Corpus Cluniacense
(The 'Cluny' collection)

SUMMARY

This collection consists of a large group of either 27 or 28 treatises, gathered into two sections or even volumes².  Most copies of this are late.  

This collection is so-called because all of its known early witnesses, extant or otherwise, are associated with Cluniac monasteries. Most of the MSS dateable before 1400 belong to this collection. All manuscripts after that date are copies of this collection.

The collection contains more texts than any other collection. Even the Apologeticum was added to some of the MSS during the middle ages. When Tertullian was printed for the first time in 1521, the text was printed from members of this collection.

Exemplars are known from Cluny (mentioned in the 11th century catalogue of Cluny), Payerne (part), Montepellier (part now lost), Gorze (lost), Hirsau (lost but part printed), Lorsch (lost). Complete examples are only extant among the Italici, of which two Florence MSS (N and F) and the Luxemburg MS are the key witnesses.

Philological analysis has revealed that the transmission of this collection split into two branches at some point before the earliest extant witnesses. These are known as the 'alpha' (or 'Montpellier') and 'beta' (or 'Hirsau') branches.

At one time it was thought that the Cluny manuscript was the parent of all the rest, perhaps since so many of the exemplars are from monasteries accepting the Cluniac reform.  However there is in fact no other evidence of this.

Many of Tertullian's works which appear in this collection were known to Isidore of Seville. It has therefore often been suggested that the collection may have been formed in that milieu. There is no other evidence for this.

The works of Tertullian all flow over the Alps to Italy at the renaissance, are gathered in Florence, and from there are disseminated across Italy and back across the Alps to Hungary, Austria, France, and Britain.

THE ORDER OF THE TEXTS IN THE TWO BRANCHES OF THE TRADITION

The order of the treatises seems very different in the alpha and beta branches.  If we ignore the later addition of the Apologeticum to copies of the alpha branch, and from it indeed to some later copies of the beta branch, the order of the 27 treatises is as follows:

However Pierre Nautin pointed out that the beta order can be produced by splitting it into three parts.  While the contents of each part are different, the order of the treatises contained within that part is the same in both branches.  This suggests that the beta order was produced by selection from an exemplar in the alpha order, in three steps over a period of time:

1. The first copyist selected from the collection two dogmatic treatises (on the incarnation and resurrection) and filled up the volume with a selection of moral treatises.
2. A second volume was then created from the remaining moral treatises.
3. Finally all that remained were copied into a third volume.

The 9th century catalogue of Lorsch records a manuscript in two volumes, the first containing the same five treatises as the alpha branch, and in the same order except that Carn has slipped from 2nd to last.  It is thus suggested that this is evidence that the Carolingian exemplar which probably lies at the base of the tree was in the alpha (Cluny-Montpellier) order.¹¹

Further reorderings take place in the renaissance in the beta branch manuscripts, to which the Apologeticum is sometimes added from the alpha branch.  Petitmengin (2004, p.78) drew up this table of some interesting synchronicities, among extant and lost mss associated with Florence:

In #1. i and ii correspond to the start of the two tomes of the Hirsaugensis.
3 is London BL Addit. 16901 + Budapest Univ. Ms. Cod. Lat. 10.
4. is the list given by Johannes Tröster, preserved in the St. Petersburg Ms. Lat. F.I.N.312, on f.35v.  The manuscript, given to Johannes Mendel and then to the Augustinian friars of Rebdorf, should be added to those signalled by Paul Lehmann, Dr Johannes TrösterL ein humanistisch gesinnter Wohläter bayerischer Büchersammlungen, Erforschung des Mittelalters IV, Stuttgart (1961), pp.349-350.
5. is the list given by Johannes Cuspinianus.  It is to be found on f.32r of Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 3256.
Note that #7, the list of Trithemius, is the same as #1 except that the two volumes are reversed, and in vol. 1, Val. was moved to the end.

Note how in 1, 2, 4, 5 and the bottom part of 7, the same order from carn-cast is preserved.

Note also the sequence of Apol plus 5 works is characteristic of a little Austrian transmission.

QUALITY OF THE TEXT

The quality of the text is not as good as that in the Agobardine manuscript. In general they seem to be good copies of an inferior exemplar.  

