Francesca Guido, Bernhard Bauer

New considerations on the Old Breton glosses in BN1616

Introduction

New considerations on the old breton glosses in bn1616. Reassesses Old Breton glosses in the BN1616 manuscript, challenging interpretations through detailed philological, palaeographical, and linguistic analysis. Explores early medieval intellectual and linguistic exchanges.

Abstract

This article examines glosses in the late ninth- or early tenth-century manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Nouv. acq. Lat. 1616 (= BN1616), which were previously analysed as Old Breton. By approaching them from different angles, we reassess and challenge some of these long-standing interpretations. Through detailed philological, palaeographical, and linguistic analysis, we address the complexity introduced by scribal errors, orthographic variants, and gloss segmentation, emphasising the critical role of comparative studies. Furthermore, connections between BN1616 and related manuscripts, such as Angers 476 and 477, provide a valuable insight into glossing traditions and their transmission. This study underscores the significance of comprehensive manuscript analysis in uncovering insights into early medieval intellectual and linguistic exchanges.

Review

This article presents a compelling and timely re-examination of the Old Breton glosses found within the late ninth- or early tenth-century manuscript Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Nouv. acq. Lat. 1616 (BN1616). The authors aim to challenge and reassess interpretations that have long been accepted within the field, suggesting a nuanced perspective on these historically significant linguistic artifacts. This immediate objective positions the study as a critical intervention in the understanding of early medieval linguistic records and manuscript traditions, promising to refine our knowledge of Old Breton and its textual transmission. The methodology outlined in the abstract is commendably rigorous and multi-faceted, employing detailed philological, palaeographical, and linguistic analyses. Crucially, the study commits to addressing inherent complexities such as scribal errors, orthographic variants, and the often-problematic segmentation of glosses. This meticulous approach, coupled with an emphasis on comparative studies and the integration of related manuscripts like Angers 476 and 477, provides a robust framework for disentangling the intricacies of these textual layers. By exploring glossing traditions and their transmission across different sources, the research offers not only a deeper insight into BN1616 but also into the broader intellectual milieu of the period. Ultimately, this study promises a significant contribution to both historical linguistics and manuscript studies. By demonstrating the critical role of comprehensive manuscript analysis, the authors are set to illuminate previously overlooked or misinterpreted aspects of early medieval intellectual and linguistic exchanges. The re-evaluation of long-standing interpretations regarding the Old Breton glosses in BN1616 is poised to offer invaluable insights into the dynamic nature of language preservation, scribal practice, and scholarly engagement in the early Middle Ages, making this a vital piece of scholarship for specialists in Celtic studies, palaeography, and historical linguistics.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.