The Experience of the Arnamagnæan Institute, Copenhagen

The Arnamagnæan Institute, principally in the form of the present writer, has been involved in a number of projects to do with the digitisation, electronic description and text-encoding of medieval manuscripts. Several of these projects were dealt with in a previous article 'The view from the North: Some Scandinavian digitisation projects', NCD review, 4 (2004), pp. 22-30. This paper looks in some depth at two others, MASTER and CHLT. The Arnamagnæan Institute is a teaching and research institute within the Faculty of Humanities at the University of Copenhagen. It is named after the Icelandic scholar and antiquarian Árni Magnússon (1663-1730), secretary of the Royal Danish Archives and Professor of Danish Antiquities at the University of Copenhagen, who in the course of his lifetime built up what is arguably the single most important collection of early Scandinavian manuscripts in the world, some 2,500 manuscript items, the earliest dating from the 12th century. The majority of these are from Iceland, but the collection also contains important Norwegian, Danish and Swedish manuscripts, along with approximately 100 manuscripts of continental provenance. In addition to the manuscripts proper, there are collections of original charters and apographa: 776 Norwegian (including Faroese, Shetlandic and Orcadian) charters and 2895 copies, 1571 Danish charters and 1372 copies, and 1345 Icelandic charters and 5942 copies. When he died in 1730, Árni Magnússon bequeathed his collection to the University of Copenhagen. The original collection has subsequently been augmented through individual purchases and gifts and the acquisition of a number of smaller collections, bringing the total to nearly 3000 manuscript items, which, with the charters and apographa, comprise over half a million pages.

The Transmission of Manuscripts and the Genetics of Texts. A new critical edition of Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival

The discussion on the New Philology triggered by French and North American scholars in the last decade of the 20th century emphasized the material character of textual transmission inside and outside the written evidences of medieval manuscripts by downgrading the active role of the historical author. However, the reception of the ideas propagated by the New Philology adherents was rather divided. Some researchers questioned its innovative status (K. Stackmann: “Neue Philologie?”), others saw a new era of the “powers of philology” evoked (H.-U. Gumbrecht). Besides the debates on the New Philology another concept of textual materiality strengthened in the last decade, maintaining that textual alterations somewhat relate to biogenetic mutations. In a matter of fact, phenomena such as genetic and textual variation, gene recombination and ‘contamination’ (the mixing of different exemplars in one manuscript text) share common features. The paper discusses to what extent the biogenetic concepts can be used for evaluating manifestations of textual production (as the approach of ‘critique génétique’ does) and of textual transmission (as the phylogenetic analysis of manuscript variation does). In this context yet the genealogical concept of stemmatology – the treelike representation of textual development abhorred by the New Philology adepts – might prove to be useful for describing the history of texts. The textual material to be analyzed will be drawn from the Parzival Project, which is currently preparing a new electronic edition of Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival novel written shortly after 1200 and transmitted in numerous manuscripts up to the age of printing (www.parzival.unibe.ch). Researches of the project have actually resulted in suggesting that the advanced knowledge of the manuscript transmission yields a more precise idea on the author’s own writing process.

An English 13th century bestiary, a new discovery in the technique of medieval illumination,

"Three hundred copies ... have been printed."

Annotating an Oral Corpus using the Text Encoding Initiative. Methodology, Problems, Solutions

The objective of this paper is to describe and evaluate the application of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) Guidelines to a corpus of oral French, this being the first corpus of oral French where the TEI has been used. The paper explains the purpose of the corpus, both in creating a specialist corpus of néo-contage that will broaden the range of oral corpora available, and, more importantly, in creating a dataset to explore a variety of oral French that has a particularly interesting status in terms of factors such as conception orale/écrite, réalisation médiale and comportement communicatif (Koch and Oesterreicher 2001). The linguistic phenomena to be encoded are both stylistic (speech and thought presentation) and syntactic (negation, detachment, inversion), and all represent areas where previous research has highlighted the significance of factors such as medium, register and discourse type, as well as a host of linguistic factors (syntactic, phonetic, lexical). After a discussion of how a tagset can be designed and applied within the TEI to encode speech and thought presentation, negation, detachment and inversion, the final section of the paper evaluates the benefits and possible drawbacks of the methodology offered by the TEI when applied to a syntactic and stylistic markup of an oral corpus.

The destinies of literary manuscripts: past present and future

This essay reviews the ways in which literary manuscripts may be considered to be archivally unique, as well as valuable in all senses of the word, and gives a cautious appraisal of their future in the next ten to twenty years. It reviews the essential nature of literary manuscripts, and especially the ways in which they form “split collections”. This leads to an assessment of the work of the Diasporic Literary Archives network from 2012 to 2014, and some of the key findings. The essay closes with reflections on the future of literary manuscripts in the digital age – emerging trends, research findings, uncertainties and unknowns.

New Philology and the Biogenetics of Texts

The discussion on the New Philology triggered by French and North American scholars in the last decade of the 20th century emphasized the material character of textual transmission inside and outside the written evidences of medieval manuscripts by downgrading the active role of the historical author. However, the reception of the ideas propagated by the New Philology adherents was rather divided. Some researchers considered it to be the result of an academic “crisis” (R.T. Pickens) or questioned its innovative status (K. Stackmann: “Neue Philologie?”); others appreciated the “new attitudes to the page” it had brought to mind (J. Bumke after R.H. and M.A, Rouse) or even saw a new era of the “powers of philology” evoked (H.-U. Gumbrecht). Besides the debates on the New Philology another concept of textual materiality strengthened in the last decade, maintaining that textual alterations somewhat relate to biogenetic mutations. In a matter of fact, phenomena such as genetic and textual variation, gene recombination and ‘contamination’ (the mixing of different exemplars in one manuscript text) share common features. The paper discusses to what extent the biogenetic concepts can be used for evaluating manifestations of textual production (as the approach of ‘critique génétique’ does) and of textual transmission (as the phylogenetic analysis of manuscript variation does). In this context yet the genealogical concept of stemmatology – the treelike representation of textual development abhorred by the New Philology adepts – might prove to be useful for describing the history of texts. The textual material to be analyzed will be drawn from the Parzival Project, which is currently preparing a new electronic edition of Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival novel written shortly after 1200 and transmitted in numerous manuscripts up to the age of printing. Researches of the project have actually resulted in suggesting that the advanced knowledge of the manuscript transmission yields a more precise idea on the author’s own writing process.