A Lost Spanish Gospel Book

A fascinating story of a vanished codex is told in an article by Mariano Revilla which was published in Spain 1918-20. As far as I know, it has never appeared in English, so I have used Google Translate to create a quick English version of the first half, and have edited this slightly, cutting parts that emerged as complete gibberish. The original can be read on Archive.org in the pages of La Ciudad de Dios, which published the article in four parts: 117, 118, 120:1 and 120:2. US readers may be able to read the re-publication in book form on Google Books.

The reason for my interest will be plain to the reader. Part of the text in the Codex Ovetensis comes from the Great Stemma.

The Codex Ovetensis of the Gospels and the Bible of Valvanera

“Colligite... fragmenta, ne pereant.” (Jn, 6:12.)

Modern critics seem to completely ignore the existence of these two ancient codices, of which Ambrosio de Morales speaks with great praise in several of his writings. Did they perhaps perish in one of many unfortunate accidents that our archives and libraries have suffered, or are they hidden at the bottom of them still unexplored? The research we have done in order to clarify this point has brought us to the sad conviction that were lost in the seventeenth century, but we dare not declare it in a categorical and definitive way because the arguments that underpin our conviction, are more negative than positive and perhaps new and more lengthy investigations can give a more satisfactory and promising answer. Fortunately, our work has not been entirely barren, for we have been provided with the remarkable discovery of fragments of these two codices where least expected, to wit, in the margins of a copy of the Vulgate printed in Venice in 1478. This magnificent incunable, which by the fineness of its vellum, the precision of its typography and the daintiness of the pen illuminations which adorn it seems made for the use of a Renaissance prince, belonged to the bishop of Plasencia, Dr Pedro Ponce de León, and when he died, it was bought with many others of the same origin for the Library of the Escorial. Ambrosio de Morales, in his report on the books of the bishop to be taken to the Royal Monastery of San Lorenzo, describes the Bible as follows:

Sacred Bible. Slightly less than one hundred years old, printed on very fine parchment and with illuminations. Glosses have been placed with great diligence in the margins of this bible using a very ancient Gothic bible for the Old Testament and a different bible, of Oviedo, for the New Testament. [...]: On account of the diligence ... and taking account of the parchment and the illumination, valued at thirty ducats. Gilded margins. (1)

(1) Memoria de los libros que se deben tomar para El Real Monesterio de San Lorencio, de los que tenía el obpo de Plasencia Don pero Ponce de León (Memorandum of books to be taken to the Royal Monastery of St Lawrence formerly owned by the bishop of Plasencia, Dr Ponce de León). Ms. Esc etc.-II-15, fol. 239v.

The author of the marginal notes was that famous preacher of Philip II, the no less celebrated historian of the Dominican Order, Friar Hernando de Castillo, as he states in a foreword on folio 1 of the said Escorial Bible, which reads as follows:

"To the reader, from Ferdinandus de Castillo, O.P. Dear friend and reader, this bible has been glossed in reliance on many others, of which the great part were in manuscript form, in the [oldest?] Gothic script. One book, containing only the four Gospels, was written 700 years ago and was kindly loaned to me by the church of Oviedo. Another, of venerable antiquity, containing both the Old and New Testament, came from the reserves of the fathers of the Monastery of St Mary of Valvanera (“Benedictine” added in the margin)."

Although this asserts that Hernando de Castillo’s marginal variants were readings obtained from “many” examples, the great majority of the manuscripts consulted consist, if the truth be told, exclusively of the Codex Ovetensis of the Gospels and the Bible of Valvanera, as noted on folio 2r, and this was apparent to Ambrosio de Morales, since for the avoidance of doubt on this point, the same Father Hernando de Castillo states it strictly in the following note from folio 2v, written in his own hand by authority of Philip II:

"I, Hernando de Castillo of the Order of St Dominic, professor of sacred theology, preacher to King Philip II of Spain, made faithful inspection of all the holy Bible, placing variant readings of the New Testament in the margins sixteen years ago from two of the most ancient copies in Gothic script (on the one hand from the fathers of the Monastery of Our Lord of Valvanera, on the other hand from the church of Oviedo) carefully comparing the differences with the authentic Latin. In witness whereof I undersign the above by the authority of his Catholic majesty and this codex is hereby placed in the Royal Library, in the Royal Monastery of St Lawrence, in the month of July 1577. Signed: Hernando de Castillo."

