Choosing the manuscripts for the model
- The 'dynamic' edition: Key Concepts
- Understanding 'dynamic' text
- Using the dynamic edition
The Declaration of Arbroath
- Methodology for the new edition of the Declaration of Arbroath
- The manuscripts of the Declaration
- Translating the Declaration of Arbroath
A model of a dynamic edition of Regiam maiestatem
- Historical Introduction
- Description of the manuscripts
- Translating Regiam
- 'Dynamic' Symbols: An Aide-Memoire
- How to Cite
How did we select the manuscripts to model Regiam?
Regiam maiestatem survives in over thirty manuscripts as a Latin and a Scots text. The surviving manuscripts containing a Latin text (at least in partial form) include:
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, MS 21246 (C)
- Harvard Law Library MS 164 (CH)
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.4.13 (D)
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.4.10 (E)
- London, British Library, Additional MS 18111 (F)
- Edinburgh University Library MS 206 (G)
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, MS 25.5.10 (H)
- Edinburgh University Library MS 207 (I)
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, MS 16497 (J)
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.5.6 (K)
- London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 167
- St Andrews University Library, MS Kf51.R4
- Edinburgh, The National Records of Scotland, PA5/3
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Acc. MS 11218/5 [reference only]
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.5.11
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.4.14
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.5.9 (O)
- London, British Library, Harley MS 4700
- Cambridge University Library, MS Ee.4.21
- Glasgow University Library, Murray MS 548 (R)
- Cambridge University Library, MS Kk.1.5
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 25.4.12 (S)
- London, British Library, Additional MS 48032
- Edinburgh University Library, MS 208
- Edinburgh University LIbrary, MS Laing III. 381
- Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, Advocates MS 7.1.9 (partially Latin, partially Scots)
The decision to select
Given the limits imposed by a three-year research project, we could not reasonably expect to produce a full edition of a dynamic edition, particularly given the number of manuscripts which survive, and the fact that the editorial model will be developed in prototype form only (as stated elsewhere, we would need to develop better metrics for measuring 'unsettledness' and incorporate automatic transcription script, necessary for maxi-manuscript editions).
As a result, we decided to select manuscripts to use in our model.
Principles behind the choice of manuscripts
We adopted four principles behind the choice of manuscripts
- To include, as much as possible, manuscripts containing the earliest known form of Regiam. This was because this text had not never been printed.
- This resulted in the inclusion of the two version 1 manuscripts (C and F)
- To reflect the range in how Regiam's content and presentation in it fifteenth-century manuscript instantiations. This was based on our hypothesis that the text of Regiam was changing and being revised at multiple points throughout the fifteenth century.
- This resulted in the inclusion of eight version 2 manuscripts (CH, D, E, G, H, I, J, S), which reflected revisions to Regiam, some of which appear to have already occurred at the turn of the fifteenth century, and continued to be copied into the mid-15th century, as well as subsequent expansions revisions and clarifications throughout that century.
- To reflect the relationship between 15th-century manuscripts and indicative sixteenth-century manuscripts, a period when the formal structures for the practice of Scots law, and the legal authorities cited were changing.
- This justified the choice of some later version2 manuscripts (J S) as well as some later fifteenth and 16th-century manuscripts (K O R), which include a version3 manuscripts.
- To include, where possible, those which had a significant amount of auxiliary content in their folios, to see whether auxiliary text in one manuscript made it into the main text in another.
- This was particularly interesting as C, a very early manuscript, has an extensive gloss, seemingly written in the same hand as the main text, as does H. I and K also contained less substantial but still meaningful auxiliary text. How far does the gloss in C and H speak to the concerns of later revisions?
Our model is thus based on: C, CH, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, O, R, S
For fuller description of these manuscripts, click here.