Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T05:55:36.382Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2020

University of Bristol and St Peter's College, Oxford
University of Bristol and St Peter's College, Oxford


This article is dedicated to Liesbeth van Houts, editor of the Gesta Normannorum ducum, generous mentor, colleague, and friend.

This article offers an analysis, edition, and translation of the Brevis cronica compendiosa ducum Normannie, a historiographical account of the dukes of Normandy and their deeds, written at the turn of the fifteenth century by the Norman jurist and man of letters, Simon de Plumetot (1371–1443). Having all but escaped the attention of modern scholars, this study is the first to examine and publish the Brevis cronica. It not only demonstrates that the work is of greater importance than its rather scrappy form might at first suggest, but it also looks to place the text within the broader context of Simon's literary and bibliophilic practices and to determine its raison d’être. In doing so, it argues that the Brevis cronica was perhaps created as part of a much larger historiographical project, namely an extended chronicle of Normandy, written in the vernacular, the text of which is now lost. By exploring these important issues, the article sheds new light on a wide range of topics, from early humanist book collecting to the writing of history in France in the later Middle Ages.

Research Article
Copyright © Fordham University 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


The research for this article was generously supported by the Research Initiatives Fund of the Faculty of Arts, University of Bristol. We would like to express our thanks to Francesco Siri for kindly facilitating access to the manuscripts, as well as to Samu Niskanen for his invaluable assistance with some of the more difficult passages in the edition and translation. The article's preliminary findings were presented at a workshop held at Fordham University, NYC in May 2019, and we would like to thank the organizers and participants for their helpful comments, particularly Scott G. Bruce, Nicholas Paul, and Paul Bertrand. Thanks are also due to the anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts. All remaining errors are, of course, entirely our own.


1 Courroux, Pierre, L’écriture de l'histoire dans les chroniques françaises (XIIe–XVe siècle) (Paris, 2016), 452Google Scholar: “Les chroniqueurs médiévaux se servirent de leurs sources de la même manière que les Pères de l’Église reprenaient la tradition païenne: en les adaptant à leurs visées.”

2 The two most recent studies on Simon de Plumetot are Delsaux, Olivier, “L'humaniste Simon de Plumetot et sa copie des poésies d'Eustache Deschamps: Une édition génétique au début du XVe siècle? (Partie I),” Revue d'Histoire des Textes 9 (2014): 273–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar9, and Brabant, Annick, “Documenter le Grand Schisme d'Occident: Étude sur les recueils de deux intellectuels normands, Simon du Bosc et Simon de Plumetot,” Mélanges de l’École française de RomeMoyen Âge 123 (2011): 597610CrossRefGoogle Scholar, available online (without pagination), <> [accessed 5 December 2019]. They expand the previous studies by Ouy, Gilbert, “Simon de Plumetot (1371–1443) et sa bibliothèque,” Miscellanea Codicologica F. Masai Dicata, ed. Cockshaw, Pierre and Garand, Monique-Cécile (Ghent, 1979), 2:353–81Google Scholar; and Ouy, Gilbert, “Autographes d'auteurs français des XIVe et XVe siècles: Leur utilité pour l'histoire intellectuelle,” Studia zródloznawcze 28 (1983): 69103Google Scholar. See also Stratford, Jenny, “The Illustration of the Songe du Vergier and Some Fifteenth-Century Manuscripts,” in Patrons, Authors and Workshops: Books and Book Production in Paris around 1400, ed. Croenen, Godfried and Ainsworth, Peter F. (Louvain, 2006), 473–88, at 482–83Google Scholar; and The Letter Collection of Peter Abelard and Heloise, ed. and trans. David Luscombe and Betty Radice (Oxford, 2013), xcvi–xcvii.

3 Catalogue des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal, ed. Henry Martin (Paris, 1885–96), 2:273–75; also cf. The Gesta Normannorum ducum by William of Jumièges, Orderic Vitalis, and Robert of Torigni, ed. Elisabeth M. C. van Houts (Oxford, 1992–95), 1:cxix (= F23) [hereafter GND]. The most detailed published discussion of this manuscript is that by Tischler, Matthias M., Einharts Vita Karoli: Studien zur Entstehung, Überlieferung und Rezeption (Hannover, 2001), 1:1094–1100Google Scholar (= Pa 1) [hereafter VK]. For a more recent yet unpublished discussion, with a particular focus on Nithard and the Annals of Flodoard, see Stéphane Lecouteux, “Les Annales de Flodoard de Reims (919–966) dans la tradition historiographique du Moyen Âge: Travail de l'annaliste et de l'historien, perception et maîtrise du temps (VIIIe–XIIe siècles),” (Mémoire de Master 2, École Pratique des Hautes Études, Paris, 2011), 81–86.