Lacking the original manuscripts, it seemed difficult to ascertain to what extent this was a true and accurate collation of these manuscripts by de Castillo. We have, however, quite clear evidence of his fidelity and diligence including the scrupulous preservation of the original spelling. A comparison of his spellings with the marginal notes in the Gothic Codex Legionensis of the College of San Isidoro, whose text, as we shall see, belongs to the same family, passes this test favourably. Even to the extent of his exquisite calligraphy, the illustrious Dominican manifests a rare care and attention. It seems, therefore, that his work of collation guarantees all the fidelity required by modern criticism. Thanks to him we can now add a brief chapter, perhaps not lacking in interest, to the history of the Latin versions of the Bible in Spain.

Our first proposal to discover these ancient fragments was sent to the Benedictine Fathers who form the Pontifical Commission for the revision of the Vulgate so they could study them easily and use the variant readings, but without detracting from this we believed an examination would also contribute to learning, since these Spanish codices, apart from their intrinsic merit, have a value as venerable relics of our cultural roots in the heroic early days of the Reconquista. We will say, then, what we know about the origin, vicissitudes and critical value of these manuscripts and we will publish a selection of the fragments, since we cannot publish all that was preserved by de Castillo, as we had originally hoped.

I. - The Codex Ovietensis of the Gospels

a. - History of the manuscript

We know the original source and purpose of this manuscript by an instrument of donation that the author wrote at the end of the codex which de Castillo preserved with his usual fidelity on folios 2v and 3r of the Escorial incunabula described above. Here is this interesting document:

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, this book of the Gospels imbued with the sacraments and arguments was assembled by me, a useless and lowly servant of Christ by the name of Justus. I am not worthy of merit and my wrongs cannot be redressed. Through the intercession of the saints, grant unto me to be acquitted and at last be reconciled to my Lord and to be freed from the bonds of all my sins. This has been the reason for my devotion, and I ask that the present book be placed on the holy altar where my body is to be buried and where I swore to fulfill my vows of office. I ask all the priests [who read from this book] to constantly pray to Our Saviour and beseech God through whose hands I came into the world for the salvation of my soul and not to weary in it. For thus it is written: he who prays for others, God commends. But if any man in the church wills harm on others, let him [...] remain in everlasting punishment with Satan and his demons. Thus I go to my judgment before Our Lord.

Then follows a note, probably written shortly after the death of the notary Justus:

Justus, the servant of God, died in 810 of the Era on January 12.

So according to these documents, the Oviedo codex was written around the middle of the eighth century by a scribe named Justus, whose death occurred in 810 of the Hispanic Era or 772 CE and it was bequeathed to a church where he was to be buried so that priests would remember him in their prayers and offer prayers for the repose of his soul during holy mass. Use of the Hispanic Era also makes it clear that the codex is Spanish in origin, for which we will later see additional evidence. However we do not know for certain what region this was in, though perhaps it was Asturias, of which Oviedo is the capital, since it was preserved there until the sixteenth century, as evidenced by several of the documents cited and confirmed by Ambrosio de Morales. He writes thus:

"In the Library of the Church of Oviedo is ... a New Testament, which from its parchment and lettering seems notably older than the other Gothic manuscripts. In plain script at the beginning it states: “The Book of Justus.” And at the end it says: “Justus, the notary, died in DCCCL of the Hispanic Era on January 12."(1).

(1) Viage de Ambrosio de Morales, por orden del Rey D. Phelipe II, a los Reynos de León y Galicia y Principado de Asturias... Madrid, 1765, pages 93-95. Facsimile

This codex, improperly called a New Testament here, is, without doubt, the Codex Ovetensis of the Gospels described by de Castillo, as de Morales indicates in his report on the books of the Bishop of Plasencia that I have quoted cited above, although the date of death of the notary Justus reported by de Morales (DCCCL) is forty years off the date given by de Castillo (810). Clearly, one of the two made a mistake in transcription, and given the choice, we have preferred the date indicated by the latter, who studied the codex with more attention and diligence than de Morales could have done during his rapid journey through the churches of León, Galicia and Asturias. Our codex is thus a contemporary of the famous Codex Toletano, which is the oldest biblical manuscript preserved in Spain, with the exception of palimpsest fragments of a manuscript of León dating back to the sixth or seventh century.

