{"id":5053,"date":"2015-08-10T03:34:09","date_gmt":"2015-08-10T03:34:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/?p=5053"},"modified":"2025-11-16T20:06:04","modified_gmt":"2025-11-16T20:06:04","slug":"a-new-leaf-from-otto-ege-manuscript-61","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/a-new-leaf-from-otto-ege-manuscript-61\/","title":{"rendered":"A New Leaf from &#8216;Otto Ege Manuscript 61&#8217;"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_5360\" style=\"width: 218px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-leaf-branded-for-Web.png\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5360\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5360 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-leaf-branded-for-Web-208x300.png\" alt=\"Budny Handlist 7. Ezekiel Leaf Verso with the end of Chapter 10 and the beginning of Chapter 11. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"208\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-leaf-branded-for-Web-208x300.png 208w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-leaf-branded-for-Web-104x150.png 104w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-leaf-branded-for-Web.png 377w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 208px) 100vw, 208px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5360\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Ezekiel Leaf Verso<\/p><\/div>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center;\">Part of Ezekiel from a<br \/>\n32-Line Latin Vulgate Pocket Bible from France<\/h2>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">Budny <span style=\"color: #3366ff;\"><strong>Handlist 7<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">Single leaf from a pocket-sized Bible<br \/>\nCirca 186 \u00d7 126 mm &lt;written area circa 119 \u00d7 81 mm&gt;<br \/>\nDouble columns of 32 lines in Gothic Bookhand, with embellishments in red, blue, and purple pigment<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">Pencil inscription &#8216;1310 French Bible&#8217; at the bottom of the recto<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">Formerly part of <strong>Ege Manuscript 61<\/strong> (<a href=\"http:\/\/mssprovenance.blogspot.com\/2014\/03\/otto-eges-manuscripts-two-recent.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Gwara, <em>Handlist<\/em><\/a> 61)<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">Southern France, circa 1325<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>[<em>Posted on 10 August 2015, with updates.\u00a0 The updates include, with permission, images from the leaf also in Exekiel from the same manuscript in Ege&#8217;s Portfolio, now at the University of Pennsylvania, and shown in a post on <a href=\"http:\/\/upennmanuscripts.tumblr.com\/post\/126531145708\/otto-eges-original-leaves-from-famous-bibles: target=\">Penn Libraries Manuscripts<\/a>, with photographs by Dot Porter.\u00a0 The photographs of the New Leaf are \u00a9 Mildred Budny.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>More recently, the announcement that (after earlier sales from that collection), the residue of manuscript materials in the possession of Otto F. Ege&#8217;s family has been purchased by the <a href=\"http:\/\/beinecke.library.yale.edu\/about\/news\/beinecke-library-acquires-%E2%80%98treasure-trove%E2%80%99-medieval-manuscripts-otto-ege\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" class=\"broken_link\">Beinecke Library<\/a> at Yale University encourages the anticipation of more revelations about surviving leaves from the dispersed manuscripts, perhaps also this one.<\/em><\/p>\n<p>Now see a follow-up for this blogpost, as research advances:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/more-discoveries-for-otto-ege-manuscript-61\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">More Discoveries for Otto Ege Manuscript 61\/<\/a> ]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Sums It Up<\/h3>\n<p>Continuing our series on &#8216;Manuscript Fragments&#8217;, we focus on another leaf dispersed through the efforts of <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Otto_Ege\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Otto F. Ege<\/a> (1888\u20131951) in assembling and distributing Portfolios of specimen leaves extracted from original one-of-a-kind manuscript books. Previously we considered the issues of Ege&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/lost-and-foundlings\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Lost and Foundlings<\/a>, and then reported the discoveries of a New Leaf from <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/a-new-leaf-from-otto-ege-manuscript-41\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ege Manuscript 41<\/a> and from <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/a-new-leaf-from-otto-ege-manuscript-8\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ege Manuscript 8<\/a>.\u00a0 [Followed by the report of a New Leaf from <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/a-new-leaf-from-otto-ege-manuscript-14\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ege Manuscript 14<\/a>.] Different sizes, different texts, same predicament.<\/p>\n<p>Set &#8216;free&#8217; from their original manuscript homes (Boo Hoo!), they have had to roam on their own.\u00a0 Cut out and cast out.<\/p>\n<h3>Pocket-Sized Book, Ready to Roam<\/h3>\n<p>Now we turn to one of Ege&#8217;s Bible manuscripts.\u00a0 The <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Bible\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Bible<\/a> in various forms and languages, including full Christian Bibles with both Old and New Testaments, was one of his specialties.\u00a0 That is clear from the number of them that he assembled, dis-assembled, and re-distributed, in bits and pieces.<\/p>\n<p>This time, the New Leaf from the Book of Ezekiel in the Latin <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Vulgate\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Vulgate Version<\/a> formerly belonged to a small-format Bible in a genre which emerged in the widespread production of <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20160910031010\/http:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1561019\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">&#8216;pocket Bibles&#8217; in the 13th century<\/a>. The &#8216;miniaturization&#8217; of Bible manuscripts in Western Europe during this period represents a fascinating development for the book production of an essential text of considerable length for people on the move. Preachers, scholars, readers included. Ready to roam, remember?<\/p>\n<p>There are many specialized studies about the genre.\u00a0 An illustrated guide to its development and some of its variations can be found in a chapter on <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20160910031010\/http:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1561019\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13th-century Portable Bibles<\/a>. To keep it slim (as if!), you can find, for example, a precise, dedicated study about what their sizes and lines per-page \u2014 anyway considering the survivors \u2014 could mean for understanding their significant transmission patterns, according to the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/3700010\/The_miniaturisation_of_Bible_manuscripts_in_the_13th_century._A_comparative_study\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">evidence<\/a> (taking a sample of 357 Bibles personally seen, out of more than 1,500 survivors).