4 Inventaire des manuscrits de Saint-Germain-des-Prés conservés à la Bibliothèque impériale, sous les numéros 11504–14231 du fonds Latin, ed. Léopold V. Delisle (Paris, 1868), 77; and GND, 1:cxvii (= F19).

5 Delisle, Léopold V., “Inventaire des manuscrits de Saint-Victor conservés à la Bibliothèque impériale, sous les numéros 14232–15175 du fonds Latin,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 30 (1869): 179, at 36–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and GND, 1:cxvii–cxviii (= F20); VK, 2:1065–82 (= Pa 21).

6 See the bibliographical references listed in the online catalogue of the Bibliothèque nationale de France, <> [accessed 5 December 2019].

7 For a full list of the manuscript's contents and the sequence in which they were copied, see VK, 2:1065–77.

8 Grell, Chantal, “History and Historians in France, from the Great Italian Wars to the Death of Louis XIV,” in The Oxford History of Historical Writing, Volume 3: 1400–1800, ed. Rabasa, José, Sato, Masayuki, Tortarolo, Edoardo, and Woolf, Daniel (Oxford, 2012), 384–405, at 384Google Scholar.

9 Cf. the fifteenth-century contents list in A†, fol. iv.

10 “De origine comitum Andegavensium” combines passages from Ralph's Abbreviationes chronicorum and Ymagines historiarum; see VK, 2:1065–66, n. 525. See Chroniques d'Anjou, ed. Paul Marchegay and André Salmon (Paris, 1871), 1:319–47.

11 GND, 1:cxvii–cxviii and cxxvi–cxxviii. See also van Houts, Elisabeth M. C., “The Gesta Normannorum ducum: A History Without an End,” Anglo-Norman Studies 3 (1980): 106–18Google Scholar.

12 Chronique de Robert de Torigni, abbé du Mont-Saint-Michel, ed. Léopold V. Delisle (Rouen, 1872–73); and Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II, and Richard I, Volume 4: The Chronicle of Robert of Torigni, Abbot of the Monastery of St. Michael-in-Peril-of-the-Sea ed. Richard Howlett (London, 1889). The most recent edition and translation of Robert's Chronica is now The Chronography of Robert of Torigni, ed. Thomas N. Bisson (Oxford, 2020). On the anonymous Anglo-Norman history and its possible sources, see Annales de l'Abbaye St. Pierre de Jumièges: Chronique universelle des origines au XIIIe siècle, ed. Jean Laporte (Rouen, 1954), 20–21 and 123–27; also cf. the discussion in VK, 2:1073, n. 554. On the Annals of Jumièges, see Alison Alexander, “Annalistic Writing in Normandy, c.1050–c.1225” (doctoral thesis, University of Cambridge, 2011), 84–103.

13 See VK, 2:1065–77. Nine of these ten booklets (“Parts B–J”) were bound together in their current order by the late 1420s, whereas the booklet that now constitutes the opening of the book (fol. 1r–12v; “Part A”) was added later in the fifteenth century (VK, 2:1066–67). As Tischler explains, the manuscript originally opened with what is now fol. 13r–v, as is evidenced by an institutional ownership mark found on the recto of this folio that was likely inserted when the book passed into the possession of Saint-Victor following the death of its maker and previous owner (Simon de Plumetot) during the early to mid-1440s (VK, 2:1066).

14 VK, 2:1071–74. Tischler's identification of Rouen as the most likely place of origin for the composition of “Part D” is, on the one hand, based on his observation that all but one of the texts included in this particular section of the manuscript (as well as the first two texts in “Part E”) can also be found in (a) Rouennaise exemplar(s) (VK, 2:1072). On the other hand, Tischler's attribution of “Part D” and “Part E” to Rouen and Paris, respectively, is supported further by the fact that they are written on sheets of paper which bear watermarks specific to these two cities (see VK, 2:1072 n. 552 and 1075 n. 560).

15 In its original form, the volume seems to have opened with the abbreviated chronicle of the kings of France (now fols. 14r–20r); cf. VK, 2:1066–67.

