An Introduction to the 'Glossa Ordinaria' as Medieval Hypertext

An Introduction to the 'Glossa Ordinaria' as Medieval Hypertext

DAVID A. SALOMON
Copyright Date: 2012
Edition: 1
https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qhhwg
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    An Introduction to the 'Glossa Ordinaria' as Medieval Hypertext
    Book Description:

    A primer and study of the Glossa Ordinaria, the medieval glossed Bible first printed in 1480/81.

    eISBN: 978-0-7083-2495-0
    Subjects: Religion

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-iv)
  2. Table of Contents
    (pp. v-vi)
  3. Series Editors’ Preface
    (pp. vii-viii)
  4. List of Illustrations
    (pp. ix-x)
  5. Acknowledgements
    (pp. xi-xii)
  6. Introduction
    (pp. 1-5)

    Today’s readers take certain things for granted. Book titles are explanatory. Authors’ names are clearly stated on title pages, as are publishers’. Books are arranged in a certain order, clearly noted by page numbers printed somewhere on a given page. Books are often arranged by chapter, thus dividing the larger body of text into smaller, more digestible sections. Footnotes or endnotes provide bibliographical references and, on occasion, further elaboration, but the difference between the footnotes or endnotes and what is called ‘the main text’ is rarely difficult to perceive.

    However, some of the earliest printed texts defy these assumptions. Many...

  7. 1 The Glossing Tradition and the Glossa Ordinaria
    (pp. 6-32)

    As Beryl Smalley writes, ‘The “prehistory” of the Gloss presents many difficulties.’¹ In hisHistoire de la Vulgate, Samuel Berger wrote in 1893 ‘L’histoire de cette volumineuse compilation ne peut être écrite aujourd’hui’ (‘The history of this great compilation has yet to be written’).² And more than a century later, and some 800 years since its writing began, we still know precious little about how the text that came to be called theGlossa Ordinariawas compiled. What manuscripts contributed, ultimately, to the first printed edition of 1480/1? What person or persons were responsible for the compilation, if not the...

  8. 2 History, the Text, and the History of the Text
    (pp. 33-62)

    The history of theGlossa Ordinariais still masked in heavy smoke. Although some scholars have begun to clear the smoke over the last thirty years, what they have then encountered, more often than not, is only thick fog below the smoke. When the Froehlich- and Gibson- edited facsimile edition first appeared in 1992, it seemed that contemporary work on theGlossa Ordinariacould truly begin. However, precious little progress has actually been made. Apart from Beryl Smalley’s work,¹ Theresa Gross-Diaz’s fine work on Gilbert of Poitiers,² Mary Dove’s edition of theGlossa OrdinariaSong of Songs,³ and several helpful...

  9. 3 Reading, Theory, and Reading Theory
    (pp. 63-81)

    Because so much of our understanding of theGlossa Ordinariahinges on how the text may have been read, it is important for us to understand the nature of reading theory for readers of the text in the Middle Ages. While we have ample evidence for the content of their reading, few medieval writers actually tell us much about the ways in which texts were read. Did they read standing or sitting, did they annotate, did they consciously memorize? What we today call ‘reading theory’ is confined to explications of the ancients or modern observations of how writers wrote about...

  10. 4 Reading the Glossa Ordinaria: Genesis 1:1, 3:1 and John 1:1
    (pp. 82-92)

    The preface to Genesis in theGlossa Ordinariaalso serves as a general preface for the entire work. In actuality, it is a cobbled-together collection – almost a collage, a postmodern pastiche – of passages, mostly from Augustine, held together with the glue of an assembler, a redactor or, as Augustine might call him, acogitator, that is, one who re-collects memories.¹ If, as Cicero and Quintilian first suggest, the memory is a landscape, a forest, then the reader searches for the various sites of information (loci) in that landscape. The analogous space of the page affords us the opportunity...

  11. 5 The Glossa Ordinaria and Hypertext
    (pp. 93-99)

    The few verses reviewed in the previous chapter reflect the ethos of the entire text, an invitation – almost oddly – to leave the text, to explore beyond the margins. In this sense, theGlossa Ordinariaoperates as a medieval version of modern hypertext. Ted Nelson, often credited with coining the term ‘hypertext’, writes almost exclusively of the concept in the context of the growing world of electronic media in the 1960s. However, other theorists, most recently including literary theorists such as George P. Landow, cultural critics such as Henri Lefebvre and Michel de Certeau, and psychologists such as Rand...

  12. Notes
    (pp. 100-114)
  13. Bibliography
    (pp. 115-126)
  14. Index
    (pp. 127-128)