<\/p>\n<p>The majority originated from France, although other regions contributed to the total.\u00a0 Most portable Bibles were produced in Paris, Southern England, and Northern Italy.\u00a0 Production was intense, and standardized to various extents, which could increase output.\u00a0 The rush was on.\u00a0 Everybody or Anybody needed such a book.<\/p>\n<h3>Sizing It Up<\/h3>\n<p>In this case, the book size (overall dimensions\u00a0\u2014 that is, height plus width\u00a0\u2014 of 312 mm), the number of lines per page (32), the written area (circa 120 \u00d7 81 mm in double columns), and the &#8216;unit of ruling&#8217; for the average height of a line area (circa 3,40 mm) fall variably within the main standards of measurements tabulated for the genre.\u00a0 Almost all cases have double columns (although a very few, as in less than a dozen surveyed, have single columns).\u00a0 Most have larger sizes (up to 450 mm overall dimensions), more lines per page (into the 50s!), a larger written area, and a smaller unit of ruling (an average of 2.64 mm).<\/p>\n<p>So, all variants considered, this specific dispersed manuscript seems to be a rather unusual book even among its surviving peers.\u00a0 Such factors may point to a rather early phase or a rather late phase in the development, to an out-of-the-way place of production, outside the mainstream, or to a specific set of choices which represent an approach that could at the time have had wider representation than the recognized survivors demonstrate.\u00a0 Or a combination thereof.<\/p>\n<p>The proposed assignment currently of &#8216;Southern France, circa 1325&#8217; as the region and date-range for the production of <a href=\"http:\/\/mssprovenance.blogspot.com\/2014\/03\/otto-eges-manuscripts-two-recent.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ege Manuscript<\/a> 61, to which this leaf belonged, seems to fit with such criteria.\u00a0 Of course, that assignment has the benefit of more information about the original manuscript than this single leaf alone might contain.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<h3>Easy Pick Up and Go<\/h3>\n<p>Designed for portability, these compact &#8216;pocket&#8217; books could cover the complete text of the Bible in very small format through the use of especially thin and lightweight leaves, as well as tiny script which compacts a maximum amount of text onto the page. Some copies, moreover, packed <a href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/media\/set\/?set=a.682987291717567.1073741846.200441529972148&amp;type=3\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" class=\"broken_link\">glosses<\/a>, or comments and explanations, into the margins, but this New Leaf remains &#8216;clean&#8217; with clear space around the columns of the Bible text, apart from the running titles which orient the reader through its different Books.<\/p>\n<p>Maybe glosses or comments were intended, to be entered, whether in the original production or as part of the processes of use.\u00a0 Anyway, here it didn&#8217;t happen.<\/p>\n<p>Pristine and untouched.\u00a0 Er, apart from the signs of wear on several parts of the leaf, recto and verso, where parts of the original text have rubbed or faded away.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes the packing of text-to-page in a Pocket Bible required dividing the small, but thick, book into more than one handy volume.\u00a0 Here, too, apparently, these divisions may have pertained.\u00a0 (Spoiler Alert.)<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, let&#8217;s see what we can see when we look at the leaf itself.<\/p>\n<h3>Taking it <em>EZE<\/em><\/h3>\n<div id=\"attachment_5197\" style=\"width: 310px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-running-title-EZE.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5197\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5197 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-running-title-EZE-300x191.jpg\" alt=\"Running title for EZE on the verso of the Ezekiel leaf from 'Ege Manuscript 61'. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"300\" height=\"191\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-running-title-EZE-300x191.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-running-title-EZE-150x96.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-running-title-EZE-1024x654.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-running-title-EZE-80x50.jpg 80w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5197\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">&#8216;EZE&#8217; portion of the running title<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"attachment_5198\" style=\"width: 310px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-CHI.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5198\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-5198\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-CHI-300x191.jpg\" alt=\"Detail of the running title on the recto of the Ezechiel Leaf from 'Ege Manuscript 61'. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"300\" height=\"191\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-CHI-300x191.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-CHI-150x96.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-CHI-1024x654.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-CHI-80x50.jpg 80w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5198\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">CHI portion of the running title<\/p><\/div>\n<p>With this New Leaf, simply looking it, already at first glance, we can recognize its text directly as part of <em>EZE<\/em>\/<em>CHI<\/em>[<em>EL<\/em>].\u00a0 That is, from the Book of <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Ezekiel\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ezekiel<\/a>, in the <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Vulgate\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Latin Vulgate version<\/a>, as customary for the genre of Pocket Bibles in the 13th century and beyond.<\/p>\n<p>EZE-PEAZY.\u00a0 (Heh, heh.)\u00a0 Especially so when I show you the parts in the correct textual order, only not how they appear on the leaf itself, left to its own devices.<\/p>\n<p>If we were stuck with this Leaf Alone, Roam Alone, we would have to step back from the leaf itself (recto and verso) to re-imagine the former book to which it belonged.\u00a0 In that case, we need to read it Back to Front.<\/p>\n<p>Happily, we can have it both ways.\u00a0 I offer the views of both parts of the title, stretched or spaced across the pages, to show how they logically should read.<\/p>\n<p>You see, the spacing of the running title in halves respectively on the recto and verso of the individual leaf presupposes the full title to be visible across an opening of the little book, with <em>EZE<\/em> on the verso of the preceding leaf and <em>CHI<\/em> on this one, and the inverse on the next opening. Thus the running titles would form neatly matching pairs between consecutive leaves, in a continuing chain of command which employs three letters apiece for its series of linked messages, and which leaves the completion of the name of the Book and its Prophet up to the reader.