16 These other lists/catalogues include the names of the Old Testament rulers (fol. 21r–v); the Roman emperors (fols. 21v–22r); the Roman popes (fols. 22r–23r); the Frankish/French kings (fol. 23r); and the archbishops of Sens (fol. 23r–v) and Auxerre (fols. 23v–24r). In addition, there is a genealogy (or “family tree”) of the Frankish/French kings (fols. 39–41v), as well as a list of the French kings (fol. 276v).

17 VK, 2:1070–71. It is not possible, at this stage, to identify the hand that wrote this list of contents in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 14663, fol. iiv as belonging to Simon de Plumetot. Likewise, due to an apparent absence of watermarks and other locally-specific features on these pages it is not possible to pinpoint the composition of this section to either Rouen or Paris in the same way as is possible with regard to, for example, “Part D” and “Part E” (see n. 14 above).

18 It cannot have happened before the sixteenth century, when the text was copied from A† (see below) into C. Based on an eighteenth-century catalogue entry, Tischler suspects that the six removed folia might have resurfaced temporarily as part of a different manuscript (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 6264) before they were lost again, but this must remain speculation; VK, 2:1134–36.

19 Inventaire des manuscrits de Saint-Germain-des-Prés, 77 refers to C as “Guillaume de Jumièges et divers morçeaux historiques tirés du recueil formant le ms. Latin 14663.” Van Houts has confirmed this relationship in her edition of William of Jumièges's GND, which identifies both B (van Houts's F19) and C (F23) as “a copy of F20 [= A†]”; GND, 1:cxvii and cxix. Most recently, Tischler has corroborated the same filiation for the manuscripts’ two copies of Einhard's Vita Karoli; see the stemma codicum provided in VK, 2:1101. Tischler describes B as “an almost complete copy” (“eine nahezu vollständige Kopie”) of A† (VK, 2:1094).

20 VK, 2:1070–71.

21 A† = avg. 48–53 letters/line, 36 lines/page; B = 50–55 letters/line, 42 lines/page; C = avg. 35–40 letters/line, 28 lines/page. Note that B uses significantly more abbreviations than C, which likely accounts for the slight difference in the numerical sums. The calculation for A† is based primarily on the “History of Yvetot” (fol. 48r), given that the final folio of Lescot's genealogy (fol. 41r–v) written by “Scribe B” only contains free-hand genealogical tables that do not abide by the mise-en-page; the preceding sections (fols. 39r–40v) do conform to the page layout, but they are written by a different hand (Tischler's “Scribe A”), though both hands might in fact belong to the same scribe working several years apart (see below); also cf. VK, 2:1070. Dudo's Historia Normannorum has been edited by Jules Lair, ed., De moribus et actis primorum Normanniae ducum (Caen, 1865) [hereafter HN]; on the text's manuscript tradition, see Pohl, Benjamin, Dudo of Saint-Quentin's Historia Normannorum: Tradition, Innovation and Memory (York, 2015), 18109Google Scholar; and Pohl, Benjamin, “Pictures, Poems and Purpose. New Perspectives on the Manuscripts of Dudo of St. Quentin's Historia Normannorum,” Scriptorium 67 (2013): 229–58Google Scholar.

22 Cf. VK, 2:1095–98. The fourteen texts in A†, fols. 181r–304r (“Parts F–J”), by contrast, are not copied in B. The only two texts from “Parts A–E” that are not duplicated in B are the Comites Tolosani (fols. 175v–179v) and the account of the truce between Louis IX and Henry III (fols. 179v–180v).

23 While A†, fols. 1r–13v (“Part A”) and fol. 37r–v both represent later fifteenth-century additions (see above), there is no evidence to suggest that the order of texts found today on fols. 14r–180v (“Parts B–E”) is different from that in the book's original early fifteenth-century binding. This is confirmed further by the book's original pagination, which perfectly matches that in the fifteenth-century list of contents (fol. iiv). Similarly, a detailed list of contents for B that survives in a catalogue made during the 1480s confirms that this manuscript, too, preserves its original form despite having been rebound in the seventeenth century. On both manuscripts and their bindings, cf. the relevant discussions in VK, 2:1066–67, 1078–79, and 1098–99.

24 GND, 1:cxvii; and VK, 2:1091 and 1136.

25 GND, 1:cxvii and cxix.

26 A†, fols. 21r–24v; copied (and in some cases continued) in B, fols. 127r–131v, fol. 149r–v, and fol. 154r–v, and in C, fols. 177v–178r.