The history of the manuscript from the sixteenth century onwards is unknown. We made repeated inquiries of the archivist of the Cathedral of Oviedo through a friend of ours and he has responded by saying that it is not to be found in the archives entrusted to him. The news is no surprise to anyone who knows the sad fate of the Library of Oviedo, of which [Manuel] Risco has said: "What I can state though it must cause severe pain to all those interested is that of the many books which existed in the church of Oviedo, only one of those which Ambrosio de Morales reported exists, and it is in reality just a mortuary of ancient deeds." (1).
(1) España Sagrada, Madrid, 1793, t. 38, pág. 115. Facsimile

Nor is there any trace of it in the Escorial, into which library a not inconsiderable number of the manuscripts of Oviedo were brought, and we have sought it in vain in modern works dealing with biblical codices or in the bibliographies of Spain, for it is either not mentioned at all or what is said by Ambrosio de Morales is simply repeated. It is therefore to be feared that it has perished, like so many other precious manuscripts from the same source. Therefore, the fragments preserved in the Escorial Library acquire a unique value.

b. - Description of the manuscript and review of its contents.

With the data provided by de Castillo and de Morales, we arrive at the following description of the manuscript of Oviedo: an 8th-century Gothic manuscript on parchment, written continuously, i.e. without regard to chapters and verses. It contained: (1) the four Gospels, (2) some prologues or notes, (3) the instrument of donation, which we have already copied. (2)
(2) "In the aforesaid book, no distinction of chapters occurs: it flows on in the manner of perpetual prayer as in the Greek-language codices of old. There is moreover prefatory matter, which we have not transcribed, since we are not concerned here with its content."

The prologue and note matter which de Castillo does convey to us is in large part, as we will see, a simple indication of the number of miracles narrated in each of the Gospels. The only matter of some interest is the prologue to the Gospel of St. Matthew and a historical note or gloss to Chapter II thereof. In this gloss the names of the Magi who came from the East to worship Jesus in Bethlehem are stated. The names given are slightly different from those found in other medieval documents. More noteworthy is the prologue, since it sets out a special system for reconciling the genealogies of Jesus Christ, according to which that in St. Luke is the genealogy of the Virgin Mary and that in St. Matthew is the genealogy of Joseph. This prologue, written in the middle of the eighth century, gives a resounding refutation of modern critics who have maintained that such a system, already rejected by St. Hilarius, not only was not supported by any other author but had not even been known of throughout the Middle Ages until Annius of Viterbo, a writer of the late XV century, proposed it. (1)
(1) See article by Prat in Dict. de la Bible, de Vigouroux, III, p. 169.

The biblical text contained in the Codex Ovetensis was that of St. Jerome's Vulgate. The Escorial fragments could serve as a basis for reconstituting it in its entirety if we could be sure that de Castillo had glossed all the places where the codex was different from the Venice edition of 1478, but since this is not established with certainty, we will refrain from such an attempt at reconstruction.

The variants that we have printed from de Castillo closely represent the interpolated readings of a Vetus Latina character which distinguish manuscripts of the Spanish family, to which the Codex Ovetensis seems to have belonged. Text scholars divide the Spanish Latin Bible into three groups as follows: the primitive, which is represented by the Codex Toletanus, from which the other two are derived: the Leonese, to which the Codex Gothicus Legionensis and the Emilianus etc., belong; and the Castilian, including the first Bible of Alcala and the Noailles Bible. Our codex cannot, in our opinion, be classified as belonging to either the Leonese or the Castilian group, for the simple reason that the Codex Ovetensis already existed before either of these recensions had been created, nor do we see any reason to support a direct mutual dependency between it and the Codex Toletanus, since there are quite numerous differences between them (1).
(1) The readings of the Codex Ovetensis which de Castillo has preserved match up with the Toletanus in 40 passages only, with the Emilianus in 38 and with the Compl. in 46.

We also collated our ancient codex with the Liber Comicus sen Lectionarias Missae (1) of the Church of Toledo and noted some remarkable agreement as well as not inconsiderable discrepancies. All this seems to prove that the Codex Ovetensis is a Spanish text, but in a recension somewhat different from that known, which can be indirectly confirmed by the preface to the St Matthew Gospel we discussed in the previous part, which is so singular that it is not to be encountered in any of the numerous manuscripts consulted by S. Berger. (2)
(1) Liber Comicus seu Lectionarius Missae, quo Toletana Ecclesia ante annos mille et ducentos utebatur. Edidit D. Germanus Morin. Maredsoli, 1893.
(2) Les Prefaces jointes aux livres de la Bible dans les manuscrits de Vulgate. Mémoire posthume de M. Samuel Berger. Paris, 1902.