\u00a0 Who would be Us.<\/p>\n<h3>Both Sides of the Picture<\/h3>\n<p>Now for the leaf as a whole.<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_5098\" style=\"width: 644px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web.png\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5098\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5098 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web.png\" alt=\"Recto of Ezekiel Leaf from 'Ege Manuscript 61'.. Photography \u00a9 Mildred Budny\" width=\"634\" height=\"612\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web.png 634w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web-150x145.png 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web-300x290.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 634px) 100vw, 634px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5098\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Budny Handlist 7, Ezekiel Leaf recto<\/p><\/div>\n<div id=\"attachment_5099\" style=\"width: 648px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web.png\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5099\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5099 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web.png\" alt=\"Verso of Ezekiel. Photography \u00a9 Mildred Budny\" width=\"638\" height=\"612\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web.png 638w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web-150x144.png 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-color-guide-branded-for-Web-300x288.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 638px) 100vw, 638px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5099\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Ezekiel Leaf verso<\/p><\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>This lovely little leaf places its whitish flesh side of the animal skin on the recto, and the yellowed hair side on the verso.\u00a0 Double columns (&#8216;a&#8217; and &#8216;b&#8217;) on each page contain 32 lines of script. In terms of the modern system of Bible chapters-and-verse, the text begins within Ezekiel 10:3 ([<em>ingrederetur<\/em> presumably on the previous page] \/ <em>uir et nubes impleuit<\/em>), completes that Chapter in column a on the verso, opens the next chapter straightaway, and breaks off within 11:15 (<em>et omnis domus<\/em> \/ [<em>israhel <\/em>presumably on the next page]).<\/p>\n<p>The Bible text is packed into the lines of text as far as the column allows, and then some, with bits of overspread, sort of like the overspread sides of a muffin top, here and there.\u00a0 That is, the text is made to conform with <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Typographic_alignment\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">right- as well as left-justification<\/a>. Sort of.<\/p>\n<p>What we ourselves think about right-justification, anyway as it appears in print, is stated in our <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/style-manifesto\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Style Manifesto<\/a>.\u00a0 That explains why our website does not use that feature, by design.\u00a0 Here, however, on the New Leaf, it&#8217;s fine.\u00a0 Hey, it&#8217;s a manuscript!<\/p>\n<p>Besides, its right-justification does not produce rigid vertical edges or odd rivers of blank spaces as in many printed texts.\u00a0 The compacted text, including many abbreviations, aims to cover as much text as possible without sacrificing legibility.\u00a0 The double columns likewise allow for increased density of text on a single page without comprising its legibility.\u00a0 Form and function co-ordinate here, as is appropriate for good book-design.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h3>Colorized<\/h3>\n<div id=\"attachment_5338\" style=\"width: 310px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-Blk-to-E-initiali.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5338\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5338 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-Blk-to-E-initiali-300x268.jpg\" alt=\"Exekiel Chapter XI begins. Photography \u00a9 Mildred Budny\" width=\"300\" height=\"268\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-Blk-to-E-initiali-300x268.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-Blk-to-E-initiali-150x134.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/Ezekiel-verso-Blk-to-E-initiali.jpg 529w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5338\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">E for &#8216;Et&#8217; (&#8216;And&#8217;)<\/p><\/div>\n<p>Some elements are polychrome, as a contrast with the standard brown ink of the main text.\u00a0 Already mentioned are the emphatic running titles, with their bubbly flourishes.\u00a0 Their letters alternate between red and blue pigment, the blue letters in their center have pen-flourishes in red to form decorative frames and extend upward and downward in undulating loops and curls.\u00a0 To the lower left of EZE extends a separate pen-flourish in red forming a descending curve into a long rising diagonal tail over column a, with expanded extensions from the downward curve into the upper part of the intercolumn. Graceful and fanciful.\u00a0 Clearly professional and proficient.<\/p>\n<p>The opening for Ezekiel Chapter XI offers a 2-line indented initial <em>E<\/em> in red pigment (lines v12\u201313), embellished with frilly infill and extensions of elaborate purple penwork. The chapter number <em>XI <\/em>squeezes\u00a0into the truncated first line of the Chapter text, evidently indented to contain it.<\/p>\n<p>That prominent numeral resembles the polychrome form and decoration of the running title, similarly with red penwork for the filling of its blue element (<em>X<\/em>). Within the text, the different sections follow the previous sections in continuous lines of script.\u00a0 Their opening letters have a wash of red pigment, as a helpful finding aid.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-vertical-bar-with-brand.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"alignleft wp-image-5202 size-large\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-vertical-bar-with-brand-256x1024.jpg\" alt=\"The decorated vertical bar for the Chapter Initial on the verso of the Ezekiel Leaf of 'Ege Manuscript 61'. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"256\" height=\"1024\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-vertical-bar-with-brand-256x1024.jpg 256w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-vertical-bar-with-brand-75x300.jpg 75w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-vertical-bar-with-brand.jpg 2040w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 256px) 100vw, 256px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_5949\" style=\"width: 235px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso5_540.