8. Because this is a rather small manuscript, it supports the hypothesis that this was a Book of Hours due to their often small size. An example of the small size of some Books of Hours is those bound with a “girdle binding.” These books were meant to be worn on one’s belt, dangling like a pouch. Because of this use, it would be impossible for the book to be much larger than approximately the size of a modern index card. http://mooonriver.blogspot.com/2006/12/girdle-book.html
9. Along the gutters of both leaves, binding marks are visible. There are four distinct cuts where the manuscript appears to be sewn to the cords.
11. MS. Pb. Med. 237: Leaves from a Book of Hours 1 leaf (2 pages) in Latin 1 leaf (2 pages) in French Vellum or Parchment Illuminated Initials 125mm X 85mm Provenance: Purchased from Philadelphia PB with Benton FD
14. MS. PB. MED. 237 c.1440 “The Legend of St. George”. Bedford Breviary BibliothequeNationale, MS. Lat. 17294 f. 447 v. c. 1424-1435 “The Visitation” Heures de Rome, c. 1450, BibliothequeNationale, MS. Rothschild 2530, f. 45
15. “The Visitation” Heures de Rome, c. 1450, BibliothequeNationale, MS. Rothschild 2530, f. 45 “The Legend of St. George”. Bedford Breviary BibliothequeNationale, MS. Lat. 17294 f. 447 v. c. 1424-1435 MS. PB. MED. 237 c.1440
16. The purpose in comparing the manuscripts MS. PB. MED. 237 and the Legend of St. George is not to propose that they were created by the same scribe or illuminator, nor is the purpose to argue that they are related in any way. The purpose is simply to illustrate a stylistic similarity that proves further evidence that this manuscript was most likely created in France or a French speaking region, for French (or for a French speaking person’s) use. While there are still many possibilities of the origin (created in a different area for use within France for instance), the probability is that this Book of Hours was created in France in order to be used by a literate, or semi-literate member of the nobility of the fifteenth-century. It is too difficult to make many more assumptions about these leaves because they are stand-alone sheets. While the fact that they are only lightly illuminated may give some clue as to their origin and use, there is not enough evidence to make any accurate assumptions. While there are no colophons, no calendar, no scribe’s notes, no dates, no inscriptions, coats of arms, shelf-marks (other than those from the BPL), there is a professional quality to the manuscript that points towards it being created with purpose.
18. Leaf 2, Recto Dame sans mille †bledmux†/ Et sans mille pâme †endurer†./ †Glouueufe† migre marie./ Plaine de †tresgiat† courtoisie/ Don doit on ferveur et amer,/ Mont †lanlttonpoar† [et] †tarir†/ e art u as partout †fetgnoute†/ En ciel et en terre [et] en mer./ Dame de putier boutillier/ Dame de pardon treso[qui]tere/ Dame plante †dunulite†. / Fan a celui pour mon père/ Que tu pourquoi saine et étier/ Et sans perdue †uniginte†
19. Leaf 2, Recto On 1RH, the text seems to indicate that it is the Hymn that follows the reading of Psalm 94 from the Office of Our Blessed Lady, to be said at Matins. There are two clues which indicate this as being the correct passage. The first clue comes from the phrase “En ciel et en terre [et] en mer .“ This phrase appears at the beginning of the Hymn, “Quem terra, pontus, aethera. . .”
20. Leaf 2, Recto The second clue is the use of the term “Dame” throughout the passage. “Dame” in Middle French refers to a woman of exulted status or queen. Nancy Netzer explains this use of the term Dame to refer to the Virgin Mary, “Mary as queen is coincident with the representation of her Son as king.” Nancy Netzer, ed., Secular Sacred: 11th-16th Century Works from the Boston Public Library and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 64.
21. Leaf 2, Verso Tu es de tous blés la fontaine./ Tu es de toute loute plaine/ Tu es celle en qui †se† †folnta†/ †Gtoelle† en [qui] †p_mt† †charhuaine†/ Sans doleur amour [et] sas pâme/ †Celu† [qui] nous fut et †forma†/ Tu es la fluer tu es la rose/ Tu es celle en qui †se† le pose/ La bonté qui toute †aultte† passe/ Tu es celle en qui en dose/ La †lonte† qui †po† nulle dose/ Qui sort ne faulte ne negsse/ Tu es celle qui no †soucient†/ Et celle de qui tout bien [et] †biet†.
22. Leaf 2, Verso It would seem that this section is from the Book of Hours’ Suffrages, specifically the Prayer to the Blessed Virgin & to St. John the Evangelist. In this passage, there are many continual references to Mary, which fit with the informal “tu” mentioned with the use of “Dame” and in having a personal connection with Mary. The passage may also be from Ecclesiasticis24, meant to be said at Terce. Once again this is due to the listing nature of the prayer and the repeated phrase “tu” to indicate Mary.
23. Leaf 1, Verso This leaf clearly represents the Office of the dead. There is a clear passage which reads: Deus Deusmeus: ad te de lucevigilo. Sitivit in te anima mea: quam multiplicitertibicaromea. This passage is from Psalm 62, a standard Psalm from the Officium Pro Defunctis or the Office for the Dead. This particular Psalm was meant to be said Ad Laudes or at Lauds. This is a clear indication of the office that this leaf comes from within a Book of Hours. It also works towards the hypothesis that this manuscript is in fact a Book of Hours unbound.
27. Gothic Textura The script is quite clearly a Gothic Bookhand. Because most of the minims do not have diamond shaped serifs, it is clear that this is not a Quadratabookhand. The letter shapes have more in common with the Gothic form Textura. With Textura, most of the letter forms have straight or only slightly diamond shaped minims. With MS.PB.MED. 237, some of the letter forms have diamond shaped minims, but not to the same extent as those found in Quandratabookhand.
28. There is also another clue that illustrates indicated the form of text, there are finishing strokes and small flourishes that run throughout certain characters and the “o” is slightly more oval than strictly circular (as in earlier script), and there is a combination of tall and rounded “s” forms. Other letter forms, such as the “x” are also quite distinctive and have small trails that some Textura scripts share. Because Textura was quite common for liturgical texts, there is a good chance that this manuscript was prepared in this script. True to form, the document is very difficult to read, and thus perhaps not meant for the laity.
