I am grateful to the Rare Book Collection, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, for access to and permission to quote from the MS. A shorter version of this paper was given at the Twelfth St. Louis Conference on Manuscript Studies (Manuscripta) in October 1985, and a brief note on the MS appears in Oxoniensia
51 (1986) 198–200. Thanks are due to Eisner, Sigmund, Ganz, David, and Kane, George for helpful advice.
The Kalendarium of Nicholas of Lynn, trans. Mac Eoin, G. and ed. Eisner, S. (Athens, Georgia 1980). My indebtedness to this superb edition is obvious throughout this paper.
Some of the eclipse drawings and the tables of ascensions and equations of houses were probably on a missing half-folio. See Eisner,
34–35 for a description of the Oxford MS.
Hereafter simply CH 522. Ganz, D. has already written a brief description, ‘A Medieval Astronomer's Handbook,’ for Library Notes
430 (January 1984), published by the Academic Affairs Library, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
I summarize here information available, in more detail, in Eisner, , Kalendarium
2–55, and Gunther, R. T., Early Science at Oxford II (Oxford 1923) 62–64.
There is no evidence, however, that Nicholas was a fellow of Merton. For more on the Merton College school of astronomy, see Gunther, , Early Science
42–69, and Bennett, J. A. W., Chaucer at Oxford and Cambridge (Toronto 1974) 58–85.
Emden, A. B., A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500 (Cambridge 1963) 370.
Emden, A. B., A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A.D. 1500
II (Oxford 1958) 1194.
Voyages (London 1907) 99–101.
Or the four Metonic cycles 1387–1405, 1406–24, 1425–43, and 1444–62. A new Metonic cycle occurs every nineteen years. The cycle is named after Meton, a fifth-century b.c. Athenian astronomer, who discovered that nineteen years to the day after a given new moon another new moon would occur. See Eisner, , Kalendarium
Elvedene (fl. 1360), a member of Gonville Hall, Cambridge, is referred to by Nicholas in his dedicatory prologue as ‘Reverend Teacher’ (Reverendi Magistri, fol. 195v). See Emden, , Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge 210–11.
Eisner, , Kalendarium
30. Because this information is not accurate in all Kalendarium manuscripts (ibid. 53 n. 39), it is possible to determine which MSS Chaucer might actually have seen. CH 522 is an early MS (ca. 1400; see 1. Date of the Manuscript, below) and contains the accurate information for April 18, so it is possible that Chaucer might actually have seen it.
See Eisner, , Kalendarium
43–44, for the MS descriptions.
No other MSS are recorded. See Thorndike, L. and Kibre, P., A Catalogue of Incipits of Mediaeval Scientific Writings in Latin (Cambridge, Mass. 1963), col. 633.
A reference to Gnatsale appears on the first flyleaf (Johannes philipp loquebat cum gnat-sale), suggesting that the compiler may have known him. See Sotheby Sale Catalogue, Western Manuscripts, 7 December 1982, Lot 62, p. 55.
De loco lunae, Thorndike, and Kibre, , col. 1282.
The scribe of the tract by Campanus signed his work, Expliciunt tractatus quadrantis. Deo gracias, quod Wilton, on fol. 155r.
Because they are separate from the prologue and canons, and their authorship is not indicated, Sotheby fails to attribute the monthly calendar and supplemental tables to Nicholas of Lynn. See Sale Catalogue 55.
Some of the passage (in bold type here) remains. Most of the erased text is recoverable under ultra-violet light (angle brackets indicate illegible words and conjectured readings): Nota quod altitude solis in isto kalendario assignata computari debent ab orizonte diversus occidentem consimili modo 〈illegible〉 in longitudine regionis quia computari in longitudine regionis computari d〈ebent〉 a gradibus in occidente et hoc est directe in orizonte ut superpono et ibi incipit computando longitudine regionis et similiter computando altitudinis solis in meridie.
In the margin of fol. 196v someone has written, in red, 〈kalendari〉 us modus operandi (cropped), signaling the computing instructions added to the first canon in CH 522. (Compare the same note, in the same hand, on fol. 144r.) In the margins of fol. 201v, another glossator has added to Nicholas' comments on the good and bad influences of certain planets: vel infortunatus and fortune sunt Jupiter/Venus si sint retrogradi, sunt infortunati.
Sotheby Sale Catalogue (above, n. 15) 53.
See Appendix, Textual Variants. Many of the saints' days in CH 522 were probably listed after the MS had begun circulating, since they are in different and sometimes later hands than that of the MS.
It is probably coincidental that the dedication took place on the feast of St. Frideswide, the patron saint of Oxford, although it is possible that the church may have been the Dominican priory church in Oxford.
Rede, later Bishop of Chichester, was a fellow of Merton College 1344–57, and served in various administrative capacities at Merton thereafter. Many of his astronomical books were bequeathed to Merton. Maudith was a fellow of Merton 1309–19; Bredon, Simon, 1330–41. See Emden, , Biographical Register of the University of Oxford
I 1556–60, II 1243–44, and III 257–58, respectively.
Knowles, D. and Hadcock, K. N., Medieval Religious Houses (London 1953) 185 and 187.
Jarrett, B., The English Dominicans (New York 1921) 52. Jarrett's information here is from MS London, B.L. Add. 6716. On the Dominican priory and convent at Thetford, see The Reliquary, n.s. 3 (1887).
See Pollard, G.,
‘The pecia System in the Medieval Universities,’
Medieval Scribes, Manuscripts, and Libraries: Essays Presented to N. R. Ker (edd. Parkes, M. B. and Watson, A. G. [London 1978]) 145–61. Pollard's comments do not address specifically the copying of scientific MSS. Nervertheless, his discussion of the various stages of copying a MS went through under the pecia system, which allowed for the fast and accurate production of copies of university texts, warns against the danger of assuming that at each stage of a manuscript's copying history it would have been a finished, ‘coherent whole’ (160–61).