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5949\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5949 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso5_540-225x300.jpg\" alt=\"Detail of the verso of the Exekiel Leaf in the University of Pennsylvania, with the opening of Chapter 36 and its decorated initial. Reproduced by permission\" width=\"225\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso5_540-225x300.jpg 225w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso5_540-113x150.jpg 113w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso5_540.jpg 540w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 225px) 100vw, 225px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5949\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Detail of the verso of the Exekiel Leaf in the University of Pennsylvania. Reproduced by permission<\/p><\/div>\n<p>The left-hand edge of the column has a vertical frame of interlocking J-bars which alternate between blue and red pigment.\u00a0 There are 4 J-bars above the initial and 7 below.\u00a0\u00a0 These sets stand outside a pair of vertical red lines with hooked tips which curve outward from above and below the Chapter initial, run more-or-less vertically alongside the column, and curve outward opposite the top and bottom of the column.\u00a0 Segments of purple penwork extend from the cusp between those hooks and the column to reach far into the upper and lower margins, as well as, at the top, into the inner margin.<\/p>\n<p>With their more-or-less vertical stems toward the column, the J-bars turn their feet or heads outward, either as feet above the initial or as heads below it.\u00a0 This alignment forms a clear bracketed distinction between the two chapters which respectively come to an end and commence in this column.<\/p>\n<h3>Numbered<\/h3>\n<p>As characteristic for many 13th-century portable Bibles, this case adopts the standard version of <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">chapter numbers<\/a> familiar to us in modern Bibles.\u00a0 (The adoption of the verses as we know them occurred later, only by the early modern period.) This system evolved by the early 13th century, apparently in Paris in the first quarter of the century, in response to the proliferation of scholastic commentaries in the 12th century and the continuing need to locate specific passages precisely and consistently.<\/p>\n<p>Earlier systems of numeration, such as the lists of <em>Capitula<\/em> (&#8216;Chapters&#8217;) in Bibles of the earlier Middle Ages, had their functions and adherents, but their divisions were variable, according to various forms, sometimes applied inconsistently within a single manuscript, and moreover erratic in their transmission between manuscripts.\u00a0 They proved to be too cumbersome and unreliable as intensive study of the Bible continued its focus.<\/p>\n<p>The new system\u00a0\u2014 sometimes attributed to <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Stephen_Langton\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Stephen Langton<\/a>, who became Archbishop of Canterbury (1207\u20131228) after lecturing at Paris\u00a0\u2014 apparently became a standard feature in pocket Bibles by circa 1240.\u00a0 The New Leaf belongs to these New Numbers.<\/p>\n<p>Its highlighted sections within the Bible Chapters correspond in part to the modern verses, but that next system of standardized divisions belongs to another phase in the long history of the transmission and study of the Bible, in Latin and other languages, across the centuries, in manuscript and print.\u00a0 On the New Leaf, the series of sections are still unnumbered.\u00a0 But they do employ some forms of distinction, for example, in their &#8216;Capital&#8217; opening letters and the red wash within them.<\/p>\n<h3>Ege-Headed<\/h3>\n<p>Otto Ege&#8217;s printed caption for Specimen Number 4 in his Portfolio \u2014 I quote from its version in Series II at Princeton University \u2014 proclaims it to be<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\">LEAF FROM A<br \/>\nParis Manuscript Bible<br \/>\nCirca 1310 A.D.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Latin Vulgate Version written in Gothic script, seven lines to the inch, on fine vellum.\u00a0 The calligraphy and ornamentation on this page deserve close inspection.\u00a0 This form of writing is in marked contrast to the minute, much abbreviated and angular text of the following century.<\/p>\n<p>A shaded reproduction of this <a href=\"http:\/\/upennmanuscripts.tumblr.com\/post\/126531145708\/otto-eges-original-leaves-from-famous-bibles\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">caption<\/a> on a slip of paper accompanies the publication of another leaf from the Book of Ezekiel at the University of Pennsylvania.<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_5946\" style=\"width: 310px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso1_540-cropped.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5946\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5946 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso1_540-cropped-300x193.jpg\" alt=\"Ege's Caption for the Pocket Bible Leaf, from the Portfolio at the University of Pennsylvania, via http:\/\/upennmanuscripts.tumblr.com\/post\/126531145708\/otto-eges-original-leaves-from-famous-bibles. Reproduced by permission\" width=\"300\" height=\"193\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso1_540-cropped-300x193.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso1_540-cropped-150x97.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso1_540-cropped-80x50.jpg 80w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso1_540-cropped.jpg 424w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5946\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Ege&#8217;s Caption for the Pocket Bible Leaf, from the Portfolio at the University of Pennsylvania<\/p><\/div>\n<p>Otto Ege&#8217;s attribution of the manuscript, or leaves therefrom, as a &#8216;1310 French Bible&#8217; can similarly be seen in his pencil inscription at the lower front of the New Leaf.\u00a0 Traces of his characteristic gauze-like adhesive mounting tapes moreover can be seen on the outer edges of the verso of the leaf, attesting to the former position attached to a mount of some kind, turning the side or page with more decoration (and, supposedly, visual appeal) to the front, like many other characteristic <a href=\"http:\/\/mssprovenance.blogspot.com\/2013\/10\/more-on-otto-ege-and-his-mounts.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">&#8216;Ege-style&#8217; tapes and mats<\/a> on his detached leaves prepared for the Portfolios and for the distribution of some of the other leaves now known as &#8216;Rogue Leaves&#8217;, cast to the winds on their own.<\/p>\n<p>Often that arbitrary redistribution had to take place, sad to say, with very little (if any) account of their origins, of other similarly &#8216;orphaned&#8217; siblings thrust out into the world through the same processes, and of the former contexts which they once had within their original manuscripts and their former collections.\u00a0 Bad, Bad, Bad.<\/p>\n<p>Sometimes \u2014 when opportunity is found \u2014 it takes dedicated <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/a-new-leaf-from-otto-ege-manuscript-41\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">detective work<\/a> to reconstruct the former manuscript and to identify the leaves which might survive from it, at least in part. Spectacular results are already visible for the <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptroadtrip.wordpress.com\/tag\/beauvais-missal\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Beauvais Missal<\/a> (&#8216;Otto Ege Manuscript 15&#8243;).