Find publications (beta)

The Eusebian canon tables are among the most long-lived and widely disseminated gospel book prefatory texts in late antique and early medieval times. This article focuses on the reception of the tables by Hiberno-Latin exegetes, highlighting in particular their treatment in the commentary on Matthew contained in Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, lat. 940. The article discusses the appearance of the Eusebian series in three parts of the Vienna manuscript: in the set of tables included at the beginning of the manuscript, in the discussion of the series contained in the preface to the Matthew commentary and in over three hundred titles interspersed throughout the commentary itself. Situating the treatment of the series in the Vienna manuscript in the context of its discussion by other contemporary commentators, the article shows how in the Hiberno-Latin milieu the Eusebian concordance served as a means of understanding and measuring the Gospels and also functioned as a potent image of the diversity and unity of the evangelical texts.

This article examines a fragment of the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians with a series of marginal comments included in St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothek, Cod. Sang. 1395. Written in a ninth-century Irish minuscule, this fragment has clear connections to early medieval Hiberno-Latin and Irish-influenced biblical exegesis, with implications for further study of this field. Many of the glosses derive from the Expositiones xiii epistularum Pauli by Pelagius, and the fragment therefore acts as a witness to the transmission of this work. A number of the non-Pelagian glosses remain unidentified in comparison with other early medieval commentaries, and such comments may be original to this fragment. Moreover, due to the layout of the manuscript with both biblical text and marginal commentary, this fragment also serves as evidence for shifts in exegetical and scribal practices in the ninth century. Considering the evidence of paleography, biblical text, and the character of the commentary, the early provenance (and possibly origin) for the fragment is placed at the abbey of St. Gall. The article concludes with an edition of both the biblical text and the marginal glosses.

Bengt Löfstedt's Fragmente eines Matthäus-Kommentars, an editio princeps of two bifolia housed in Tokyo and in London, has allowed the author to compare the fragments edited by Löfstedt with parallels from Frigulus' Matthew commentary, Qu. Cod. 127, and with another Matthew commentary, Orl. (65) 62. The author has attempted not only to improve upon Löfstedt's edition by resolving some of the lacunae in the fragments, and to add various patristic and biblical sources and/or parallels to Löfstedt's apparatus, but more importantly has suggested by his study that the two bifolia edited by B. Löfstedt form part of a series of recensiones of a major commentary on Matthew's Gospel.