The manuscripts portal, now boasts links to an impressive 10,338 manuscripts, probably making it from this date the biggest single online library in the the world of medieval and early modern hand-penned books.
However the retrograde step to low quality is disappointing. Microfilming of the Vatican manuscripts began in the 1950s and the quality of these grainy black and white images is far below what scholars expect nowadays. In many cases words are entirely illegible or lost in dark folds and gutters. The illuminations are often just murky patches of grey.
Color scanning was an enormous advance. The books are laid in cradles under shadowless light and photographed from two angles, with the images then post-processed. The Library is being frank about this downgrade and is marking the microfilms as "low quality", but offers no explanation of why it is changing course. [Later note: there has since been an assurance that these manuscripts will be color-scanned, and that the black-and-white versions are merely stopgaps.]
I may not be able to offer you a complete list of this massive release as the work required to collate it would simply be beyond my time and resources. But here is a small sample: the Reginense latino series, has suddenly grown from 93 items to 492. All of the 399 additions are marked "low quality" though many really did deserve better treatment:
- Reg.lat.19
- Reg.lat.21
- Reg.lat.27
- Reg.lat.29
- Reg.lat.37
- Reg.lat.49
- Reg.lat.52
- Reg.lat.66
- Reg.lat.67
- Reg.lat.69, Carolingian? with Alcuin, John the Deacon and others.
- Reg.lat.75
- Reg.lat.91
- Reg.lat.93
- Reg.lat.96
- Reg.lat.99
- Reg.lat.106
- Reg.lat.107,
- Reg.lat.116
- Reg.lat.117
- Reg.lat.122
- Reg.lat.124, Rabanus Maurus: De laudibus sanctae crucis: A principal copy made in 825 or 826: read this introduction to the Liber de_laudibus_Sanctae_Crucis. On the author: Wikipedia. The reproduction of this beautiful book is in fact a color scan
- Reg.lat.125
- Reg.lat.126
- Reg.lat.129
- Reg.lat.132
- Reg.lat.133
- Reg.lat.134
- Reg.lat.140
- Reg.lat.141
- Reg.lat.147
- Reg.lat.150
- Reg.lat.160
- Reg.lat.162
- Reg.lat.167
- Reg.lat.185
- Reg.lat.187
- Reg.lat.191
- Reg.lat.193
- Reg.lat.194
- Reg.lat.195
- Reg.lat.201
- Reg.lat.215
- Reg.lat.219
- Reg.lat.222
- Reg.lat.224
- Reg.lat.230
- Reg.lat.234
- Reg.lat.251
- Reg.lat.255
- Reg.lat.258
- Reg.lat.263
- Reg.lat.272
- Reg.lat.274
- Reg.lat.280
- Reg.lat.288
- Reg.lat.294
- Reg.lat.296
- Reg.lat.300
- Reg.lat.304
- Reg.lat.306
- Reg.lat.309, a copy of a famed Carolingian compendium of astronomy, the Handbook of 809. Horrible imaging:
- Reg.lat.310
- Reg.lat.318
- Reg.lat.324
- Reg.lat.333
- Reg.lat.338
- Reg.lat.342
- Reg.lat.343
- Reg.lat.344
- Reg.lat.348
- Reg.lat.358
- Reg.lat.373
- Reg.lat.377
- Reg.lat.378
- Reg.lat.379
- Reg.lat.385.pt.1
- Reg.lat.385.pt.2
- Reg.lat.388
- Reg.lat.399
- Reg.lat.407
- Reg.lat.424
- Reg.lat.426
- Reg.lat.430
- Reg.lat.432
- Reg.lat.453
- Reg.lat.455
- Reg.lat.457
- Reg.lat.463
- Reg.lat.467
- Reg.lat.469
- Reg.lat.470
- Reg.lat.471
- Reg.lat.477
- Reg.lat.479
- Reg.lat.480
- Reg.lat.481
- Reg.lat.482
- Reg.lat.484