27 Similar catalogues were compiled by historiographers of earlier centuries, including the Anglo-Norman period. For example, Robert of Torigni produced long lists of Norman, French, and English archbishops, bishops, and abbots to assist with the composition of his Chronica (and possibly his redaction of William of Jumièges's GND), copies of which survive on the flyleaves of Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 6042, fols. 1v–2v and 121v–122v, as well as in Cambridge, University Library, MS Gg. 2.21; see Pohl, Benjamin, “Robert of Torigni and Le Bec: The Man and the Myth,” in A Companion to the Abbey of Le Bec in the Central Middle Ages (11th–13th Centuries), ed. Pohl, Benjamin and Gathagan, Laura L. (Leiden, 2017), 94–124, at 120–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 There is, of course, the theoretical possibility that the Brevis cronica was written at an earlier point — the terminus post quem being William the Conqueror's victory at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and the subsequent bestowal of the Norman duchy upon his eldest son, Robert Curthose (B, fol. 153v) —, and that the maker of A† merely copied (rather than composed) the text, just as he did the works of other writers from the Anglo-Norman period. This seems unlikely, however, given the “draft-like” language of the text that bears little to no resemblance to the Latin used by historians of earlier centuries. In the absence of any concrete evidence to the contrary, the Brevis cronica once found in A† will therefore be treated as an “original” composition.

29 B was produced on behalf of (but not by) Jean Budé (1430–1502), who employed a range of copyists in his personal service; see Garand, Monique-Cécile, “Les copistes de Jean Budé (1430–1502),” Bulletin d'information de l'Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes 15 (1969): 293332CrossRefGoogle Scholar; also cf. GND, 1:cxix; and VK, 2:1098. The owners of C have been well established from the late sixteenth/early seventeenth century onwards, but precious little is known for the period prior to that; see GND, 1:cxvii.

30 For discussion, with reference to an image of the colophon in A†, fol. 13r, which reads, in part, “Ce livre cy ont escript maistre Symon de Plumetot advocat au Parlement”, see VK, 2:1078 n. 580.

31 On what follows, see Delsaux, “L'humaniste Simon” (n. 2 above), 275–85; and Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 359–64.

32 On Simon's activities in Rouen, see VK, 2:1078–79; also cf. Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 363–64.

33 The structural differences between the GND's different redactions are visualised helpfully in the summary table provided by van Houts, “The Gesta Normannorum ducum” (n. 11 above), 116 (= “Appendix I”). Also cf. GND, 1:cxxi–cxxviii.

34 van Houts, “The Gesta Normannorum ducum” (n. 11 above), 108–110; and GND, 1:lxi and lxxvii–xci. Also cf. Pohl, Dudo of Saint-Quentin's Historia Normannorum (n. 21 above), 225–40. Examples indicating that Simon used Dudo's HN directly, rather than through its second-hand insertion in the GND, include: the name given to Bernard, who in the Brevis cronica appears as Bernard of Rouen (“Bernardo scilicet Rothomagen(sis)”; B, fol. 151v), rather than Bernard the Dane (“Bernardus Danus/Dacigenus”; GND, 1:100 and 106); the order of the monastic churches founded by Duke Richard I, which in accordance with the HN are listed in the Brevis cronica as Rouen — Mont Saint-Michel — Fécamp (“[ecclesie] beate Marie Rothomagi, sancti Michaelis in Monte, et sancte Trinitatis in Fisca(n)no”; B, fol. 151v; HN, 290), rather than Fécamp — Rouen — Mont Saint-Michel (GND, 1:130–33); the passage telling of William Longsword's acceptance as duke amongst the people of the Franks, Burgundians, Flemish, English, Danes, and Irish (“ … sicque exaltatus est quod Franci, Burgundi, Flandrenses, Angli et Dacigene, et Isbernenses ei parebant”; B, beginning of fol. 151r), which is provided by Dudo (HN, 192), but not in the GND.

35 B, fol. 150v: “et nichilominus prefatus [ … ] exuit in Christo”; GND, 1:68–69. The first part of this re-insertion of the HN into the GND belongs to Robert of Torigni (“redaction F”) and the second part to Orderic Vitalis (“redaction E”), which was subsequently adopted by Robert. According to van Houts, it was Robert who first combined Dudo's original account with Orderic's additions concerning the Battle of Soissons etc., which is precisely what can be seen in the Brevis cronica; GND, 1:lxxxi.