In many places (at 81, if we have not miscounted), the readings of the Codex Ovetensis agree with the text edited by Wordsworth-White, which is based, as the reader knows, mainly on the AASY Northumbrian manuscripts, according to these authors, the most faithful representatives of the Vulgate of St. Jerome. When it does not agree either with the Spanish manuscripts or with the Northumbrians, it usually agrees with Colbertinus, the Corbeyensis, the Sangermanensis I and II and other Vetus Latina manuscripts. It should not be overlooked finally, that there are in the Codex Ovetensis some variations which are new, or at least very rare. These are: Mt IV, 25 et curavit omnes, XIII, 40 colligunt, XXI, 23 docentes, XXXIII, 18 debitorem, XXVII, 9 Zachariam; the omission of part of verses 55 and 56 of chapter IX of Luke (3), and so on.
(3) This omission is also noticed in the cod. Sangerm. I and in many Greek manuscripts.

As we are far from being masters of the difficult art of textual criticism, it would be temerity to deliver our opinion on the critical value of each of these readings, some of which would be judged as certain by the textual critics and others of which would be thought doubtful.

All that we intend to do here is to narrate the story and draw attention to the nature and importance of the Codex Ovetensis. We finish our brief survey with the publication of some small fragments of it which are preserved in the Escorial Bible, omitting only that which we consider of little or no use, namely those readings that deviate from the Venice edition of 1478 (which was the base text for the collation by de Castillo) but concord with the Clementine Vulgate.

Variations and variant readings in the Codex Ovetensis

Gospel of Matthew
1. Sicut Lucas eua~gelista per Nathan marie origine~ ducit: ita et Matheus eua~gelista per Salomone~ Joseph origine~ demo~strauit idest, ex tribu Juda: vt appareat eos de vna tribu exire, et sic ad xp~m secu~du~ carne~ peruenire, vt co~pleatur quod scriptu~ est: vicit Leo de tribu Juda radix Dauid. Leo ex Salomone: radix ex Nathan.
2. Sunt in hoc libro curati. 23. signa quinque, exceptis his quae. 12. discipuli a dn~o missi in locis fecere diuersis.
3. Nomina Magorum Bater, Tagarma et Melchi.

Gospel of Mark
In hoc libro sunt curati 18. Signa quinque ex ea quae missi a dno discipuli in diuersis locis fecerunt.

Gospel of Luke
In hoc libro sunt curati. 23. signa tria ex ea quae a domino missi discipuli eius seu duodecim in locis fecere diuersis:

Gospel of John
In hoc libro sunt virtutes quatuor signa quatuor.

[Revilla gives several columns of variants, mostly single words, which the reader can easily consult in the Archive.org edition, as no Spanish is required to understand them. The additions appear with the notation + (= addit) and omissions with - (= omittit). Revilla adds that sometimes, for clarity, he also quotes in brackets the corresponding reading from the Clementine Vulgate and precedes this with the letter l (= loco). The remainder of his article is concerned solely with the Valvanera Bible and is not translated here. I would appreciate readers offering any improvements to the above translation by way of the comment box below.]

A 1990 note on Hernando de Castillo OP (-1593), giving this and further literature, can be found in Klaus Reinhardt's Bibelkommentare spanischer Autoren (1500-1700). De Castillo also played a key role as a royal minister and influenced the Inquisition. This is discussed in Spanish political histories, for example in a book by Bruce Taylor, Structures of reform: the Mercedarian Order in the Spanish Golden Age. I have used the name spelling de Castillo, rather than del Castillo, since this seems to be more common. Reinhardt suggests the lost book should be called the Codex Ovetensis secundus, and this matches Ayuso's coding, which calls it Ov2. I remain unsure what the primary Codex Ovetensis is, but it seems this may be the inventory of deeds mentioned by Manuel Risco, which survived at the Escorial.

The story of the bishop of Plasencia and his library is told by Antolín, and an abstract of Escorial &-II-1 may possibly be in Catálogo de los Manuscritos Castellanos de la Real Biblioteca de el Escorial [RBE, Catálogo], 3 vols. (San Lorenzo de el Escorial, 1929) (try 272-74). See the RBE's own introduction as well.

Mariano Revilla Rico (1887-1936), incidentally, was shot during the Spanish Civil War, and seems to have later been beatified as a martyr by the Catholic Church of Spain.

Ordo Annorum Mundi

A new page, dealing with the Ordo Annorum Mundi, has now been placed on the Macro-Typography website. It seems to me that the OAM may be a piece of writing by the Great Stemma's author, but I am still looking for the killer evidence. The OAM seems to appear only in Iberian-origin manuscripts, but has achieved wider diffusion through its incorporation in the Commentary on the Apocalypse of Beatus of Liebana.

