Presentation on theme: "The ‘Electronic Hêliand Project’: theoretical and practical updates Verona, 4th March 2010 Speaker: Marina Buzzoni Technical Support: Francesca Anzalone,"— Presentation transcript:
The ‘Electronic Hêliand Project’: theoretical and practical updates Verona, 4th March 2010 Speaker: Marina Buzzoni Technical Support: Francesca Anzalone, Filippo Caburlotto, Damiano Bolzoni
This paper aims to provide an overview of the often disregarded differences amongst the witnesses of the Hêliand (a ninth-century Old Saxon alliterative reworking of the Gospel). show how, as against a printed edition which offers us a static text, an electronic edition presents the text in a variety of forms. critically consider the process and progress of manuscript digitization within the ‘Electronic Hêliand Project’.
The manuscript tradition The text of the Saxon poem has been preserved in two major manuscripts: M (= Munich, first half of the 9th century, http://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00026305/images/index.html) http://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00026305/images/index.htmlhttp://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00026305/images/index.html C (= Cotton, second half of the 10th century). Fragments of the poem have survived in four other witnesses: V (= Vatican fragment, ll. 1279-1358); P (= Prague fragment, ll. 958b-1006a); S (= Straubing fragment, ll. 351-722, http://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00003953/images/index.html); http://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00003953/images/index.htmlhttp://daten.digitale- sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00003953/images/index.html L (= the newly discovered Leipzig fragment, found in April 2006, ll. 5823-70a). ll. 5823-70a).
Stemma codicum (based on Taeger 1984: XXIV) O | A *CM *CP/L? *MS P/L? M S C V
Witnesses and textual ‘mouvance’ From the linguistic point of view: - the syntax of C seems to reflect an earlier stage in the development of Old Saxon. From the theological point of view: - M conveys an over-orthodox religious message; - C (copied in England) seems to be less concerned with conveying such a message.
Linguistic features Doubly filled complementizer: l. 298bDoubly filled complementizer: l. 298b C: He afsôf that that siu habda barn undar iru He afsôf that siu habda barn undar iru M: He afsôf that siu habda barn undar iru Lack of pronoun in anaphoric or expletive contexts: ll. 92b-93Lack of pronoun in anaphoric or expletive contexts: ll. 92b-93 C: gern uuas he suîđo, / that he ø thurh ferhtan hugi fremmean môsti M: gern uuas he suîđo, / that he it thurh ferhtan hugi frummean môsti Case attraction in the relative clauses: ll. 267b-268Case attraction in the relative clauses: ll. 267b-268 C: Endi ni kumid, / thes uuîdon rîkeas giuuand, thes he giuualdan scal M: Neo endi ni kumid, / thes uuîdon rîkeas the he giuualdan scal
Codicological and paratextual elements The differences amongst the witnesses are of crucial importance in order to understand the specific use (and possibly re-use) of the text during the Middle Ages.
M: Neums, stresses, corrections Heliand, Ms. M, f. 5r; ll. 6- 15; 288-302 Heliand, Ms. M, f. 5r; ll. 21- 24; 309b-314
(f. 3) Annunciation of the Virgin Mary (f. 4v) Visitation (f. 5) Birth of Christ (f. 6v) Angels and the Shepherds (f. 7) Massacre of the Innocents (f. 8v) Presentation in the Temple (f. 9)Adoration of the Magi (f. 10v)Baptism of Christ by John the Baptist C: Illuminations
C: Pictures and analogues Nativity Cotton Caligula A.vii Liverpool ivory Benedictional of S. Aethelwold (c. 950) (c. 975-80)
C: Pictures and analogues Annunciation Cotton Caligula A.viiBenedictional of S. Aethelwold
stressesneumscorrectionsglossesilluminations Hypotheses on the use M Liturgical use C (different from M) Book as an object V ? Liturgical use (?) S P Didactic use (in Eastfalic monastic schools?) L =
The electronic edition and its ‘added value’ The peculiarities linked to the actual use of the manuscripts within the Middle Ages deserve proper consideration while editing the text. A traditional paper edition risks hiding the communicative power of each witness. A traditional linear apparatus risks hiding “complex” linguistic and textual features, mainly because of its word-oriented (rather than sentence-oriented or text- oriented) structure. Cotton Caligula A.vii, ll. 5764-5782
Encoding paratextual features Early choice (then dropped) (scribal apparatus) (historical apparatus)
Encoding paratextual features Glosses gitalas lungras
Encoding paratextual features Corrections I Ex1. im`o´ im o
Encoding paratextual features Corrections II Ex2a. uuelde (e a) uueld e a uuelda Problem: the two forms (uuelde and uuelda) are both morphologically well-formed, while this encoding seems to suggest a prevalence of the second form over the first.