See 4. Accuracy of the Manuscript, below.
The terminus a quo of any Kalendarium MS is 1386, the year in which Nicholas tells us, in his prologue, that he compiled the calendar.
See Provenance, above.
Watson, A. G., Dated and Dateable Manuscripts c. 435–1600 in Oxford Libraries
II (Oxford 1984), pl. 227. Another photograph appears in Minio-Paluello, L., ‘Two Erasures in MS Oriel College 15,’ The Bodleian Library Record 4 (1952–53), pl. xiiib. The hand of MS Oriel College 15, however, is of a distinctly higher grade and is written more uniformly than the works of either William Rede or Nicholas of Lynn in CH 522.
‘Chaucer's Use of Nicholas of Lynn's Calendar,’
Essays and Studies (ed. Donaldson, E. T. [London 1976]) 6–7. I think it plausible that a later (i.e., post-1387) scribe might have mechanically preserved Gaunt's title, especially if copying quickly, and CH 522 does refer to Gaunt only as ‘King of Castile,’ whereas the other MSS address him as ‘King of Castile and of León.’ As Eisner points out, however, ‘In the late fourteenth century the King of Castile was also the King of León’ (7 n. 1), so that the scribe's failure to include León is not necessarily significant.
Here Eisner disagrees with the fourteenth-century catalogue date in Macray, W. D., Catalogi codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae partis quintae fasciculus secundus: Viri Munificentissimi Ricardi Rawlinson J. C. D. codicum classem tertiam, In qua libri theologici atque miscellanei, complectens; accedit in uniuscujusque classis codicum contenta index locupletissimus (Oxford 1857), section 467–68.
Aside from its earlier date, CH 522 could not have been copied from MS Rawlinson C. 895, which has many more omissions.
The column headings are Ciclus opposicionis and Tempus vere opposicionis (h. and m.).
With three exceptions: the first figure in the first column, Ciclus opposicionis, is recorded for February, March, and May. The figure for February is correct. Those for March and May are scribal errors peculiar to CH 522. In some of the previously identified MSS, these columns are erased and adjusted for later Metonic cycles.
See Eisner, , Kalendarium
11. Also, Eisner's frontispiece shows the first page of the monthly calendar for January.
The only candidate, among those MSS already identified by Eisner, is MS London, Sloane, B.L.
1110, since it too is early and has incomplete Metonic cycles for 1444–62 inclusive. It would be more likely that MS Sloane 1110 was copied from CH 522, however, since there would have been no advantage to separating the monthly calendar and tables from the prologue and canons if the exemplar had them inserted. MS Sloane 1110 also omits, from the dedicatory prologue, the statement that the canons appear at the end of the Kalendarium. If the scribe of MS Sloane 1110 was using CH 522 as an exemplar, he would naturally eliminate the indication in the prologue that the canons immediately follow, perhaps providing nothing in its place. Also, several data entries in CH 522 correspond to those in MS Sloane 1110 from which Eisner emends his base text when it is inaccurate, further suggesting a relationship between CH 522 and MS Sloane 1110. See 4. Accuracy of the Manuscript, below.
Of course, such an explanation needs to be tested against the format of all previously identified MSS, to determine whether or not more finished copies use the clearer format throughout. I have not seen or had access to films of these MSS. I should note, however, that the table recopied onto fol. 194r (see Description of the Manuscript, above), at the very end of the calendar proper, contains only two additions to the table canceled on fol. 193v: a few figures, whose recording would not have required recopying the entire table, and format changes similar to the ones I have been describing.
I am grateful to Kane, G. for the details of this explanation. Further evidence that the scribe was copying more quickly is the increased incidence of error corrected by marginal and interlinear insertions on the double-column pages.
Eisner, , Kalendarium
There are more than twenty instances of cursive e in the first twenty-two lines of the treatise. Thereafter it is used very rarely.
All pages in the prose treatise. See Description of the Manuscript, above.
A dot after the y may indicate the -us suspension.
Eisner's base text, MS Bodleian Laud. Misc. 662, has the erroneous heading, and he emends accordingly.
See Appendix, Textual Variants, Prologue and Canons, for all the instances.
The time from sunrise to sunset, as compared to the ‘vulgar’ day, computed by adding the lengths of the morning and evening twilights to the length of the artificial day. See Eisner, , Kalendarium
See Eisner, , Kalendarium 240–42, for the exact and inexact figures.
Eisner, , Kalendarium
38. Appendix A of Eisner's edition contains tables comparing the presumably accurate figures, the approximate figures, and the precise figures, arrived at by modern computing.
Also, approximate figures and exact figures always appear on sheets with facing halffolios.
Here I am, of course, assuming that Nicholas would not have compiled his calendar straight through before having it copied, writing out himself a complete MS. I have no evidence to support this assumption, except the common-sense inference that such calculating would involve some error, and therefore would not have been done initially on vellum, and the possibility that Nicholas was working fast. We do not know exactly when Gaunt requested that Nicholas compile the calendar, but assuming that he began some time in 1384–85 (Elvedene's calendar would expire in 1385), and that a finished, presentation copy had to be ready some time before September 1387 (when Gaunt renounced his claim to the Spanish throne), Nicholas might have been compiling while a scribe was making a working copy.
It seems unlikely that, without this textual inducement, a scribe would round off the figures for low solar altitudes for all twelve months on his own — even the sort of intelligent university scribe paid to copy such a text.
The block of text after this break appears on the following page, fol. 198ra.
Retentivam has a lower-case r in the manuscript.