Note added in August 2012: No killer evidence found. It seems more than likely that the Ordo Annorum Mundi is not by the Great Stemma author, who probably worked from a chronology drafted by Hippolytus of Rome. However the OAM's history seems intimately entwined with that of the diagram. It could well be the work of someone who revised and altered the diagram at a later stage, altering it to reflect a chronology of world history computed by Eusebius of Caesarea. Professor José Carlos Martín of the University of Salamanca will soon be issuing an editio princeps of the Ordo Annorum Mundi, and we are keenly awaiting this important publication.

The Vetus Latina Hispana of Ayuso

In 1953, Teófilo Ayuso Marazuela published the first volume of his Vetus Latina Hispana. It was an ambitious project, presumably with government funding, to recover the bible texts that circulated in Iberia before the introduction of Jerome's Vulgate. It was in direct rivalry with the Vetus Latina that was being reconstructed at the Abbey of Beuron in Germany, and it was awarded a prize (marked on the title page) in the name of Spanish dictator Francisco Franco.

Ayuso devised his own numbering system for the codices and other manuscripts he used. The numbers seem to have fallen completely out of use, but are still essential in reading scholarly Spanish articles of the period, in particular Ayuso's own writing, about biblical manuscripts. Since the numbers seem to be nowhere on the internet, I am tabulating them online in the hope they can be of service to modern scholars.

The left column comprises the VLH or Ayuso numbers themselves, followed by the abbreviations commonly used and the sequence numbers for each manuscript of the same provenance. For example, Leg² or Legionense² is the Codex gothicus. Burgense¹ is the Burgos Bible, also called Biblia de San Pedro de Cardena. The last column lists the (1953) locations of the manuscripts.