<\/p>\n<h3>A French Pocket Bible Apparently in Two Volumes<br \/>\nDivided Between Psalms and Isaiah<\/h3>\n<p>The source manuscript is, at least in part, <strong>Gwara <em>Handlist<\/em> Number 61<\/strong>.\u00a0 Detached leaves from it are distributed individually as <strong>Number 4<\/strong> within two of Ege&#8217;s early Portfolios, issued in 2 versions respectively in 1936 and 1938, with different numbers of leaves and different numbers of sets.\u00a0 Other leaves are distributed as &#8216;Rogue Leaves&#8217; in the form of leaves and\/or bifolia which have found their way into various collections, both public and private.\u00a0 Those patterns of distribution are familiar, alas, to scholars of manuscript fragments.<\/p>\n<p>Ege&#8217;s arrangements of detached leaves in portfolios exhibiting features of script, decoration, and book design across the centuries are described in an earlier <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/lost-and-foundlings\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">post<\/a>, with links to more studies and illustrations of those habits.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-bottom-penwork.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"alignright wp-image-5199 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-bottom-penwork-300x192.jpg\" alt=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/Research-Group-on-Manuscript-Evidence\/259443617456668\" width=\"300\" height=\"192\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-bottom-penwork-300x192.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-bottom-penwork-150x96.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-bottom-penwork-1024x654.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-bottom-penwork-80x50.jpg 80w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-top-penwork.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"alignleft wp-image-5203 size-medium\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-top-penwork-300x191.jpg\" alt=\"Penwork at the top of the column on the verso of the Ezekiel Leaf from 'Ege Manuscript 61'. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"300\" height=\"191\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-top-penwork-300x191.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-top-penwork-150x96.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-top-penwork-1024x654.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-verso-White-cropped-to-top-penwork-80x50.jpg 80w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<h3>&#8216;Original Leaves&#8217;, Detached &amp; Dispersed<\/h3>\n<p>These two Portfolios assembled by Ege share the same title of <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20150915002109\/https:\/\/www.avemaria.edu\/MajorsPrograms\/Library\/SpecialCollections\/Collections\/FamousBibleLeaves.aspx\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Original Leaves from Famous Bibles, Nine Centuries 1121\u20131935 A.D.<\/a> Issued in 2 series or versions, they are Series A and B, as listed in an inset printed caption in the latter (reproduced in Gwara, <em>Otto Ege&#8217;s Manuscripts<\/em>, Figure 61) or Series I and II, as listed by both John P. Chalmers, <a href=\"http:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20160424045919\/http:\/\/catalogue.nla.gov.au\/Recird\/3486970\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">&#8216;Checklist of Leaf Books&#8217;<\/a>, Number 68, and Scott Gwara, <a href=\"http:\/\/mssprovenance.blogspot.com\/2014\/03\/otto-eges-manuscripts-two-recent.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Otto Ege&#8217;s Manuscripts<\/a>, Appendix I (pages 95-96).\u00a0 Unlike Ege&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20170302051408\/https:\/\/wiki.cincinnatilibrary.org\/index.php\/Otto_Ege_Collection\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><em>Fifty Original Leaves<\/em> Portfolio<\/a>, with numbered sets, the <em>Famous Bibles<\/em> Portfolios (both versions) are unnumbered. Their specimens include only 4 (Numbers 1-4) from manuscripts, while the rest come from printed Bibles.<\/p>\n<p>The Portfolios appeared in these ways:<\/p>\n<p>I.\u00a0 <strong>Series A <\/strong>[or <strong>I<\/strong>], with 37 leaves in 200 sets, issued in October 1936<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><em>Famous Bibles,<\/em> I = Chalmers, <a href=\"http:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20160424045919\/http:\/\/catalogue.nla.gov.au\/Recird\/3486970\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Checklist<\/a>, Number 68<br \/>\nGwara, Appendix I, pages 95\u201396, lists the locations of 31 sets, including one set &#8216;now dispersed&#8217;.<\/p>\n<p>II.\u00a0 <strong>Series B<\/strong> [or <strong>II<\/strong>], with 60 leaves in 100 sets, issued in October 1938<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><em>Famous Bibles<\/em>, II = <a href=\"http:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20160424045919\/http:\/\/catalogue.nla.gov.au\/Recird\/3486970\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Checklist<\/a>, Number 73<br \/>\nGwara, Appendix II, pages 97\u201399, lists the locations of 51 known sets.<\/p>\n<p>Within both Series, leaves from the source manuscript appear as <strong>Number 4<\/strong>.\u00a0 In Scott Gwara&#8217;s\u00a0 <a href=\"http:\/\/mssprovenance.blogspot.com\/2014\/03\/otto-eges-manuscripts-two-recent.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><em>Handlist of Manuscripts Collected or Sold by Otto F. Ege<\/em><\/a> (2013), the manuscript, with its traceable remnants, is <strong>Number 61<\/strong> (Appendix X, pages 140\u2013141).<\/p>\n<p>The &#8216;find places&#8217; of the dispersed leaves within these Portfolios establish that the dismemberment had already begun by the time of the preparation of the first Series, that is, at the latest, by 1936 (although cited as &#8216;1938&#8217; in Gwara,<em> Otto Ege&#8217;s Manuscripts<\/em>, page 346). The dismemberment and dispersal of some Portfolios themselves (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.aspireauctions.com\/#!\/catalog\/48\/249\/lot\/8853\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">as here<\/a>) might seem like fair play, or anyway turnaround.<\/p>\n<p>The two declared series of 100 + 200 sets with 1 leaf apiece in the Portfolios account for 300 leaves, with many more to spare.<\/p>\n<p>Some other detached single leaves or bifolia (the paired, conjoint leaves from the single, folded sheet of one animal&#8217;s skin) have surfaced as &#8216;Ege Rogue Leaves&#8217;\u00a0\u2014 that is, not issued in any of Ege&#8217;s Portfolios but only by other means\u00a0\u2014 including the New Leaf.\u00a0 Some are listed as Gwara <em>Handlist<\/em> Numbers 61.1\u20137, belonging to various institutional collections in the United States.\u00a0 Now emerging in private ownership, newly identified as an Ege <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/lost-and-foundling\" target=\"\" rel=\"noopener\">Lost and Foundling<\/a>, the New Leaf deserves to be added to their company.