36 Cf. HN, 183–86, 192–93; and GND, 1:76–79.

37 Today, there are almost fifty surviving copies of the GND in its various redactions; see van Houts, “The Gesta Normannorum ducum” (n. 11 above), 116; and GND, 1:xcv–cxxi. By contrast, there are only fourteen known manuscripts of Dudo's HN; see Pohl, Dudo of Saint-Quentin's Historia Normannorum (n. 21 above), 262–63.

38 Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 363; Delsaux, “L'humaniste Simon” (n. 2 above), 285–96; and VK, 2:1066. Also cf. Collard, Franck, “La bibliothèque de Saint-Victor au service des rénovateurs de l'histoire de France vers 1500? Nicole Gilles, Robert Gaguin et Paul Émile face aux ressources victorines,” Cahiers de recherches médiévales et humanistes 17 (2009): 227–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 For St. Bonaventure's scheme of authorship, see Minnis, Alastair, Medieval Theory of Authorship: Scholastic Literary Attitudes in the Later Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia, 1988), 94Google Scholar.

40 Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 373–81. For minor corrections to this, see Les manuscrits de l'abbaye de Saint-Victor: Catalogue établi sur la base du répertoire de Claude de Grandrue (1514), ed. Gilbert Ouy (Turnhout, 1999), 1:15–19.

41 That Simon appears to have taken extracts from the GND and adapted them for use in the Brevis cronica before copying William's chronicle in extenso should come as no surprise. After all, such a pattern of production not only ties in with what we know about Simon's working practices (on which see below), but it also no doubt reflects the practicalities of interacting with a large text, the pragmatic dynamics of which are as familiar to modern students of history as they were to their medieval counterparts, whereby notes are first taken, often in “draft-like” form, before more extensive (or even verbatim) copies are made when both time and resources allow.

42 Collard, “La bibliothèque de Saint-Victor”, 232.

43 Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 369.

44 On the autographs collected by Simon, see Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), passim; Ouy, “Autographes d'auteurs français” (n. 2 above), 69; Delsaux, Olivier, Manuscrits et pratiques autographes chez les écrivains français de la fin du Moyen Âge: L'exemple de Christine de Pizan (Geneva, 2013), 174–78Google Scholar; and Calvot, Danièle and Ouy, Gilbert, L’œuvre de Gerson à Saint-Victor de Paris: Catalogue des manuscrits (Paris, 1990), 2123Google Scholar.

45 Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 371–72. Not everyone is in agreement, however, that Simon was the author of several poems as argued by Gilbert Ouy. For an alternative view, see Delsaux, Olivier, “L'humaniste Simon de Plumetot et sa copie des poésies d'Eustache Deschamps: Une édition génétique au début du XVe siècle? (Partie II),” Revue d'Histoire des Textes 10 (2015): 141–95, at 164CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 By contrast, a comparison (both stylistically and structurally) between the Brevis cronica and Simon's other known authorial works yields little useful information due to the fact that the latter are predominantly finished versions, whereas the Brevis cronica shows clear signs of being either a draft or, at the very least, a work-in-progress. An interesting avenue for future research would be a detailed comparison between the Brevis cronica and the fourteenth-century Grande Chronique de Normandie, on which see particularly Labory, Gilette, “Les manuscrits de la Grande Chronique de Normandie du XIVe et du XVe siècle,” Revue d'histoire des textes 27 (1997): 191222CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47 A†, fols. 1r–10r (Anjou), 251r–273v (Guillaume de Nagis). There are other abbreviated chronicles of the kings of France on fols. 14r–20r and 181r–192v.

48 Guyot-Bachy, Isabelle, “La Chronique abrégée des rois de France et les Grandes chroniques de France: Concurrence ou complémentarité dans la construction d'une culture historique en France à la fin du Moyen Âge,” The Medieval Chronicle 8 (2013): 205–32, at 215Google Scholar.

49 Guyot-Bachy, Isabelle, “La Chronique abrégée des rois de France de Guillaume de Nangis: Trois étapes de l'histoire d'un texte,” in Religion et mentalités au Moyen Age. Mélanges en l'honneur d'Hervé Martin, ed. Pichot, Daniel, Chauou, Amaury, and Rousselot, Lionel (Rennes, 2003), 39–46, at 39Google Scholar.