1	Guelf		Vaticano -Guelferbitano	Vaticano
2	Tur		Turonense	Paris
3	Fragm. To		Fragmentos toledanos	Toledo
4	Freís		Fragmentos de Freising	München
5	Palimps		Palimpsesto de León	León
6	Ottob		Ottoboniano	Vaticano
7	Lugd	1	Lugdunense	Lyon
8	Lugd	2	Lugdunense	Paris
9	Escu	1	Eseurialense	El Escorial
10	Ov	1	Ovetense (Desaparecido)	Oviedo
11	Luxeuil		Leccionario de Luxeuil	Paris
12	Ov	2	Ovetense (Desaparecido)	Oviedo. Escorial
13	Cav		Cavense	Cava
14	Cav dpdo		Cavense duplicado	Vaticano
15	To	1	Toledano	Madrid
16	To dpdo		Toledano duplicado	Vaticano
17	Co	1	Complutense	Madrid
18	Co	2	Complutense	Madrid
19	Leg	1	Legionense	León
20	On		Oniense	Salamanca
21	Leg	2	Legionense	León
22	Leg dpdo		Legionense duplicado	Vaticano
23	Leg	3	Legionense supuesto (Desaparecido)	León
24	Emil	1	Emilianense	Madrid
25	Burg	1	Burgense	Burgos
26	Valv		Valvanerense (Desaparecido)	Escorial
27	To	2	Toledano	Toledo
28	Pin		Pinatense	Madrid
29	Moz		Breviario Mozárabe	Madrid
30	Psalt	1	Salterio	Madrid
31	Psalt	2	Salterio	Madrid
32	Psalt	3	Salterio	Madrid
33	Psalt	4	Salterio	London
34	Psalt	5	Salterio	Nogent-sur-Marne
35	Psalt	6	Salterio	Escorial
36	Psalt	7	Salterio	Madrid
37	Psalt	8	Salterio	Santiago
38	Cant		Liber Canticorum	Madrid
39	Com	1	Liber Commicus	Toledo
40	Com	2	Liber Commicus	París
41	Com	3	Liber Commicus	León
42	Com	4	Liber Commicus	Madrid
43	Seg	1	Seguntino	Sigüenza
44	Esc	2	Escurialense	El Escorial
45	Tolos	1	Tolosano	Toulouse
46	Tolos	2	Tolosano	Toulouse
46*	Esc		Escurialense Misceláneo (not a bible)	El Escorial
47	Lugd	3	Lugdunense	Lyon
48	Teod		Teodulfiano	Paris
49	Anic		Aniciense	Le Puy
50	Bern		Bernense	Bern
51	Hub		Hubertiano	London
52	Sang		Sangermanense	Paris
53	Sang		Sangermanense	Paris
54	Sang		Sangermanense	Paris
55	Riq		Saint Riquier	Paris
56	Laud		Laudiano	Oxford
57	Mon		Monacense	München
58	Aur		Aureo	Escorial
59	Cas	1	Casinense	Monte Cassino
60	Cas	2	Casinense	Monte Cassino
61	Cas	3	Casinense	Monte Cassino
62	Cas	4	Casinense	Monte Cassino
63	To	3	Toledano	Toledo
64	Matr	2	Matritense	Madrid
65	Matr	3	Matritense	Madrid
66	Matr	4	Matritense	Madrid
67	Matr	5	Matritense	Madrid
68	Matr	6	Matritense	Madrid
69	Matr	7	Matritense	Madrid
70	Matr	8	Matritense	Madrid
71	Purp		Purpúreo (Desaparacido)	Urgel
72	Urg		Urgelense	Urgel
73	Rip		Ripollense	Vaticano
74	Roa		Rodense	Paris
75	Vic	1	Vicense	Vich
76	Vic	2	Vicense	Vich
77	Vic	3	Vicense	Vich
78	Vic	4	Vicense	Vich
79	Par	1	Parisiense	Paris
80	Par	2	Parisiense	Paris
81	Par	3	Parisiense	Paris
82	Esc	3	Escurialense	El Escorial
83	Mall		Malloricense	Palma
84	Leg	3	Legionense	León
85	Leg	4	Legionense	León
86	Leg	5	Legionense	León
87	Leg	6	Legionense	León
88	Leg	7	Legionense	León
89	Osc		Oscense	Madrid
90	Matr	9	Matritense	Madrid
91	Burg	2	Burgense	Burgos
92	Burg	3	Burgense	Burgos
93	Cal		Calagurritano	Calahorra
94	Emil	2	Emilianense	Madrid
95	Ler		llerdense	Lérida
96	Co	2	Complutenses	Madrid
97	Av		Avilense	Madrid
98	Esc	4	Escurialense	El Escorial
99	Alf		Alfonsino (Desaparacido)	Barcelona?
100	Avig		Avignoniense (Desaparcido)	Avignon?
101	Barc	1	Barcinonense	Barcelona
102	Barc	2	Barcinonense	Barcelona
103	Barc	3	Barcinonense	Barcelona
104	Barc	4	Barcinonense	Barcelona
105	Barc	5	Barcinonense	Barcelona
106	Bil	1	Bilbilitano	Calatayud
107	Bil	2	Bilbilitano	Calatayud
108	Burg	4	Burgense	Burgos
109	Burg	5	Burgense	Burgos
110	Cal		Calagurritano	Calahorra
111	Conc		Concentainense	Concentaina
112	Dar		Darocense	Daroca
113	Esc	5	Escurialense	El Escorial
114	Esc	6	Escurialense	El Escorial
115	Esc	7	Escurialense	El Escorial
116	Esc	8	Escurialense	El Escorial
117	Esc	9	Escurialense	El Escorial
118	Esc	10	Escurialense	El Escorial
119	Esc	11	Escurialense	El Escorial
120	Esc	12	Escurialense	El Escorial
121	Esc	13	Escurialense	El Escorial
122	Esc	14	Escurialense	El Escorial
123	Esc	15	Escurialense	El Escorial
124	Esc	16	Escurialense	El Escorial
125	Esc	17	Escurialense	El Escorial
126	Esc	18	Escurialense	El Escorial
127	Esc	19	Escurialense	El Escorial
128	Esc	20	Escurialense	El Escorial
129	Esc	21	Escurialense	El Escorial
130	Esc	22	Escurialense	El Escorial
131	Esc	23	Escurialense	El Escorial
132	Esc	24	Escurialense	El Escorial
133	Esc	25	Escurialense	El Escorial
134	Esc	26	Escurialense	El Escorial
135	Hisp		Hispalense	Sevilla
136	Mall	2	Malloricense	Palma
137	Mall	3	Malloricense	Palma
138	Matr	10	Matritense	Madrid
139	Matr	11	Matritense	Madrid
140	Matr	12	Matritense	Madrid
141	Matr	13	Matritense	Madrid
142	Matr	14	Matritense	Madrid
143	Matr	15	Matritense	Madrid
144	Matr	16	Matritense	Madrid
145	Matr	17	Matritense	Madrid
146	Matr	18	Matritense	Madrid
147	Matr	19	Matritense	Madrid
148	Matr	20	Matritense	Madrid
149	Matr	21	Matritense	Madrid
150	Matr	22	Matritense	Madrid
151	Matr	23	Matritense	Madrid
152	Matr	24	Matritense	Madrid
153	Matr	25	Matritense	Madrid
154	Matr	26	Matritense	Madrid
155	Matr	27	Matritense	Madrid
156	Matr	28	Matritense	Madrid
157	Matr	29	Matritense	Madrid
158	Matr	30	Matritense	Madrid
159	Matr	31	Matritense	Madrid
160	Matr	32	Matritense	Madrid
161	Matr	33	Matritense	Madrid
162	Matr	34	Matritense	Madrid
163	Matr	35	Matritense	Madrid
164	Matr	36	Matritense	Madrid
165	Matr	37	Matritense	Madrid
166	Matr	38	Matritense	Madrid
167	Oxorm		Oxomense	Burgo de Osma
168	Par	4	Parisiense	Paris
169	Plas	1	Plasentino	Plasencia
170	Plas	2	Plasentino	Plasencia
171	Salm		Salmanticense	Salamanca
172	Segov		Segoviense	Segovia
173	Segunt		Seguntino	Sigüenza
174	Ser		Serenense	Villanueva de la Serena
175	Sor		Soriano	Soria
176	Tar		Tarraconense	Tarragona
177	Tir		Tirasonense	Tarazona
178	To	4	Toledano	Toledo
179	To	5	Toledano	Toledo
180	To	6	Toledano	Toledo
181	To	7	Toledano	Toledo
182	To	8	Toledano	Toledo
183	To	9	Toledano	Toledo
184	To	10	Toledano	Toledo
185	To	11	Toledano	Toledo
186	To	12	Toledano	Toledo
187	To	13	Toledano	Toledo
188	To	14	Toledano	Toledo
189	To	15	Toledano	Toledo
190	To	16	Toledano	Toledo
191	To	17	Toledano	Toledo
192	To	18	Toledano	Toledo
193	To	19	Toledano	Toledo
194	To	20	Toledano	Toledo
195	Urg	2	Urgelitano	Urgel
196	Urg	3	Urgelitano	Urgel
197	Valent	1	Valentino	Valencia
198	Valent	2	Valentino	Valencia
199	Valent	3	Valentino	Valencia
200	Valent	4	Valentino	Valencia
201	Valv	2	Valvanerense	Valvanera
202	Vat		Vaticano	Vaticano
203	Zar	1	Zaragozano	Zaragoza
204	Zar	2	Zaragozano	Zaragoza

