Resuming the recounting of my last trip to Catalonia, we left the story at the amazing Santa Maria del Mar in Barcelona but finished that day back in Vic, where we had an excellent dinner at la Creperia and then the next day fell to something alarmingly like work. Admittedly, that work started with a visit to the Museu Episcopal de Vic, because you have to, but they don’t like photography and more and more of their collections are online now, even if still not the bits I would like most. But after that, while my companion went a-touristing, I went to an archive like a real historian. This was something of a flying visit, made more effective as ever by the tremendous help of Dr Rafel Ginebra and the great knowledge of Monsignor Miquel dels Sants Gros i Pujol, exemplary archivists if ever such there were. But I had come in with a hit-list of charters intended to answer certain questions, and apart from a very few that were away for conservation, I came out with all the answers I’d wanted. And since some of the relevant questions are ones I’ve raised here, I may as well tell you the answers!
For example, I have many times used this document in my work, because it recounts a meeting at Taradell in which two charters were replaced after having been lost, and it does so in terms that sound utterly realistic but actually must derive from a written model.1 (Joan, if you’re reading, this is our testimony for the Vilar de Gaudila…) I’ve written about it so much that it was clear I would at some point need to illustrate it, so this was me making sure I could. But there are two documents deriving from that meeting, and I had always wondered what the relationship between them was. It turns out it’s physical; they’re both written on the same parchment, as you see, and if you click through to a slightly bigger version you’ll see that several of the same witnesses signed both bits autograph. There’s more questions this raises about how the ceremony actually went, but now I have all the evidence there is with which to answer them.
Most of what I was doing, however, was hunting scribes. For example, I have become interested in a particular scribe called Joan who wrote charters for Bishop Guisad II of Urgell but only in various areas of Osona, and doesn’t seem to have been linked to the cathedral which actually covered that county, Vic, although it’s there where his documents largely survive.2 Obviously one question that therefore arises is whether all the documents are by the same Joan. Well, there’s one above…3
… and here’s another and immediately, you see that the simple answer is the correct one; although I did find others by this guy, there is at least one other, the scribe of the above, and one of my new tasks is therefore to go through the list and group the charters according to what I can now see of who is writing them.4 But wait: there is something even more interesting here. Do you remember when I was working through the excellent book of Benoît-Michel Tock about signatures in charters that he had cases where signatures might have been made on and then actually cut off from the formal version of the charter that went into the archive.5 Well, look along that lower margin above there and tell me that isn’t what’s happened here; that mark is the top of someone else’s ruche, isn’t it? We’ll never know whose but it’s educational just to know it could happen.
Likewise with scribe-hunting: do you remember me writing about a scribe named Ermemir, based at Santa Eulàlia de Riuprimer, who seemed to have been keeping the charters he wrote in his own church? Here’s one of them.6
This, on the other hand, is pretty clearly by a different Ermemir, who actually turns up in a small group of his own.7 Now I can separate the two (or, as it may be, more).
This is the Riuprimer guy again, but this one has its own interest, because you will observe if you look closely that the actual charter text, the paler ink, sat a few centimetres clear of the left-hand margin. Accordingly, someone very short of parchment later wrote an inventory in the margin (the darker ink). This runs onto the reverse, as well. The edition gives one only the tiniest hint of this; Ordeig just says, “Al marge esquerre i al dors hi ha escrits uns capbreus (s. XI)”.8 I’m sure he’s gone on to edit in its proper place in the eleventh-century series but I don’t have access to that, so can’t answer questions like whether this is the same lands that are being inventoried, and whether this therefore counts as a sort of update, or if this was just random parchment reuse.9 Well, now, in theory I can, if I can only read it. And having a high-resolution photograph makes that a lot easier! Now, one last one.
You will probably remember my long long series of posts arguing with Michel Zimmermann, and you may remember that a certain trend in his scholarship emerged as a theme in these posts to the extent that I was very surprised to find him writing towards the end of his massive work about an eleventh-century female scribe, called Alba ‘femina’.10 Unfortunately, I had my doubts about whether that scribe was really writing the charter, because there was clearly another one on the same parchment by a very similar-looking hand. Well, now I have seen the parchment, and the other hand is not in fact the same. You have to look very carefully, they are very similar, but they form their loops differently and, perhaps most clearly, the capital N in their signatures is differently constructed. She may have learnt from him, may even have been working wth him and that be why they wound up writing documents on the same parchment, but I’m now fairly sure she did do her own writing, or at least that he did not do hers. And this is the kind of question you can only answer when you can see the original, or at least get a decent picture of it. So my thanks go again to the Arxiu i Biblioteca de Vic, to Rafel Ginebra and to Miquel dels Sants; I will be back when I have more questions!
