lives better every single day. iii Abstract Matthew Paris (c.1200-1259) compiled a number of influential historical and hagiographical works at St Albans abbey. The edition of most of his historical works in the Rolls Series between 1858 and 1890 served as a springboard for scholarship on Paris, with a particular emphasis on authorship and the sources for his historical texts. In 1953 and 1958, Richard Vaughan published an acclaimed article and a monograph, in which, apart from adding to the authorship debate, he provided the first systematic description of Paris’s hand. Vaughan’s works have been at the core of all subsequent scholarship on Paris. However, there has not been any new scholarship dealing with Paris’s manuscripts from a palaeographic perspective since 1958. Vaughan’s description of Paris’s hand was impressionistic in nature and left out aspects like abbreviation and punctuation, while he determined the number of collaborating scribes to be fifteen without providing a description of those hands. The application of quantitative methods to palaeography, and subsequently the development of the Digital Humanities allows for more questions to be asked: What are the palaeographic characteristics of each collaborating scribe? What is the extent of the contribution of each of them? Did the hand of Matthew Paris change through time? In what ways? This project is based on the analysis of ten manuscripts on Vaughan’s list, and employs palaeographic, digital and quantitative methods. The digital framework Archetype has been used – under the name MParisPal – to create scribal ‘profiles’ made up of individual annotations of characters made on digital images, which allows to create more detailed scribal descriptions and opens up the possibility of cross-comparison. Overall, this project provides three main outcomes: firstly, a new and more complete description of Paris’s hand; secondly, a quantitative survey of the evolution of Paris’s hand through time; and thirdly, a description of all collaborating scribal hands in the analysed manuscripts, and of the extent of their contribution. These outcomes will broaden existing knowledge of book production at St Albans abbey in the thirteenth century; more generally of monastic book production in the Late Middle Ages; and of the development of the Gothic scripts. It also provides an online repository of manuscript images and palaeographic annotations that can be enlarged, continued or adapted in future research projects. iv Contents1 Acknowledgements iii Abstract iv Abbreviations vi List of figures vii 1. Introduction 1 a. Objectives 1 b. Life, works and manuscripts of Matthew Paris (c.1200-1259) 4 c. Historiographical approaches to Paris as author and scribe 23 2. Scribal identification, Archetype and the MParisPal corpus 39 3. Matthew Paris after Vaughan: script, changes and chronology 81 a. The hand of Matthew Paris 81 b. The evolution of Matthew Paris’s hand: a quantitative survey 98 c. Matthew Paris’s manuscripts: a chronology 127 4. The collaborating scribes: hands and scribes 146 a. Description of scribal hands 146 b. The scribes: A, B and C 240 c. The extent of scribal collaboration in the manuscript corpus 252 5. Conclusions 257 Appendix 264 Bibliography 268 1 The digital version of this dissertation includes in-text hyperlinks in the list of contents, the list of figures, and in cross-references to other sections. v Abbreviations BdL Bodleian Library, Oxford BL The British Library CCCC Corpus Christi College, Cambridge CCCO Corpus Christi College, Oxford ChL Chetham’s Library, Manchester CM Chronica Majora, 7 vols., ed. H. R. Luard, Rolls Series (London, 1872-83) CUL Cambridge University Library FH Flores Historiarum, 3 vols., ed. H. R. Luard, Rolls Series (London, 1890) GA Gesta Abbatum, 3 vols., ed. H. T. Riley, Rolls Series (London, 1867-69) HA Historia Anglorum, 3 vols., ed. F. Madden, Rolls Series (London, 1866-69) TCD Trinity College Dublin vi List of figures 1. Introduction 1.1. The relationships between Roger of Wendover’s Flores Historiarum and Matthew Paris’s Chronica Majora and Flores Historiarum. 14 2. Scribal identification, Archetype and the MParisPal corpus 2.1. Terminology used in MParisPal. 66 2.2. Annotations, scribal hands and annotated leaves per manuscript (excluding Matthew Paris). 75 2.3. Number of annotated leaves containing Matthew Paris’s hand, and of annotations per manuscript. 76 2.4. Annotated leaves and their correspondence with scribal hands in CUL Dd 11 78. 78 2.5. Fragment of a list of annotations in Paris’s hand in CUL Dd 11 78, as seen on MParisPal. 79 3. Matthew Paris: script, changes and chronology 3.1. Matthew Paris’s hand in BL Royal MS 14 C VII (9va13-20), CCCC MS 26 (57va1-10) and TCD MS 177 (31rb1-13). 83 3.2. Examples of caroline and round a in Matthew Paris’s hand. 83 3.3. Examples of letters g and d in Matthew Paris’s hand. 84 3.4. Examples of letters e and s in Matthew Paris’s hand. 85 3.5. Examples of the ascenders of b, h and l; and descenders of h, x and p in Matthew Paris’s hand. 85 3.6. Examples of fusions and ‘kissing’ in Paris’s hand. 87 3.7. Examples of punctuation and signes de renvoi in Paris’s handwriting. 89 3.8. Examples of abbreviation signs and superscript vowels in Matthew Paris’s handwriting. 93 3.9. Examples of ‘regular’ and ‘large’ open-head a in Paris’s hand. 99 vii 3.10. Average percentages of ‘regular’ and ‘large’ open-head a throughout the corpus. 100 3.11. Use of ‘large’ double-compartment a in the corpus. 101 3.12. Samples of round a in Paris’s hand.