<\/p>\n<h3>Parts of the Pocket Bible, Prices &amp; Mats Included<\/h3>\n<div id=\"attachment_4999\" style=\"width: 1034px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-pencil-branded-8-percent.png\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-4999\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-4999 size-large\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-pencil-branded-8-percent-1024x231.png\" alt=\"Ezekiel recto with pencil inscription. Photography \u00a9 Mildred Budny\" width=\"1024\" height=\"231\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-pencil-branded-8-percent-1024x231.png 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-pencil-branded-8-percent-150x34.png 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-pencil-branded-8-percent-300x68.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-4999\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Pencil inscription (Budny Handlist 7)<\/p><\/div>\n<p>According to Otto Ege&#8217;s caption for the dual Portfolio series, the original manuscript comprised a &#8216;Paris Manuscript Bible, ca. 1310 A.D.&#8217;\u00a0 Hence, obviously, the &#8216;Ege inscription&#8217; in pencil at the bottom of the recto of the New Leaf:\u00a0 &#8216;1310 French Bible&#8217;.<\/p>\n<p>According to the advertised prices (reported in Gwara, <em>Otto Ege&#8217;s Manuscripts<\/em>, page 348), single leaves from this very bible cost US $2.50 for a leaf, and $20.00 for one with a historiated initial, in the 1944 <a href=\"http:\/\/www.limalibrary.com\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Lima Public Library<\/a> sales catalogue, and their prices had risen respectively to $3.50 and $25.00 in a sales catalogue of circa 1952 (now at <a href=\"http:\/\/www.samford.edu\/home\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Samford University<\/a>, Birmingham, Alabama).\u00a0 Unlike some other &#8216;Rogue Leaves&#8217; from Ege Manuscripts (for example in the <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/lost-and-foundlings\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Budny Handlist<\/a>, illustrated <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/lost-and-foundlings\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">here<\/a>, the &#8216;Ege inscription&#8217; on the New Leaf does not cite its price.<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_5003\" style=\"width: 1034px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-tape-traces-rotated-with-branding-at-5-percent.png\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5003\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5003 size-large\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-tape-traces-rotated-with-branding-at-5-percent-1024x461.png\" alt=\"Traces of Ege-style mounting tape at the outer edge of the Ezekiel Leaf from 'Ege Manuscript 61'. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"1024\" height=\"461\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-tape-traces-rotated-with-branding-at-5-percent-1024x461.png 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-tape-traces-rotated-with-branding-at-5-percent-150x68.png 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-cropped-to-tape-traces-rotated-with-branding-at-5-percent-300x135.png 300w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5003\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Traces of the &#8216;Ege-style&#8217; mounting tapes along the outer edge<\/p><\/div>\n<p>Like the &#8216;Ege-matted&#8217; Portfolio leaves and some other &#8216;Rogue Leaves&#8217; from Ege Manuscripts, this leaf preserves the traces of its &#8216;Ege-style mount&#8217; in the form of the characteristic gummed gauze tapes.\u00a0 When I first saw the leaf, this was its condition, with the tapes having already been removed (almost), along with their former mat (now lost).\u00a0 Hard to say when that removal, and the discarding of the mat, occurred.\u00a0 Perhaps even before the leaf reached its present owner, at a time unremembered and unrecorded.<\/p>\n<h3>The Books of the Bible<\/h3>\n<p>Some specimens of <strong>Ege Manuscript 61<\/strong> can be viewed freely online.\u00a0 They include examples from<\/p>\n<p>Portfolio Series I:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Epistle to Romans 8 \u2013 10:9<\/strong> at <a href=\"https:\/\/stjliblog.wordpress.com\/2011\/04\/13\/new-exhibition-crafting-the-bible-from-scriptoria-to-printing-houses\/bible\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Saint John&#8217;s University<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Portfolio Series II:<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_5947\" style=\"width: 359px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso3_400-cropped.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5947\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5947 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso3_400-cropped.jpg\" alt=\"Verso of the Exekiel Leaf in the University of Pennsylvania. Reproduced by permission\" width=\"349\" height=\"502\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso3_400-cropped.jpg 349w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso3_400-cropped-104x150.jpg 104w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso3_400-cropped-209x300.jpg 209w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 349px) 100vw, 349px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5947\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Verso of the Exekiel Leaf in the University of Pennsylvania. Reproduced by permission<\/p><\/div>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<div id=\"attachment_5948\" style=\"width: 359px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso4_400-cropped.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5948\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-image-5948 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso4_400-cropped.jpg\" alt=\"Leaf in the University of Pennsylvania, plus its mounting tapes. Reproduced by permission\" width=\"349\" height=\"505\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso4_400-cropped.jpg 349w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso4_400-cropped-104x150.jpg 104w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/08\/from-UPenn-tumblr_nskguqnf0Y1uubqfso4_400-cropped-207x300.jpg 207w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 349px) 100vw, 349px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5948\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Recto of the Exekiel Leaf in the University of Pennsylvania, plus its mounting tapes. Reproduced by permission<\/p><\/div>\n<p><strong>Ezekiel 36:11 ([<em>et reple-<\/em>\/]<em>bo vos hominibus<\/em>) \u2013 37:4 (<em>dixit ad<\/em>) [\/ [me]<\/strong> at the <a href=\"http:\/\/upennmanuscripts.tumblr.com\/post\/126531145708\/otto-eges-original-leaves-from-famous-bibles\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">University of Pennsylvania<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>Acts of the Apostles 18:16 (<em>miniauit<\/em>) \u2013 19:5 (<em>nomine<\/em>) on recto <\/strong> at the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cincinnatilibrary.org\/main\/bible.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" class=\"broken_link\">Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>Romans 1:27<\/strong> <strong>[<em>desideri<\/em>]<em>is suis in inuicem<\/em>\u00a0\u2013 3:4 <em>sermoni<\/em>[<em>bus<\/em>]<\/strong> at <a href=\"http:\/\/library.sc.edu\/spcoll\/medievalmss\/images\/mss%20100-118.