Studies of the text carried out for the Sources Chrétiennes edition of De exhortatione castitatis reveal that the text has been slightly but systematically modified for this work wherever the text could be suspected of Encratism or Montanism.  Nicholas Rigault, the first editor to have access to a text not so modified, the Codex Agobardinus, expressed his surprise: "our edition of this book is complete, revised and corrected in so many places as to pass for new".⁸ 

Kroymann had already noted that someone must have tampered with the text of the Cluny collection.⁹  The whole collection has not yet been examined, but Moreschini lists the deviations for Ex. 

For instance, in Ex. 10: 5, the Cluny text omits all mention of the Montanist prophetess Prisca and her oracle (although, according to the apparatus of the SC text, so does Rigault!).  This must have been part of the original text, since it can hardly have been added by a medieval scribe.  On the other hand, it is easy to imagine a medieval scribe omitting the mention of the heretic and her fake oracle.

In ch. 9 there were passages capable of an encratite interpretation, to a medieval eye.  Other passages capable of implying that laymen could be priests were also 'clarified' by the editor.  (A list is given on p.54 of SC).¹⁰.

MANUSCRIPTS

Alpha branch (Cluny-Montpellier)

This includes the Apologeticum so consists of 28 works.

The family consists of:

• The 11^th century Montpellier MS, Codex Montepessulanus H54 (M)
• The 15^th century Florence MS, Codex Florentinus BNC Conventi soppressi VI, 9 (N).

The first contains only part of the collection - the last, which seems to be a direct or indirect copy of the Montpellier MS, contains the whole collection.

Readings also exist from some now lost manuscripts, which have been classified by Fredouille as belonging to this branch:

• The Gorze MS (G), of which a collation was used by Rhenanus for his 3rd edition.
• The Dijon MS (D), used by Rigault (1634) of which 3 collations also exist.

The following manuscript may or may not be an alpha-branch Ms.  It was used for the first edition of Rhenanus and is still with his papers, and covered with his marginal annotations:

• The 11^th century Payerne MS ('Paterniacensis'), now at Sélestat, Codex Selestatensis 88. 

Beta branch (Cluny-Hirsau)

This does not include the Apologeticum so consists of 27 works.  The order of the texts is different to that in the alpha branch.

The family depends on late manuscripts and the editio princeps. All the Italici apart from 'N' also belong to this family. The exact relationships of the senior members is a matter of dispute.

• All of the manuscripts descend from a now lost Hirsau MS (H), used by Rhenanus for his first edition (1521).  The works not in the Paterniacensis are copied from this MS, and variants also were supplied from H for the works printed from P. 
• The 15th century Luxembourg MS, Codex Luxemburgensis 75 (X), seems to be a copy of H.
• The 15th century(1426) Florence MS, Codex Florentinus BNC Conventi soppressi VI, 10 (F).  This was written in Germany in a gothic hand, acquired by Niccolo Niccoli who made a copy (also extant) from which Kroymann showed that all the Italici are derived.

Two further MSS have sometimes also been considered independent witnesses, although it has usually been recognised that they may be merely derived from F.

• The Naples MS, Codex Neapolitanus, Mus. Naz. 55, portions of which were once in Vienna as Codex Vindobonensis 4194 (V).
• The BPL Leiden MS, Codex Leidensis latinus 2 (L).  This has recently been shown by Petitmengin to be purely a copy of V, written in Italy for transmission to France.

There are also a significant number of Italici.  In a classic study⁷, Emil Kroymann showed that all were copies direct or via others from F. There are also manuscripts which have come to light since then which remain to be placed in the stemma. In some cases only a selection of the whole collection has been copied.  In some, the Apologeticum has been added -- from the alpha branch Ms. N., by this time also in Florence.