50 Guillaume's abridged chronicle is best known for its vernacular text, but this is based upon an original Latin version that today is found in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 6184, fols. 1r–15v.

51 Zale, Sanford, “Bastards or Kings or Both? Louis III and Carloman in Late-Medieval French Historiography,” Comitatus 29 (1998): 95112Google Scholar.

52 Guyot-Bachy, “La Chronique abrégée” (n. 48 above), 215.

53 Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 369–71; and Brabant, “Documenter le Grand Schisme” (n. 2 above), n. p. Also cf. Fournier, Gilbert, “Ouvrir la bibliothèque: Lecteurs étrangers et lectures étrangères au collège de Sorbonne au XVe siècle”, Les manuscrits médiévaux témoins de lectures, ed. Croizy-Naquet, Catherine, Harf-Lancner, Laurence, and Szkilnik, Michelle (Paris, 2015), 17–45, at 31–35Google Scholar.

54 For discussion, see Delisle, Léopold V., “Notice sur vingt manuscrits du Vatican,” Bibliothèque de l’École des chartes 37 (1876): 471527CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 502 n. 1.

55 Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 371–72; and Brabant, “Documenter le Grand Schisme” (n. 2 above), n. p.

56 Gilbert Ouy lists MS BBB.12 among those manuscripts “lui [Simon] ayant probablement appartenu”; Ouy, “Simon de Plumetot” (n. 2 above), 379. See also Labory, “Les manuscrits de la Grande Chronique” (n. 46 above), 200 for some important qualifications.

57 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS lat. 14767, fol. 180v.

58 Laporte, Annales de Jumièges (n. 12 above), 21 argues that this reworking of the annals could have been accomplished before 1220, meaning that Simon would have simply copied an existing text. However, Laporte also notes the preponderance of entries concerning Anglo-French relations, a subject close to Simon's heart, the absence of events relating to Jumièges itself and the fact that the text is “mauvais, abrégé avec négligence, et confus par endroits,” a description that could just as easily be applied to the Brevis cronica. As such, while it is likely Simon simply copied an existing text, it is not impossible that he “authored” these notes in the same manner as the Brevis cronica.

59 “MoCCXXXIIIo [sic]. Obiit inclitus rex Francie Phillipus apud Meduntam et fuit portatus ad Sanctum Dionisium, cui successit Ludovicus filius ejus et Blanchia ejus uxor filia regis Yspanie, et pariter coronati Remis die transmigrationis Domini”; A†, fol. 174v.

60 Ouy, Gilbert, “Discovering Gerson the Humanist: Fifty Years of Serendipity,” in A Companion to Jean Gerson, ed. McGuire, Brian P. (Leiden, 2006), 79–132, at 97Google Scholar.

61 Leiden, Universiteitsbibliotheek, MS Vossius lat. F. 77, which is accorded the siglum F6 in van Houts's critical edition of the GND. According to van Houts, A† (her F20) is one of five copies of redaction F, all of which are distinguished by the fact that at the end of book viii.42 there is a fragment of Robert of Torigni's Chronica for 1137 (GND, 1:cxii–cxiii, cxvii, and cxix). In A†, this fragment appears at the top of fol. 130v and a later user of the manuscript, who was obviously comparing the text with Duchesne's edition (mentioned at the beginning in the margin of fol. 68r), has written “Hæc brævis additio non est edita.” The other F redaction manuscripts that include this fragment are F19 (= our C); F23 (= our B); F8, which is an English manuscript (now in the Parker Library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge); and F6 (now at Leiden). Since Simon is unlikely to have consulted the manuscript now at the Parker, it would seem that he copied the GND from the codex now at Leiden.

62 Brabant, “Documenter le Grand Schisme” (n. 2 above), n. p.

63 This is van Houts's F3 (GND, 1:cx). On this manuscript and its codicology, see Pohl, Dudo of Saint-Quentin's Historia Normannorum (n. 21 above), 32–33; Pohl, “Pictures, Poems and Purpose” (n. 21 above), 244–57; and Pohl, Benjamin, “The Illustrated Archetype of the Historia Normannorum: Did Dudo of St. Quentin Write a ‘Chronicon Pictum’?,” Anglo-Norman Studies 37 (2015): 225–55Google Scholar.

64 Brabant, “Documenter le Grand Schisme” (n. 2 above), n. p.

65 GND, 1:xci. See also van Houts, “The Gesta Normannorum ducum” (n. 11 above), passim.