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Furman University<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>Apocalypse 9:17 (<em>erant<\/em>) \u2013 11:13 (<em>septem<\/em>)<\/strong> at <a href=\"http:\/\/libx.bsu.edu\/cdm\/compoundobject\/collection\/BibleLvs\/id\/78\/rec\/5\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ball State University<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Online information (but not viewing) and personal consultation respectively reveal the contents of two other examples in this same Series II:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Jeremiah 29\u201330<\/strong> at <a href=\"https:\/\/web.archive.org\/web\/20150915002109\/https:\/\/www.avemaria.edu\/MajorsPrograms\/Library\/SpecialCollections\/Collections\/FamousBibleLeaves.aspx\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Ave Maria University<\/a><\/li>\n<li><strong>I Maccabees 14:30 (<em>congregauit<\/em>) \u2013 15:13 (<em>cum centum<\/em>)<\/strong> at <a href=\"http:\/\/catalog.princeton.edu\/cgi-bin\/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=original+leaves+from+famous+bibles&amp;Search_Code=TALL&amp;PID=j-OLf8sfiU_Yka5p7gUr5Z2EdqIT&amp;SEQ=20150818162107&amp;CNT=50&amp;HIST=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Princeton University<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Worth recording that the Portfolio Series II at Kent State University does not contain a leaf from this Bible.<\/p>\n<p>Some &#8216;Rogue Leaves&#8217;, like the New Leaf, belong to the Old Testament:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>I Chronicles 10:13 ([<em>prevari-<\/em>\/]<em>catus<\/em>)\u2013 13:14<\/strong> at <a href=\"http:\/\/ds.lib.berkeley.edu\/B3_26\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Oberlin College<\/a> = Gwara <em>Handlist<\/em> 61.6<\/li>\n<li><strong>Isaiah 44:6 (<em>exercitum<\/em>) \u2013 45:6 (<em>non est deus<\/em>)<\/strong> = for sale in <em>Enchiridion 21:\u00a0 Medieval Fragments for Teaching &amp; Research<\/em>, Number 2j.<\/li>\n<li><strong> Jeremiah 33:14 \u2013 34:3 (<em>et oculi<\/em>)<\/strong> at the <a href=\"http:\/\/ds.lib.berkeley.edu\/EgeMS2_28\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Providence Public Library<\/a> = Gwara <em>Handlist<\/em> 61.7<\/li>\n<li><strong>Ezekiel<\/strong> <strong>10:3 (<em>uir<\/em>) \u2013 11:15<\/strong> <strong>(<em>domus<\/em>)<\/strong> = Budny <em>Handlist<\/em> 7, or, the &#8216;New Leaf&#8217; (You are Here)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>A fuller examination of the leaves overall, as they emerge, would or could establish the patterns of distribution of portions extracted from which Books into which directions allocated among the Portfolio editions and the &#8216;Rogue&#8217; components. But more important than deciphering the patterns of distribution among these routes would be discovering what remains of the original, and where the remnants reside.<\/p>\n<h3><em>Multum in Parvo<\/em> (&#8216;A Lot in a Little&#8217;)<em><br \/>\n<\/em><\/h3>\n<p>Scott Gwara suggested that the source manuscript for his Ege Handlist 61 is &#8216;Possibly <em>Census<\/em> 4&#8242; (Gwara <em>Handlist<\/em>, number 61, page 140).\u00a0\u00a0 That record is <a href=\"http:\/\/catalog.hathitrust.org\/Record\/001173216\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Seymour de Ricci, with the assistance of W.J. Wilson, <em>Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States<\/em><\/a>, Volume II (1937), page 1937,<strong> Item 4<\/strong> in &#8216;The Library of Otto F. Ege, 188 South Compton Road, Cleveland, Ohio&#8217;.\u00a0 The <em>Census<\/em> entry simply describes that manuscript thus:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><strong>4. Biblia<\/strong>. Vel[lum]. (c[irc]a 1375), 530 ff. [= folios] (19X13 cm.). Isaiah to Apocalypse only.<br \/>\nWritten in France.\u00a0 45 illum[inated]. initials; illum[inated]. borders. XVIIth c. brown calf.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Obtained (1932) from E. Dawson, Los Angeles.<\/p>\n<p>OK, now we might know a little bit more.\u00a0 A total of 530 folios, no matter how small in their size, offers a very large number for distribution, given the inclination for a piecemeal approach.\u00a0 A plenitude of 45 illuminated initials and borders offers a desirable catch, with bounty for the taking, and with profit to booty (not a typo, that).<\/p>\n<p>Other manuscripts which Otto Ege obtained from this same <a href=\"http:\/\/mssprovenance.blogspot.com\/2014\/04\/ege-leaves-at-occidental-college.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">named source<\/a> in Los Angeles are described, for example, in the same volume of the <em>Census<\/em> (pages 1940 and 1947), numbers 20 and 65.\u00a0 Consisting of 103 leaves and still bound in &#8216;original wood boards and brown leather&#8217;, the Terence manuscript of <em>Census<\/em> number 65 was &#8216;obtained (1935) from E. Dawson, Los Angeles&#8217;.\u00a0 Number 20, an unbound Missal of &#8216;c[irc]a 80&#8217; leaves &#8216;obtained (1932)&#8217; from her, comprised part of a volume of which the other &#8216;half&#8217; was then owned by Mr. <a href=\"http:\/\/ead.ohiolink.edu\/xtf-ead\/view?docId=ead\/OCLWHi1761.xml;query=;brand=default\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Alfred Mewett<\/a>, Cleveland&#8217; (1895\u20131955), as described elsewhere in the <em>Census<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>If, as may be, <em>Census<\/em> number 4 in the &#8216;Library of Otto F. Ege&#8217; by the time of the preparation of the <em>Census<\/em> description(s) was in fact this book, there deserve some answers.\u00a0 The preparation of the <em>Census<\/em> records for Ege&#8217;s Library manifestly occurred in stages, with a selection by Seymour de Ricci supplemented by &#8216;more ample notes&#8217; by W. J. Wilson, as stated on page 1937.\u00a0 If this very <em>Census<\/em> item was the 32-line Pocket Bible which constitutes <strong>Ege Manuscript 61<\/strong> in the Gwara <em>Handlist<\/em> and its pieces distributed in the <strong>2<\/strong> <strong>Portfolios Number 4<\/strong>, then the date of &#8216;circa 1375&#8217; reported in the <em>Census<\/em> would have changed along the way to &#8216;1310&#8217; by, and perhaps for, the distribution of leaves into the <em>Famous Bible<\/em> Portfolios (Series I &amp; II), starting by 1936.\u00a0 Interesting.<\/p>\n<p>The number of 530 folios in the <em>Census<\/em> accounts only for the Books of the Bible from Isaiah to the end of the New Testament.\u00a0 A small, but fat book.\u00a0 Perhaps this one?<\/p>\n<p>The span as reported in the <em>Census<\/em> would include the Exekiel portion of the &#8216;New Leaf&#8217;. But \u2014 even considering variants for the order of the Books of the Bible in Pocket Bibles from Paris and other centers of production \u2014 it would presumably exclude the leaf from I Chronicles at Oberlin College, and perhaps also some other known leaves from the same <strong>Ege<em> Handlist<\/em><\/strong> <strong>Manuscript 61<\/strong> elsewhere \u2014 which I have not yet had a chance to inspect.<\/p>\n<p>They may have strayed from another part, say volume I, of the same voluminous but pocket-sized Bible.\u00a0 They could mean a disturbed, or non-canonical, order of the Old Testament Books in <strong>Ege&#8217;s <em>Census<\/em> Manuscript 4<\/strong>.\u00a0 Or they point to a different manuscript instead.