《Ms. Bodley 271 Establishing the Anselmian Canon》.pdf

Ms. Bodley 271: Establishing the Anselmian Canon? Ian Logan Blackfriars Hall, Oxford University This paper addresses the role and importance of Ms. Bodley 271. It reviews the case presented by Dom F.S. Schmitt for the authorship and dating of this manuscript and the objections presented by R.W. Southern. Following detaile d palaeographical analysis of the hands of the scribes involved in the manuscripts production, I identify the main scribe, and through a comparison with his other known works suggest a date for his involvement. In conclusion, I argue that this manuscript marked an attempt to produce a definitive canon of Anselm’s works, in which Anselm himself may have been involved. Introduction1 In the last century, Dom A. Wilmart and Dom F.S. Schmitt successfully led the attempt to distinguish the authentic works of St. Anselm of Canterbury from later accretions.2 Alongside and following on from this pioneering work, Schmitt produced his critical edition of the works of Anselm.3 For Schmitt, a particularly important manuscript was a document originally from the library of Christ Church Priory, Canterbury, now residing in the Bodleian Library in Oxford: Ms. 4 Bodley 271 (SC1938), which following Schmitt I shall refer to as B. Schmitt’s understanding of the importance of B was based on his identification of its main scribe as Thidricus, the recipient of two extant letters from Anselm, which led him to believe that Anselm was actively involved in its production in 1104. R.W. Southern challenged Schmitt’s view,5