- Reg.lat.486
- Reg.lat.489
- Reg.lat.497, contains a single folio of the Old English history of the Viking Ohthere of HĂ„logaland (Wikipedia)
- Reg.lat.498
- Reg.lat.499
- Reg.lat.500
- Reg.lat.509
- Reg.lat.516
- Reg.lat.517
- Reg.lat.520
- Reg.lat.521
- Reg.lat.522
- Reg.lat.523
- Reg.lat.524
- Reg.lat.529
- Reg.lat.532
- Reg.lat.535
- Reg.lat.539
- Reg.lat.540
- Reg.lat.541
- Reg.lat.543
- Reg.lat.544
- Reg.lat.548
- Reg.lat.553.pt.1
- Reg.lat.553.pt.2
- Reg.lat.556.pt.1
- Reg.lat.556.pt.2
- Reg.lat.558
- Reg.lat.561
- Reg.lat.562
- Reg.lat.566, the only existing manuscript of the Epitoma of Helgaud
- Reg.lat.568
- Reg.lat.571
- Reg.lat.572
- Reg.lat.576
- Reg.lat.577
- Reg.lat.578
- Reg.lat.579
- Reg.lat.580
- Reg.lat.582
- Reg.lat.585
- Reg.lat.592
- Reg.lat.593
- Reg.lat.596
- Reg.lat.598
- Reg.lat.605
- Reg.lat.606
- Reg.lat.610
- Reg.lat.612
- Reg.lat.616
- Reg.lat.620
- Reg.lat.621
- Reg.lat.624
- Reg.lat.630
- Reg.lat.631
- Reg.lat.633.pt.1
- Reg.lat.633.pt.2
- Reg.lat.641
- Reg.lat.644
- Reg.lat.648
- Reg.lat.657
- Reg.lat.658
- Reg.lat.666
- Reg.lat.667
- Reg.lat.668
- Reg.lat.669
- Reg.lat.672
- Reg.lat.673
- Reg.lat.681
- Reg.lat.692
- Reg.lat.694
- Reg.lat.703.pt.1
- Reg.lat.703.pt.2
- Reg.lat.712
- Reg.lat.722
- Reg.lat.727
- Reg.lat.729
- Reg.lat.736
- Reg.lat.738
- Reg.lat.744.pt.1
- Reg.lat.744.pt.2
- Reg.lat.745
- Reg.lat.750
- Reg.lat.755
- Reg.lat.760
- Reg.lat.763
- Reg.lat.767
- Reg.lat.768
- Reg.lat.774
- Reg.lat.776
- Reg.lat.777
- Reg.lat.781
- Reg.lat.787
- Reg.lat.791
- Reg.lat.807
- Reg.lat.827
- Reg.lat.830
- Reg.lat.832
- Reg.lat.833
- Reg.lat.834
- Reg.lat.835
- Reg.lat.838
- Reg.lat.846
- Reg.lat.849
- Reg.lat.852
- Reg.lat.857
- Reg.lat.859
- Reg.lat.863
- Reg.lat.868
- Reg.lat.902
- Reg.lat.920
- Reg.lat.921
- Reg.lat.923
- Reg.lat.931
- Reg.lat.936
- Reg.lat.937
- Reg.lat.944
- Reg.lat.951
- Reg.lat.971
- Reg.lat.973
- Reg.lat.977
- Reg.lat.982
- Reg.lat.992
- Reg.lat.1003
- Reg.lat.1010
- Reg.lat.1023, this is one of the most important Roman law texts with various arbor juris schemata. Most are semi-illegible:
- Reg.lat.1048
- Reg.lat.1050
- Reg.lat.1054
- Reg.lat.1061
- Reg.lat.1099
- Reg.lat.1104
- Reg.lat.1115
- Reg.lat.1123
- Reg.lat.1127
- Reg.lat.1128
- Reg.lat.1131
- Reg.lat.1140
- Reg.lat.1145
- Reg.lat.1148
- Reg.lat.1171
- Reg.lat.1177
- Reg.lat.1205
- Reg.lat.1209
- Reg.lat.1220
- Reg.lat.1238
- Reg.lat.1241
- Reg.lat.1245
- Reg.lat.1253
- Reg.lat.1260
- Reg.lat.1263
- Reg.lat.1268
- Reg.lat.1272
- Reg.lat.1276
- Reg.lat.1281
- Reg.lat.1282
- Reg.lat.1290
- Reg.lat.1294
- Reg.lat.1297.pt.1
- Reg.lat.1297.pt.2
- Reg.lat.1315
- Reg.lat.1352
- Reg.lat.1354
- Reg.lat.1357
- Reg.lat.1364
- Reg.lat.1370, the earliest grammar (1437 – 1441) of a Romance language (Tuscan). See HistoryofInformation.com and Cecil Grayson.
- Reg.lat.1385
- Reg.lat.1388
- Reg.lat.1389
- Reg.lat.1391
- Reg.lat.1418
- Reg.lat.1421
- Reg.lat.1429
- Reg.lat.1431
- Reg.lat.1442
- Reg.lat.1446
- Reg.lat.1456
- Reg.lat.1461
- Reg.lat.1479
- Reg.lat.1481
- Reg.lat.1486
- Reg.lat.1490, Chansonnier cangé: see an account of the trobairitz female troubadours.