You are welcome to copy my list and reproduce it as you wish, though a credit would be appreciated. As far as I can assess, the list in the book can no longer be subject to copyright, and in any case I have modified it to present it here on the web.
There is one peculiarity, perhaps a lapse in attention by Ayuso. Pages 25-6 (IV. Lista de codices espanoles o de origen hispanico estudiados, numeros y siglas correspondientes) list 203 sources only, while pages 347-83 (Los manuscritos bíblicos espanoles) contain a list that is one element longer (204). The extra item in the latter list comes at position number 113, Escurialense⁵, which is inexplicably missed from the summary table, so that every item below it is displaced by one position when the two lists are compared. In the above tabulation, I have followed the numbering on pages 347-83, since this seems to be correct. Perhaps there is an errata page, or a handwritten correction, in a copy in a Spanish library, and I would be grateful to anyone willing to check this. But there is no such correction in the Hamburg State Library copy, which is kept in the city's Bergedorf stack and does not seem to have been much used down the years.
[A later note:] Ayuso's earlier articles use quite different sigla, including A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, 7-8. These are apparently the items in the Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid (lines 64-69 above). A2 for example is the Bible of San Juan de la Peña, and these are listed in the print catalog (Tomo 1) here. His earlier "Bu" is the Burgos Bible in line 25, as noted above. Ayuso renumbered the León bibles, since 3 Legionense in line 23 is a lost one, whereas the Leg3 he had referred to in 1943 was clearly the Second León Bible which is very much in continued existence. In line 12, 2 Oventense is the lost Gospel Book of Justus which I discuss in another post.

Léon Abbreviations

The great Léon bible known as the Codex Legionensis or Leg² (to distinguish it from Leg³, a copy made 100 years later, and Leg¹, also known as ....) has never been published online as far as I know. I was able to see a facsimile of it in the summer at the Prussian State Library in Berlin: it is brought to you in a suitcase-sized wooden box, and the volume would probably not be transportable as hold baggage without paying a supplement: it weighed over 20 kilograms.