• Codex Florentinus BNC Conv. Soppr. VI, 11. Niccolo's copy of F.
• Codex Vaticanus Latinus 190, magnificent, with index at the back
• Codex Vaticanus Latinus 191, plain.
• Codex Vaticanus Latinus 189. Vol 1 of 3, of a copy of the complete Corpus Cluniacense.
• Codex Vaticanus Latinus 192. Vol 2 of 3, of a copy of the complete Corpus Cluniacense.
• Codex Vaticanus Latinus 193. Vol 3 of 3, of a copy of the complete Corpus Cluniacense.  Hoppe states that the Apol. is copied from N.
• Codex Vaticanus Urbin. 64.  This copy has had the Apologeticum added from somewhere.
• Codex Neapolitanus VI B. 14. Luxury, with pictures.
• Codex Florentinus Laurentianus 89, 55. Just 3 works, in a codex containing other things.
• Codex Florentinus Medicianus Faesulanus 60.    Hoppe states that the Apol. is copied from N.
• Codex Florentinus Laurentianus 26, 12. Part 1 of a 2 part set
• Codex Florentinus Laurentianus 26, 13. Part 2 of a 2 part set.    Hoppe states that the Apol. is copied from N.
• Novara, Bibl. cap. 38.  [Details from CCSL 1 table of codices]
• London, British Library.  Additional 16901.  Contains Apologeticum, f.2; De Monogamia, f.48; De pallio, f.63; De Patientia dei, f.71; Adversus Praxean, f. 81; Adversus Valentinianos, f.109v.  [Details from personal inspection]
• Hungary, Budapest.  Univ. 10.  dated 1468. Contains Adversus Marcionem.

There are also some lost members of the group:

• The codex used by Trithemius, from which he quotes the incipits, must have been of this family since it lacks the Apologeticum.  The order of the texts is the same as the Hirsaugensis, except that the two volumes appear in reverse order, and Val. has been moved to the end of one (perhaps it was originally omitted as boring, and then copied as an afterthought?).

Others not yet classified

• Vienna 3256 (283)  (Only De Monogamia, De Carne Christi and De Resurrection Carnis).  Also contains the list of Cuspinianus (above).

Lost MSS

A number of manuscripts belonging to this family are listed in medieval library inventories, or known from early editions.  In addition to the Gorze and Dijon MSS mentioned above for the alpha branch and the Hirsau MS mentioned for the beta branch, we know of the following.

• Cluny MS [Known from inventory].  This may be the same as the Montpellier Ms.
• Lorsch MS [Known from inventory]
• Pforzheim MS.  This was the exemplar for F, but may be the same as the Hirsau MS. [Details from F].
• Lincolnshire MS from Bardeney.  Contained Adversus Marcionem.  [Details from Liddell's article]
• Papal Ms. listed in a very detailed catalogue made by Peñiscola in 1412-1415, where the manuscript contains, after the works of Tertullian, De incarnatione of Ambrose of Milan.  The latter work is mentioned at the end of the table of contents in N, but was not copied. (See M. FAUCON, La libraire des papes d'Avignon, sa formation, sa composition, ses catalogues, t. II. Paris (1887) p. 112.  Details from Petitmengin 2004 p.73 n.42).  Presumably an alpha-branch Ms. -- did it contain the Apologeticum?
• A manuscript sent in 1448 from Vespasiano da Bisticci to William Gray, Bishop of Ely (owner of the Balliol Apologeticum) containing "opera Tertulliani et Athanasii et Gregorii Nazianzeni in papiro scripta" (letter of 30th December, 1448.  Published G.M.Cagni, Vespasiano da Bisticci e il suo epistolario, Roma (1969) p.121. Series: Temi e testi 15.  Not checked. Reference Petitmengin 2004,n.67).
• A manuscript of unknown contents owned by Pico della Mirandola, which probably disappeared with the Grimani collection: cf. P. KIBRE, The library of Pico della Mirandola, New York (1936), p.199. Not checked. Details Petitmengin 2004 n.76.  

STEMMAS

A stemma for these MSS can be seen here.  However the exact position of V and L is debateable.

TEXTS IN THE COLLECTION

These are the works it contains:

Codex 1 (10/11 books) :

De patientia
De carne Christi
De carnis resurrectione
Adversus Praxean
Adversus Valentinianos
Adversus Marcionem (5 books)
(Apologeticum: but only in alpha branch)

Codex 2 (17 books) :

De fuga
Ad scapulam
De corona
Ad martyras
De paenitentia
De virginibus velandis
De habitu muliebri 
De cultu feminarum
De exhortatione castitatis
Ad uxorem (2 books)
De monogamia
De pallio
Contra Judaeos
[Adversus omnes haereticos - spurious]
De praescriptione haereticorum
Adversus Hermogenem

OTHER NOTES

It has been thought for a long time that this collection originated in Spain in the 5th¹ or end of the 6th² century, perhaps in the circle of St. Isidore of Seville³.  Two volumes of collected works are listed in the catalogue of the library of the Benedictine monastery at Cluny in the 10th-11th century⁴, and the name 'Cluniacense'  was applied by Kroymann to the collection because he felt that these two volumes must be the ancestor of the collection we have in later MSS.