- Reg.lat.1495
- Reg.lat.1496
- Reg.lat.1501
- Reg.lat.1505
- Reg.lat.1511
- Reg.lat.1513
- Reg.lat.1516
- Reg.lat.1517
- Reg.lat.1519
- Reg.lat.1531
- Reg.lat.1541
- Reg.lat.1549
- Reg.lat.1553, an early 9th-century copy of the Bern Riddles
- Reg.lat.1555
- Reg.lat.1556
- Reg.lat.1557
- Reg.lat.1560
- Reg.lat.1569
- Reg.lat.1570
- Reg.lat.1572, this is a most remarkable manuscript, uniquely containing a previously lost Latin philosophical text dating from antiquity, the missing part 3 of De Platone by the 2nd-century writer Apuleius. Justin Stover points out this discovery was made in 1949 by the historian of philosophy Raymond Klibansky, who neither disclosed the location nor published any edition
by the time of his death in 2005. [Justin Stover kindly points out (comment below) that Klibansky did reveal the shelfmark in 1993, in his catalogue of the manuscripts of Apuleius' philosophical works, with Frank Regen, Die Handschriften der philosophischen Werke des Apuleius.] Here is the book's start at fol. 77r (frame 78): Stover's edition, A New Work by Apuleius: The Lost Third Book of the De Platone, has since appeared with OUP. (HT to Pieter Buellens (@LatinAristotle).) - Reg.lat.1573
- Reg.lat.1575
- Reg.lat.1583
- Reg.lat.1584
- Reg.lat.1591
- Reg.lat.1592
- Reg.lat.1593
- Reg.lat.1595
- Reg.lat.1598
- Reg.lat.1602
- Reg.lat.1603
- Reg.lat.1616
- Reg.lat.1624
- Reg.lat.1630
- Reg.lat.1637.pt.1
- Reg.lat.1637.pt.2
- Reg.lat.1638
- Reg.lat.1642
- Reg.lat.1650
- Reg.lat.1652
- Reg.lat.1659
- Reg.lat.1666
- Reg.lat.1669
- Reg.lat.1670
- Reg.lat.1671
- Reg.lat.1672
- Reg.lat.1673
- Reg.lat.1676
- Reg.lat.1682
- Reg.lat.1684
- Reg.lat.1686
- Reg.lat.1691
- Reg.lat.1708
- Reg.lat.1716
- Reg.lat.1719
- Reg.lat.1721
- Reg.lat.1722
- Reg.lat.1723
- Reg.lat.1725
- Reg.lat.1731
- Reg.lat.1738
- Reg.lat.1758
- Reg.lat.1762
- Reg.lat.1773
- Reg.lat.1801
- Reg.lat.1803
- Reg.lat.1805
- Reg.lat.1806
- Reg.lat.1809
- Reg.lat.1818
- Reg.lat.1824
- Reg.lat.1825
- Reg.lat.1830
- Reg.lat.1832
- Reg.lat.1834
- Reg.lat.1837
- Reg.lat.1840
- Reg.lat.1841
- Reg.lat.1845
- Reg.lat.1848
- Reg.lat.1849
- Reg.lat.1852
- Reg.lat.1853
- Reg.lat.1863
- Reg.lat.1867
- Reg.lat.1870
- Reg.lat.1875
- Reg.lat.1884
- Reg.lat.1894
- Reg.lat.1909
- Reg.lat.1910
- Reg.lat.1911
- Reg.lat.1914
- Reg.lat.1958
- Reg.lat.1964
- Reg.lat.1970
- Reg.lat.1971
- Reg.lat.1973
- Reg.lat.1987
- Reg.lat.2000
- Reg.lat.2001
- Reg.lat.2018
- Reg.lat.2021, with Girolamo Mei, Letter to Vincenzo Galilei
- Reg.lat.2023
- Reg.lat.2043
- Reg.lat.2049
- Reg.lat.2052
- Reg.lat.2061
- Reg.lat.2062
- Reg.lat.2071
- Reg.lat.2077, Palimpsest, Lowe CLA 1 114 and 115
- Reg.lat.2079
- Reg.lat.2082
- Reg.lat.2090
- Reg.lat.2099
- Reg.lat.2102
- Reg.lat.2103
- Reg.lat.2120
- Reg.lat.???: item missed in my haste
I would like to offer a small correction to no. 300. Raymond Klibansky did reveal the shelfmark in 1993, in his catalogue of the manuscripts of Apuleius' philosophical works, with Frank Regen, Die Handschriften der philosophischen Werke des Apuleius.
ReplyDeleteThank you, however, for mentioning this fascinating text...
Justin Stover
Thank you so much for correcting this, and my apologies that the comment was not cleared immediately to be published
Delete