In the end I decided against transcribing its version of the Great Stemma and preferred that in the Facundus Beatus. However the Léon bible is sometimes considered the greater treasure by scholars. I have just been looking at Téofilo Ayuso's 1960-61 article in Estudios Bíblicos which comprehensively describes it. Ayuso offers some useful instructions on how to read it, summing up its abbreviations and punctuation. Most of these features are applicable in the other documents in Visigothic script, and are worth reproducing here:

Nexos y Abreviaturas
No vale la pena insistir. Son los propios de la escritura de la época, sin rarezas.
Son normales los nexos y abreviaturas de at, bis, en, er, es, et, ex, nt, per, re, rtem, rum, se, ti, ter, tre.
Normalmente usa ȩ (e con cedilla) en los diptongos ae, oe: uitȩ, suȩ, quȩ, prȩdicasse, etc. A veces la omite: celum, etc. A veces la pone en falso rȩcedent, ȩgo, ȩnim. En alguna ocasión tiene et diptongo.
Ya hemos insinuado algunas abreviaturas por suspensión:
que: usq^s, neg^s, dixeruntq^s;
y la de bus: trib^s,quib^s, etc.
Igualmente ius, mus, pus, etc.: hui^s, sum^s, temp^s, y la de bis, con una especie de cedilla: noḅ.
En cuanto a las abreviaturas por apócope, en las mayúsculas suele ser una raya horizontal gruesa ( ¯¯ ) con adornos o doble suspensión; y en las minúsculas dos o tres puntos: cü ...dṡ ..., bien para la supresión de una letra uitulü, bien para la contracción aüm.
Para e' relativo (q^ve, q^vem), suele usar una v pequenita, volada.
A base de eso las abreviaturas suelen ser las ordinarias:

apsl	apostolus
aum	autem
dd	dauid
dns	dominus
ds	deus
epla	epistola
gla	gloria
gra	gratia
fr	frater
ihrslm	iherusalem
ihs	ihesus
kmi	karissimi
ms	meus
nmn	nomen
ns	noster
oms,	omnis
ppls	populus
qm	quoniam
ppr	propter
pprea	propterea
scdm	secundum
sps	spiritus
scs	sanctus
srl	srahel
usa	uestra
xps	christus

Signos de puntuación
Valen todas las observaciones que hicimos sobre la Biblia de Oña.
Usa con bastante regularidad los signos correspondientes al incisum o subdistinctio, media distinctio y ultima distinctio o punto final. Estos signos son ^·(punto alto); · (punto en medio de linea); y ., o de .' (punto bajo, seguido de una comita un poco mayor, ya sea al mismo nivel, ya un poco mas elevada). Como es sabido, indican, poco más o menos, lo que nuestra coma, punto y coma, dos puntos y punto final.
[A note of explanation here: this is the medieval system of punctuation as developed by Aristophanes of Byzantium which we generally ignore in transcriptions, since it does not match current notions of grammatical punctuation:
media distincto: midlevel pause (≈ comma)
subdistincto: pause (≈ semicolon)
distincto: long pause (≈ period)]
Después de ., o de .' suele seguir mayúscula. Unas veces a ren­glón seguido, otras comenzando la linea siguiente.
Usa, como dijimos, una cedilla para expresar los diptongos ae, oe,
Usa un puntito sobre 'a y levantada.
Usa corrientemente un signo de interrogación, chie consiste en una pequeña espiral o rayita quebrada, sobre et espacio que signe a la última letra.
Para indicar la división de capitulos, bien en et margen, bien en medio de linea, usa un ángulo recto, alto, dentro del cual incluye los números romanos correspondientes: I, II, etc.

Old Vellum and Bookselling

A learned article by Richard Rouse and Charles McNelis appeared a decade ago. North African literary activity is subtitled "A Cyprian fragment, the stichometric lists and a Donatist compendium" and incredibly it rounds up four utterly diverse topics in one discussion: the unlikely discovery of a very worn piece of old vellum in a codex binding, Late Antique bookselling, a North African Christian sect and how 19th-century philologists could not see the wood for the trees. The article comes to the conclusion that a lot of the Late Antique bible-handbook and chronographic material we now have was saved for posterity in a single compendium.
Rouse, who is now emeritus professor at UCLA, and McNelis, now associate professor at Georgetown University, suggest a way by which the Great Stemma (that is not of course their name for it) might derive from the Liber Genealogus. It would be nice if this fitted the facts, but we have three signal differences between these works:

• they use different versions of the Table of Nations from Genesis 10
• they use different chronologies of the kings of Rome
• the Great Stemma has none of the Liber's etymological content

Of course the overall structure of the documents is similar, and both evince a fascination with the Twelve Minor Prophets of the Old Testament. It looks as if the latter topic is going to need some further research...

Burgos Exhibition

With interest, I see that an exhibition of a selection of key Genealogies of Christ is currently under way at Burgos in northern Spain (link). From October 2009 till June 2010, a series of facimiles of Beatus manuscripts will be displayed. The centrepiece is of course the Burgos Bible. Also fascinating is that the San Millán de la Cogolla bible and another Madrid genealogy are now online in complete, high-quality digital editions.