However the statements just made have come under attack in recent years. Tränkle in his edition of Adversus Judaeos took the view that the Cluny volumes were not as represented, and attacked the statements of Kroymann upon which the prevailing view is based ⁵. 

REFERENCES

1. René BRAUN, Tertullien : Contre Marcion, Sources Chrétiennes 365 (1990), p20ff. French critical edition, introduction, translation. Checked. Braun sensibly remarks that there is no actual evidence to verify this, but that this is the communis opinio - the consensus of informed opinion.

2. Charles MUNIER, Tertullien : A son epouse, Sources Chrétiennes 273 (1980), p64ff. French critical edition, introduction, translation. Checked Following Kroymann in the preface to CSEL 47.

3. Paul MATTEI, Tertullien : Le Mariage Unique, Sources Chrétiennes 343 (1988), p102ff. French critical edition, introduction, translation. Checked.

4. Jean-Claude FREDOUILLE, Tertullien : Contre les Valentiniens, Sources Chrétiennes 280 (1980), p48. French critical edition, introduction, translation. Checked.  Includes detailed analysis of this collection.

5. H. TRÄNKLE, Adversus Judaeos. p xciv. Checked.

6. Frédéric CHAPOT, Tertullien : Contre Hermogene, Sources Chrétiennes 439 (1999), pp.54-5.  French critical edition with Latin text, and French translation and notes.  Checked.

7. Emil KROYMANN, Die Tertullien-Ueberlieferung in Italien, Sitzungsberichte der Philosophisch-Historischen Classe der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien, 138 (1897 or 1898) 3rd booklet (34 pages). also in   Stemma included.

8. N. RIGAULT: Observationes ad Tertulliani libros IX, Paris (1628), p. 135. Not checked.  This discussed by Pierre PETITMENGIN, De Adulteratis Patrum Editionibus: La critique des textes au service de l'orthodoxie, in: Les Pères de l'Église au XVII^e siècle, Actes du colloque de Lyon. Ed. E. BURY et B. MEUNIER, Paris: Cerf (1993), pp. 21-31, esp. p.22.  Checked.  The SC text is SC 319 (1985), by C. Moreschini, pp. 53-55. Checked.

9. E. KROYMANN, CSEL 47 (1906), p. xi.  (Details from SC 319, which wrongly quotes 'CSEL 67', sic.). Checked.

10. C. MORESCHINI, Tertullien: Exhortation a la chasteté, Sources Chrétiennes 319, Paris: Cerf (1985), pp. 53-55.  Checked.

11. Pierre PETITMENGIN, Tertullien entre la fin du XIIe et le début du XVIe siècle, in M. CORTESI (ed), Padri Greci e Latini a confronto: Atti del Convegno di studi della Società Internazionale per lo Studio del Medioevo Latino.  Firenze: SISMEL (2004).  pp. 63-88.  Checked.

12. Umanesimo e Padri della Chiesa. Manoscritti e incunaboli di testi patristici da Francesco Petrarca al primo Cinquecento, Firenze: Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, a cura di S. Gentile, [Milano] (1997). Not checked.  Details Petitmengin 2004 n.43. Contains details of the main Florence Mss. pp.188-191=BML Laur.26,13; pp.223-225= BNC Conv. Soppr. J.VI.10 & 11; pp.236-7=BNC Conv. Soppr. J.VI.9.

13.  L. LABARDI, Niccolo Niccoli e la tradizione manoscritta di Tertulliano, 'Orpheus' New Series 2 (1981), pp. 380-396.  Not checked. (Details Petitmengin n.58)

+Add Moreschini articles, and info from them.

[Add ref. for text type, and for all statements. Add proper stemma stuff from Fredouille]

This page has been online since 10th December 1999.

Return to the Tertullian Project / About these pages