<\/p>\n<p>If so, they disturbingly add to the count of manuscripts and leaves dismembered through Ege&#8217;s efforts to promulgate information, by the example of original specimens, and to obtain some financial remuneration, and perhaps academic kudos, along the way.<\/p>\n<p><strong>A Handful, And Then Some<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>If the sequence of the Biblical Books in <strong>Ege Manuscript 61<\/strong> corresponds with the generally (not universally) established order of those Books for French Pocket Bibles, then the brief sampling which I have been able to discern of leaves distributed from the manuscript (both between the two Series of <em>Portfolios<\/em> and outside them) could establish that Ege (and\/or others) despoiled a full copy of the Bible, with both Old and New Testaments, not just a large (albeit &#8216;small&#8217;, ha ha) part of it.\u00a0 If so, that Bible could have been divided into 2 volumes, say between Psalms and Isaiah, at a convenient half-way point given the bulk of the texts.\u00a0 Such division points are well attested in medieval copies of the Vulgate Latin Bible, in various formats.\u00a0 It&#8217;s a big text, even when little.\u00a0 (Yes, I mean that.)<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_5200\" style=\"width: 310px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-col-b-bot-faded.jpg\"><img aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-5200\" loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-5200\" src=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-col-b-bot-faded-300x217.jpg\" alt=\"Abraded portion of text at bottom right on recto of Exekiel Leaf from 'Ege Manuscript 61'. Photography by Mildred Budny\" width=\"300\" height=\"217\" srcset=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-col-b-bot-faded-300x217.jpg 300w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-col-b-bot-faded-150x109.jpg 150w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-col-b-bot-faded-1024x742.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/Ezekiel-recto-White-col-b-bot-faded-222x160.jpg 222w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-5200\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Wipe Out<\/p><\/div>\n<p>Such divisions are not unknown in the history of the transmission of the Bible in full, in various formats, both little and large, and in between.\u00a0 (An early case, in awesome large-format, appears in an earlier post on <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/foundling-hospital-for-manuscript-fragments\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The &#8216;Foundling Hospital&#8217; for Manuscript Fragments<\/a>.) In that case, the dismembered leaves would have come from both volumes, but that&#8217;s another story.<\/p>\n<p>The <em>Census<\/em> record for Ege Library Item 4, if it in fact represented a volume of this manuscrtipt, could have caught a glimpse of the original \u2014 whether by chance, serendipity, or owner&#8217;s hubris, if not all these factors at once \u2014 at a moment in between the commencement of its dispersal and the progression to the rest.\u00a0 A valuable record, poignant to boot.<\/p>\n<p>And so, if so, Ege might have obtained both volumes from his Los Angeles source; he might have obtained a single, whole manuscript containing both Testaments; and\/or he and his biblioclastic associates might have begun despoiling the manuscript, say starting from the front, already before the <em>Census<\/em> description was prepared.\u00a0 Further research might decide the dismal case.<\/p>\n<h3>*****<\/h3>\n<p>On this optimistic note, we turn next to another Leaf in the <em>Handlist<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>P.S.\u00a0 If you know of other leaves from this little book, please let us know!<\/p>\n<p>We would be glad to hear from you.\u00a0 You could leave a comment, <a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/contact-us\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Contact Us<\/a>, or join the conversation on our <a href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/pages\/Research-Group-on-Manuscript-Evidence\/259443617456668\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\" class=\"broken_link\">Facebook page<\/a>. \u00a0 Over to you.<\/p>\n<p>*****<\/p>\n<p>Gladly we thank the staff of the libraries of the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.library.kent.edu\/special-collections-and-archives\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Kent State University<\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/rbsc.princeton.edu\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Princeton University<\/a> for help with inquires about materials in their collections. Special thanks are recorded to Amanda Faehnel (Kent State University) and Don Skemer and Brianna R. Cregle (Princeton University).<\/p>\n<p>We also happily thank Lynn Ransom and Dot Porter of the <a href=\"http:\/\/schoenberginstitute.org\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Schoenberg Institute for Manuscript Studies<\/a> at the University of Pennsylvania for permission to include photographs of the Exekiel Leaf at the University of Pennsylvania, its Ege caption, and Ege&#8217;s title-page for the Portfolio, as reproduced on the <a href=\"http:\/\/upennmanuscripts.tumblr.com\/post\/126531145708\/otto-eges-original-leaves-from-famous-bibles: target=\">Penn Libraries Manuscripts<\/a> blogpost.\u00a0 That post, appearing after ours here, informed us about the presence of the leaf, so that we could recognize a close relative for the New Leaf, from the same Book of the Bible (although not consecutive leaves). Step by step, progress might continue.<\/p>\n<p>The research can be complicated, not only when the materials are so widely dispersed without appropriate descriptions at the points of dispersal. Collaborative help is invaluable, and appreciated!<\/p>\n<p>[See:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/more-discoveries-for-otto-ege-manuscript-61\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">More Discoveries for Otto Ege Manuscript 61<\/a> ]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>*****<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Part of Ezekiel from a 32-Line Latin Vulgate Pocket Bible from France Budny Handlist 7 Single leaf from a pocket-sized Bible Circa 186 \u00d7 126 mm &lt;written area circa 119 \u00d7 81 mm&gt; Double columns of 32 lines in Gothic Bookhand, with embellishments in red, blue, and purple pigment Pencil inscription &#8216;1310 French Bible&#8217; at [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":5197,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[678,115],"tags":[1442,1450,462,7,489,652,680],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5053"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5053"}],"version-history":[{"count":59,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5053\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20915,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5053\/revisions\/20915"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5197"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5053"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5053"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/manuscriptevidence.org\/wpme\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5053"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}