medieval-religion: Scholarly discussions of medieval religion and culture
On Thursday, December 14, 2006, at 5:48 pm, John Briggs wrote:
>
> Yes, OK - that's Usuard in his own time, as we understand him now, and
>
> presumably - if I have this right - as he was "rediscovered" (so to
> speak)
> in the sixteenth century
Yes on Usuard in his own time; not sure about Usuard as he was utilized for the RM in the sixteenth century. Paris, lat. 13745 (the later ninth-century ms. that may be U.'s autograph and that forms the textual base for Dubois' edition) was known in the seventeenth century to Mabillon, who certainly understood its primacy among witnesses to the "original" U. But I don't know what ms(s). of U. Baronius actually used.
<SNIP>
> I think I was querying the extent to which
> he was
> actually followed during the middle ages.
That's why I prefaced my original evidence from Usuard with the phrase "For what it's worth". With respect to any particular calendar, U.'s dates are merely a handy baseline. U. was both widely used and widely departed from.
Best again,
John Dillon
**********************************************************************
To join the list, send the message: join medieval-religion YOUR NAME
to: [log in to unmask]
To send a message to the list, address it to:
[log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send the message: leave medieval-religion
to: [log in to unmask]
In order to report problems or to contact the list's owners, write to:
[log in to unmask]
For further information, visit our web site:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/medieval-religion.html
|