We cannot verify your location
Browse Book and Journal Content on Project MUSE
Guiraut de Bornelh's Quan la brun'aura s'eslucha: An Experiment in Textual Criticism, II

From: Tenso
Volume 10, Number 1, Fall 1994
pp. 1-8 | 10.1353/ten.1994.0016

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

GUIRAUT DE BORNELH'S QUAN LA BRUN'AURA S'ESLUCHA: AN EXPERIMENT IN TEXTUAL CRITICISM, ?1 As stated in Part I (8-9). the purpose of this experimental edition is to test the editorial method based on recensio; this, in the conviction that ¿ioffers a reasonably objective means ofassessing the evidence preserved by a given textual tradition consisting ofmultiple copies and therefore the soundest basis for a critical edition of such a text. As noted (I. 2-4), Kolsen's 19 10 edition of Quan la brun'aura s'eslucha is based on MSS CR and M, provides only selected variants, and furnishes no indication of editorial intervention. Sharman's 1989 edition of the same text is based on MS C, provides the variants, but indicates editorial intervention inconsistently (cf. I, 6-8). Neither Kolsen nor Sharman support their choice of base manuscripts nor do they justify their editorial interventions by reference to a detailed analysis of manuscript relationships, i.e. recensio (I, 12). The experimental edition presented here (I, 13-22) is based on MS B. provides the variants, and supports both the selection of the base manuscript and justifies all editorial interventions by reference to the evidence of recensio. But has this effort resulted in an edition of Quan la brun'aura s'eslucha that improves in any significant way upon the editions published by Kolsen and Sharman? The text in question consists ofsix coblas ofeight verses each for a total of 48 verses plus a final and somewhat anomalous cobla of three verses. Because the final cobla is not present in MSS CR and M, the versions of it offered by Kolsen and Sharman require a separate examination. See note 5. Now, orthographic variation aside, a verse by verse comparison of the six coblas of the main body ofthe canso reveals Uiat the three editions are identical in 29 verses (60%). Kolsen and Sharman, both ofwhose editions are based wholly or in part on MS C, agree against Nelson in 18 verses (37%). Kolsen and Nelson agree against Sharman in 1 verse (1.5%) while Sharman and Nelson agree against Kolsen in 1 verse (1.5%). The fact that the three editions are nearly identical is clearly the consequence ofa relatively coherent manuscript tradition, while the differences in every instance can be attributed to the different base manuscripts in use. JAN A. NELSON Most of the differences observed between Kolsen and Sharman [KS] and Nelson [N] are insignificant inasmuch as they do not affect the essential meaning of the verse. These insignificant differences are listed here as well as an assessment of their relative authority with reference to the stemma (I, 10). In the case of longer readings only the overall pattern of agreement is considered. For a more detailed analysis, see the record ofvariants (I. 16-19). A discussion of differences deemed significant will follow. V. 8 [KS] Tort n'awetz vos m. [V(Sg)(CRM)(IK)]: [N] Vos n'auretz tort m. [AB(DE)(NTcHg)J. The presence of 9 may indicate the reading of the archetype, although the fact that the variation is a simple inversion renders the evidence ambiguous. V. 11 [KS] p. re q. [DE(Sg)(CRMHgDI) (V unique)]: [N] p. soq. [AB(NTc)]. The presence ofDE may indicate the reading of the archetype, although again the fact that the variation is so simple renders the evidence ambiguous. V. 17 [KS] Quel cors d. [V(Sg)(CRM)]: [N] Lo cors d. [AB(DE) (NTc)(giK)]. The latter reading is the archetype. V. 18 [KS] n. Vesbranc [V(CRM)(IK)]: [N] nil desbranc [AB (DE)(NT)(Sg)9(c varies)]. The latter reading is the archetype. V. 20 [KS] Car [(DE)(NtC)(V)(CRM) (Sg unique)]: [N] Quan [AB(QIK)]. The evidence is ambiguous. V. 20 (con'd) [KS] sai que r. [V(Sg)(CRM)]: [N] veiquer. [AB(DE)(Ntc)(giK)J.The latter represents the archetype. V. 2 1 [KS] Enans men'era [(Sg)(CRM) (V unique, giK vary)]: [N] Anz sai qem n'er a [AB(DE)(NtC)J. The evidence is ambiguous. V. 26 [KS] defendria ad un, which Kolsen has published as defendri'ad unand Sharman as defendria d...