1. My writing for now at Jonathan Jarrett, “Pathways of Power in late-Carolingian Catalonia”, unpublished Ph. D. thesis (University of London 2005), online here, pp. 49-53, though actual publication of these thoughts is even now under review. The charters are most recently edited as Ramon Ordeig i Mata (ed.), Catalunya Carolíngia: els comtats d’Osona i Manresa, Memòries de la Secció Històrico-Arqueològica LIII (Barcelona 1999), 3 vols, doc. nos 33 & 34.
2. Although as this post makes clear they are not all by the same scribe, if you only have the edition ibid. doc. nos. 668, 670, 674, 675, 837, 840, 849, 863, 896, 899 & 1499 are all contendors for his authorship.
3. Printed as ibid. doc. no. 674.
4. This one printed as ibid. doc. no. 840.
5. B.-M. Tock, Scribes, souscripteurs et témoins dans les actes privés en France (VIIe – début XIIe siècle, Atelier de Recherches sur les Textes Médiévaux 9 (Turnhout 2006), pp. 392-397.
6. Printed as Ordeig, Catalunya Carolíngia IV, doc. no. 1792.
7. This one is too late for the Catalunya Carolíngia; it must be printed in Ramon Ordeig i Mata (ed.), Diplomatari del Catedral de Vic (segle XI) (Vic 2000-2010), 6 fascicules, but nowhere in Britain has more than the first two volumes of that and I’d have to be in London, Oxford or Cambridge even for those.
8. Ordeig, Catalunya Carolíngia IV, III p. 1292 (doc. no. 1822).
9. Again, this must be edited in Ordeig, Diplomatari de la Catedral de Vic (segle XI), but this one won’t even be in one of the sections that is in the country. I am looking into buying a copy…
10. Michel Zimmermann, Écrire et lire en Catalogne (IXe-XIIIe siècles), Bibliothèque de la Casa de Velázquez 23 (Madrid 2003), 2 vols, II p. 1250, fig. 4.
Wonderful post! Very good job! It’s a must to be able to discern between writers hand’s. I really wish to have all those C10th documents already processed, lots of informations that should allow us an unprecedent level of definition on reconstructing those times.
On Gaudila, and the documental reparatio, yes, the most curious thing to me is that althoug each document is clearly addressed to each side of the transaction, one for the buyer, the other for the seller, both exists in a single parchment! What’s this? A copy for some kind of archive…!? Or, maybe they were never splitted? How curious!
My take on that documents, looking at the context, is that some people come from the area of Nimes (I have located two, by now) and/or Provence, and with them probably came the unusal terminology. In this sense, it’s also suggesting the fact that the buyer that prompted the documental reparatio, was named Bosone…
In any case, the ‘high resolution’ global picture points to a more interconnected world that we use to suppouse today. Not exactly a ‘modern’ idea… :)
I have so many questions about that document, but I don’t think I read it the same way you do. It’s two connected oaths before roughly the same people, isn’t it? In the first one the erstwhile buyer Boso swears that he did have the charters and that the lands were sold to him; and in the second this is confirmed by the witnesses he offers. It makes sense to me that these would both be on the same parchment, as they are both parts of a pair that prove Boso’s right to the land. What we don’t seem to have is the actual new charter he should have been issued as the outcome of the oaths…
As for the people from Nîmes, you know that you will need more than just a coincidence of names to prove that to me :-) Do they at least occur together at Nîmes?
I think you are righ. The second document confirms the first one (the oath of the buyer, alone), and the need for that second documents probably originates in the fact that the seller was already dead by then, and that’s why the auditores of the original transaction have to be called instead, two days after. Thanks!
Not sure about the need of a ‘new’ document, the seller was already dead, there was no way to make him sign again! :) The sum of both texts replaces imo the original one, that’s why it makes sense to stay together in a single parchment.
On the Nimes ‘connection’, well, i don’t think about it in terms of ‘prove’, just accumulation of tangential evidence, but maybe you have a better explanation for that cancellario? :)
I expect a ‘new’ document only because for most judicial procedures the oath and the final statement would be separate cases (thus, the Sant Joan hearing, one massive oath document and one much smaller quitclaim, CC4 119 & 120 respectively). But here there’s no need of a quitclaim, obviously, and now that I think about it the law that covers this reparatio scripturae (Forum Iudicum VII.5.2) doesn’t require that in any obvious way. The oath itself might do for a charter; and here, I suppose it did!
As for the cancellarius, well, as you know I am on record using him, and the fact that he is the only one in 1864 documents from Osona and Manresa from 880 to 1000, as proof that there was a written formula in use by the scribe which makes it dangerous to extract details of practice from this document. If there actually was a cancellarius on holiday in Taradell that week, my argument disintegrates, so obviously I need you to be wrong :-)
Pingback: In Marca Hispanica XXXIII: parts of Vic previously unreached | A Corner of Tenth-Century Europe